Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/racoviancatechisOOunse THE llACOVIAN CATECHISM, WITH NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS, TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN : TO WHICH IS PREFIXED A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF UNITARIANISM IN POLAND AND THE ADJACENT COUNTRIES. By thomas' rees, f.s.a. LONDON: PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, PATERNOSTER ROW. ISIS. Printed by Richard and Arthur Taylor} Shoe-Lane. ADVERTISEMENT. Several years have now elapsed since the following work was first promised to the pub¬ lic. A variety of circumstances have operated to delay its appearance; of which the princi¬ pal has been a painful bodily indisposition of long continuance, whereby the translator was unfitted for the close application, and the men¬ tal exertion, which his undertaking required. A kind Providence, to whom he can never be sufficiently grateful, has at last restored to him the invaluable blessing of health, and enabled him thus to put the finishing hand to his task. He cannot send his work forth to the world without expressing his consciousness, that it will stand in need of much indulgence. The reader of discernment and taste win not util to discover many defects in its literary execution. a 2 But ADVERTISEMENT. But the translator ventures to cherish the hope that the acute sufferings under which a great part of it was composed, will plead his apo¬ logy for the principal of them, and mitigate the severity of criticism in respect to the whole. In a publication of this nature., a laboured elegance of style would have been misplaced ; and from the character of the original would have been impracticable in the translation. All that has been aimed at, has been, to ex¬ hibit the work in an English dress that would convey to the reader as correct an idea as possible, not only of the sentiments, but also of the manner of thinking, and the pecu¬ liar tone of feeling, which distinguished the authors of the Catechism. In this object, the translator is obliged to say, he has not always succeeded to his wishes ; for he has, in his pro¬ gress, had to encounter difficulties which he dares not flatter himself that he has in every case completely vanquished. On some of the subjects discussed in the Catechism, the au¬ thors and editors had not very distinct and clear ideas ; — there is therefore necessarily a degree ADVERTISEMENT. degree of obscurity in the language in which they endeavour to express their thoughts. They have also occasionally embarrassed their style by the employment of scholastic terms and phrases* which, without a previous know¬ ledge of the particular treatise or system to which their observations w^ere meant more im¬ mediately to apply, it is not easy fully to un¬ derstand. The translator confesses that he has on these accounts been sometimes consi¬ derably perplexed: and he is not without ap¬ prehension, that, in a few instances, the obscu¬ rity of the original may have been transfused into the translation, and that he has failed to express the precise shade of meaning which the authors intended to convey. He has how¬ ever done his best; and it will afford him great pleasure to receive the corrections of any persons who may be more fortunate than him¬ self in eliciting the sense of the original work. It was the translator’s first design to give, with an English version of the latest autho¬ rized edition of the Racovian Catechism, a detailed statement of all the alterations made a 3 in ADVERTISEMENT. in the work by successive editors, with the view of exhibiting the changes which took place in the opinions of the Polish Unitarians, on some of the peculiar articles of their creed. But, on making the experiment, he soon found that he should, by such a proceeding, only crowd and disfigure his pages, without effect¬ ing any valuable object. This part of his plan, therefore, he immediately abandoned, except in relation to a few cases, in which he has deemed it proper to notice some remarkable deviations in the last from the first edition of the Catechism. He has added some other notes of his own, partly with the view of il¬ lustrating the text or the notes of his original, and partly for the purpose of explaining, to readers not already conversant with the sub¬ ject, the chief points of difference between the sentiments of the Polish, and those of the modern English, Unitarians. These notes are included within [ ] brackets, and sub¬ scribed with the word Translator. To these the writer does not attach much impor¬ tance: they may serve, however, to prevent persons ADVERTISEMENT. persons who are not better informed, from imputing to the Unitarians of the present day opinions that were held by their predecessors, "but which they regard as unwarranted by the Scriptures. To the original work the present editor has prefixed an Historical Introduction, compri¬ sing a view of the rise, progress, and vicissitudes of the Unitarian doctrine on the continent of Europe subsequently to the (era of the Refor¬ mation. The limits within which it was ne¬ cessary that he should confine himself, ren¬ dered it impracticable to treat this subject at such length as its interest and importance would otherwise" have demanded: nor could he, in such an abstract, enter into the critical discussion of those facts concerning which his statements vary from those of all preceding writers on this part of Church annals. He designs it merely as a rough and imperfect outline of a larger History of Unitarian ism which he has for some time had in contem¬ plation, and for which he has collected a con¬ siderable mass of valuable materials. With this work, ADVERTISEMENT. work, should the subject appear to be interest¬ ing to the religious world, he now feels dis¬ posed to proceed, with all the expedition which other demands on his time, and the na¬ ture and magnitude of the undertaking, will admit. It may be thought that a larger por¬ tion of this sketch has been devoted to Tran¬ sylvania than is warranted by its connexion with the following Catechism, which relates more particularly to Poland. But the writer con¬ ceived that he might be held justified, in con¬ sideration of the new light which he has been able to throw on the interesting transactions, hitherto so imperfectly detailed, relating to Francis David. Having the means in his hands, he felt it to be his duty to embrace the opportunity to wipe away from the memory of that eminent person the unfounded charge, by which he has so long been calumniated, of holding opinions little consonant with the Christian revelation. Nor is he without some expectation that his account of those proceed¬ ings may serve to weaken the accusations that have been preferred against Faustus Soci- nus ADVERTISEMENT. nus for the share he has been thought to have had in the direction of them. The Confes¬ sions of Faith inserted in the notes will be read with interest, as exhibiting the religious creed of a numerous body of Unitarians, of whom little information has thus far been con- nmmeated to the English public. The editor has now only to consign his- work to the disposal and blessing of the God of Truth. Should it at all conduce to pro¬ mote the knowledge of His attributes and cha¬ racter, and to advance His merciful designs in the dispensation of “ Grace and truth where¬ in he has in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,” it will not have been undertaken in vain, and the writer will feel amply compen¬ sated for all his labours in the execution of it. London^ Feb. 1813.. VOTES of the PARLIAMENT touching the Book commonly called The RACOVIAN CATECHISM. Mr. Millington reports from the Committee to whom the Book (entituled Catechesis Ecclesiarum quae in Regno Poloniae, &c, commonly called The Racovian Cate¬ chism) was referred, several passages in the said book which wrere now read. Resolved upon the question by the Parliament, That the book, Entituled Catechesis Ecclesiarum quae in Regno Poloniae, &c. commonly called The Racovian Cate¬ chism, doth contain matters that are blasphemous, er¬ roneous, and scandalous. Resolved upon the question by the Parliament, That all the printed copies of the book Entituled Catechesis Ecclesiarum quae in Regno Poloniae, &c. commonly called The Racovian Catechism, be burnt. Resolved upon the question by the Parliament, That the Sheriffs of London and Middlesex be authorized and required to seize all the printed copies of the book En¬ tituled Catechesis Ecclesiarum quae in Regno Poloniae , & c. commonly called The Racovian Catechism, where¬ soever they shall be found, and cause the same to be burnt at the Old Exchange London, and in the New Palace at Westminster, on Tuesday and Thursday next. Friday, the Second of April, 1652. Resolved by the Parliament, That these Votes be forthwith printed and published. Hen. Scobell, Cleric, Parliamenti. London: Printed by William Field, Printer to the Parliament of England, 1652. CONTENTS. HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Page i Preface^ by Andrew Wissowatius and Joachim Steg- man the Younger - xcv SECTION I. Of the Holy Scriptures - - 1 Chap. I. — Of the Authenticity of the Holy Scrip¬ tures - - ib. Chap. II. — Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scrip¬ tures - - - 13 Chap. III. — Of the Perspicuity of the Holy Scriptures - - - - 17 SECTION II. Concerning the way of Salvation - 20 Chap. I. — The Reasons of the Revelation of the Way of Salvation - - ib . Chap. II. — Concerning those Thingswhich con- stitute the Way of Salvation - 24 SECTION III. Of the Knowledge of God - 25 Chap. I. — Of the Nature of God - ib. Chap. II .-= — Of the Will of God - 48 SECTION IV. Of the Knowledge of Christ - 51 Chap. I, — Of the Person of Christ - - ib. SECTION CONTENTS. SECTION V. Of the Prophetic Office of Christ - Page 1G8 Chap. I. — Of the Precepts of Christ which he added to the Law - 173 Chap. II. — Of the Precepts of Christ delivered by him separately - - 239 Chap. III. — Of the Baptism of Water - 249 Chap. IV. — Of the Breaking of the Holy Bread 2(13 Chap. V. — Of the Promise of Eternal Life - 2 77 Chap. VI. — Of the Promise of the Holy Spirit 284 Chap. VII. — Of the Confirmation of the Divine Will - 295 Chap. VIII.— Of the Death of Christ - - 297 Chap. IX.— Of Faith - - - 320 Chap. X.— Of Free Will - - - 325 Chap. XI. — Of Justification - 346 SECTION VI. Of the Priestly Office of Christ ' - - 349 SECTION VII. Of the Kingly Office of Christ - - 360 SECTION VIII. Of the Church of Christ - - - 369 Chap. I. — Of the Visible Church - - ib. Chap. II. — Of the Government of the Church of Christ - - - - 370 Chap. III. — Of the Discipline of the Church of Christ - 376 Chap. IV. — Of the Invisible Church - - 381 Index of Texts quoted and illustrated - - 385 General Index - 396 HISTO- HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. In the following pages, it is intended to exhibit a rapid sketch of the History of Unitarianism on the continent of Europe subsequent to the sera of the Re¬ formation ; but more particularly of its rise, establish¬ ment, and vicissitudes in Poland and its dependen¬ cies, with a view to the churches of which the an¬ nexed Catechism was originally compiled. It is not possible to ascertain the precise date to which the revival of the doctrine of the divine Unity ought to be referred. Long before Luther renounced the communion of the Church of Rome, and erected the standard of the Reformation in Germany, many individuals had declared their dissent from particular articles of its creed, and, in defiance of its authority, had formed themselves into societies for separate reli¬ gious worship upon other principles and with differ¬ ent forms*. Among the tenets which were called in question * Such, among others, was the case of the Waldenses, who arose about the middle of the twelfth century, and who hold a very interesting place in Ecclesiastical History. They denied the supremacy of the Pope, remonstrated against indulgences, confession to a priest, prayers for the dead, and purgatory. They had bishops, presbyters and deacons. Some of them admitted the Catholic Church to be a true church, others re- a gaided 11 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. question after men had thus ventured, in spite of their spiritual shackles, to think for themselves, and to bring the received opinions to the test of the Scrip¬ tures, the doctrine of the Trinity appears to have been one of the first. In several of the writings of this period traces incidentally occur of antitrinitarian sentiments, which were regarded with deep horror, and assailed in the severest terms of reprobation, both by persons who still maintained their fidelity to the Roman Church, and by those who had begun to arraign the purity of its faith in other matters. It seems probable, however, that these censures were drawn forth bv the doubts and insinuations which had » garded the Pope as Antichrist. According to some of their published Confessions, they seem to have held the common opinion on the subject of the Trinity; but the following extract from a confession inserted in a curious old work, intituled Histoire des Vavdois, par Jean Paul Perrin, printed at Geneva in 1618, will furnish some ground of suspicion that on this point all their churches were not strictly orthodox. “ 1. Nous croyons qu'il nest qu.vn seul Dieu- qui est Esprit, createur de tputes choses, Pere de tons, qui est sur tons, et par toutes choses, et en nous tons, lequel on doit adorer en esprit et verite, auquel seul attendons, et donnons gloire de nostre vie, nourriture , veste- tnent, sante, maladie, prosperity, et adversite, laimons comme autheur de toute bonte, le craignons, comme celuy qui eognoit les coeurs. 2. Nous croyons que Jesus Christ est le Fils de l image du Pere ; qu en lay habite toute plenitude de diuinite y pur lequel nous cognoissons le Pere, lequel est nostre Mediateur et aduo - cat, et ny a point d autre nom sous le ciel donne aux homines, auquel il nous faille estre sauues : an nom duquel seul nous invo- quons le Pere, et nvsons d'autres oraisons que de celles qui sont contenues en VEscriture Saincte, ou concordant es a icelles en sub¬ stance. 3. Nous croyons que leSainct Esprit est nostre consolateur, procedant du Pere et du Fils, par T inspiration duquel nousfaisons priercs, estans par lay renouueles, lequel fait toutes bonnes oeuwes en nousj et par luy auons cognoissance de toute verite. ill tllSTORICAU INTRODUCTION. ill iii some cases been hinted, more or less obscurely, respecting this doctrine*, rather than by any public renunciation of it ; of which no well attested instance is recorded, until after the Reformation had made some progress. As far as can be collected from the accusations of their adversaries, the persons who first openly impugned this tenet were anabaptists of Ger¬ many and Holland; — a designation under which were comprised, not only those wild and infuriate visiona¬ ries who were at one time the terror of all Europe, but likewise men of high character and reputation, distinguished by their solid learning, their rational * Of the mode of impugning the popular creed which was adopted at this period, we have two remarkable examples in the persons of Bernard Qchin and Lselius Socinus. Ochin is charged with having pursued this method to bring some of the doctrines of the Catholic Church into disrepute in his public discourses, while he adhered to her communion, stating difficulties and objections, and omitting to answer them, or subjoining unsatisfactory solutions. At a later period of his life he did the same, in respect to the doctrine of the Trinity, through the press. In his celebrated Dialogues, (Dial, xx. et xxi. lib. ii. pp. 146 et seqq .) in discussing this subject, he insi nuates strong objections to the popular notion, but adduces very feeble arguments in its support ; and plainly shows that he has not without reason been charged with having embraced antitrinitarian sentiments. Lcelius Socinus pursued the same plan during his residence in Switzerland, never, seemingly, dpenly avowing his own opinions, hut embodying his objec¬ tions and difficulties in the form of questions., which he sub¬ mitted, with apparent modesty and diffidence, for the solution of the great luminaries of the Reformation. The freedom of some of these questions exposed him to the suspicion of he¬ resy, and had nearly involved him in difficulties ; and others of them drew from Calvin a very angry letter, in which he pet¬ tishly observes — Si plura deeider as aliunde petenda sunt . Vide Bock, Hist. Antitrin. tom . ii. p. 485 fyc. et p. 609. a 2 piety. Iv HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. piety, and enlightened zeal for divine truth ; who shared the obloquy attached to their denomination in consequence of denying to the rite of infant baptism the obligation of a Christian institution. The person who is considered to have been the earliest public advocate of antitrinitarianism, is Mar¬ tin Cellarius, a native of Stutgard. He was born in the year 1499, and educated at the university of Wit- temberg, where he is said to have studied with sin¬ gular success polite literature, philosophy, and theo¬ logy, the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee and Syriac languages. His learning and talents secured for him the warm friendship of Luther and Melancthon, whose principles he had embraced. Being deputed to hold a public disputation with Stubner and Stork, two of the founders of the German Anabaptists, he yielded to the arguments of his acute and learned opponents, and went over to their party ; but pur¬ suing his inquiries further than they had done, re¬ linquished, among other tenets, the doctrine of the Trinity. His defection from the Lutheran cause, and his open avowal of antitrinitarian sentiments, exposed him to various persecutions, to escape which he re¬ moved in 1536 to Basil in Switzerland, where he re¬ mained until his death in the year 1564. On his settlement in this city he took the name of Borrhaus, being a translation of his original surname into the corresponding Greek term, and was appointed pro¬ fessor of rhetoric and philosophy. He is mentioned by Faustus Socinus in high terms of eulogy as the friend of his uncle Lselius } and the ministers of Tran¬ sylvania m HISTORICAL INTROHUCTTOK. V Sylvanta class him with Servetus anti Erasmus, as ap- pointed by God to convey to mankind extraordinary information concerning himself and Jesus Christ. Andrew Althamerus, who wrote a work against Cel- iarius, represents him as having revived the errors of Paul of Samosata, &e. and maintained that Jesus Christ was a mere human prophet*. Contemporary with Cellarius was Lewis Hetzer, a Dutchman by birth, who is usually classed among the anabaptists, but without sufficient evidence f. He settled at Zurich in the year 1523. Hetzer was a man of great learning, and deeply versed in the ori¬ ginal languages of the Scriptures, of which he exhi¬ bited undeniable proof in a German translation of all the books of the prophets,which he published,.inl527, in conjunction with John Denkius. Sandius states that in his theological sentiments he was manifestly and certainly an Arian, and represents him as having taught that the Father alone was the true God ; that Christ was inferior to the Father, and of a different es¬ sence ; that there were not three persons in the god¬ head ; and that God was neither essence nor person in the sense in which those terms are commonly ern- * Meshovii Hist. Anabaptistica , p. 3. This writer calls him Matthias Cellarius. Bock, Hist. Antitrin. tom. ii. pp. 223' at scqq. Sandii Bibliotheca Antitrinitar. p. 15, who quotes the Words of the ministers of Sarmatia and Transylvania in. their work Da falsa et vera cognitione Dei: “ Luther o et Zivih- glio dadit \_Demf refer-endos et justificationis et rei sacrament-a¬ fire fructus ; Martino vero Cellario, Serveto , et Erasmo Rote - rodamo fructus alios prcecipuos cognitionis veri Dei et Christie &e. • f Bock, ubi supra , tom. ii. p. 232. ployed. VI HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION, ployed* * * §. He wrote a work against the deity of Christ, which however was never published ; the manuscript having fallen into the hands of Zwinglius was sup¬ pressed. Hetzer was put to death by the magistrates of Constance in the year 1529, but historians dis¬ agree as to the cause and the manner of his punish¬ ment. Seckendorfff affirms that he was burnt at the stake for his heretical opinions ; but Sandhis and others, concurring with this writer as to the reason of his condemnation, state, and, it would seem, more correctly, that he was beheaded J. But some, whose relation the learned Bock has followed, assert that he suffered on account of his licentious principles and conduct. This statement, however, which is grounded on the representation of enemies, ought to be received with much caution. At this period it was customary to implicate in the guilt of the most criminal of the anabaptist sect all whose dissent from the popul% faith caused them to be ranked under this denomina¬ tion ; and a denial of the supreme deity of Christ was sufficient to expose any individual, however exem¬ plary in his morals, to the imputation of crimes the most abhorrent to his feelings. This consideration should incline us to believe with Sandius and Seeken- dorff, both most respectable authorities, that HetzeCs real offence was what the latter styles his blasphe¬ mies against God§. * Nucleus Hist. Eceles. 4to. p. 424. Bibl. Antitrin. p. 16, •f Hist. Lutheran, lib. ii . p. \45. J Bibl. Antitrin. p. 1 7- § Bock, ubi supra, tom, ii. p. 231. With historical introduction. vii With the name of Hetzer is connected that of John Denkius, who has already been noticed as associated with him in his German version of the prophetical writings. Denkius, who is mentioned as a man of extensive erudition, and a profound Hebrew scholar, was a native of Nuremberg, and for some time held the situation of rector of the school of that city. He is stated to have maintained that God was the fountain of all created things ; that the Spirit or power of God was the next in order; and afterwards the Word of God, which he had begotten of himself by the Spirit. Hetzer and Denkius are represented as holding the first rank among the antitrinitarians of this age in Germany and Switzerland ; and it is said that their fame, having spread into Italy, had the direct of bringing over to their opinions many individuals in that country *. The next name that occurs in this connexion is that of John Campanus, supposed to have been a native of Juliers. He settled at Wittemberg in 1528, where he is charged with having clandestinely pro¬ mulgated his opinions. Sandius states him to have been an Arianf. He wrote a work on the Trinity, wherein he maintained that the Son was begotten of the substance of the Father, before the world was created; that there was a time when he had no exist¬ ence ; and consequently that he was inferior to the Father, who employed him as his minister in the creation of the world, and in other affairs; and that * Bock, ubi supra, tom. \\.pp. 240, 241. f Nucleus Hist. Eccles. p. 427. the Vlli HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. the Spirit was not a divine Person, but meant the nature and operations of the Father and the Son*, He is supposed to have died about 1530, previously to which he suffered some persecution for his opinions. Another antitrinitarian of this period was Adam Pastor, a man of great learning, who had previously borne the name of Rudolphus Martin. He belonged to the anabaptists of Frisia, from whose society he was excluded about 1546, on account of his senti¬ ments concerning the Trinity, having before held a public disputation on this subject at Goch in the duchy of Cleves, with Theodore Philips and Menon Simonis. He maintained that the Father alone was the true God; that the Son had existed before the world, but was not co-eternal with the Father, nor yet omnipotent, nor consubstantial with the Father,, nor equal to him, but was one with him in will ^ and that the Holy Spirit was the power or operating energy of God f. About the year 1530, a person of the name of Clau¬ dius, called, from the province wherein he was chiefly known to the public, Claudius Ailobrex, caused con¬ siderable sensation by the dissemination of antitrini¬ tarian sentiments in Switzerland and some adjacent districts. He denied that there were three persons in the divine essence, and maintained that the Father was greater than the Son, and was the only true God. * Sandii Blbl. Anlitrin.p.lJ. Bock, ubi supra, tom. u.vp. 248 249. t Sandii fiibl Antitrin. p. 38. Nucleus Hist. Ecclcs.p. 425. He HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. IX He affirmed that the Scriptures were corrupted, espe¬ cially the beginning of John’s gospel, which, he con¬ tended, ought to be read In principio erat verhumy et verbum illud erat Dei The names of several other persons occur about this time, who are reputed to have held antitrinita- rian sentiments ; but the limits prescribed to this sketch forbid the enumeration of them here, with the exception of Michael Servetusf, a man who holds a pre-eminent rank in this class, and whose celebrity, arising both from his splendid talents and his tragi¬ cal fate, entitles him to particular notice. This di¬ stinguished person was born in 1509, at Villanueva in Arragon, where his father exercised the profession of public notary. After having passed with extra¬ ordinary success through the customary routine of juvenile instruction, he was sent to the university of Thoulouse to study the canon law. During the three years he passed in this celebrated seat of learning, he devoted a large portion of his time to the critical perusal of the Scriptures, — an employment to which he was probably excited by the spread of the Refor¬ mation, and which eventually led to his renunciation of the prevailing opinion concerning the Trinity. Ap- * Bock, ubi supra, tom. i. p. 103, tom. ii. p. 298. J His Spanish name was Servedo : sometimes he called himself Reves, a word formed by the transposition of some of the letters of his original surname. Occasionally it is found written Renes ; hut this is an evident error of the press, the letter u being mistaken for n. At the latter part of his life he called himself Michael Villanovanus, or simply Villano¬ vanus, from the place of his birth. - a 5 prehending X HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. prehending that in France he could not with safety pursue his theological inquiries, or give publicity to his own convictions, he removed, in 1530, to Basil in Switzerland, where he obtained the esteem and friendship of the most eminent of the reformed clergy in that city. Having given these divines credit for more enlarged views and a more liberal spirit than they had imbibed, he made no scruple of avowing to them the opinions he had been led to embrace. But he soon discovered that they were as little disposed as the Catholics to extend toleration to any who pursued their speculations further than themselves; — his friend CEcolampadius having taken occasion in some letters which he addressed to him, to upbraid him in no very gentle terms with the heresy of his sentiments Finding himself thus under unpleasant restraint, where he had looked for freedom, he quitted Basil in 1530 or 1531, and went to Strasburg. In the latter year, and shortly after his arrival in this city, he published his first work on the Trinity under the following title— De Trinitatis Erroribus , Libri septern , per Michaelem Serueto , alias Fleues,ab Ara- gonia Hispanum. It was printed at Haguenau in Alsace, by John Seccer for Conrad Rouse, a book- * Fingis, quasi nos liumano more de filiatione Dei loquamur, et crude faciamus filium Dei, aboleamusque honor em fil'd Dei : id quod turn cum summa blasphemia Jacis, deprehendo enim diabolicas illas versutias. Interim dum non summam pa- tientiam prce me fero, dolens Jesum Christum filium Dei sic de~ honestari, parum Christiane tibi agere videor. In aliis man- SUETUS ERO : IN BLASPHEMES QUiE IN CHRISTUM, NON ITEM. Allwoerden, Hist. Michael . Serveti}p. 13. Bock, Hist. Antitrhi. tom. ii. p. 331. seller HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XI seller of Strasburg, to whom Servetus had given his manuscript at Basil. The appearance of this book produced a very powerful sensation among the leaders of the Reformation, who embraced every opportunity to hold it up to public execration, as much, appa¬ rently, from the dread of being charged by their Ca¬ tholic adversaries with holding the opinions of the author, as from their real abhorrence of the tenets it advocated*. Bucer, who resided at Strasburg, is stated to have declared publicly to his congregation, that the writer deserved to have his intestines torn from his body. Servetus, not deeming himself secure at Strasburg while this storm raged, returned in the same year to Basil; but finding CEcolampadius most highly in¬ censed against him for his recent publication, he took his departure for Lyons. On his way he passed through Haguenau, where, in 1532, he published, * The following may be taken as a sample of their language on this occasion. It is an extract from a letter addressed by CEcolampadius to Bucer, and dated August 5, 1531 : — Invisi hac hebdomada Bernates, qui te et Capitonem militant plu-> rimum. Libellus de Trinitatis Erroribus a quibusdam ex illis visus duntaxat, supra modum offend'd. Vellem te scribere Lu¬ ther o, quod nobis insciis liber alibi excusus sit. Impudentia etiam erat adscribere Lutheranis, ffstificationis ratio nem eos ig - norare : ut de reliquis taceam. Ssd Ph oti nianus die, vel nescio cuffs sectce homo, solus sapere sibi videtur. Nisi ab ecclesics nostra" doctoribus explodetur, pessime auditura est. Tu, pres aids, oro vigiles: et si non alibi, certe in confutatione tua ad hn- peratorem ecclesias nostras excusa, utcunque bestia irrepserit. Abutitur omnibus in suum sensum, tantam ne confiteatur Filium coceternum Patri et consubstantialem. Atque hie est qui suscipit probandiim, hominem Christum esse Filium Dei. Allwoerden, ubi supra , p. 29. Bock, tom. ii. p. 335. X31 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. with Iiis name as before, his second work, intituled, Dialogorum de Trinit ate , Lihri duo ; De Justicia Regni Christi , Capiiida quatuor. It is affirmed that, in order to obtain permission to quit Basil unmo¬ lested, he had promised to publish his recantation* This promise he artfully contrived to fulfil in words, in the preface to the latter work, in the first sentence of which he states that he retracted all that he had written in his seven books against the received doc¬ trine of the Trinity, — -not, however, he proceeds to intimate, because what he had written was false, but because it was imperfect*. On his settlement at Lyons, Servetus, in order to escape persecution, took the name of Villanovanus, from his birth-place. After a residence of three years in this city he went to Paris, where he applied him¬ self to the study of medicine with so much success tfhat he soon obtained his degree of doctor, and was admitted one of the public lecturers at the university* From Paris he returned to Lyons. Here he was oc¬ cupied in superintending the press of the Trechselii, celebrated printers of that place, for whom he edited an edition of Ptolemy’s Geography, which was publish¬ ed in 1535, and again in 1542; — and also an edition of Pagninus’s Bible in Hebrew, with an interlined Latin translation, which appeared in 1542. In 1541 he removed his residence to Vienne in Dauphiny,. * Quae nuper, contra receptam de Trhutate sententiam, septem Uhris scripsi, omnia nunc , candide lector, retracto. Non quia FALSA SINT, SED QUIA IMPERFECTA, ET TANQl’AM A PARVULO PAR VULI S SCRIPTA. where HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Xlfl where he practised as a physician, and enjoyed the friendship and patronage of the archbishop of the province, to whom he dedicated the second edition of Ptolemy’s Geography. After his settlement at Vienne, Servetus entered into a correspondence with Calvin, then residing at Geneva. In the letters* which passed on this occa¬ sion, both the learned combatants displayed consider-' able warmth and acrimony of spirit in the defence of their respective theological systems ; and the freedom with which Servetus arraigned the tenets of the Reformer laid the foundation of that implacable re¬ sentment to which he ultimately owed his ruin ) for Calvin scrupled not to avow that he would be satis¬ fied with no atonement for this attack upon his creed short of the death of his adversary, should the dis¬ posal of his life be ever in his power f. While things were in this state, Servetus committed to the press his last and most celebrated work, intituled Chris tia- nismi Restitutio, or u Christianity Restored.” It was printed in 1553 at Vienne, by Balthazar Arnollet, but neither the place nor the printer’s name appears in the title page : nor was the author’s name at¬ tached to this publication ; — the letters M. S. V., standing for Michael Servetus Villanovanus, are how- * Thirty of the letters which Servetus addressed to Calvin are inserted at the end of his last work, Christianismi Restitu¬ tio , pp. 557 et seqq. f Calvin, writing in 1546 to Viret, minister of Lausanne, uses these words : Servetus cupit hue venire: si venerit, nun- quam patiar ut salvus exeat. Bock, uhi supra , tom. ii. p. 360. ever HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XIV ever placed at the end. Calvin was in possession of the secret that Servetus was the writer of this ob¬ noxious book, a copy of it having been forwarded to him by the author. By means of a young man named William Trie, a native of Lyons, then residing at Geneva in consequence of having embraced the re¬ formed religion, he procured some sheets of it to be conveyed to France, and put into the hands of the inquisitor at Lyons, with an intimation that the au¬ thor was in his neighbourhood. He afterwards sent several of the letters which, in the course of a confi¬ dential correspondence, he had received from Serve-' tus, in order to furnish additional evidence to convict him of heresy and blasphemy. On the ground of these documents Servetus was arrested at Vienne, and- committed to prison ; whence, however, he soon ef¬ fected his escape. After his flight he was tried, con¬ victed, and sentenced to the stake ; his books were committed to the flames, and himself burnt in effigy. Servetus escaped early in the month of June 1553. His intention was to proceed to Naples; and with this view, after wandering for some time, he went to Ge¬ neva, where he was recognised in the month of August, and at the instigation of Calvin committed to prison. Various attempts have been made by the apologists of the Reformer to remove from him the foul stigma of being the author of his adversary’s arrest ; but, ill truth, Calvin himself never denied or disguised the fact. On the contrary, he expressly avows it in more than one of his printed works, and takes credit to himself for having thus acted towards a man whose principles HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XV principles he held in abhorrence, and whom, on more than one occasion, he thought fit to brand with the opprobrious epithet of dog*. Servetus, on being taken into custody, was de¬ prived of the property he had about him, which was of considerable amount, and thrown, like a common malefactor, into a damp, squalid, and noisome dun¬ geon. Proceedings were immediately instituted against him for his alleged blasphemies. The accu¬ sations were preferred by Nicholas de la Fontaine, a person residing in Calvin’s house, either in a menial situation, or for the benefit of his instruction ; but the real prosecutor, as was manifested in the course of the trial, was the Reformer himself. Servetus repelled * Calvin, in his work Fidel. Expos. Serveti Errorum , thus avows the part he acted in this transaction : Quidquhl in senatu nostro actum est, mi hi passim adscribitur. Nec sane d'ssimv.lo, mea opera consilioque jure in carcerem fuisse conjectum. Quia recepto civitatis hujus jure, criminis ream peragere oportuit : causam hue usque me esse prosecutum, fateor. “ All the pro¬ ceedings of our senate are ascribed to me : and indeed I do not dissemble that he (Servetus) was thrown into prison through my interference and advice. As it was necessary according to the laws of the state that he should be charged with some crime, I admit that I was thus far the author of the transac¬ tion.” Writing to Sultzerus, he observes, “When at last he was driven here by his evil destiny, one of the syndics, at my instigation, ordered him to be committed to prison : for I do not dissemble that I deemed it my duty to restrain as much as lay in my power a man who was worse than obstinate and, ungovernable, lest the infection should spread more widely.” Tandem hue malls auspiciis appulsum, unus ex syndicis , me av cto re, in carcerem dueijussit. Neque enim dissimulo, quin ojficii met duxerim, hominem plusquam obstinatum et indomitum quoad in me erat compescere, ne longius manaret contagio. All- woerden, ubi supra, pp. 61, 62. Bock, tom. ii. p. 360. the XVI HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. the whole of the charges with great firmness, and openly avowed himself the author of the writings that were stated to contain the heretical opinions for which he was arraigned. His trial proved exceedingly te¬ dious and vexatious, and lasted from the 14th of Au¬ gust to the 26th of October, when, a majority of his judges having decided against him, he was condemned to be burnt to death by a slow fire. If Servetus cannot be commended for the temper with which he sometimes replied to his accuser, it is impossible to view without feelings of disgust, mingled with deep concern, the manner in which Calvin acted during the whole of these iniquitous proceedings ; and particularly to observe the savage tone of exultation with which, immediately after his conviction, he stated to a friend the effects produced upon his victim by the communication of his sentence. 6i But lest idle scoundrels should glory in the insane obstinacy of the man, as in a martyrdom, there appeared in his death a beastly stupidity ; whence it might be con¬ cluded, that on the subject of religion he never was in earnest. When the sentence of death had been passed upon him he stood fixed now as one astounded ; now he sighed deeply ; and now he howled like a maniac ; and at length he just gained strength enough to bellow out after the Spanish manner, Misericordia ! Miseri - cordial”* The truth, however, is, that Servetus bore _ _ _ _ _ his *Cetcrum ne male feriati nebulones, vecordi hominis pervica- eia , quasi martyrio glorientur : in ejus morte apparuit belluina stupiditas, unde judicium face re liceret , nihil unquam scrio in religione ipsum egisse. Ex quo mors ei denunciata est, nunc at - tonito HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. xvii his fate at this trying season with great firmness and serenity, disturbed indeed, occasionally, by the view of the terrific apparatus which was preparing, for his exe¬ cution. He never wavered in his religious faith. When exhorted on the last morning by Fared, the minister of Neufchatel, and the friend of Calvin, who was ap¬ pointed to attend him, to return to the doctrine of the Trinity, he calmly requested his monitor to convince him by one plain passage of Scripture, that Christ was called the Son of God before his birth of Mary. The day following that whereon sentence had been passed upon him he was led to the stake, praying, i( O God, save my soul; O thou Son of the Eternal' God, have mercy on me.” In order to aggravate his sufferings he was surrounded by green faggots, which, after half an hour of excruciating tortures, completed the work of death- In the same fire was burnt, at¬ tached to his body, his last book, Chris tianismi Re¬ stitutio Thus perished Servetus at the age of forty- four, tonito similis hccrere, nunc alta suspiria eclere, nunc instar lym - phatici ejulare. Quod .post remum tandem sic invaluit, nt tanium Hispanlco more rcboarct, Misericordia, Misericordia ! A II woe r* * den, ubi supra, p~ 1 13. Bock, tom. ii. p. 371. * Bock ( Hist . Antitrin. tom. ii. p. 376,) has extracted from another author the following interesting particulars of the ex¬ ecution o.f Servetus. Ita ductus est ad strucm lignornm, fascicu¬ les querms viridibus, adhuo frondosis, admix tis lignis talcis con - structam. Impositus est Servetus , truneo ad terrain posito, pe- dibus ad terrain pertingentibus. Capiti imposiia est corona, vcl straminca, velfrondea, eaque sulphure conspersa : corpus palo alligation ferrea catena, cottum autem June crasso quadruplici aut quintuplici laxo, liber- femori alligatus. Ipse carnificem ro- gavit, nc se dlu torqueret. Interea carnifex ignern in eius con- spec turn, et delude in orbem admov.it: Servetus visoigne horren- dum XV111 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. tour, in a Protestant state, for exercising that right of private judgement in the formation of his religious opinions, which his persecutors had themselves acted upon in dissenting from the Church of Rome ! The intolerant spirit displayed by the Reformers, both in Germany and Switzerland, towards those who went beyond themselves in the freedom of their inquiries, and avowed or embraced sentiments in any respect different from their own, especially in relation to the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, rendered it necessary for all persons who came under this de¬ scription, and were unwilling to conceal or abandon their principles, to seek a safer asylum in some other country. The state of Poland at this period, the freedom of its constitution, and the tolerant spirit of the reigning sovereign, Sigismund the Second, who had permitted the open profession in his dominions of the Reformed religion of the schools both ofWit- temberg and Geneva, naturally directed their views to that quarter. Among the persons who first emigrated . . 1 ‘ ■*" . dum exelamavit , et universum popidum porter refecerit. Cum dm langueret, accesserunt ex populo, qui fasciculos confertim in eum conjecerunt. Ipse horrenda voce clamans, Jesu, Fill Dei, miserere mei, post dimidice circiter horce cruciatnm exustulatns et fumo suffocatus, animam exspiravit . It is asserted by some, and tire circumstance derives great probability from the rest of his conduct in this business, that when Calvin beheld Servetus led out to execution, he laughed immoderately, and was obliged to conceal his face in his mantle. Bock, vol. ii. p. 3/7* Allwoerden, p.121, note. There is a very valuable memoir of Servetus, grounded chiefly on Bock’s materials, inserted in the fifth volume of the “ Monthly Repository of Theology and ge¬ neral Literature,” a work which periodically conveys to the public a rich store of interesting and important materials. into HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION* XiX into Poland on account of their religious opinions, a considerable number appears to have consisted of anabaptists, or of those to whom this designation was applied. Many of them were men of education and learning, of sound principles and unimpeachable moral characters. It is to one of these that the introduction of Unitarianism into Poland is to be ascribed. In the year 1 54(3, a native of Holland, who went by the name of Spiritus, but who is supposed on good grounds to have been Adam Pastor, already noticed above, settled at Cracow. Being one day in the li¬ brary of John Tricessius, a person of high celebrity in that city, distinguished for his literary acquirements, who had invited him to meet some of the most emi¬ nent men of the place, he took down by accident a book wherein he observed prayers addressed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. He immedi¬ ately exclaimed, — “ What 1 have you then three Gods r” The conversation to which this question led made a deep impression on the minds of all the party, but especially on that of Andrew Fricius Modrevius, the king’s secretary, w’ho shortly afterwards, in con¬ sequence of prosecuting his inquiries upon the sub¬ ject, abandoned the doctrine of the Trinity, and ap¬ peared as the open advocate of Unitarianism in a work which he published under the title of Sylvco This proved an important event to the new' settlers, and greatly contributed to the spread and establish¬ ment of their opinions. About the time when Spiritus first appeared in Po¬ land, * Sundii Blblloth. Antitrin. p. 36, XX HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION land, a circumstance occurred in Italy vvhich it wilt be proper to notice in this place, as it conduced in an eminent degree to the future progress of the Uni¬ tarian cause in the former country. While Luther and Melancthon in Germany, and Zwinglius, Calvin, and their associates in Switzerland, were prosecuting the work of Reformation, the public attention was drawn by their labours and writings to the corrup¬ tions of the Church of Rome, in some of the Italian states, and more particularly in that of Venice. Se¬ veral persons distinguished for their rank and learn¬ ing formed themselves into a society at Vicenza, a small town in this district, for the purpose of discuss¬ ing with freedom the principles of the popular creed, and promoting the study of the Scriptures. In the prosecution of their inquiries they renounced the doc¬ trine of the Trinity; and they are reported to have held that there is but one most high God, who created all things by his mighty word, and preserves them by his will and good providence ; and that his only be¬ gotten Son, Jesus Christ, was as to his nature a man, but not merely a man, having been conceived of the Holy Spirit by the Virgin Mary. The place of meeting, and the opinions of this so¬ ciety, having come to the knowledge of the officers of the Inquisition, their deliberations were suddenly in¬ terrupted. Three of the members were seized, of whom one (James de Chiar) died in prison, and two (Julius Trevisanus and Francis de Ruego) were put to death at Venice ; the rest were obliged to seek their safety in flight. In the number of those who escaped HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXI escaped are commonly named Laelius Socinus^ Niccola Paruta^Valentine Gentilis, Darius Socinus5F rancis Ni¬ ger, and John Paul Alciatus, and also, though it should seem erroneously, Bernard Ochin. Paruta, Gen tills, Darius Socinus, and Alciatus, settled in Moravia, but Laelius Socinus fixed his residence at Zurich #. • * Narratio comp end) osa Spc. Auctore Andrea, IV issowatio^ ad ealeem Sandii Blblioth. Antitrin. p. 20.9. Biblioth. Antitrin. in vita L. Socini, Nic. P amice , J. P. Alciati, pp. 19, 25, 8f 27* Lubienieeii Hist. Reform. Polonicce, p. 38. Mosheim (Cent. xvi. sect. iii. part ii. note) professes to doubt the truth of this statement with respect to the rise of Unitarianism in Italy, and to question even the existence of this college, or society, at Vincenza : but the reasons on which he grounds his suspicions are extremely weak, and very insuf¬ ficient to invalidate the general authenticity of the account. He objects, first, that “ it is extremely improbable, nay, ut¬ terly incredible, that all the persons who are said to have been present at these assemblies were really so f — and he mentions in particular, Bernard Ochin, and Laelius Socinus. But, allow¬ ing that this were the case, an error in the enumeration of some names ought not, upon any rule of criticism, to be ad¬ mitted as of itself a decisive proof of the falsehood of the whole of the story. Besides, Mosheim has by no means demon¬ strated, that these two celebrated individuals could not have been members of this association. It is, indeed, clear that Bernard Ochin could not have belonged to it in 1546, the year in which it is stated to have been dispersed, as he appears to have quitted Italy in 1543, and perhaps he might never have attended its deliberations. There is nothing, however, to render such a circumstance “ utterly incredible,”or “ extremely improbable j” for his residence in that part of Italy, and his attachment to the principles of the Reformation, while he yet officiated in the Roman church, render it, on the contrary, very likely that he might on some occasions hold private confe¬ rences with persons of congenial views and feelings. But there is certainly no good evidence nf his having at this period em¬ braced antitrinit arian sentiments. Mosheim’s reasons for con¬ cluding that Laelius Socinus could not have been present at these assemblies, are extremely frivolous, — namely, that it cannot be supposed that so young a man, then only twenty- one HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. xxii This eminent person was born at Sienna in Tus¬ cany, in the year 1525, and educated for the profes¬ sion one years of age, “ would leave the place of his nativity (Si¬ enna) and repair to Venice orVincenza, without any othervievv than that of disputing freely on certain points of religion j” or fe that a youth of such inexperience should obtai n the first rank and supreme authority in an assembly composed of so many eminently learned and ingenious men. ’ To the former of these reasons, our objector’s own translator, Dr. Maclaine, has suf¬ ficiently replied — “ Is such a supposition really so absurd? Is not a spirit of enthusiasm, or even an uncommon degree of zeal, adequate to the production of such an effect?” With respect to the latter, the least consideration will show that there was nothing so very extraordinary in his obtaining these distinctions, if we take into account his splendid talents, his ■extensive acquirements, the high rank of his family and the influence possessed by them in that part of Italy. It may how¬ ever be conceded to Mosheim, that this society was not “ the feource and nursery of the whole Unitarian sect,” and that the Unitarian system of doctrine, as it was afterwards professed, was not arranged and digested here in the manner intimated by Lubieniecius in the passage above referred to of his History of the Polish Re ormation. Mosheim refers, in confirmation of his own opinion on this subject, to the German work of Fueslin, Reformations Betrd- gen. A summary of the principal objections of this writer has been given by Bock {Hist. Antitrin. tom. ii. p. 405). In addition to those which Mosheim has himself urged, Fueslin observes, 1. that “ neither Sandius, nor Wissowatius, adduces any au¬ thorities as the source of his information and 2. that “ no other writer makes any express mention of those persons who are said to have perished by the hand of the executioner, though every sect is forward to celebrate its martyrs.” With respect to the first of these objections, it ought to be recollect¬ ed that one of these historians, Andrew Wissowatius, may himself be regarded in the light of an original authority. He held a very distinguished rank among the Unitarian body in Poland, and was a lineal descendant, in no very remote degree, jof the family of the Socini, being the grandson of Faustus So- cinus by h's daughter Agnes, who had married Stanislaus Wissowatius. He was therefore likely to have been accu- -’••• ‘ - • " rately HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXlii si OR of the law, in which many individuals of his fa¬ mily had raised themselves to the highest distinction. Having x'dtely informed as to the circumstances which led to the expa¬ triation of his family. Sandius must have written from the in¬ formation communicated to him by the Polish Unitarians. He is, however, an historian of high respectability, who was not likely to put his credit to the hazard by such a statement, without having previously satisfied himself of the sufficiency of the evidence by which it was supported. As to the second objection, it must perhaps be admitted that, as far as appears, there is no direct mention of the persons who are said to have pei'ished, in the work of any contemporary writer. I have failed to discover any in the numerous Italian histories and chronicles of this period which I have had the opportunity of examining ; and the learned Bock, after the laborious investi¬ gation of voluminous documents relating to those times, makes the same confession. Pie supposes however that some light might be thrown on this subject, could a certain work of Fran¬ cis Niger, one of the enumerated members of the Vincenza so¬ ciety, be discovered, the title of which he gives as follows — Brevis Historia de Fanini Faventini, ac Dominici Bassanensis morte, qui nuper ob Christum in Italia Rom. Pont, jussu impie o'ccisi sunt, a. 1550. But, after all, there is nothing very re¬ markable in the silence of contemporary historians upon an execution of this nature. It is to be apprehended that many of a similar kind have occurred in Catholic countries, which have had no register or memorial beyond that of the tradition which may have been preserved and perpetuated (as might be the case in this instance) among their families and their friends. It might be mentioned as a circumstance tending to authenti¬ cate the statement of Wissowatius and Lubieniecius, that they give the names of the sufferers. It has been judged proper to say thus much here on this subject, as it involves a material question of fact in connexion with the history of Unitarianism. Bock, a much higher au¬ thority in this case than Mosheim, devoted a large share of his attention to the investigation of this point, and has published a very satisfactory dissertation upon It, in his Plistory of Antitri- nitarianism, vol. ii. p. 395 — 421, which is recommended to the leader’s perusal. Mosheim refers in his note to Zeltner’s Historia Crypto-So- * cinismi XXIV HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION’. Having turned his thoughts to theological subjects, and becoming dissatisfied with the established reli- gion, he went to Vincenza, whence, after the dissolu¬ tion of the society, he proceeded to Switzerland, an exile on account of his sentiments. After his settle¬ ment at Zurich he made occasional tours to other countries, especially to those where the principles of the Reformation were admitted and professed. In the year 1551 he made a journey to Poland, which he visited again about 155S. On the former occasion, he became acquainted with Francis Lismanin, a Cor¬ sican monk, who at that time resided at Cracow in the capacity of confessor to Bona Sfortia, the queen of Sigismund the First. Lismanin had already been partly gained over by the Polish Reformers ; his con¬ versation with Laelius Socinus completed his conver¬ sion to the Unitarian sentiments of his instructor, and determined him to quit his habit and withdraw from the communion of the Roman Church*. Another very important accession was made to the Unitarian party at this period by the conversion of Gregory Paul, a divine of extensive learning and great talents, who officiated as the minister of a Reformed church in the suburbs of Cracow. Thus far the dissemination of Unitarianism in Po- cimanismi. But the observations of that writer (p. 321, note) comprise merely an intimation that this alleged origin of So- cinianism in Italy had not been sufficiently examined, and de¬ served to be further investigated. * Lubieniecii Hist. Refor. Pol.p. 40. Bock, ubi supra, tom. ii. p. 594, in Vita Lain Sochi. land HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXV land seems to have been effected bv means of conver- sation, or discussions of a more private kind, and by occasional publications from the press. The first person who appears to have stood forward in a public assembly to impugn the doctrine of the Trinity was l*eter Gonezius, or Convza, who, at a synod of the reformed clergy held at Seceminia in 1556, asserted the supremacy of the Father over the Son and Holy Spirit, and contended that the Apostles’ Creed ought to be received as the sole rule of faith, denouncing the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds as mere human com¬ positions of no authority. The sensation produced by this discourse on the minds and feelings of the Tri¬ nitarian clergy is described to have been very great ; and the immediate effect of it was an agreement to reconsider the subject at a future meeting, and in the mean time to obtain the opinion of Melancthon on the disputed points*. In the vear 1558, at a synod held at Pinczow, then the principal seat of the Antitrinitarians, the name of Blandrata occurs as being present, George Blan- drata was a native of Piedmont, of the medical pro¬ fession. Having embraced the sentiments of Serve- tus, he quitted his native country and went to Poland, Where, through the interest of Lismanin, he was ap¬ pointed physician to the queen. Bona Sfortia. Pie after this returned to Piedmont, but soon removed his residence to Geneva. Disagreeing here with Cal- * Sandii Biblioth. Antitrin. p. 41. Pol. p. Ill. Lubieniecii Hist. Ref or. vin. b XXVI HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. vin, and dreading his resentment and power after the recent fate of Servetus, he went a second time to Po¬ land in the year 155&, and was appointed one of the eiders of the reformed church of Cracow*. From Poland he removed to Transylvania, in connexion with which country his name will again occur in the course of this history. At another synod held at Pinczowki 1563, we find John Valentine Gentilis holding a public disputation on /the doctrine of the Trinity, maintaining that the Father alone was God, and that he had created before all worlds a . mighty spirit, who afterwards became in¬ carnate in the human body of Jesus. Gentilis was a native of the south of Italy, and joined himself, as we have seen, to the little society of Vincenza. After quitting Italy he settled in Moravia; but removing to Berne, in Switzerland, he was there arrested, tried for heresy, condemned, and beheaded in 1566 ,j\ lip to this period all the synods held in Poland were composed indiscriminately of the members and ministers of all the reformed churches of every com¬ munion, Lutheran, Calvinistic, and Aiititrinitarian. The consequences of the discordant opinions which were held by the parties forming these assemblies, were, as might be expected, continual disputations, which were frequently conducted with great warmth and violence,. Several attempts were made by per¬ sons who felt scandalized by such proceedings, to pro- * Sandii Biblioth. Antitrin . p. 28. Bock, ubi supra , tom. ii. pp. 4/0 et seqq. f Sandii Biblioth. Antitrin. p . 26. Bock, tom. ii. p. 427 . mote HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. NXvil mote peace, and to reconcile the differences, espe- ciaily between the Trinitarians and their Unitarian opponents, which were the chief causes of disunion ; but all without success. The last effort of this kind was tried at a public conference held by appointment for this purpose at Petricow in the year 1565, which was attended by the chief persons of all the reformed churches. The Trinitarians finding themselves unable to silence their opponents, who were availing them¬ selves of every opportunity to promulgate their sen¬ timents, arid perceiving that they were on this occa¬ sion the more numerous and powerful party, came to a resolution whollv to exclude them thenceforth from their public assemblies*. From this time, therefore, the Unitarians formed a separate religious body in the country, having their churches, their collegiate and other establishments, exclusively to themselves. Notwithstanding, however, this separation of the Unitarian from the Trinitarian reformers, it is not to be understood that all the individuals comprised under the former denomination were perfectly agreed in their religious opinions. They ail concurred in maintaining the supremacy of the Father : but with respect to Jesus Christ, some thought him to be a God of inferior nature, derived from the supreme Deity ; others held the doctrine of Arius, conceiving him to have been the first created spirit, who became incarnate with the view of effecting the salvation of mankind ; while a third party believed him to be a * Lubieniecius, ubi supra, p. 201. b 2 human XXVlll HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. human being. These last were again divided into two classes ; the one believing the miraculous conception of Jesus, the other considering him to have been the son of Joseph, as well as of Mary. Another point on which they differed among themselves was the wor¬ ship of Jesus Christ; — some, even of those who be¬ lieved in his simple humanity, maintaining that he was entitled to divine honours on account of the high rank and authority with which he had been invested after his resurrection, as the king and lord of the church ; whilst others held that divine worship was to be paid to the Father alone. In relation to the Holy Spirit, it was the common opinion among them that it was not a Person, but the power or operating energy of God, displayed in the miracles which were wrought by Christ and his apostles as the evidence of their divine mission and authority. They differed, besides, upon some other points of minor importance, which cannot be enumerated in this general sketch. Though these Antitrinitarian reformers have been occasionally styled Unitarians in the preceding nar¬ rative, in conformity with modern usage, it must be observed that they were not known by this designa¬ tion in Poland. At the period now under review, they were called by various denominations, arising chiefly from local or temporary circumstances. They were first distinguished by the name of Pinczovians, from the town of Pinczow, where they had their ear- liest settlement. Some of the body were afterwards called Farnovians, from Stanislaus Farnovius, who held the Arian doctrine concerning the person of Christ* friSTORTCAL INTRODUCTION. xxix Ch list. Others were styled Budn^ans, from Simon Budnaeus, who maintained the opinion of the simple humanity of Christ, and denied his being a proper ob¬ ject of religious worship. But the designation by which they were afterwards most generally known was that of Racovians, from the town of Racow, which for several years formed their metropolis. In the year 1579 the celebrated Faustus Socinus, the nephew of Lselius Socinus, arrived in Poland. He was born in 1539, and had at an early age imbibed the sentiments of his uncle, whose papers, after his death, fell into his hands. A conscientious attach¬ ment to his new opinions, induced him to relinquish the most splendid prospects in his native country, and to go into voluntary exile, in order to be able to prosecute his theological studies, and promulgate his sentiments with the greater facility and security. He retired first to Switzerland, and fixed his resi¬ dence at Basil. From hence he was called into Transylvania by Blandrata, to assist him in refuting or stopping the dissemination of the opinion of Fran¬ cis David respecting the worship of Jesus Christ. After that venerable confessor had been thrown into prison, and while the proceedings against him were yet pending, Socinus, alarmed by an epidemic dis¬ order which raged in the country, withdrew to Poland, As it was understood that Socinus went further in his sentiments than most of the leading individuals among the Polish Unitarians, he was not permitted to join in communion with their churches, or to have any voice in the direction of their affairs. His splendid talents XXX HISTORIC • AL IN Til 023 U Cl' ION . talents and high character, however, soon ])rocnred for him the friendship and patronage of persons of the first distinction in the country. This circumstance enabled him to give to the public, through the me¬ dium of the press, a considerable number of works,, upon theological subjects. His writings, in which he is considered to have made liberal use of the manu¬ scripts of his uncle, who was greatly his superior in learning, and particularly in his knowledge of the ori¬ ginal languages of the Scriptures, served to methodize and fix the indeterminate, and frequently confused no¬ tions held at that time by many of the Polish Unita¬ rians respecting the principal doctrines of Christia¬ nity, and to bring over nearly the whole body to his own sentiments concerning the unity of God, and the humanity of Jesus Christ*. The Unitarians of Poland were now become a large and powerful body, comprising in their number se¬ veral of the first nobility, and eminently distinguished by their learning, talents, and general respectability- of character. Their chief settlement was at Racow, a city which was built in 1569 by a nobleman at¬ tached to their interest, who erected for them a church and college-house. This collegiate establish¬ ment was on a large scale. It maintained a high * A Memoir of the life of Faust us Soeinus was written by Przipcovius, and is inserted p. 4FJ, &c. of his Works in folio. An English translation of this, from the pen of John Biddle, was published in ISmo, in 1 653. Doctor Toulmin gave to the public in 17 77, an excellent life of this celebrated individual in 8vo. Bock has also inserted a memoir in the second volume ci his History of Antitrinitarianisin, pp. 654 ct scqcj. degree HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXM degree of reputation, and was filled with scholars from every part of the continent of Europe. The number of the students amounted at one time to up¬ wards of a thousand, of whom more than three hun¬ dred were of noble families. And credit may readily be given to the report of an historian concerning it, that those who came there Catholics, Lutherans, or Calvinists, were soon imbued with the sentiments of the professors, and went away enemies of the doc¬ trine of the Trinity*. The printing establishment at Racow soon acquired: a degree of celebrity equal to that of the college^ from the number of publications which issued from it,, the seeming novelty, the variety and importance of the subjects to which they related, and the genius,, learning, and talents of the writers. Besides the col¬ lege and printing-house at Racow, they had others on: a smaller scale in other towns. Their churches were- found in all the chief cities, towns and villages of the* kingdom ; but the principal were at Racow, Cracow,, Pinczow, Lublin and Lubeck. We are now arrived at what may be termed the? flourishing period of the histoiyof the Polish Unita^ rians. For the prosperous condition to which they had by this time attained they, were indebted to the patronage of some powerful families, to the favour¬ able disposition of several successive monarchs, and * Lamy, Histone du Socinianisme, p. 104. For an account of the Racovian Church and College, see Lubieniecius’s History/ of the Polish Reformation, pp. 239 et seqq. b 4. to? HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. xxxii to what was denominated the pacta conventa, a kind of contract between the sovereign and the peo¬ ple, whereby every candidate for the throne was bound on oath, to preserve all the rights and privi¬ leges, both civil and religious, which belonged to the subjects of the state*. It may well be supposed that the U nitarians neither acquired nor enjoyed this state of prosperity with the cordial good-will of the other religious bodies, whether Catholic or Reformed. Both these parties viewed the wide dissemination of their tenets with alarm, as threatening to subvert those principles which they held in common, and which they regarded as the grand essentials of Christianity. They there¬ fore exerted, without intermission, all the influence they could acquire, and resorted to every artifice, to obstruct their labours, and ruin their cause. With what success thev planned and prosecuted their mea¬ sures will be seen in the sequel. The first event that operated to the serious disad¬ vantage of the Unitarian interest was a malicious pro¬ secution instituted against an opulent merchant of their body, named John Tyscovicius, who had served the office of Questor, or Syndick, of the town of Biesk in Podolia, where lie resided. It was insinuated by his enemies, that his accounts had not been fairly kept, and he was required to verify them on oath. * Hartnocli ds Repub. Polonica, lib. ii. cap. ii. § 2. Haute- ville. Relation Historique dc la Pologne , chap, xviii. To HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXiil To this he readily assented on condition of being per¬ mitted to swear by Almighty God : — but it was in¬ sisted that he should swear by the triune God, or by the image of Christ on the cross ; and for this pur¬ pose a crucifix, with the figure of the Saviour affixed to it, was placed in his hands. Indignant that his ve¬ racity should be questioned, and his religion insulted, he threw the crucifix to the ground, exclaiming that he knew of no such God as they proposed to him. For this act, which was construed into a heavy of¬ fence against the Trinity, he was immediately arrested and thrown into prison. Proceedings were forthwith instituted against him, which, after repeated appeals from one tribunal to another, ended in his condem¬ nation. He was sentenced to have his tongue pierced, for his alleged blasphemy; to have his hands and feet cutoff, for having thrown down and trodden upon the crucifix ; to be beheaded for his rebellious contumacy, in appealing from the first tribunal that had given decision against him ; and finallv to be burnt at the stake for his heretical opinions. This sen¬ tence, horrible as it may appear, w as, at the instiga¬ tion of the Jesuits, executed in all its circumstances at Warsaw, on the 16th of November 1 G 1 1 *. The Catholics were greatly elated by their success in this cruel prosecution, and certainly not without reason, as they had been warmly opposed in the whole of the proceedings by many of tfie first mdivi- * Brevis Relax o de Johannis Tyscovicii Martyrio , ad cait ,m Suudii Bill. Antiirin. p. 203. b 5 duals XXXIV HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. duals among the nobility of the country. Their triumph gave a new impulse to their intolerance, and led them to seize every opportunity to prejudice the Unitarians in the public mind, and arm against them the powers of the government. Unfortunately, an occasion soon offered for the full display, and the ample gratification, of the insatiable spirit of hosti¬ lity by which they were actuated. In the year 1638, some students belonging to the college of Racow, with imprudent and childish zeal,, beat down with stones a cross which had been placed near one of the entrances into the town. This was construed by the Catholics into a designed insult of their religion, and an act of impiety of the blackest description. Notwithstanding the parents of the youths, and the heads of the colleges, punished the offenders, and publicly apologized for their conduct, offering at the same time to make any further atone¬ ment which the case could justly require or admit ; — nothing could allay the fury of the people, who were led on and exasperated by their religious superiors. The cause was carried before the Diet of Warsaw in the course of the year, and was regarded with deep interest by all the distinguished persons there as¬ sembled. Eminent individuals of all communions, — of the Greek Church, of the Reformers, and even of the Catholic body itself, — interposed their influence to quash the proceedings, but all without success. For a decree was passed, enjoining that the Unitarian church at Racow should be closed, the college be broken X HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXV- broken up, the printing-house be demolished, and the ministers and professors be branded as infamous, proscribed, and banished the state *. This decree was instantly executed in all its rigour, and proved a very heavy misfortune to the Unitarians, For besides depriving them of their chief seminary, and of their principal ecclesiastical establishment, it gave encouragement to the provincial tribunals in every part of the kingdom to persecute with the ut¬ most severity all who openly professed Antitrinitarian sentiments, and to prevent the unfortunate individuals who had been expelled from Racow, obtaining a se¬ cure and peaceable asylum in other places f. These misfortunes were shortly afterwards aggra¬ vated by an invasion of the Cossacs, who marked out the Unitarians as especial objects of their outrage and vengeance. In the year 1655 the peasants of Po¬ land also, being instigated by the Catholics, rose up in arms against them in several districts, and pursued- them everywhere with sanguinary ferocity, pillaging. * Lubienieeii Hist. Reform. Polon. p. 252. Vindieiae pro Unitariorum in Polonia Religionis Libertcite, ad calcem Sandii Bibl. Ahtitrin. p. 2 78. Histoire da Socinianisme, 4 to, p. 1 14. 't Among the individuals who were at this period persecuted- for their Unitarian sentiments, was Jonas Schl-ichtingius, one of the ablest writers belonging to the Unitarians of Poland. In 1647 he published a work intituled Confessio Fidei Chris- trance, edita Nomine Ecclesiarmn quce in Polonia unum Dcnrn et Filium ejus unigenitum Jesum Christum, et Spiritum S. profi- tentur, &c. For this he was proscribed by the Diet of War¬ saw in the same year, and banished the state, and his book was ordered to be burnt by the hands of the common hang-, man. This work he afterwards published in 1651, with cor¬ rections and additions. The first edition I have never seen : the second, which is also very scarce, is in my collection. XXXVl HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. their property, burning their houses, and putting all to death who fell into their hands. The Catholics having succeeded thus far in the ex¬ ecution of their designs against the Unitarians, re¬ solved at last to put a closing hand to their work, by either reducing them to complete silence, or forcing them to depart the country. With this view, being assured of the disposition of the sovereign, John Ca- s'imir, they preferred against them, at the Diet of Warsaw in 1658, a formal accusation, charging them, among other offences, with aiding the king of Swe¬ den in his late invasion of the kingdom, on the ground of some families having, during his occupation of Cracow, sought an asylum in that city against the outrages of the peasants. The charges were readily entertained; and a decree was passed forbidding the public exercise of their religion, or the dissemination of their sentiments in any way whatever, under the penalty of death ; and commanding them to quit the kingdom of Poland and its dependencies, within three years, unless in the mean time they joined the com¬ munion of the Church of Rome, or that of the tole¬ rated reformed churches of the Lutherans or Cal¬ vinists. This dreadful edict, — which was confirmed by three successive diets, in direct violation, if not of the positive written laws of the nation, certainly of that enlightened spirit by which the administration of public affairs, as respected the subject of religion, had for upwards of a century been conducted, — fell upon the Unitarians as a calamity of the most afflicting kind. Their body comprised several families of the first HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION, XXXV11 first distinction, both as to rank and opulence, who adhered to their communion from principle, and whose convictions and fidelity were not to be easily shaken by persecution. The alternative which re¬ mained to them, of expatriation, with the certain loss of a very large proportion of their property, and in some instances of almost inevitable and absolute pe¬ nury, was, however, so appalling; that they determined to use what influence they could yet command to avert the threatening storm, or obtain some mitiga¬ tion of the sentence. Accordingly, in 1660, two years after the first decree had been passed, a synod was appointed, at the solicitation of some of the more powerful of their adherents, to be held at Cracow, in the month of March, which the Unitarian ministers were invited to attend, in order to hold a public con¬ ference or disputation with the Catholics and ortho¬ dox reformed on the principal controverted points of their respective theological systems. The Unitarian ministers augured no benefit from this measure, and being withal apprehensive that some snare might be intended, declined being present, with the exception of only one individual, Andrew Wissowatius, whose name stands most honourably connected with this celebrated assembly. Disdaining to have it imputed to him that he was ashamed openly to avow his reli¬ gious opinions, or afraid to stand forward as their public advocate, at the hazard of his liberty or his life; and fearing also that if no minister of the party appeared to plead their cause, some individuals, whose resolution might have been shaken by their present sufferings, xxxvm HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION*- sufferings, and their dark future prospect, might make a fatal shipwreck of conscience by abandoning their faith; this intrepid confessor boldly proceeded to the place of meeting, and secured a reception suited to the splendour of his talents and the magnanimity of his spirit. In the disputation which followed, and which continued from the 11th to the 16th of March,. Wissowatius, though standing alone, and unsupport¬ ed, vanquished by his eloquence, and the overwhelming, force of his reasoning, every adversary who appeared against him in the combat *. This victory, however, which was evinced by the silence of his opponents, though it covered this un¬ daunted champion with well merited honour, was. productive of no advantage to the cause he had ad¬ vocated. On the contrary,, the Catholics, irritated * There is a singular testimony to the triumph of Wissowa¬ tius on this occasion from a reverend Catholic. Being asked, by Wiclopolski, the governor of Cracow, who presided at the discussions, what he thought of the controversy, he replied — “ If all the devils from hell had been here, they could not have maintained their religion more ably than this one mi¬ nister has done.” Et si omnes ex inferno prodirent , non pos- sent fortius religionem suarn tutari quam hie units." “ But5 what,” rejoined the governor, “if more of these ministers had. been present? and there are many of similar powers.” “ If such be the case,” answered the monk, “ I do not know in what manner we are to defend ourselves against such per¬ sons.” — “ Behold,” writes a Catholic historian of this incident in a tone of lamentation, “the advantages which Catholic di¬ vines sometimes obtain from the conferences they are so ready to grant to heretics, before magistrates and others of the laity, ( who commonly understand the business of war, of courts, and of politics, better than the concerns of faith and piety !” Epist. de Vita A.JVissowatii, adcalcem Sandii Bihl. Antitrin p. 252. Lamy, Histoire da Socinianisme3 p. 121. HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXIX by a defeat, which was admitted even hy their own friends, became more violent than ever in their hos¬ tility, and resorted to a new act of cruelty to wreak their vengeance on the unfortunate objects of their hatred. Under pretence that the Unitarians had violated the terms of the former edict, by promul¬ gating their sentiments openly or clandestinely, they procured a new and more rigorous decree to be passed against them on the 20th of July 1660. In this the clause in the former, allowing to the Unita¬ rians the space of three years for the arrangement of their affairs, the disposal of their property, and the consideration of the alternative proposed to them, was rescinded, and anew edict passed, enjoining them instantly to leave the kingdom, or join the commu¬ nions authorized by the laws, — empowering all magis¬ trates and others, in case of their disobedience, to bring them before the public tribunals, and even to put them to death. This unexpected ordinance reduced them to the greatest difficulties. Their ene¬ mies threw every impediment in the way to their settling their affairs. Many found it wholly impos¬ sible to dispose of their property at any price; — others were obliged to part with it for what was con¬ siderably beneath its value; so that several of the noble and wealthy families who still adhered to the party, were reduced nearly to a level with the poorest among them. In these trying circumstances some made an outward show of abandoning their faith, and thus saved themselves from the evils of exile;— but a very large proportion, rather than sacrifice their con¬ science xl HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. science at the throne of human power, submitted to the painful condition of being separated for ever from their native land. These undaunted confessors, com¬ prising many thousand individuals of both sexes and all ages, yielding to their hard destiny, took a final leave of their country, and wandered with uncertain steps, friendless and destitute, to seek an asylum in some foreign clime. Of this honourable band about four hundred proceeded to Transylvania and Hun¬ gary; many bent their steps towards Prussia, Silesia, and Moravia; others emigrated to Holland and the Low Countries, and some passed over to England*. Thus was terminated the public profession of Unita- rianism in the kingdom of Poland, about one hun- * There s a very affecting detail of the evils and sufferings endured by the Unitarians on account of these proceedings against them, and their banishment from the country, given in a letter o Samuel Przipcovius, dated Konigsberg 1 66*3, and inserted at the end of Lubieniecius’s History of the Polish lie- formation. The following passage will show the feelings with which the unfortunate exiles contemplated their calamities. Postulus ut calamitatis ct egestatis nostra tibi descriptionem ex- hibeam. Infandum tu nempe jubes renovare dolorem, ne per vestigia luciuum iterum, et cruda adhuc et hi ant hi, needum c'tca- tricibus obducta retractare vulnera : horret animus ad exceptos tot fulminum ictus, atiomtus et pavens. Qai nos casus hucusque agitaverint, quceque ipse miserrima vidi, et quorum pars quail- tulacunque fid exponere, non mens tanturn, sed maims quoque ac calamus trepidat ac refug'd. Fuimus, fuimus Troes, et vel ipsa non rnulto aide , benignitate Dei, tot per annos iuduUa ecclesiis nostris felicitas, acriorem scnsum prcesentium malorum reddit : ut etiam recordari pigeat, quando et quomodo et quibus gradibus, quod fuimus esse desymus. Et nisi mentes nostras causa, ob quarn pathnur bonitas, et commendarc quondam a Domino hujns generis patientice solatia erigerent, tanta calamitatis procella prostratis atque obrutis pern optimum factu videbatur, quo levins ferantur prcesentia , prceteritorum menwrium a mitt ere. died HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Xli dred and twenty years after its first introduction into • » that country, and after giving birth to a host of ad¬ vocates, distinguished equally by their learning, their talents and their virtues, who were an ornament to their age and an honour to human nature. For several years previously to its suppression in Poland, Unitarianism had obtained a firm establish¬ ment, and made considerable progress, in Transylva¬ nia. The settlement of Blandrata in Poland in 1558, has already been mentioned. In the year 1563 he went into Transylvania to attend the prince, Jonn Sigismund the Second, who was labouring under a dangerous disorder ; and his success in effecting the cure of his royal patient, joined to his insinuating manners, soon rendered him a favourite at court. The influence which he thus acquired encouraged him to attempt the introduction of his theological opi¬ nions into this country ; and circumstances favoured his design in a degree far beyond what he could have anticipated. At the time of his arrival the reformed churches of Transylvania and Hungary, which were numerous and flourishing, were under the superin¬ tendance of Francis David, a divine of great learning and powerful eloquence, who resided at Clausenburg, or Coloswar, and whose distinguished talents and cha¬ racter had procured fur him the esteem of the prince, and of many of the first nobility. David had ori¬ ginally adopted the Augsburg Confession, and had, in 1556, published a work in support of the Lutheran doctrine concerning the Eucharist. Shortly after this he embraced the Calvinistic system, which he appears to HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. xlii to have held when he became first acquainted with Blandrata. The unsettled state of David’s opinions at this period disposed him to attend the more readily to Blandrata’s objections to the leading articles of the popular creed \ and the result of their conversations on these subjects was his entire conversion to Unita- rianism. The joint efforts of these two eminent individuals, - after this event, to disseminate their opinions, though at first they acted with great caution in explaining their views of Christianity, soon attracted the notice and excited the alarm of the ministers of the reformed com¬ munions. Peter Melius, the superintendant of the re7 formed churches in Hungary, preferred a formal com¬ plaint against them to the prince, whom he prevailed, upon to convoke a synod of the ministers of Transyl¬ vania and Hungary at Weissenburg ( Alba Julia) in the month of May 1556, for the consideration and settle¬ ment of the controverted points. To this assembly Blandrata and Da. id submitted several propositions, declaratory of their sentiments ; but they were drawn up with so much care, and expressed in such ambi¬ guous terms, that the synod found no cause for cen¬ suring them, and contented itself with subjoining to the several articles, its own u Limitations,’ * or Com¬ mentary*. Peter Melius seems to have been little satisfied with the result of these deliberations. Anxious to stop the * These propositions were published at Clausenburg in 1566, with the limitations of the Hungarian ministers and the judgement of another synod held at Vasarhelly. Petri Bod, Hist. Unitariorum in Transylvania, p.\2. progress HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Null progress of Hie new opinions, and with this view to impart to others his own fears, and inspire them with a portion of his own zeal, he assembled in the follow¬ ing year the ministers of his own district, to consider the best means of effecting his object. This synod was followed by some others, convened for the same purpose. The public mind being greatly agitated by these frequent public conferences, the prince, with the design of composing the differences and restoring tranquillity, summoned ageneral synod to be held at Weissenburg on the 3d of March 156S Py — Blandrata having promised that he would then publicly de¬ monstrate the truth of his opinions. The proceedings of. this assembly were formally arranged beforehand, and the discussions held at it were continued during ten successive days, the chief speakers being Francis David and Blandrata f, on the part of the Unitarians, and * The disputations at this synod were immediately pub¬ lished at Weissenburg, under the following title : — Brevis Enar ratio Disputationis Alliance de Deo Trim ei Christo du - plici, coram Serenissimo Principe et iota Ecclesia decern Diebns habit a, &c. f If the report of the historian be worthy of credit, Blan¬ drata made but an indifferent figure in these discussions. Being pressed on the ninth day by an opponent who had un¬ dertaken to reply to some of his observations — he exclaimed — Quod ad me-veno attinet — Ego nee scio, nee possum illud ecc- plicure, raucedine enim luboro . Neque ego sum Doctor Theo r logics , sed Medicines. Bod, ubi supra, p. 43. This historian relates (p. 43) that in the course of this year was confirmed a decree which had been passed at the diet of Thordein 1557, and afterwards sanctioned by the states of the kingdom in 1563, securing to persons of all denominations the free exercise of their religion. From the union of the formed HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XllV and on the side of the Trinitarians, Peter Melius. It terminated, however, without accomplishing the ob¬ ject for which it was convened. In the following year, Francis David, with the con¬ currence, and under the authority of the prince, con¬ voked another synod, of the ministers of Transyl¬ vania and Hungary, which was held at the town of Waradin, on the iOth of October. On this occasion, David drew up a series of propositions for the consi¬ deration of the assembly, and comprising the senti- merits of the Unitarians with respect to the unity of God, the person of Christ, and the nature of the Holy Spirit*. At this synod again, the chief speakers on the opposite sides were David and Melius. Blandrata was present, but took no part in the public discus¬ sions, in consequence, it is thought, of his ill success at the former meeting. The deliberations of this as¬ sembly concluded, like those of all the preceding sy¬ nods, without effecting any thing towards the recon¬ ciliation of the contending parties. Before their separation the ministers of the Orthodox Churches delivered in a written confession of their faith in op¬ position to the propositions of David, wherein, after stating their own sentiments, they condemn in no very formed of all parties in passing this edict, an union to which they were led by weighty public reasons, they were designated uniti, or unjtauii. This title was afterwards restricted to those persons who maintained that the Father alone was the true and eternal God, and by them read ly adopted of their own accord ; — while those who held that there were three persons in one essence, were by way of opposition styled Tri- Uitarii. * Bod, nb l supra , p. 57- gentle HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. xlv gentle terms, as u heretical blasphemies,” the system of the Unitarians*. Not contented with this, Me¬ lius, full of zeal for the interest of his party, after¬ wards addressed a formal letter to the prince, wherein he labours to prejudice his mind against Blandrata and his followers. But in this object he wholly failed, the prince having continued to afford them his protec¬ tion and patronage until the time of his death, which took place on the 14th of March 1571. John Sigismund was succeeded by Stephen Bathor, who ascended the throne with a disposition to pre¬ serve to all classes of his subjects the same freedom of religious worship as they had enjoyed during the reign of his predecessor. On taking possession of his government, he declared that he was the king of the people, and not of their consciences : — -that God had reserved three things to himself; To create some¬ thing out of nothing, to know future events, and to rule men’s conseiences, — that therefore to tyrannize over conscience was the greatest wickedness, and an invasion of the prerogative of Heaven f. In the year 1574, the prosperity of the Unitarian cause was seriously affected by an unfortunate rup¬ ture between the two individuals to whom it had chiefly owed its advancement and 'success. Blandrata having been guilty of a gross offence, which Ids ac¬ cusers have veiled under the designation of peccaium * Botf ubi supra, pp. 67 si scqq. ■f Idem, p. 83. ' Italicum , m STO R I C'A L I N T RO D U CTION . S&Vl Slulicum*, David declined all further intercourse with him, and took measures to destroy his influence hi the Unitarian body. This conduct naturally drew upon him the enmity of Bianclrata, and paved the way for those proceedings which terminated in Ins death. < Blandrata, well knowing the high estimation in which the venerable superintendent was held in the country, felt it necessary to act against him with great art and circumspection. Though liberty was granted to ail religious parties alike to conduct public worship on their own principles, there existed at this time a law that none of them should be allowed to promulgate any new doctrine without previously obtaining the permission of the national council. Blandrata learnt that David had violated this ordinance, by-maintain¬ ing in a public discourse that Christ could not with propriety be addressed in prayer, since he was not God by nature, — an opinion which was then gaining ground among the Unitarians, but had formed no part of their creed when the public profession of it had been originally permitted. His first step, after re¬ ceiving this information, was to request him to desist from this conduct, intimating, with an appearance of friendship, that if he persisted the Unitarians, inclu¬ ding himself, might not he allowed to remain in the country : and then, under pretence of clearing thein- * Bod, ubi supra, pp. 84 et 102. The authority for this ac¬ count is a letter addressed by some of the Unitarian ministers of Transylvania to Palseologus, who was then absent, convey¬ ing to him an account of the proceedings against David. Bod has . given this important document entire. selves HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. ’StlvH selves from suspicion, and securing the interest of the party, he recommended to David to unite with him in accusing two or three ministers of this offence, and procuring their condemnation. But the pious super* intendant treated this vile and insidious proposal with becoming indignation. Blandrata had now recourse to another scheme. He wrote to Faustus Socinus, who was then residing at Basil, inviting him to come to Transylvania c. cui ace-edit Fansti Socini Senensis Vita , et Dissert alio Operibns suis , ab D quite Polono ■ prcemissa. Cum Catalogo Opernmejm- dem Faust i Socini . In the year following this book at- * It may be mentioned liere that there are two editions bear¬ ing the date of 1609. They are both in ISmo, one comprising 2/9 pages ; the other, which is on smaller paper, extending to 317 pages. It is difficult perhaps to determine which of them pro¬ ceeded from the Racow press. I am disposed to think that the former copy is the original, and that the other was printed subsequently in Holland. There is a copy of each of them in Dr. Daniel Williams’s Library. f Walchii Bibliotheca Theologica sale eta, tom. \.p. 537- Vogtii Catalog. Hist. Crit. Librarian Ruriorum, p. 183. tracied IxXX HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. traded the notice of the British Parliament, who, on the 2d of April 1652, passed a resolution, requiring' the Sheriffs of London and Middlesex to seize all the copies of the Catechism, and cause them to be burnt ■ at the London Exchange, and at Palace Yard, West¬ minster, on the 6th and Sth of the same month f . The life of So'cinus was afterwards published separately* An English edition of this work in ISmo was printed at Amsterdam in 1652 for Brooer Janz, under the fol¬ lowing title : u The Piacovian Catechisme; wherin you have the Substance of the Confession of those Churches, which in the Kingdom of Poland, and the great Duke- dome of Lithuania, and other Provinces appertaining to that Kingdom, do affirm, that no other savethe Fa¬ ther of our Lord Jesus Christ is that one God of Is¬ rael; and that the Man Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of the Virgin, and no other besides or before him, is the only-begotten Sonne of God.” Dr. Toul- min conjectures that this translation was executed by John Biddle f, and the date of its appearance renders this extremely probable. The translator has omitted the dedication to James the First, and substituted a preface of his own. It must be observed that this work is, in many parts, rather a paraphrase than a version of the original ; and that occasionally the translator has introduced whole clauses to express his * Bee the original V otes in another part of this volume. This edition is exceedingly scarce : — it is mentioned in no fo¬ reign work relating to the Racovian Catechism • and the only copy I have seen is in the British Museum. Sandius and Walchius notice the circumstance of its being burnt by order of the Parliament, but both mistake the date. \ Life of Socinus, p. 260. own HISTORICAL I NT ROD 0 CTT#lSr • Ixxxi own opinion, though at variance with the sentiments of the compilers of the Catechism. One instance of this interpretation, relating to the Holy Spirit, is no¬ ticed in the present work *. After the expulsion of the Unitarians from Poland, Jonas Schlichtingius prepared an edition of this work for the press, considerably altered and enlarged from the Latin edition of 1609, which was afterwards printed under the following title : Catechesis Ec- clesiarum Polonicarum , unum Deiim Patrem , Mi - usque Filium unigenitum , una cum Spiritu Sane to, ex S. Scriptura confitentium , anno 1609 in lucem pri- mum emissa , et post per Vivos aliquot in eodem Regno correcta: Iierumque interpositis complurihus annis d Jokanne Crellio , Franco , ac nunc tandem a Jona Schlic/itingio a Bucoweic recognita , ac dimidia am - plius parte aucta. Irenopoli sumptilms Frederici T/ieophili post annum Domini 1659. “ Catechism of the Polish Churches, which confess, according to the Holy Scriptures, one God the Father, his only begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit : — first published in the year 1609, and afterwards corrected by some Persons in the same kingdom. Again, after an inter¬ val of some years, first by John Crellius, and now at length by Jonas Schlichtingius, revised and enlarged more than half.” — Irenopolis stands in the title-page for Amsterdam ; and Sandhis intimates that the date of the publication, here expressed by post annum Do~ mini 1659, was about 1665 f. To this editioi . ■>' appended some notes and emendations by M F Biblioth. Antitrin p. 1 d 5 It*. * See page 75. HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Ruarus, with occasional observations upon them, by way of reply, from the pen of Schlichtingius; and prefixed to it is an admirable address to the reader on the rights of private judgment in religious matters, the joint production of Andrew Wissowatius and Joa¬ chim Stegman the younger. This edition was translated into Dutch by John J Cornelius,, commonly called Knoll ; but as he made considerable alterations in it, and omitted the chap¬ ters on Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, his version was never admitted by the Unitarians. In conse¬ quence of which they published a complete edition in the same language in quarto, in 166G*. In the year 16S0 this Catechism was republished 5n quarto under the following title : Catechesis Ec - clesiarum Polonicarum , unum Deiim Pairem , illP usque Filium unigenitum Jesum Christum , una cum Spiritu Sanclo , ex S. Scriptura coufilentium . JPrimum anno 1G09 in lucem emissa ; et post ea- rundern Ecclesiarum jussu correct a ac dimidia am - pirns parte aucta; atque per Viros in his coetihus in- clytos, Johannem Cre Ilium , Francum , hinc Jonam Schlichtingiuma Bukoweic* ut et Mariinum Ruarum* ac tandem Andream Wissowatium recogn.it a atque emendata ; Notisque cum horum , turn et aliorum il~ lustrata , nunquam antehac hoc modo edit a . “ Ca¬ techism of the Churches of Poland, which confess, ac¬ cording to the Hedy Scriptures, one God the Father, his only begotten Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy * Sandii Bib. Ant. p. 101. Walchii Biblioth. Theol. Select . ubi supra , p. 539. Spirit. HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. IxXXlil Spirit. First published in the year 1609, and since, by order of the same Churches, corrected, and en¬ larged more than half, and revised and improved by Men eminent in those congregations, — John Crellius of Franconia, Jonas Behlichtingms of Buckoweic, and Martin Ruarus, and at last by Andrew Wissowatius. Illustrated with Notes both by them and by other Persons ; never before published in this form. Stau- ropolis, by Eulogetus Philalethes.” This edition was printed at Amsterdam by Christopher Pezold, and first appeared appended to Crellius’s Ethica Aristo- telica , which was published in quarto in 1681 . Wisso¬ watius revised the text, and introduced into it most of the emendations suggested by Ruarus in his notes to the preceding edition: but the alterations are not very material, being confined, with the exception of one or two instances, to verbal corrections. He added how- ever some valuable notes of his own. Besides these, se¬ veral other notes from the pen of his learned nephew Benedict Wissowatius are ’likewise inserted here, and two bearing the initials F. C,, which stand for Florian Crusius*, a physician of considerable eminence, who was married to the sister of Wolzogenius. There is reason to suspect that the last editor of this edition was Benedict Wissowatius, from t lie manner in which the labours of Andrew Wissowatius in the revision of the text are noticed in the prefatory remarks, and also from the notes of Benedict Wissowatius being' designa- ted merely as those of B.W. This edition was followed * Bock, ubi supra, tom. i. p. 1029. Walchius, ut supra, tom. i. p. 511. by lxxxiv HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION* by another in small octavo in 1684, intituled Catechesh Ecclesiarum Polonicarum , iinum Deum Patrem , illi- usque Filium Jesum Christum , wzza czzm Spiritu Sane - /o, ex Sacra Scriptura conjitentium. Primurn anno 1609 2?z lucem emissa ; et post earundem Ecclesiarum jussu correcta ac dimidio amplius parte aucta , atque per Viros in his ccetibus inclytos, Johannem Crellium , Francum , kinc Jonam Schlichtingium a Bukoiveik; ul et Martinum Rita rum, ac tandem Andream Wis - sowatium , Benedictum Wissowalium , ?zcc tzuzz zzzzo- mymum queudam F. C. recognita atque emendata. Notisque horum, turn et aliorum illus tr at a. Editio novissima. Siauropoli , per Eulogetum Philalethem. The Catechism of the Churches of Poland, which confess, according to the Holy Scriptures, one God, the Father, and his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit. First published in the year 1609; and since, by order of the same Churches, cor¬ rected, and enlarged more than half ; and revised and improved by Men eminent in those congregations,— John Crellius of Franconia, Jonas Schlichtingius of Bukoweic, Martin Ruarus, Andrew Wissowatius, Be¬ nedict Wissowatius, and also a certain anonymous person F.C. Illustrated with the Notes of those and of other Persons. The last edition. Stauropolis, by Eulogetus Philalethes, cjoioclxxxiv.” This edition, though purporting in the title-page to be the last of this Catechism in the Latin language, is, in fact, as far as respects the text and body of the work, the identical edition of Schlichtingius printed a after 1659,” or about 1665. It has the same HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Ixxxr same mistakes, and the same table of errata at the end. It would appear that the publisher had a stock remaining on hand, and that he thought he might promote the sale of them by printing, as an appendix, the notes inserted in the quarto edition of ItiSO, and prefixing to the whole a new title-page, such as has been copied above, declaratory of the contents of the book. The quarto edition of 1680 must therefore be regarded as in reality the latest, and is in every re¬ spect the most valuable. The text is the most correct, and the notes are inserted in the places to which they properly belong : and it also exhibits the most recent view of the theological system of the Polish Unitari¬ ans. On these accounts a decided preference was given to it, after a careful collation with the other editions, for the present work,-— and the translation has in every instance been made after the text as here amended. Besides the editions of this Catechism above enu^ merated, which were published by theUnitarians them¬ selves, there are a few others extant, which were print¬ ed by their adversaries, with the view of adding their own observations upon its doctrines by way of refutation; The first of these is contained in a work of Nicolaus Arnoldus, intituled Religio Sociniana, sea Catechesis Racoviana Major , publicis Di sput ationibm , inserto ubique for mall ipsius Catecheseos contextu , refutata . Amstelodavii apud Joannem Janssonium, 4 to, 1654* Walchius speaks of this book as not being held in much estimation *. The author seems at first to have used * Bibl'mth, Thcolog. Sclccta, ubi supra, tom . i. p. 545. the IxXXVl HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. the German translation of the Catechism, and to have given in his work his own Latin version ; as the lan¬ guage, in the earlier part, differs materially from that of Moscorovius’s Latin edition of 1(109, which, how¬ ever, he afterwards transcribes throughout. At a sub¬ sequent period, Joachim Langius printed the edition of Schlichtingius of 1664 or 1665, omitting the anno¬ tations upon it*: and at a still later date Oeder publish¬ ed an edition in a work bearing this title: Catechesis Racoviensis , seu Liber Sociriianorum primorum , ad fidem editionis anno 1609 recenmit , Socinianam vero Impietalew , et hoc lihro Ir adit am et a recentioribus assumtam adcurate projligavit Georg. Lud. Oedepus, Ft • ancoj . et Lip sire , 1739, 8 vo. Moscorovius’s Latin edition of the Racovian Cate¬ chism printed in 1609, as intimated in the title-page, is here given entire, and to this work the commentary and the answer of Oeder are chiefly applied. Occa¬ sionally, however, he transcribes passages from the later editions, with the notes upon them, and subjoins his animadversions upon those also. Mosheimf speaks of Oeder ’s work as comprising “ a solid refu¬ tation” of the doctrines of the original Catechism , and this judgment has been adopted with implicit faith by more recent writers. To Mosheim himself, and those who agree with him in their theological sentiments, it might appear in this light ; but it will give little sa¬ tisfaction to persons who dissent from the popular creed. The author certainly displays a very respect- * Wal chius, ubi supra, tom. i. p. 541 . 'f'EccIes. Hist. cent. xvi. sect. iii. part ii. par. xix. note. able HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Ixxxvii able share of learning and talents ; bat, like many others of the same class of controversial writers, is too fond of substituting exclamations and abuse for argument and demonstration. Several other works in reply to the Racovian Ca¬ techism were published on the continent, and some in our own country. Wolfgangus Franzius printed at Wittemberg in 1620 a book with this design, under the following title : Augustan ce Confessionis Arliculi Fidel xxi. et Articuli Abusuum vii. Disputationibus xxxiv. in tres libellos dislributis, adversus Ponlificios , Calvinianos etc cumprimis Antitrinitarios, sen Photi- nianios hodiernos , breviter explicati et ex Verbo di- vino covfirmati , cum Adpendice irium Comment atio- num de tribus Per semis Divinitatis , in quibus mon- stratur , qua methodo Antiirinitarii hodierni pot enter et feliciter sint covfutandi et reprimendi . To this work Valent. Smalcius published a reply from the Racow press in 1614, with this title: Refutatio The - skim Prantzii de preecipuis Religionis Christiance Ca- pitibus : and to this Frantzius published a rejoinder in 1621, intituled, Vindicice Dispuiationum theologi - carurn pro Augustana Confessione , adversus Valent . Smalcium. In 1613 Geor. Rostius published an answer in Ger¬ man, which is spoken of as a performance of no great merit *. By the appointment of the University of Wittemberg, who seem to have taken high offence at the dedication of the Catechism to them, Frederick Baldwin drew up an elaborate answer to it, which was * Walchius, ubi supra, tom, j. p. 543. published Ixxxviii HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. published in German, but without the author Yname, in 1619. A Latin translation of this work was print¬ ed the year after, under the following title : Solida Rcfutat 'io Catechismi Ariani , qui Racovice in Polonia anno 1608 excussus &c. To this writer is assigned the first rank among those who have undertaken to refute the doctrines of the Racovian Catechism *. Other replies were published by Christopher Sonn- tagius in his Pseudocalechismus Racoviensis explo- szis. Altorf. 1J05, 4/o, and Henric. Alstedius in his Theologia Polemica , which was translated into Dutch by John Greyde, and printed in 1651. To which may be added a work by Matthew Wren, intituled, Increp tatio Barjesu , sive Polemicce Adser Clones Locorum aliquot S. Scripturce ah Imposturis Perversionum in Catechesi Racoviana , &c. Londini 1660, et Lugdun . Batav. 1668 f. Mosheim remarks' J that u it must be carefully ob¬ served, that the Catechism of Racow, which most people look upon as the great standard of Soeinia- nism, and as an accurate summary of the doctrine of that sect, is, in reality, no more than a collection of the popular tenets of the Socinians, and by no means- * Walchius, ubi supra, tom. i. p. 543. _ •f For further information concerning the Racovian Cate¬ chism the reader may be referred to the following works Placcii Theatr . Anonymor. p. 89. Schmidii Programmat. do Catechismo Racoviensi, Helmstadt. 1707, 4/o. Wolfii Noi. adCa - muboniana, p. 213. Fabricii Histor. Bibliothec. par. vi. p. 468. Rambachii Kinleitung in die religionstreitigkeiten mitdden Soci- manern, parti, p.294. Novis Liter nr. Hamburg 1 708. Koecheri* Riblioth. Symbol, p. 656. Fids Walchii Biblioth. Theol. Selecta, loin. i. pp. 535 et seqq. et p. 545 nota ** adcalcem. + Eccles. Hist. cent. xvi. sect. iii. part ii. par. xix. a just HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. IxXXHP a just representation of the secret opinions and senti¬ ments of their doctors. 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 themselves, than to impose upon strangers* and to mitigate the indignation which the tenets of th is community had excited in the minds of many.” These are grave insinuations and charges to be de¬ liberately preferred by the learned chancellor of an university, in an historical work professedly designed to convey to the pupils under his immediate superin¬ tendance, and to the world at large, a correct repre¬ sentation of the state of opinion among Christians in various times and countries : and it would have been well if he had condescended to verify his accusations by something in the form of evidence. How came he to know the secret opinions and sentiments of the Socinian doctors ? By the attentive perusal of the writings of these learned men ? But if in their writ¬ ings they may be discovered, he might have vouch¬ safed to inform his readers, how they could still re¬ main secret; and in what manner those reasons and principles could continue hidden and ficti¬ tious, which are avowed and published to the world in HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. SC in printed compositions accessible to all men ? Why, moreover, has not our author, as became a faithful his¬ torian, stated what those “ secret opinions and sen¬ timents” of the Soeinians were, of which he speaks ? What the “ hidden reasons and true principles from whence the doctrines of the Catechism were derived r” Why has lie not explained the nature of those “ So- cinian tenets and institutions” which he declares to be “entirely omitted” in this Catechism, and which in his judgment “ might have contributed to render the sect still more odious, and have exposed its inter¬ nal constitution too much to public view ?” Had he been pleased to have added such facts and elucida¬ tions to his work, the world might have been prepared to acknowledge the justice as well as the libera¬ lity of the charge he thus solemnly denounces against a whole community of “ learned men,”of wilfully “im¬ posing upon strangers,” with the view of “ miti¬ gating the indignation which their tenets had excited in the minds of many!” It is painful to observe a writer, on many accounts so highly respectable, thus forgetting what is due to the dignity and truth of History, and indulging the feelings of a low and bigoted controversialist, by dealing out foul aspersions and dark unfounded insi¬ nuations against his theological adversaries. • The Polish Soeinians always designed their Cate¬ chism to he an “ accurate summary ” and a “ just representation” of their religious opinions. And a careful comparison of it with the published writings of the leading persons in their community will show, that HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. XCl that it is justly entitled to he regarded in this light. It omits no material article of their creed ; and com¬ prises those very “ tenets and institutions” which had excited against them most “odium” and most “indig¬ nation” in the minds of religious professors of other parties. It is true, indeed, that individuals among the Unitarians dissented from some of the articles maintained in this Catechism 5 but their objections are openly stated in their writings; and their integrity will on examination be found to be above suspicion, and their characters were exemplary and irreproachable. Mosheirn objects further to this Catechism, that “ it never obtained among the Socinians the autho¬ rity of a public confession or rule of faith;” and that “ hence the doctors of that sect were authorized to correct and contradict it, or to substitute another form of doctrine in its place.” It would appear that this writer had no idea of a public confession of faith, except as a general rule of religious belief, carrying with it the authority of law, and to which all men through successive generations, and in the face of in¬ creasing light and knowledge, were to be compelled by civil penalties to conform in every the minutest parti¬ cular : — a notion which was natural enough in the chancellor of a Lutheran university, who was himself bound by the Confession of Augsburg, which he was not “ authorized to correct or contradict,” and in the place of which he could not, without forfeiting his situation, “ substitute another form of doctrine.” But the Polish Unitarians had other thoughts on this head, and far more enlightened views of Christian freedom. KCl! HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. freedom. To adopt the judicious remarks of a late venerable and esteemed friend*, — “it would have been inconsistent with the liberty of prophesying, for which we see they argue in the preface [to the Cate¬ chism], to have limited their religious inquiries to this standard ; and to have treated it as a Rule of Faith, would have been a violation of their declarations, that they dictated to no one, and assumed no authority. * ' * And the alterations their sentiments underwent, were the consequence of their avowed principles, and the result of the free inquiry they allowed. The [last] edition of the Catechism was different from a pre¬ ceding publication of that kind, being in some places altered, and in some instances enlarged. This they own ; and their plea is not only a justification of those alterations, but a caveat against any censure of any future changes in their religious system ; and furnishes an answer to the eminent historian. { We think,’ say they, c there is no reason to be ashamed of it, if our Church improve in some respects. We are not in every instance to cry out - 1 believe — I stand in my rank — here I fix my foot, and will not be removed the least from this place. — This is like the Stoics, obs¬ tinately to support every thing, and stiffly to perse¬ vere in our opinion. It is the duty of the Christian philosopher, or of the candidate for the wisdom that Hornes from above, to be eu% eiOrjv, not au0a$>jv ; easy to be persuaded, not pertinaciously pleasing himself; but ready to give up his opinions, when any other offers supported by stronger evidence f.’ ” * Dr. Toulmin; — Life of Socinus, p. 2/0. f Proifat . ad Catechismum Pol. Ecol. CATECHISM OF THE CHURCHES OF POLAND, Which confess, according to the Scriptures, one God, the Father, his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. First published in 1609; and since, by order of the same Churches, corrected, and more than one half enlarged; revised also and improved by Men eminent in those Congregations, — John Crellius, Jonas Schlichtingius, Martin Ruarus, Andrew Wissowatius, Benedict Wissowatius, and an anonymous Writer F. C. Illustrated with their Notes. Ilegula fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis et irreformabilis , ere - dendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem, mundi conditorem : et F ilium ejus Jesum Christum , natum ex Virgine Maria, crucifixum .mb Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in ca;lis, se- dentem nunc ad dextram Patris, venturum judicare vivos et mortuos, per carnis resurrcctionem : Hac lege Jidei manente, ccetera jam disci- ; plince et conversationis, admittunt novitatem correctionis, operante sci¬ licet et projiciente usque injinem, gratia Dei . Tertullian. Lib. de Virg, Veland. cap. i. STAUROPOLIS: BY EULOGETUS S'BILAI.ETIJES, CI0I3CLXXX. PREFACE, FBy Andrew Wissowatius and Joachim Stegman the Younger.] TO THE PIOUS READER, Health and favour from God, the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ. We here publish a Catechism, or Institute of the Christian Religion, drawn from the Holy Scriptures, as it is professed by our Church. It must not be thought, because in many things it departs from the standard of all other Christians, that, in sending it forth to the public, differing in their perceptions upon all matters, we intend, as it were by a herald, to pro¬ claim hostility, or sound the trumpet for the combat, and, as the poet sings, JEre ciere vlros, Martemque accenclerc cantu: The warrior trumpet in the field to sound. With breathing brass to kindle fierce alarms. Dryden. It was not without reason that Hilary, bishop of Poictiers, heavily complained of old, that after the Council of Nice nothing was written but creeds, and these indeed annually and monthly; u by which,” he observes, u one after another, we are bitten until we are almost devoured.” The same writer elsewhere styles the bishops of Gaul, head and f dices, blessed Sand happv, because they had neither composed, nor received, nor acknowledged any other Confession be¬ sides that first and most simple one, which has been delivered to the Universal Church from the very days of the apostles. It is not without just cause that many pious and learned men complain at present also, that the Confessions and Catechisms which are nowput forth, and published by different Christian Churches, are hardly any thing else than apples of Eris, trumpets XC.vi PREFACE. of discord, ensigns of immortal enmities and factions among men. The reason of this is, that those Con¬ fessions and Catechisms are proposed in such a man¬ ner that the conscience is bound by them, that a yoke is imposed upon Christians to swear to the words and opinions of' men; and that they are established as a Rule of Faith, from which, every one who deviates in the least is immediately assailed by the thunderbolt of an anathema, is treated as a heretic, as a most vile and mischievous person, is excluded from heaven, consigned to hell, and doomed to be tormented with infernal fires. Far be from us this disposition, or rather this mad¬ ness. Whilst we compose a Catechism, we prescribe nothing to any man ; whilst we declare our own opi¬ nions, we oppress no one. Let every person enjoy the freedom of his own judgment in religion ; only let it be permitted to us also to exhibit our view of divine things, without injuring and calumniating others. For this is the golden Liberty of Prophesying which the sacred books of the New Testament so earnestly re¬ commend to us, and wherein we are instructed by the example of the primitive apostolic church. 66 Quench not the spirit,” says the apostle (1 Thess. v. 19, 20); 66 Despise not prophesying ; prove all things, hold fast that which is good.” How deaf is the Christian world, split as it is into so many sects, become at this day to that most sacred admonition of the apostle ! — And who are you, base mortals, who strive to smother and extin¬ guish the fire of the Holy Spirit in those in whom God has thought fit to kindle it ? Is not this perti¬ naciously to strive against God? ££ Do ye provoke the Lord? Are ye stronger than He?” (1 Cor. x. 22.) Who are you that despise or envy in others the gift of Prophecy, which surpasses almost all other divine gifts ? Why do you not rather imitate Moses, that PREFACE. xcvii great Mediator of the Old Covenant, than whom no rnan was more meek ; and say with him (Numb, xi. 2.9.) u Would God, that all the Lord’s people were prophets ?” Who are you that permit not men to prove either your own opinions or the opinions of others, that what is good might be retained, and what is bad rejected; — but would have your sentiments adopted without examination or inquiry, and wor¬ shipped with servile submission, and the sentiments of others rejected and condemned without trial ? ee What ? came the word of God out from vou ? or •i came it unto you only ?”(1 Cor.xiv. 36.) Do you alone carry the key of knowledge, so that from you nothing in the Sacred Scriptures is locked up, nothing sealed ; and so that no one can open what you close, or close what you open ? Why do you not remember that one alone is our master, to whom these prerogatives per¬ tain, — even Chris t : but that we all are brethren, to no one of whom is given authority and dominion over the conscience of another ? For although some of the brethren may excel others in spiritual gifts, yet iu respect to freedom, and the right of sonship, all are equal. , But whilst, with the apostle, we contend, that the spirit should not be quenched, nor prophesyings be despised, it must not he thought that we are advo¬ cating the cause of enthusiasts, and arrogating to our¬ selves divine miraculous inspirations, or prophetical authority. We acknowledge that now there exist no longer such miraculous gifts as the divine goodness, at rfthe first rise of the Church, poured out by Christ, in a full and, so to speak, a threefold measure, in order -that the novelty of the Christian religion might, as ;.by a pillar, be supported by them. Nevertheless, no one, we apprehend, will assert that the arm of the Lord is shortened, or deny that the Holy Spirit is even yet given to believers in Christ. For although those e XCVlii PREFACE. rivers of living water do not now flow from the belly of believers, — that is, though the Holy Spirit be not given in such abundance as before ; though it do not now display itself in so conspicuous a manner; though it have not, as formerly, such efficacy as to create and produce new properties in men; — it suffices, that such a divine influence may nevertheless he at this day hoped for by all who invoke Christ with a pure heart, as may improve the powers which they possess by nature, or have acquired by art and study ; and, with, due care and industry, render the mind acute and pe¬ netrating in seeking the sense of the Holy Scriptures. We admit, also, that no prophets are now sent whose words are to be regarded as divine oracles which it is unlawful to reject. We do not, therefore, by any means assume such an authority for ourselves : — nay, this is the very thing which we reprobate in those persons who place their Confessions and Catechisms almost on an equality with the writings of prophets and apostles, so that it is not permitted to us even to open our lips against them. We believe, however, that there exists at present such a gift of prophecy, whereby the most hidden meanings of the sacred Scriptures maybe penetrated, and the mind of the Holy Spirit, by whose authority they were written, be everywhere happily and correctly discerned : — which gift, al¬ though it be very important, is nevertheless far infe¬ rior in dignity and excellence to the gift of prophecy by which the times of the apostles were distinguished. For to the latter very little of human talent and ex¬ ertion was added ; — but the former requires a great deal. They who are endowed with the one cannot mistake, in what they declare in the name of God, — those who possess the other are never exempt from the danger of erring. The reason is, that the persons who possess the latter are not themselves the principal cause the things they utter, but the Holy Spirit, PREFACE. XC1X which dictates to them the matter, and sometimes even the very words ; so that they are nothing but the instruments of the Holy Spirit, and serve for its mouth and tongue: — whilst those who possess the former are the first cause of their declarations, the Holy Spirit being only the second and assisting cause. Hence it follows that the authority of the one gift can by no means be equal to that of the other. But as the one gift was not bestowed upon all men, as the apostle plainly intimates, in explaining the diversity of gifts existing in the Church (1 Cor. xii. 10 — 29), so also, in respect to the other, although all men, if they ear¬ nestly strive for it, may perhaps obtain, yet all do not acquire it, because all do not seek it with equal diligence and application. And as the one was given in an unequal measure, both as to quality and quan¬ tity, so it is certain that the other also is, in like man¬ ner, conferred upon some in a greater, and upon others in a less quantity, or, so to speak, in a less dose. On this account besides, no one who has not this gift ought to arrogate it to himself ; nor should he who has a little attribute to himself more than he pos¬ sesses ; as the apostle also admonishes in reference to all divine gifts in general (Rom. xii. 3, 4, 5) u I say through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. For as we have many members in the same body, and all the members have not the same office, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one mem¬ bers one of another.” That is to say, just as the whole human body is not the tongue only, or the eye, — for, as the same apostle writes (1 Cor. xii. 17), u If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? if the whole were hearing, w7here were the smelling?” — so the body of the Church of Christ is not made up of e 2 c PREFACE. teachers and prophets alone. And as again in the human body, the eyes do not usurp the office of hear¬ ing, which pertains to the ears, nor the ears the office of seeing, which belongs to the eyes, nor the feet the office of speaking, which belongs to the tongue, nor the hands the office of walking, which pertains to the feet; but every member rests satisfied with the pecu¬ liar faculty with which it has been invested, and does not encroach upon the offices of the other members ; so also in the Church of God, there are divers fa¬ culties, divers gifts of God, and clivers offices ; and therefore every one ought to rate himself according to his measure, and keep within his proper bounds, lest he should trench upon districts he ought not to touch, and put his sickle into what may be called the har¬ vest of another. Occasion will otherwise be given for a complaint similar to that of Horace (Lib* ii. Epist. 1.) Navem agere ignarus navis timet : abrotonum cegro Non audet, nisi qui didicit, dare : quod rnedicorum est, Promittunt media : tract ant fabrilia fabri : Scribhnus indocti doctique poemata passim. A pilot only dares a vessel steer ; A doubtful drug' unlicens’d doctors fear: o' 7 Musicians are to sounds alone confin’d. And each mechanic hath his trade assign’d: But every desperate blockhead dares to write ; Verse is the trade of every living wight. Francis. For in this manner did Jerome justly complain of old, in his Epistle to Paulinas, that all men claimed for themselves the art of publicly interpreting the Scriptures. “ This/’ he observes, But how do you prove that the Christian Religion is true ? First, Chap. 1.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 7 First, from the divinity of its author ; — and se¬ condly, from the nature and circumstances of the Re¬ ligion itself ; for these all demonstrate that it is divine, and consequently true. Whence does it appear that Jesus Christ, the au¬ thor of the Christian Religion, was divine? From the truly divine miracles which he wrought and also from this circumstance, — that after having submitted to the most cruel death, on account of the religion he had taught, God raised him again to life. How do you know that he wrought miracles ; and that those miracles were divine ? That he wrought miracles, is proved by the ac¬ knowledgement, not only of those who believed in him, but also of his professed enemies, the Jews. That those miracles were divine, may easily be inferred from hence, that otherwise they must be attributed to * • the devil : but this the perfect holiness of the doc¬ trine of Christ, established by these miracles, makes it impossible for us to admit; as it is utterly hostile to- the counsels of the devil a, and designed for his shame and a [This is one topic respecting which the Unitarians of the present day differ in opinion from the Socinians of Poland, namely, the existence of a real being, called the Devil, or Sa¬ tan ; “ originally of angelic rank, but now degenerated; of in¬ veterate malice, and unrelenting cruelty ; who delights to in¬ jure mankind ; and whose power of injuring them extends to their minds and to their bodies, to this material world, and to the future state.” Most modern Unitarians have abandoned this belief, as a vulgar error, involving the most palpable inconsis¬ tencies, and wholly irreconcileable with the fundamental truths of natural and revealed religion. The reader will find this sub¬ ject most ably discussed in Mr. John Simpson’s Essays on the Language 8 OF THE AUTHENTICITY [Sect. I. and complete discomfiture, and for the highest glory of God. You will, moreover, perceive the divinity of the miracles of Jesus, when I shall have proved that God raised him from the dead. For, as he asserted that he wrought miracles by a divine power, it is evi¬ dent, since God after his crucifixion restored him to life, that what he had declared was true — -namely, that his miracles were divine. Prove to me, then, that God raised him from the dead ? This appears from the two following considerations: — first, that many persons almost immediately after his death most positively affirmed that they had beheld him raised from the dead ; and, on account of their attesting this fact, exposed themselves to much per¬ secution, and several of them to the most painful deaths. It hence necessarily follows, either that Je- sus was actually raised from the dead ; or else, that these men, by persisting to declare what they knew to be false, voluntarily subjected themselves to such heavy misfortunes, and to the most cruel deaths. The latter case, common sense alone would show to be impossible — the former must therefore be consi¬ dered as demonstrated. Secondly, a great multitude of other persons also, who had received their infor¬ mation from these first witnesses, submitted, in attes- Language of Scripture, volume i. essay ii. intituled “ An at¬ tempt to explain the meaning of the words jtCUN SATAN, 2A- TANA2, AIAB0A02, etc/’ He may also consult Mr. Farmer’s excellent Essays on the Demoniacs of the New Testament, and on Christ’s Temptation. Translator.] tation 9 Chap. 1.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. tation of the same fact, to heavy calamities, and to the most horrid deaths ; which they never would have done, unless they had been convinced of its certainty by the most indisputable evidence js 1 What is asserted here, and in some answers that follow, as well as the truth of the Christian Religion generally, may, with¬ out adverting to other arguments, be in this manner clearly demonstrated : No person of sane mind will deny that some things were done antecedently to his birth, and when he could not have been a present spectator : but he can know this in no other way than by testimony and historical relation. Now if any history be worthy of credit, certainly that of Jesus of Na¬ zareth and his disciples may safely be considered in this light ; a history which has through so many ages been confirmed, by the constant and unanimous testimony of an uninterrupted suc¬ cession of witnesses of such high respectability, existing among all the various nations of the earth, and differing widely from each other in their language and manners, and in their opinions on other points : No one, besides, during the whole of this in¬ terval, having been able to impeach the credit of the religion itself, by substantiating against it a charge of falsehood, while almost all have been labouring to extirpate it by force. It is apparent, as will be shown in the sequel, that these witnesses could not have been instigated to give their testimony by any prospects of worldly advantage — and yet (and in this consists the force of the argument) an immense host of them, like a cloud, reaching from the earliest age down to our own time, may be produced. The reader who wishes to see the truth of Christianity discussed more at length, may consult the work of Faustus Socinus on the Authority of the Holy Scriptures, Gro- tius’s book on the Truth of the Christian Religion, Joachim Stegman junior’s Brevis Veritatis Religionis Cknstiance De~ monstratio (Brief Demonstration of the Truth of the Christian Religion) inserted in the works of Brennius, and Henry More’s Mugni Mysterii Pietatis Explcmationes , Lib. Sept.h Benedict Wi SSOWATIUS. b [Socinus’s work above referred to, is not so well known to the English reader as it ought to be, considering its great merit. It contains a clear and comprehensive summary of the argu- b 5 ments 10 OF THE AUTHENTICITY [Sect. I. Is there any other proof of this fact ? Yes : — for it is wholly incredible that this religion, — which holds out to its professors none of the glory, wealth, or pleasures of this world, but on the contrary takes away from them all such attractions, and sub¬ jects them to many of the adversities and afflictions of the present state, — should have been received by so many nations, unless it had been confirmed by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead ; and also by the signal miracles wrought in his name after this event. ments in favour of the genuineness and credibility of the Scrip¬ tures, and of the truth of the Christian Religion: and its utility has been superseded by no publication of more recent date. The best Latin edition is that printed without the author’s name, at Steinfurt in 1611, under the editorial direction of Vorstius, whose pious labour drew on him the heavy censures of the bigots of the time, who did not believe, it seems, that any good thing could come out of Racow.” This edition is now exceedingly scarce. An English translation of it was pub¬ lished in 1731, in a thin octavo volume, by Mr. Edward Combe, a divine of the Church of England, who prefixed a de¬ dication to the Queen. This translation is also scarce : it is moreover of rather uncouth execution : and, on these accounts, he would deserve well of the Christian world, who should give the work to the English public in a more pleasing and inviting dress. Grotius’s treatise is better known, both to the scholar and to the mere English reader ; the Latin being no unusual school hook, and several English translations being current in the market. Dr. Smallbrook, bishop of St. David’s, says of this work, that Grotius in the composition of it “ was, among se¬ veral other authors, more especially assisted by the valuable performance of a writer otherwise justly of ill fame, viz. Faus- tus Socinus’s little book De Auctoritate S. Scriptures." (Charge to the Clergy of St. David’s, 1729.) The reader will be at no loss 11 Chap. 1.] OF THE HOLV SCRIPTURES. event-, whereby it was evinced that he was then alive, and exercised authority in heaven0. * You have proved from its author that the Christian Religion is divine : — I wish you now to do the same from the nature of the Religion itself ? This appears from its precepts and promises; which are of so sublime a kind, and so far surpass the in¬ ventive powers of the human mind, that they could have had no author but God himself. For its precepts inculcate a celestial holiness of life, and its promises comprehend the heavenly and everlasting happiness of man. How do you prove the same from the circum¬ stances of this religion ? loss to discriminate between the verdict of the critic and the charitable denunciation of the bishop. Stegman’s treatise is an excellent little compendium. It is appended, as stated above, to Brennius’s Commentary on the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, which is often classed as a tenth volume of the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polono- rum. Numerous references might be here given to more modern English works on this subject: the names of a few only can however be inserted. Dr. Lardner’s great work on the Cre¬ dibility of the Gospel History holds a pre-eminent rank in this class. Dr. Paley’s more popular View of the Evidences of Christianity, in two volumes octavo, is also a work of great and acknowledged merit. Besides these, the reader may con¬ sult with advantage Bishop Watson’s Apologies in Answer to Paine and Gibbon, and Mr. Belsham’s Summary View of the Evidence and practical Importance of the Christian Revelation, which comprises a concise but comprehensive abstract of the arguments in behalf of the truth and divine authority of our holy religion. Transl.] c [The opinion of the Polish churches with respect to the na¬ ture and extent of the authority with which Christ was invested after his resurrection, will be explained hereafter. Tkansl.] This 12 OF THE AUTHENTICITY [Sect. 1. This can be easily shown from its rise, progress, power, and effects. How do you prove from its rise that the Christian Religion is divine ? This you will readily perceive when you consider who the first founders of this Religion were : — men of mean birth, held in universal contempt ; aided by no power or wealth, by no worldly wisdom or autho¬ rity, in converting others to their doctrine. How do you prove the same from its progress ? From this consideration : — that in a very short in- j terval of time it spread in a manner truly astonishing ; • — for several nations, and an innumerable multitude of persons, learned and unlearned, of exalted rank and of mean condition, and of both sexes, relinquishing the religious systems which they had derived from their parents and ancestors, allured by no prospect of worldly advantage, and intimidated by none of the heavy sufferings which usually befell its professors, — embraced the religion of Christ \ exhibiting a change which nothing but the heavenly origin and the divine power of this Religion could have effected. How do you prove the same from its power and ef¬ fects ? First, because it could be suppressed by no human wisdom, or craft, or force, or authority. Secondly, because it did away all the old religious systems, ex¬ cepting the Jewish, which it acknowledged to be of divine authority, though it was to flourish only until the advent of Christ, the author of so much more per¬ fect a religion. You Chap. 1.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 13 You have now shown me how authentic and cre¬ dible the Scriptures of the New Testament are ; — prove to me in the next place that the Scriptures of the Old Testament are equally entitled to belief? This, indeed, is shortly proved from hence, that the Scriptures of the New Testament bear witness to their authenticity. Since, therefore, the witnesses are, as I have already demonstrated, true and authentic, it is evident that that concerning the truth of which they testify must also be true and authentic. CHAPTER II. OF THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. You have proved to my satisfaction that the Scrip¬ tures of the Old and the New Testament are authen¬ tic and credible; — I wish to know, further, whether they are of themselves sufficient, — so that in things necessary to salvation they alone are to be depended upon ? They are in this respect amply sufficient; because Faith that uwrorketh by Love,” which alone, the apo¬ stle Paul asserts (Gal. v. 6.), ce availeth anything in Christ Jesus,” is in them sufficiently inculcated and explained. How do you prove that Faith is sufficiently incul¬ cated and explained in the Holy Scriptures ? From hence : — because Faith, which is directed to God and Christ, is nothing else than the belief ce that God is, and that he is the rewarder of them that seek him.” (Heb. xi. 6.) And this Faith is most fully in¬ culcated in the Scriptures. How I 14 OF THE SUFFICIENCY [Sect. I. How do you prove the same in respect to Love ? This appears from hence, that the duties of Love, whether towards God, or Christ, or our neighbour, are so fully explained, either in general or in parti¬ cular precepts, as to place it beyond doubt, that he who practically observes them is endued with perfect love : and the same may also be asserted of the other duties of piety. Have you any other reasons to prove this perfection of the Holy Scriptures ? There are, indeed, several other reasons; but I shall content myself on the present occasion with no¬ ticing only two. The first is, that every thing which, in addition to the Law delivered by Moses, it is ne¬ cessary to believe under the Gospel, in order to sal¬ vation, has been declared by the authors of the Evan¬ gelical History. For Christ, as he himself testifies, taught all these things : and whatever he taught as necessary to be known, it was the express object of these writers faithfully to record. And Luke asserts in respect to himself (Acts i. 1, 2, compared with his Gospel, chap. i. 3, 4.) that he had declared “ all that Jesus began both to do and teach, until the day in which he was taken up.” So also John xx. 3 1 ; (£ But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God ; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” What is the second of these reasons ? It is this : — that it is wholly incredible, that in so large a body of sacred literature, which God caused to be written and preserved with the express view of fur¬ nishing 15 Chap. 2.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. nishing men with the knowledge of saving truths, those few particulars with which it is necessary for every person, even the most ignorant, to be acquaint¬ ed, in order to his salvation, should not all have been included : and that, while a great number of things are written, the knowledge of which is not essential to salvation,-— any one of those particulars should have have been omitted, without which all the rest are of no avail. Of what use then is right reason, if it be of any, in those matters which relate to salvation ? It is, indeed, of great service, since without it we could neither perceive with certainty the authority of the sacred writings, understand their contents, discri¬ minate one thing from another, nor apply them to any practical purpose. When therefore I stated that the Holy Scriptures were sufficient for our salvation, so far from excluding right reason, I certainly as¬ sumed its presence. If then such be the state of the case, what need is there of Traditions, which, by the Church of Rome, are pronounced to be necessary to salvation, and which it denominates the unwritten word of God ? You rightly perceive, that they are not necessary to salvation. What then is to be thought concerning them ? That some of them are not to be reckoned under the name of traditions, in the sense in which the Pa¬ pists employ the term ; — but that many of them were not only invented, without just reason, but are also productive of great injury to the Christian Faith. What 16 OF THE SUFFICIENCY [Sect. I. What are the traditions of the former class ? They are those whose origin may he deduced from historical writings, or other authentic testimonies and sources of information, independent of the authority of the Church, and of the spirit, hv which it is itself continually directed. For there is a certain medium between sacred scripture and what they call tradition. What are the injury and danger resulting from the traditions of the latter class ? That they furnish occasion to draw men from di¬ vine truth to falsehood, and to fables of human de¬ vice. But the Papists appear to maintain these traditions on the authority of the Scriptures ? Some of the testimonies which they adduce from the Scriptures, in support of their traditions, do indeed de¬ monstrate, that several things were said and done by Christ and his apostles which are not included in the sacred volume : but they by no means prove that those things are essential to salvation ; much less, that they are the identical matters which the Church of Rome obtrudes upon our belief. Some of those testimonies, as eyidently appears from several passages of Scrip¬ ture, do not refer to traditions which were never com¬ mitted to writing; but to such as were not written with an exclusive view to particular persons and sea¬ sons ; but which, nevertheless, might have been writ¬ ten by the same individuals or by others, in respect of other times, and of other, or even of the same, per¬ sons. Moreover, though some traditions were to be admitted, those ought on no account to be received which * Chap. 2.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 17 which are repugnant to the written word of God, or to sound reason; — of which kind are not a few main¬ tained by the Roman Church. CHAPTER III. OF THE PERSPICUITY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. You have now shown that the Holy Scriptures are both authentic and sufficient ; — what is your opinion as to their perspicuity ? Although some difficulties do certainly occur in them ; nevertheless, those things which are necessary to salvation, as well as many others, are so plainly de¬ clared in different passages, that every one may un¬ derstand them ; especially if he be earnestly seeking after truth and piety, and implore divine assistance. How will you prove this ? By the following considerations : — first, that since it was the design of God, when it pleased him to give the Holy Scriptures to mankind, that they should from them acquaint themselves with his will ; it is not to be believed that the writings he would furnish them with for this purpose, should be of so defective a kind, that his will could not be perceived and understood from them by all. Secondly, that the apostles, evtfn at the very first promulgation of the Christian Religion, addressed their epistles, which comprise the chief my¬ steries of Christianity, to men of plain understandings. Whence then arise such differences in ascertaining the sense of the Scriptures ? These differences, so far as they relate to the parts of Sacred Writ which are necessary to salvation, are not 18 OF THE PERSPICUITY [Sect. I. not very numerous ; though the contrary is commonly supposed. And where differences do really exist, al¬ though some of them may arise from the obscurity of particular texts, yet the greatest number must be charged to men’s own fault. For either they read the Scriptures with negligence, or bring not with them a sincere heart, disengaged from all corrupt desires $ or have their minds warped by prejudice 3 or seek not divine assistance with becoming earnestness ; or else, finally, are perplexed by their ignorance of the lan¬ guages in which the Scriptures were written. This last circumstance, however, can hardly exist in re¬ ference to those particulars which are essential to salvation : for, if some of these be conveyed in more obscure, the rest are delivered in the plainest, decla¬ rations of Scripture. By what means may the more obscure passages of Scripture be understood ? By carefully ascertaining, in the first instance, the scope, and other circumstances, of those passages, in the way which ought to be pursued in the interpreta¬ tion of the language of all other written compositions. Secondly, by an attentive comparison of them with si- similar phrases and sentences of less ambiguous mean¬ ing. Thirdly, by submitting our interpretation of the more obscure passages to the test of the doctrines which are most clearly inculcated in the Scriptures, as to certain first principles; and admitting nothing that disagrees with these. And lastly, by rejecting every interpretation which is repugnant to right reason, or involves a contradiction. Are Chap. 3.] OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 19 Are the same rules of interpretation to be applied to the predictions of the Prophets ? Not altogether : for the meaning of the more ob¬ scure prophecies cannot be ascertained without the immediate aid of the divine spirit, unless men divinely inspired have furnished us with their proper explana¬ tion, or communicated to us the information by which we may be enabled to understand them ; — or unless their true interpretation have been shown in their ac¬ complishment. This is what the apostle meant to assert, when he observed (2 Peter i. 20,) that ec no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpre¬ tation If the proper mode of interpreting the Scriptures be such as you have stated, of what service are reli¬ gious teachers ? To propose and inculcate those things which are necessary to salvation, notwithstanding they may be already plainly declared in the Scriptures ; — since all men are not able, or, if able, are not of their own ac¬ cord disposed, to peruse them ; and since it will be easier to acquire a clear apprehension of these things after the detached passages relating to them, which are dispersed throughout the sacred volume, have been collected by such teachers into one view. Furth¬ er, to excite men to maintain, and reduce to practice, the knowledge they have once acquired : and lastly, to assist them to understand those matters which are more difficult. SECTION 20 THE REASONS OF THE REVELATION [Sect. IL SECTION II. CONCERNING THE WAY OF SALVATION. CHAPTER I. THE REASONS OF THE REVELATION OF THE WAY OF SALVATION. I acknowledge myself satisfied by you in respect to the Holy Scriptures : but, as you stated at the com¬ mencement, that the way which leads to immortality was pointed out by God, I wish to know why you made this assertion ? Because man is not only obnoxious to death ; but could not of himself discover a way to avoid it, and that should infallibly conduct to immortality. But wherefore is man obnoxious to death ? On two accounts ; — whereof the first is, that he was originally created mortal ; — that is, was so consti¬ tuted that he was not only by nature capable of dying, but also, if left to himself, could not but die ; though he might, through the divine goodness, be for ever preserved alive. How does this appear ? First, because he was formed out of the earth : — secondly, because, as soon as he was created, he had need of food : and thirdly, because he was destined by God to beget children : — neither of which circum¬ stances can be affirmed of an immortal nature. Be¬ sides, if Adam had been created immortal, it would have 21 Ghap.l.] OF THE WAY OF SALVATION. have availed nothing to grant him the tree of life, whose fruit had the power of perpetuating existence. And lastly, who can doubt that his nature was such that he might have been stabbed, or suffocated, or burnt, or crushed to pieces, or in many other ways destroyed ? But how can this be reconciled to those passages of Scripture wherein it is asserted, that “ God made man in his own image, and after his own likeness” (Gen. i. 26); that u he was created to be immortal/* (Wisdom of Sol. ii. 23) ; and that u death entered into the world by sin” (Rom. v. 12) ? With respect to the first passage, wherein it is de¬ clared that man was made in the image of God, it is to be remarked, that the Ci image of God” does not signify immortality ; as is hence apparent, that the Scriptures, even after man had been made subject to death, still acknowledge this image in him : thus Ge¬ nesis ix. 6 ; es Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed — for in the imanc of God O made he man.” And James iii. 9 ; “ Therewith (the tongue) bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.” — The phrase properly imports the authority of man, and his dominion over all inferior creatures, which result from the reason and judgement commu¬ nicated to him; as may clearly be perceived from the very passage itself in which it is first employed, Ge¬ nesis i. 26 ; u Let us make man, in our own image, after our likeness : and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over 22 THE REASONS OF THE REVELATION [Sect. II. over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” What think you of the second testimony adduced in this case ? I observe, first, that the passage is taken from an apocryphal book, and therefore cannot be admitted to furnish any decisive proof. Secondly, it is one thing to assert that man was created immortal, but a far different thing to say that he was created for im¬ mortality. The former indicates his natural condi¬ tion ; the latter only declares the end for which he was created. Indeed, if man was created with the intent that he should ultimately become immortal, how could he have been created immortal ? Lastly, the word a.oyo;, or the Word. Grotius comments in nearly the same manner on this place, the Introduction to John s Gospel, and confirms his interpretation under John xvii. 5 ; and 1 John i. 1. Socinus himself, with many others, contends that the first verse of John’s First Epistle (which seems to correspond with the beginning of his Gospel) does not relate to the person of the Son of God. They who main¬ tain that by Xoyos, with the article prefixed, the Son of God is always designated, are greatly mistaken ; so much so, that the contrary, rather, may be asserted. See only in the same Evan¬ gelist, John ii. 22 ; iv. 3 7, 41, 50; v. 24; vi. 60; vii. 36; viii. 31, 37, 43, 51, 52, 55; xiv. 24 ; xv. 3, 20; xvii. 6, 14, 20; xviii. 32 ; xix. 8 ; xxi. 23 ; and 1 John ii. 5, 7, &c. In all these instances o Xoyo; is clearly distinguished from the Son of God. In the Old Testament, also, the Hebrew term Hi, Dabar, or Word, is very far from denoting the Son of God, or any spiri¬ tual person. See in reference to this subject Exodus ii. 15 ; ix. 4, 5, 6 ; xii. 24 ; xxx. 17- Numbers xv. 31 ; xxiii. 5, 16* Deut. iv. 2 ; ix. 5 ; xviii. 20. Josh. xi. 15 ; xxi. 45. Judges iii. 19, 20. 1 Sam. xvii. 29, 30. 2 Kings ii. 22. In several of these passages, besides, the word occurs with the article H pre¬ fixed, imn. The same may be observed of the Chaldee Mimra Jeho¬ vah ; as the author of a treatise on the Word of God (who is said Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 65 But in what sense is it asserted that the Word was in the beginning of the Gospel ? In the following, that any one might learn that Jesus, even at the very beginning of the Gospel, was said to have been William Vorstius) has demonstrated. In¬ deed, it is to be remarked, that the Chaldee Paraphrast ex¬ pressly distinguishes Messiah from frOO'D Mimra. For he thus renders Isaiah xlii. 1 • “ Behold my servant Messiah, I will uphold him my chosen, in whom my word delightetli. I will put my holy spirit upon him 3 he shall reveal my judg¬ ments to the people.” In like manner, we find, in the intro¬ duction to the Book Sohar, that Chochamah, that is. Wisdom, (which is there used as synonymous with <5 ^oyoi), is never by the Cabbalists called Son : but Seir Anpin, which is found in Se- phira Tiphereth, is by them constantly and properly rendered Son, or First-born. See the work above referred to, part ii. p. 80, 81, 185. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, may, nevertheless, be cor¬ rectly denominated oXnyo?, on account of the Word of Life dwelling in him, in relation to his office. Moses is, by Philo Judaeus, called ws, that is, the purest mind, and Aaron is de¬ nominated by him 0 Xsyo? abm, or his word. Lib. de nom. mut. And he expresses himself in a similar manner elsewhere, Lib. quod det. pot. insid. soleat. Indeed, he calls Moses the Prince or Chief of the Angels, and the most Ancient Word. For he writes, that he who says, I will stand in the midst be¬ tween you and the Lord (who was Moses, as evidently ap¬ pears from Dent. V. 5) was, 0 ae%aiyyi\o; kcu rtgiffSoraros hoyos. Lib. quis rer. dm. hares sit. With equal propriety, then, si- Imilar language might be used respecting the Messiah. Besides what is stated above, the paraphrase of Schlichtin- Igius on the beginning of John’s Gospel, which is comprised in his Annotations on 1 Peter i. 20, deserves to be consulted 3 as also Brennius’s notes on the same passage. It ought, more¬ over, to be considered, whether Luke, in the opening of his Gospel (chap. i. 2), when he says that the apostles were from the beginning eye witnesses and ministers r* Aoya, of the word, did not mean to express the same thing as John has stated at the commencement of his Gospel, and of his First Epistle ? B. Wissowatius. invested 66 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. Invested with his office, though he had not as yet en ¬ tered on its duties, being at that time communing with God : — Wherefore the Baptist was on no ac¬ count to be preferred before him, because, when he was preaching the Gospel, Jesus was not present and publicly seen. The evangelist therefore distinguishes him by the appropriate title of the word, that is, ol God, in order to show that even in this very respect the office of Christ was long anterior, more ancient, and more excellent than that of John the Baptist. And with what propriety he ascribes this title to Jesus, and asserts that he is, by virtue of his office, the first in the concerns of the Gospel, he evinces by the cre¬ ation effected by him of all things under the Gospel : And who this Baptist was, and wherefore he cannot be compared with Jesus, or preferred before him, he ex¬ plains in verses the third to the ninth of this chap¬ ter ; and confirms his observations further on by the personal testimony of the Baptist himself. What answer do you make to the second testimony, which alleges that he was in heaven ? That there is no mention here of the eternity spoken of. For the Scriptures expressly assert in this place, that the Son of Man, that is, a Man, was in heaven ; who, it is beyond all dispute certain, had not existed from eternity I0. What 10 That this text refers to the existence of the man Christ in heaven, might be proved from many passages of Scripture, and from the reason and probability of the thing : and this has been done by Schlichtingius in his Commentary on John iii. 13. M. Ruakus. Curcellaeus also does the same in his Institutiones, lib. v. cap. 1.8. Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 67 What reply do you make to the third testimony, wherein Christ asserts that he was before Abraham ? That in this place it is not only not stated that Christ had existed from eternity (since it is one thing to have been before Abraham, and another to have been from eternity) — but also that it is not declared even that he had existed before the Virgin Mary. For that these words might be otherwise rendered (name¬ ly, “ Verily, verily 1 say unto you, before he be- cap. 18. But it ought chiefly to be observed, that Christ here asserts not only that he had descended from heaven, but that he had also ascended into heaven : — and further on (chan. vi. 50 — 60) that the bread which had descended from heaven was liis fleshk. B. YVissowatius. k [The Polish Socinians held, as the reader may collect from the above answer, and from some other passages of this Cate¬ chism, that Jesus, after his baptism, was conveyed to heaven in order to receive the necessary instructions previously to his entering on the duties of his sacred office ; and hence interpret the text under consideration as referring to this literal ascent, and to his subsequent descent from heaven to speak and teach on earth, as Schlichtingius observes, the celestial things which he had there learnt. The Unitarians, in this country, gene¬ rally, if not universally, now interpret the whole of the verse figuratively. By ascending into heaven they understand in this place, agreeably to a Hebrew form of speaking, being made acquainted “ with the counsels and purposes of God to mankind.” And in conformity with this sense of the phrase, the whole passage has been thus paraphrased. “ No man hath ascended up to heaven,” e. No one is instructed in the divine counsels : “ But he that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man :” i. e. excepting the Son of Man, who had a commission from God to reveal his will to mankind. [The son of man] Ki who is in heaven, — who is instructed in the gracious pur¬ poses of God to man.” Belsham’s Calm Inquiry, pages 48 et seq. (1st edit.) where the reader will find the reasons for this interpretation briefly stated. He may also consult Lindsey’s Sequel, page 214, &c., and Commentaries and Essays, vol. i. page 391. Transl.] comes 68 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. comes Abraham I am he”) is evident from those pas¬ sages in this evangelist, where the same or similar forms of speech are found in the Greek. Thus chap. xiii, 19, u Now I tell you before it come, that when it is come to pass ye may believe that I am he.” And xiv. 29, u And now I have told you before it come to pass, that when it is come to pass ye might believe.” What would be the sense of this reading ? It would be very excellent. For Christ admo¬ nishes the Jews, who sought to entrap him in his dis¬ course, to believe that he was the light of the world, while yet an opportunity was afforded them, and be¬ fore the divine favour, which he offered to them, was taken from them, and transferred to the Gentiles. For that the words I am (eyco eig/) are to be construed as if he had explicitly stated, (( I am the light of the world,” appears from the commencement of his ad¬ dress, verse 12, — and also from hence, that Christ twice designates himself by the same words, I am or I am he (syoo in verses 24 and 28. That the words u before Abraham was I am” mean what I have already intimated, may be shown from the sig¬ nification of the name Abraham, which is on all hands agreed to denote the Father of many nations. Genesis xvii. 5. But since he was not actually made the Father of many nations until after the grace of God having been manifested to the world by Christ, many nations had become, through faith, the sons of one Father, who was in token thereof called Abraham, — it is apparent that Christ might with propriety ad¬ monish the Jews to believe that he was the light of the world Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 69 world before Abraham should become the Father of many nations, and thus the divine grace be transferred from them to other nations. It is not unusual in the sacred writings to render proper names significant of some circumstance in the condition of those to whom they are given. Thus in Ruth i. 20, “ Call me not Naomi (that is pleasant), call me Mara” (or bitter). 1 Samuel xxv. 25, “ As his name is, so is he; Nabal (that is fool) is his name, and folly is with him.” Isaiah viii. 10, 6£ Speak the word and it shall not stand; for Immanuel, that is, God is with us.” Matt. xvi. IS, “ Thou art Pe¬ ter (that is a stone), and on this rock,” &c. Mark iii. 17, u He surnamed them Boanerges;” which name, as it could not be understood in Greek, the evangelist translates, subjoining, ££ which is, the sons of thunder.” It may be added, that Christ might justly say that he was before Abraham, in as much as he was, by a divine appointment, before that age; as was also his day, which, on this account, Abraham might in spirit have seen, and did see (John viii. 58), which was what Christ sought to prove11. What are the passages of Scripture from which it is inferred that Christ was begotten from eternity out of the essence of the Father ? Chiefly the following : — Micah v. 2, (£ But thou, 11 This last interpretation is given more at large by Schlich- tingius, in his commentary on the place. Augustine and Beza confess that the words admit of this construction, and in this they are followed by Fricius Modrevius. Syl. i. Tract, i. cap. v. Grotius likewise is of the same opinion, and cites as parallel forms of speech, John xvii. 5 ; 1 Peter i. 20 ; Rev. xiii. 8. B. Wissowatius. T> ,, , . Bethlehem 70 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. iV. Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, vet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting/ * [Et egressiones ejus ah initio , eta dielus seculi, whose goings forth have been from the beginning, from the days of the age.] Psalm ii. 75 ie Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.” Psalm cx. 3, “ From the womb of the morning,” Sic. which the Vulgate ren¬ ders — Ex uter o , ante Luciferum genui te , “ From the womb, before the morning star, have 1 begotten thee.” Proverbs viii. 23, where Wisdom says of itself, (£ I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.” What answer do you make to these testimonies ? Before I reply to these testimonies separately, it must be observed, that this generation out of the Fa¬ ther’s essence involves a contradiction. For if Christ had been generated out of the essence of the Father, he must have taken either a part of it, or the whole. He could not have taken a part of it, because the di¬ vine essence is indivisible. Neither could he have taken the whole; for in this case the Father would have ceased to be the Father, and would have become the Son : and again, since the divine essence is nume¬ rically one, and therefore incommunicable, this could by no means have happened. But what answer is to be given to the first of the scriptural testimonies, cited from Micah ? That this testimony states nothing whatever as to a generation from the essence of the Father; and by no Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 71 no means proves a generation from eternity : for men¬ tion is made here of a beginning and of days, which cannot apply to what is eternal : and the words which are rendered in the Vulgate “ a principio , a dielms ceternitatis” — 66 from the beginning, from the days of eternity,5’ — stand in the Hebrew 66 from of old, or from former time — from the days of age” ['D'D tsViy], but the Christ; and because in this very address Christ is throughout distinguished from God (ver, 21, 24). In<. the next place, the apostle calls the blood which Christ shed, God the Father’s own blood, for this reason, — - that whatever any one possesses through the gift of another, and is as such lawfully his own, may never¬ theless still he said to be the property of him from whom it was obtained. Whatever Christ was, he was through the gift or appointment of God, and he pos¬ sessed nothing which he had not received from God, and which did not, of right, still belong to him. It may therefore he said that Christ’s blood was God’s own blood, especially if we consider in what manner it was shed for us,— because it was shed as the blood of 84 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. of the lamb of God, that is, of such a victim as God provided, as it were of himself, to take away the sins of the world. It may be added, that the blood of Christ may with propriety be called God’s own blood, in as much as that Christ was God’sown Son, begotten of him by the Holy Spirit. Nor must it be omitted, that in the Syriac version the words of Christ, and not of Goo, occur in this place16. In some Greek manuscripts also Lord an d God are inserted : the word God being added to Lord in order to intimate that Christ was in such a sense made Lord by the Father, that the title God might with propriety be ascribed to him ; that by this means the dignity' of his church and the excellence of his blood might appear so much the more conspicuously. Agreeably to this in¬ terpretation besides, Thomas, if he addressed those words to Christ, was not satisfied with calling him Lord, but stvled him also God, that he might acknowledge, not his ordinary, but his divine, authority over him. What answer do you make to the eighth testimony, 1(1 It is thus that Jerome quotes this passage in his Com¬ mentary on Titus. A. Wissowatius. That very ancient Greek MS. of Thecla, as Grotius observes, reads m Kvpa. of the Lord. So also the Armenian version reads “ the Church of the Lord,” as a bishop of Armenia informed Sandius, as Cingallus states in his Scriptura S . Trln. Revela- trie, p. 138. m B. Wissowatius. 111 [Griesbach 1ms inserted rov xvpov, “ofthe Lord,” in his text as the genuine reading, — a substitution which is demanded by the concurrent authority of the most ancient and best manu¬ scripts which are extant of the New Testament. The common reading is supported by no manuscript or version of great anti¬ quity or value. See Griesbach and the Improved Version on the place. The MS. of Thecla referred to by Grotius is the cele¬ brated Codex Alexandrians in the British Museum. Transl.] from Chap. 1.] OE THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 85 from 1 John iii. 16 — u Hereby perceive we the love of God, because be laid down his life for us ?” In the first place, I must inform you that the word God is not found in any Greek copy, except the Complutensian ; nor does it occur in the Syriac ver¬ sion. But if this word were found in every copy, would it therefore follow that the pronoun he (exeivoc) must be referred to God? Certainly not; and this not only for the reason which 1 have already noticed, in answer to the third testimony, — that words of this class do not always refer to the proximate antece¬ dent, or the nearest person,-— but also because John, in this very chapter, twice applies the Greek pronoun exsivo$ to Christ, although his name does not appear for some time before, as mav be seen in the fifth and seventh verses, where he writes, u Ye know that he [exeivo;) was manifested,” &c. And (( even as he, sxstvo$, is,” &c. The same occurs in chap. iv. 17. And indeed this pronoun, if its proper and customary signification be attended to, will be seen to have re¬ ference, not to the person who is named immediately before, but to one who has been noticed more re¬ motely, or even not at all. The meaning of this pas¬ sage, therefore, is, that the love of God is perceived in this, that Christ his son laid down his life for us. You have satisfied me so far as respects the names of Jesus Christ : — I now wish you to explain those tes¬ timonies relating to works and operations which our adversaries imagine to be ascribed to Christ in the Scriptures ? These testimonies are those in which, in their ap¬ prehension. 86 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. prehension, the Scriptures inculcate concerning Christ, 1 .That he created heavenand earth with all things. 2. That all created things are preserved by him. 3. That he conducted the children of Israel out of Egypt, dwelt with them in the wilderness, leading them on their way, and acted as their benefactor. 4. That his glory was seen by Isaiah. 5. That he became incarnate. State what those testimonies are whereby they con¬ ceive it to be proved that Christ created heaven and earth ? They are the following -John i. 3, u All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” Again, ver. 10, (( The world was made by him.” Coloss. i. 16, (( By him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers ; all things were created by him and for him.” Heb. i. 2, 66 By whom he made the worlds.” And lastly, the words of the Psalmist, quoted Heb. i. 10, 11, 12, u Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the founda¬ tion of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thine hands. They shall perish, but thou remainest ; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment, and as a vesture shalt thou fold them, and they shall be * V changed; but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.” What answer do you make to the first of these tes- timonies, John i. 3 ? In the first place, the word here used is not CRE¬ ATED, but made : — which I notice, lest any one should understand Chap. 1.] OF THK PERSON OF CHRIST. S 7 understand by creation the production ofsomethlng out of nothing. Secondly, John writes, “ All things were made by him/’ (per eum) ; aform ofspeech employed to denote not the person who is the first cause of any thing, but him who is the second cause, or medium. Nor, indeed, can it be said that all things were made by Christ in any other sense, than that God had made them by him as appears from Ephes. iii. 9, where the apostle writes, according to the Greek, that God u created all things by Jesus Christ” (§<« J^crou X§i- (ttov). From this very passage, also, it clearly appears that the writer treats not of the first creation of all things, but of a second creation : because in the ac¬ count of the first creation there is no direct mention of any person by whom God effected the great work, as we find to be done in respect to the second creation. Lastly, the words all things are not to be here un¬ derstood of all objects whatever, but are to be re¬ stricted to the subject matter of discourse, as is most commonly done in other eases in the sacred writings, and particularly in the New Testament. A remark¬ able instance of this kind occurs 2 Cor. v. 17 , where the apostle has under his consideration the very sub¬ ject of which the evangelist John is treating, and where he states “All things are become,” or made, “ new;” though it is apparent that there existed many things which were not then new made. As then the subject matter of which John is treating is the gospel, it follows that the terms all things are to be under¬ stood of those objects merely which pertain to the new creation effected under the gospel. Why 88 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV, Why does John add, “and without him was not any thing made ?” This clause was subjoined, the better to illustrate the preceding declaration that “ by him all things were made.” For these words seem to affirm gene¬ rally that all things were done immediately by the Word itself, although some of them, and those too of great importance, were not effected personally by himself, but by means of the apostles, such as the calling of the Gentiles, and the abolition of legal ce¬ remonies. For though these things originated in the discourses and proceedings of the Lord Jesus, they were not effected immediately by Jesus Christ himself, but afterwards by his apostles ; not, however, without him. For the apostles did all things in his name and by his authority; as he declares John xv. 7* t£ Without me ye can do nothing.” Why, again, does John superadd the words, “ That was made,” — for can any thing be made which is not made ? In order to show, not that all things that exist were made by God through the instrumentality of this word,, which is Christ, but that all things which were made were made through him :—an evident proof that lie does not speak of the old and first creation, wherein ail things that are Were made by God ; — but of the new, in re¬ lation to which many things exist that were not made, since they do not pertain to it.n What n [As the distinction observed inthis reply between things that exist, and things that are made, may not seem very intelligible to the reader, the original question and answer are subjoined. Quo I Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 89 What answer do you make to the second testimony from John i. 10. (( The world was made by him ?” Firsts that the evangelist does not state here, that the world was created, the word creation being un¬ derstood to mean production out of nothing, — but that it was made. Secondly, he adopts a mode of expression which denotes an intermediate cause; — • “ the world,” he says, “was made by (through) him.” Thirdly, the term world, like others which in the Scriptures are used in precisely the same sense, de¬ notes not only heaven and earth, but, besides its other significations, designates the human race generally; as may be seen in the very verse under consideration, where the writer states, “ he was in the world, and the world knew him not:” so likewise, John xii. 19, “ Behold, the world is gone after him it is also used for the future world, to which Paul refers, Rom. iv. 13, where, speaking of Abraham, he observes, that “ the promise that he should be the heir of the world, was not to him, or to his seed through the law.” It is this world that Peter also has in view, 2 Pet. iii. 13, when he states that Christians are “ look¬ ing for new heavens and a new earth.” So likewise the author of the epistle to the Hebrews in the Quo vero fine addidit, quod factum est ? An enirn aliquid fieri potuit quod factum non cut ? Utdoceret non omnia qua; sint per Sermonem hunc, qui Chris¬ tas est, a Deo facta esse, sed omnia quae facta sint, per earn esse facta ; evidenti documento, non agere ipsum de creatione ilia ve~ tere et prima, in qua omnia quee sunt, a Deo facta sint, sed de nova, cu'us respectu multa sunt quee facta non sunt, quippe ad earn non pert inentia. TransC.] following 90 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. following passage, (Heb. i. 6,) “ And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith. And let all the angels of God worship him.” That this writer intends here the future world, is confirmed by what he observes in the second chapter of this epi¬ stle and the fifth verse — u For unto the angels hath he not put into subjection the world to come, where¬ of we speak.” But he has no where spoken of it except in the passage just quoted, from the sixth verse of the first chapter. There is, besides, another pas¬ sage (chap. x. ver. 5), where, speaking of Christ, he says, “ Wherefore, when he cometh into the world he saith. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me.” Here, since it is ob¬ vious that he speaks of the world, in which, after he had entered upon it, Christ exercised all the func¬ tions of a priest, as all the circumstances demon¬ strate, it is also apparent that he has reference not to the present, but to the future world; especially since he says of Christ (chap. viii. 4), that “ if he were on earth, he should not be a priest.” What then do you understand by this declaration, {( And the world was made bv him ?” The words admit of two interpretations : — First, that the human race were renovated, reformed, re¬ stored, and as it were new made, by Christ; because he had conveyed eternal life to them while they were in a lost condition, and obnoxious to eternal death; and had imparted to them the most efficient motives to return to God whom they had forsaken. In reference to this John reproves the world, because that after Christ 91 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. Christ had delivered it from destruction, and had il¬ lumined it with the light of the gospel, it did not ac¬ knowledge him, but had spurned and rejected him. For it is agreeable to the Hebrew language, that in such forms of speech the words to make, and to create,, should have the same meaning as to make anew, and recreate ; because that language is destitute of what are called compound verbs. The second inter¬ pretation is, that the future world, which we expect, is, as to us, made by Christ ; as it is also called future in respect to us, though now present to Christ and the angels. What answer do you make to the third testimony. Coloss. i. 16, “ By him were all things created, &c. ?” Besides that the apostle speaks here of Christ as an intermediate or secondary cause, the verb to create is used in Scripture not only with reference to the old, but also to the new creation. Of this you have an instance, Ephes. ii. 10, “ For we are his workman¬ ship, created (xTjcrflgvre^) in Christ Jesus unto good works:” and a little further on (ver. 15) “ to make” or 66 create” (xtkty]) in himself of twain one new man.” So likewise James i. 18, which is commonly under¬ stood to refer to the new creation, “ Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first fruits of his creatures” Moreover, that the expressions, “all things in heaven and earth,” are not here used for all objects what¬ ever, appears not only from the words of Paul further on, (ver. 20,) where he states that “ God by him (Christ) reconciled all things unto himself, whether thev • 92 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. they be things in earth or things in heaven;’' but also from this very passage itself; wherein the apostle does not'say that heaven and earth were created, but only all those things which are in heaven and earth. What then do you understand by this testimony ? That all things in heaven and on earth are ordered by Christ, and by him transformed into a new state or condition ; and this, because God has appointed him to be the head both of angels and of men, who before acknowledged God alone as their sovereign ; whence has followed a new order of things among all beings endued with intelligence I7. What 17 That this passage of the epistle to the Colossians ought to be interpreted of the new creation, maybe proved by the three following arguments : — First, A reason is here assigned, why Christ is called “ the first born of every creature.” Now, since the first born is of the number of those of whom he is called the first born ; and as Christ cannot, in reference to the old creation, be understood to be the first among created beings, many generations having intervened between Adam and him ; it follows, that he must be so designated in reference to the new creation, which commenced from him ; — and to this crea¬ tion the reason of this designation is accommodated. Secondly, What are here stated to he created by Christ are not heaven and earth and all the things which they contain, conformably "to the language used elsewhere, when the old creation is spoken of, — but only rational natures ; as being alone susceptible of a new creation. Thirdly, The very enumeration of the things created by him sufficiently shows that the new creation is here spoken of. For with respect to “ things in heaven,” the angels are indeed said to have been created by him, but under the names of “ thrones, and dominions, and principalities, and powers ; which are not names of simple existences, but of dignities with which the Lord honours them; just as we say that a king, a prince, or a consul, has been created, not when he is born, but when he is so de¬ signated. 93 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. What answer do you make to the fourth testimony, Heb. i. 2, “ By whom he made the worlds ?” ^ ^ signated. What is comprehended in the creation of “ things in earth,” and in what manner it is effected, may be seen from the eighteenth verse, where the church of Christ alone is men¬ tioned, “ He is the head of the body, the church and by this also the new creation is connected with Christ in the nineteenth and twentieth verses, since God is said to fill all things by him, and by him to have “ reconciled all things to himself,” he “hav¬ ing made peace through the blood of his cross,” between those things which are in heaven and those which are on earth — things which cannot be referred to the old creation. The reader may compare with this the parallel passage, Ephes. i. 10, “ That in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth.” It may not be foreign from the purpose to have stated the above reasons for the better understanding of the real meaning of this text. M. Ruarus. [On the above note Schlichtingius remarks] — I concur in opinion that it may be of use to state here the reasons above given, except that in the third reason, those titles of dignities should appear to be inserted not to intimate that Christ con¬ ferred those dignities on the angels — for whence does this appear ? — but to show that the highest and chief angels are not exempted from the creation made by him, since they also are obliged to acknowledge him for their head. It is in the (ava*£^aXa/w(7s/) “ gathering together of all things in Christ,” that this creation chiefly consists : Ephes. i. 10. I. Schlich¬ tingius. That this creation was made by Christ as man is admitted bv Athanasius, Cyril, Fulgentius, Salmero, Arias Montanus, &c. Piscator’s observations on this passage may also be con¬ sulted. A. Wissowatius. Procopius Gazaeus, in his observations on the first chapter of Genesis, thus interprets this passage of the epistle to the Colossians — “ Omnia per ilium condita sunt, sive quce in terra sunt, sive quae in coelis: id est, renovata, et in integrum resti- tuta. “ By him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth : — that is, renovated, and restored to their pristine state.” Grotius likewise writes to the same pur¬ pose ; and his observations should bv all means be consulted. See 94 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. I observe, that what is here explicitly stated, not that Christ made the worlds, but that God made them bv him ; may be asserted in reference to mankind, or understood of the world to come. And in what sense both the human race and the world to come may be said to have been made through Christ, I have already explained in my observations on the second testimony, John i. 10. That the original creation of this world is not intended here, is evident from this, that the same writer asserts that God made the worlds by him whom he had appointed heir of all things but it is evident this was no other than the man Jesus. Besides, the very order of the words proves that these worlds were made subsequently to his being appoint¬ ed the heir of all things ; and that this was not done till after his resurrection, is declared in several pas¬ sages of the holy scriptures rS What See also his prolegomena to the gospels, and his annotations on Ephes. i. 10; ii. 10 ; iii. .9 ; James i. 18 ; Rev. iii. 14 ; iv. 11. Grotius remarks that Chrysostom explains this passage to mean that the world was created on account of Christ. The interpretation given of it by John Simplicius, in his Articles of Faith, § G, may also be consulted. This agrees with the expla¬ nation which Schlichtingius has proposed in his observations on the introduction to John's gospel, inserted m his commen¬ tary on 1 Pet, i. 20.° B. Wissowatius. ° [Modern Unitarians concur with the authors of this Cate¬ chism, arid the above annotators, in interpreting this passage of the new moral creation effected by Jesus Christ, by means of his gospel. The reader may consult, on this subject, in addi¬ tion to the authorities above referred to, an admirable essay on the creation of all things by Jesus Christ, inserted in Commen¬ taries and Essays, vol, ii. p. 9 ; and also a Discourse by the Rev, Russell Scott of Portsmouth, on the same subject, Transl.J i8 Grotius remarks that in his opinion this passage may with¬ out 93 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. What answer do you make to the fifth testimony, from Psalm cii. 25, &c. quoted Heb. i. 10, 11, 12, u Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the founda¬ tion of the earth, ” & c. ? To this testimony I reply, that these words of the Psalmist, which were spoken of the one supreme God, are by this author applied to Christ only so far !as they pertain to the scope of his argument. For it must be observed that the discourse in this testi- Imony refers not to one subject only, but to three di¬ stinct subjects : — First, the creation of the heavens and the earth1; secondly, the destruction of all created things ; and thirdly, the endless duration of God. Now that the writer does not refer the first of these to Christ is hence evident, that he proposes to him¬ self, in this chapter, to prove the pre-eminence of Christ, — not that pre-eminence by which he would himself be the supreme God, but that which through the divine favour he “ obtained by inheritance,” and whereby he was made tc better than the angels/7— !out harshness be rendered, propter quern mundum fecit , ft on whose account he made the world.” And he shows in his com¬ mentary on this place, and on Heb. i. 10, that it was under¬ stood and believed among the Jews that the world had been created with a view to the Messiah. This interpretation would he more accordant with the bearing of the apostle’s observa¬ tions, and better harmonize with the preceding context that the son of God was for this reason appointed the heir of all things, that God had for, or with a view to, him, made the ages, or the world. For the Greek preposition has, with a genitive case may be rendered for, or “ with a view to,” as appears from a passage of Gregory Nazianzen, which, among others, is usually quoted as an example in the Lexicons. t»j< **• t^vornra. Qics B, WiSSOWATIUS. which 96 OF THE PERSON OF CURT ST. [Sect. IV. which is to be dated from that time when he sat down at the right hand of God, as clearly appears from the third and fourth verses. For he thus ex¬ presses himself, (i He sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high, being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” Since then the kind of superiority here specified, neither is, nor can be, the creation of heaven and earth, it is apparent that the words of the Psalmist were not cited by this author with the view of proving that this creation was the work of Christ. — But to explain this matter some¬ what more at large. — Since it appears that these words of the Psalmist were addressed to the one su¬ preme God, if they were applied by the author to the Hebrews, to Christ, in the sense contended for, he must have done it either that he might declare Christ to be that one supreme God, or that he might set him forth as joined with and subordinate to God. But the first cannot have been the case ; because, if this fact was at the time known to those Hebrews, what occasion could there have been for their re¬ quiring these additional proofs of the pre-eminence of Christ? But if it was unknown, then this point ought the rather to have been proved and demon¬ strated from the scriptures. For it would have been absurd, tacitly andwithout evidence to assume that to be already known wherein the chief pre-eminence of Christ consisted, and which is most difficult of belief, while that which is greatly inferior in dignity, and more credible, is advanced with so much care, and with 97 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. with so many scriptural proofs. But further : — Let it now be supposed that Christ was the one supreme God — what more would this scriptural testimony prove, than that He who is the one supreme God, created heaven and earth ? a position concerning which, assuredly, there never was any question. More¬ over, ifit were assumed that Christ was the one supreme God, there could remain no ground for the comparison which the author institutes between him and the an¬ gels. For to what purpose would it be to compare, in respect to pre-eminence, the one supreme God, the creator of all things, with the angels, his own crea¬ tures ? Lastly, The writer would in this case him- self overturn the very thing which he had undertaken to establish. For was there ever a time when this one supreme God was made better or more excellent than any created beings ? The second case then which I have stated must be asserted, namely — that the words of the Psalmist are applied by this author to Christ, because he is in the things enumerated joined with and subordinate to God. But this junc¬ tion and subordination have no reference to the old creation of the heavens and the earth, which is spoken of in these words of the Psalmist: for in the old creation God had no one joined with and subordinate to him. To suppose this would also be assuming what ought much rather to be proved than the very thing for the establishment of which this testimony is ad¬ duced, and the taking of which for granted would in like manner destroy the comparison here instituted between Christ and the angels. For if Christ was sub- F ordinate 98 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. ordinate to God in the creation of heaven and earth, there can be no doubt but that he was also subordi¬ nate to him in the creation of the angels 5 and thus the angels, no less than the heavens and the earth, would be his creatures. Lastly, this also would de- stroy the very position towards the establishment of which all the observations of the writer are directed ; namely, that Christ, after he had sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high, was made better than the angels. For in this case he would have been made more excellent than the angels, not first at this par¬ ticular period, but before the creation of all things. Now if the author take neither of these things for granted, how could he refer to Christ the declaration of Scrip¬ ture, 'which ascribes the creation of heaven and earth to God, in either of the senses I have mentioned ? What could he, by the citation of this testimony, prove to those persons who admit neither of the cases I have stated ? — It remains then, that we are to consider these words to be referred to Christ in so far as he is in the other particulars, that is in the destruction of heaven and earth, subordinate to God, and united to him in the perpetuity of his future existence: — these, in arguing with Hebrew Christians, the author might with propriety state as indisputable facts. For with respect to the first, it is certain, both from the testimony I have already cited, and from other decla¬ rations of Scripture, that Christ will reign as long as heaven and earth and the existing age shall endure : — 011 which account the destruction of heaven and earth cannot be effected except under his reign, and accord- 99 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST, ingly by his own act. For it was no less known to the Hebrews, that those things which God was to perform during the reign of the Messiah, with a view to the sal¬ vation of his people and the punishment of the wicked (to which events the destruction of heaven and earth refers), were to be performed by the Messiah, whom for this purpose he had constituted the King and Lord of all things. And since God has put all things in sub¬ jection to Christ, who can doubt but that heaven and earth are his ; and that therefore, if they are to be de¬ stroyed, they must be destroyed by Christ ? — With respect to the perpetuity of his future existence, this was also not at all doubted by them ; for they believed that the Messiah would abide for ever, and acknow¬ ledge that when raised from the dead, and received into heaven, he should live a celestial life with God. This then is the reason why the author deservedly, and in an appropriate sense, applies to Christ the words that were by the Psalmist addressed to God; which he does very properly and seasonably after the decla¬ ration, which has already been noticed, that the throne of Christ was to endure for ever and ever : that is to say, that he might show that, so far from the existence of Christ terminating with the end of the age during which he is to reign, it is he who is to put an end to that age, and to destroy heaven and earth, — whilst he him¬ self will live and remain through all eternity. This certainly comprises the most conclusive proof of his superiority to angels: for, while in respect to their im¬ mortality he is in nothing their inferior, he is in re¬ gard to the power and authority implied in the de- f 2 struetion H)0 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. struction of heaven and earth, far more excellent and divine p. But if the former part of this passage, in which the creation of heaven and earth is spoken of, have no re¬ ference to the design of the writer to the Hebrews, how happens it that he did not omit the clause ? On this account ; that the other parts, which are applicable to his argument, are connected with this by pronouns and adjectives : — As t£ they shall pe¬ rish;” iC all shall wax old 66 thou shalt fold them, and they shall be changed,” &c., and he chose to repeat the whole enumeration rather than change the words of Scripture, and substitute the nouns for the adjectives and pronouns. Have you any other similar examples of this prac¬ tice ? They are indeed sufficiently common among all writers both sacred and profane. Take for one instance Matt. xii. IS — 21, 6£ 18 Behold my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved in whom my soul is well pleased : I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles. 19 He shall not strive nor cry ; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. 20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send P [F ew modern Unitarians, if any, would, I apprehend, sub¬ scribe to the preceding interpretation. The words of the Psalmist are understood by them to be quoted by the writer to the Hebrews with no other view than to prove the lasting or permanent duration of the spiritual sovereignty of Christ, from the immutability of God, who was the founder and is the supporter of his kingdom. Transl.J forth 101 $hap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. forth judgement unto victory. 21 And in his name shall tiie Gentiles trust. ” In this quotation (from Isaiah xlii. 1, &c.) it is sufficiently apparent, that the nineteenth verse alone applies to the evangelist's pur¬ pose, which was to account for Christ’s prohibition, contained in the sixteenth verse, that those whom he healed “ should not make him known.” We have another instance. Acts ii. 17—2 1 . \7 u And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, 1 will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh : and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and vour old men shall dream dreams : IS And on my servants, and on my handmaidens, I will pour out in those days of my spirit ; and they shall prophesy : 19 And 1 will show wonders in hea¬ ven above, and signs in the earth beneath ; blood and Are, and vapour of smoke ; 20 The sun shall be turn¬ ed into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come : 21 And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on thename of the Lord shall be saved.” In this quotation (from Joel ii. 28, &c.) it is obvious that only the seven¬ teenth and eighteenth verses are pertinent to the apo¬ stle Peter’s observations, which went to show that the Holy Spirit had fallen on the disciples of Christ. Again, in the same chapter of the Acts, verses 25 — 27. 25 “ I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that 1 shall not be moved. 26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad : moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope : 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades, f 3 the 102 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. the grave] neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption in which quotation (from Psalm xvi. 8, &c.) it is apparent that the twenty-seventh verse alone bears upon the subject ; since it was the apostle’s aim to prove that it was not possible that Christ should be detained by death. Lastly, in the very chapter under our consideration (Heb. i. 9.) it is manifest that the words, “Thou hast loved righteous¬ ness and hated iniquity,” have no connection with what the apostle undertakes to prove, which is, that Christ was made better than the angels. I wish to know whether there be any other instances of words spoken of one person, being applied to an¬ other on account of some subordination or likeness ? You need not go beyond this chapter in search of examples of this kind, as you may find some in the context of the words which I have last quoted : for in the sixth verse, words which in another Psalm (xcvii. 7) are spoken of God, “ Let all the angels worship him,” are applied to Christ for no other reason than because he is subordinate to God in reli¬ gious worship. For the angels cannot worship God, as I shall hereafter show, without first worshipping him to whom God has subjected both themselves and the world they inhabit : and on the other hand, in worshipping Christ they worship God himself. Again, in the seventh verse (“ who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire”) words which in another Psalm (civ. 4,) are spoken of winds and storms, and lightnings that dart along the hea¬ vens, are applied to angels on account of some ima¬ gined 103 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. gined similitude. You may refer also to Acts xiii. 47, where the prediction of Isaiah concerning Christ, Is, xlix. 6, (i£ 1 have set thee to be a light of the Gen¬ tiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth”) is quoted by Paul and Barnabas as if it had been delivered in relation to themselves. I shall adduce some further examples hereafter, when I come to reply to the arguments grounded on ex¬ pressions used respecting God in the Old Testament and applied to Christ in the New Testament. But does it not seem harsh that when some words in passages of this kind do, on some account, per¬ tain to Christ, the whole should not be referred to him ? It ought not to seem harsh that words of this de¬ scription, spoken of another person, should be ap¬ plied to Christ so far only as they correspond to his person. The writer to the Hebrews supplies us with an example of this in the fifth verse of the first chap¬ ter ; where, in the following words spoken by God con¬ cerning Solomon (2 Sam. vii. 14), u I will be his Fa¬ ther, and he shall be my Son ; if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men” — he applies the former part alone to Christ; omitting the latter portion, because it might indeed be suitable to Solomon hut could not be to Christ, who was free from all sin and iniquity. The same writer, in several other in¬ stances, applies expressions which are used of God, to Christ, as far as his circumstances and person re¬ quired, as you shall hear in the proper place. But 104 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Scet. IV. Eut mav not the old creation of heaven and earth be referred to Christ in some appropriate sense, which would indicate his high pre-eminence above the angels ? Certainly : namely — -in so far as Christ, being an¬ tecedently to all creation foreknown, especially chosen, and predestined to glory by God, was the cause of God’s creating the world and all things, whereby he might carry into effect his purpose of con¬ ducting Christ to glory, and conferring through him eternal life on the human race : in which sense, in¬ deed, the creation of heaven and earth and all things might justly be referred to Christ as its author; and this was of old known to the Hebrews, viz. that the world was created with a view to the Messiah ; fur¬ nishing, too, a clear proofof this fact, that Christ, after being advanced to his glory, was made more excellent and worthy than the angels. — If any one shall say that this was the ground on which the author attributed those words also, in which the creation of heaven and earth is attributed to God, to Christ, in the sense I have intimated, that is, a sense appropriate to him, be will find that I entirely concur with him in opinion. To this manner of speaking may be likened that wherein parents are said (Exod. xx. 12) to prolong the days of those children who honour them : which never¬ theless they are not able to do, but God does it with a view to themselves or their offspring ; — and also wherein the friends of the mammon of unrighteousness are stated (Luke xvi. 9) to receive us into everlasting habitations ; which, in like manner, will not be done fiy 105 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. by them, but by God on their account. To the same purpose is the saying of Salvianus in the preface of his book against avarice : Rede ipse scripsisse dicitur , per quern factum est ut scriberetur — 6C He is justly said to have written, by whom the writing was caused to be made19/’ 19 What if to these two interpretations of this very difficult passage we add a third ? — I observe then, that the divine au¬ thor applies the passage of the Psalms, which speaks of the old creation, to the new creation effected by Jesus Christ, in an accommodated sense. For if the prophets could say that God created a new heaven and a new earth when he improved the condition of the people of Israel, — with how much greater pro¬ priety may this language be used in reference to the reforma¬ tion of the world by Christ! For this renovation of the Is¬ raelites induced no alteration of the heaven or the earth, or even of that small district ; — whereas the new reformation ef¬ fected by Christ gave a new lord to heaven and earth, who rules them at his pleasure, and has power to destroy them; who has also made all the inhabitants of heaven and earth par¬ takers of an entirely new state of things, introduced a new or¬ der even among the angels in heaven, with various kinds of dignities and offices — established on the earth among mankind far different principles and different manners, — and reconciling both to each other has formed them into one commonwealth. The sense of the passage would therefore be as follows : — • And thou, Lord God, from the beginning of the new creation, hast by Christ laid the foundation of the earth, — which a little before was convulsed by the wickedness of men, and hasten- ingto destruction, — bynewlaws, and the heavens are as a new work of thine hands, in as much as they are transformed by thee through Christ into a state wholly different from that wherein they were before. But they nevertheless shall perish — beingto be destroyed by Christ,- — but thou, together with him whom thou hast associated with thee in the conduct of this new reformation, shalt remain : they all as a garment shall wax old, and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up by Christ ; but thou and thy Christ are the same, and thy years and his, whom thou hast made immortal, shall not fail. In order to render this interpretation the more probable. r 5 those 106 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. By what testimony is it attempted to be proved that Christ preserves all created tilings ? By that passage of the epistle to the Hebrews (chap. those passages of the prophets should be consulted where some national calamity is represented by the ruin of the world, by earthquakes, by the darkening of the sun and moon and other planets, and the fall of the stars, by lightning also and by thunder : while on the other hand national prosperity is set forth by the restoration of light to the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies. Of the former we have examples. Judges v. 4. 20 ; Psalm xviii. 7 j Ixxv. 3 ; Ixxxii. 5 ; Isaiah xiii. 10. 13 ; xxiv. 18. 23 5 xxxiv. 4 ; li. 6 ; Ezek. xxxii. /, 8 ; Joel ii. 10; Amos vi i. 9 ; Mich. i. 4; Hagg. ii. 7- Of the latter, Is. xxx. 26 ; li. 16 j lx. 20 ; Ixv. 17 ; lxvi. 22. Of both, Psalm lx. 2. — Many more instances, and some of them more striking, are collected by Rabbi Moses BenMaimon in his learned work intituled More Nebochim , part ii. chap. 29. M. Ruarus. I do not approve the third interpretation which is here add¬ ed. It may be objected to it, that the author of the epistle to the Hebrews is confirming his discourse by scripture testi¬ mony ; but this testimony does not at all refer to the new creation. All the testimonies of scripture which he quotes either directly prove his position, or contain something whence the superiority of Christ over angels maybe inferred ; which is the case in this, passage, where God, as he is stated to have cre¬ ated the heaven and the earth, is also said to destroy them hereafter. And as it appears from the preceding testimony that this will happen in the time of Christ’s kingdom, it follows that it will be accomplished through Christ. For he has on this ac¬ count made him Christ and king — that he might accomplish through him all things pertaining to the salvation of his people (among which the destruction of the present heaven and earth forms a principal part) — which was admitted also by the He¬ brews themselves. Hence likewise it may easily be seen how greatly Christ excels the angels. But that these words of the Psalmist were spoken or addressed to Christ, no one will he bold enough to assert, unless he take for granted that Christ is the one God. And if this be assumed, the whole force of the author s reasoning is overturned and destroyed. Moreover, the Psalmist does not here place the creation of heaven and earth, and the destruction of them, us opposite or dissimilar Chap. I.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 107 (chap. i. 3) where Christ is said to (e uphold all things by the word of his power.” What answer do you make to this ? That dissimilar events, which this third interpretation requires, but as consentaneous occurrences : which objects, as they were created, it is no wonder that they should be destroyed. Neither, in fact, will those heavens in which the angels reside be destroyed. One may thus paraphrastically explain the author’s meaning: — Lest any one should think that Christ is said so to reign for ever, as if an end were not to be put to this world — the scriptures elsewhere assert, addressing God, “ Thou, Lord,” &c. From which words it appears that under the reign of Christ, and consequently by his kingdom, an end will bp'put to this world, and the heavens and the earth be destroyed. Hence it is obvious to every one how superior Christ is made to the angels. In short, the author does not adduce this testimony, because that by the Hebrew title Jehovah (Lord), Christ is to be understood, or that the words are addressed to Christ, — but merely because they contain an argument in proof of the superiority of Christ over the angels. It is thus also that he cites the words spoken of God in the sixth verse, and those spoken in the seventh, of thunder and lightning. If then the angels ought to worship God, and testify their sub¬ jection to him, when he brings his first begotten into that world inhabited by the angels, it follows that tne angels should worship the first begotten also, and submit themselves to- him, since he is brought into that world m order that as their King and Lord he might receive it and all its inhabitants as his in¬ heritance and possession. The author resumes this argument in the following chapter, and explains and confirms it more at large. And since the titles angels and ministers in the Psalms are changed, and both are used concerning storms and lightning — it follows that Christ is made far super or to the angels ; the title of Elohim (God), and a “ throne enduring for ever,” being attributed to him. I. Schlichtingius. Although the new creation is not treated of in this Psalm, nevertheless the words, taken in that other sense, may be ac¬ commodated to that occurrence, as is done mother accommoda¬ tions, and in this very chapter, 5 — 8. Cornelius Jansen, bishop of Ghent, on this Psalm, and also his disciple Estius on this place, interpret these words of the restoration of the New Je¬ rusalem effected by Christ. But we may notice, in the first place. 108 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. That the word translated u all things” does not mean in this place, any more than in many others, all things universally, without exception ; but may be re¬ ferred place, a passage of Isaiah (li. 16), where the plantation of the heaven and the foundation of the earth are in the primary sense clearly attributed to the prophet. And what should hinder that similar things should with greater propriety be asserted concern- ingthe Messiah? Jerome, speaking of the words of Christ “My Cod, why hast thou forsaken me ?” says that some passages are quoted in the New Testament from the Old, foreign from the purpose. See also Galatinus, lib'. viii. cap . 1 8«y JB ellarmine, tom. i. contr.v i. de Purgat. lib . ii. cap. 5, writes, that the Church is wont to quote some words, although the greater part of them do not bear upon the purpose immediately under consi¬ deration. Bonaventura (Ps. cxviii.) says, that the Virgin Mary from the beginning founded the world with God, because he made the world with a view to her : — we may speak thus of her son with much better reason. But the same words being applied to different things do not prove that those things are the same. As Isaiah vi. 9 ; Acts xxviii. 25 ; John xii. 39 ; Matth. xiii. 14; Mark vi. 16. 27, 28. A. Wissowatius. He who desires to examine the source of the second expo¬ sition which is given above, may consult the Annotations of the illustrious Grotius, whence these observations are taken ; and an interpretation similar to the third maybe found in Enjedinus and Brenius. And no one ought to feel surprised that many explanations should be given of this place. After it has been proved that the opinion which our opponents deduce from this passage is false, and their exposition at variance with the scope of the author— (as Augustine says in one place, si diceretur Christus major qnam angelir ridendum crat , incomparabiliter culm major est creator omni creatura , (Horn, in Job. iii.) “ it would be ridiculous to assert that Christ is greater than the angels, for the creator must be beyond all comparison greater than every creature,”) — if we show that many consistent inter¬ pretations can he given of the words, so much the better. To those already produced I will therefore add one, which to me appears plainer than any of them. Many take for granted that the words of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth verses relate to Hbc son cf God : nevertheless, we do not see that any one has hitherto Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 1 Of) ferred to those things alone that pertain to the king¬ dom of Christ, which is here, in the opinion of some very learned men, the subject of discourse, — all which hitherto stated any necessary cause for this assertion. The apostle, both in what precedes and in what follows, is treating of the operations as well of God the Father as of his Son. Now the creation of heaven and earth is never attributed to Christ absolutely, as it is here. But the supreme God (whom we have already shown to be the Father alone) is said to have done this, and that alone and of himself, Is. xliv. 24 ; Neh. ix. 6 ; Job ix. 8, &c. The Hebrews also, even to the present times, firmly believe that the creation of heaven and earth was effected by the one person of the supreme God, without any assistant or instrument. The divine author ob¬ serves afterwards, that God had placed his Son over all the works of his hands. Further, the first creation, which (as reason dictates, and the primitive Church constantly taught in opposition to heretics,) was not made out of pre-existent matter co-eternal with God, could not have been executed by a plurality of Lords. Besides, Luke (whom many of the ancients regard as the author of this epistle) clearly asserts that he had diligently inquired after and accurately narrated all things which Jesus taught and did. (Acts i. 1, compared with Luke i. 3.) Not a hint appears how¬ ever in any part of his writings, that the Son of God had creat¬ ed heaven and earth. That the words under consideration may properly be applied to God the Father, is acknowledged, among others, by Thomas Aquinas, in his observations on the passage. See also Fool’s Synopsis on this place. It is to be observed, moreover, that this passage is scarcely any where employed by the ancients against those who denied that the Son of God was the Creator. That such modes of speaking are not unusual with the sacred writers may be seen from Gen. xlix. 18 ; Rom. xi. 33, &c. ; 2 Thess. ii. 8, 9 ; and, as some think, Rom. ix. 5 ; 1 John v. 20, &c. A more ample explanation and defence of this place is given by the ministers of Sarmatia and Transylvania, concerning the true and false knowledge of the one God the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, lib. ii. c. 13. You will find the same in the Albanian Controversy, and other writings of the Transylvanians: for more cannot be said here concerning this passage. B. Wissowatius. things OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV, tilings it may truly be said that the Lord Jesus “ up¬ holds by the word of his power.” But if, in the next place, you examine the connection and order of the words of the sacred author, it may be shown that ' * the expression ct all things” comprises those things only which were subjected to the authority of Christ while he sustained on earth the image of the sub¬ stance or person of God; that is, while he in some de¬ gree represented and placed before us the invisible God, and before we had been purified from our sins. These were the things, which, while he dwelt on earth, Christ ruled, and which submitted to his powerful command. It ought, besides, to be remarked, that the phrase “ the word of his power,” agreeably to the usage of the sacred writings, denotes nothing else than his powerful command and authority. Hence also it will be perceived that the word “ upholding” signi¬ fies in this place some movement or agitation of things, rather than their preservation; for to the former, and not to the latter, are commands and au¬ thority adapted. The Greek term wxhich the sacred writer employs is elsewhere used for impulse or move¬ ment, as appears from 2 Pet. i. 21, where the same word is found in the original : “ Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost20.” By 20 It is not from the purpose to observe that Grotius, in this place, interprets ferre “ to uphold,” regere, “ to govern.” It is also worthy of remark in this writer, that in the manuscripts the words here are 'hwtkpim aim, and that Cyrillus so reads them, viii. contra Julianum M. Ruarus. s [The English reader should be apprised, that the only differ¬ ence Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. Ill Bv what testimony is it maintained that Christ led • J the children of Israel out of Egypt ? By the fifth verse of the Epistle of Jude, ce Jesus having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, af¬ terwards destroyed them that believed not.” ml What reply do you make to this ? That the word Jesus occurs in no Greek copy whatever, but in its stead the term Lord is found in all. Wherefore, this testimony by no means proves what our adversaries aim to establish. For though Jesus Christ is, in the New Testament, in many in¬ stances called Lord, yet in those places which refer to the Old Testament, God himself is often designated by this term, according to the customof the Seventy; who, with the other Jews, thus render the name Je¬ hovah . Whence is it proved that Christ was with the Is¬ raelites in the desert, that he conducted them, and acted as their benefactor ? From the words of Paul (1 Corinthians x. 3, 4), “ And they did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual rock which followed them, and that rock was Christ.” And also from what he states further on (ver. 9), u Neither let us tempt Christ, as ence in the Greek of the common editions of the New Testa¬ ment, which in this instance is followed by Griesbach, Qwa^ius awry), and the reading quoted byGrotius from Cyrillus Quva.fi.ius uLm), consists in the aspirate over the v in the last word of the former, which makes the sense his own power; whereas ac¬ cording to the latter it would be his power. But every Greek scholar is aware that no importance ought to be attached to this circumstance. Traxsl.] some 112 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.” What answer is to be given to these testimonies ? In respect to the first, the very thing itself shows that the rock whereof the Israelites drank was not li¬ terally Christ, but figuratively; that is, because it was an image or type of him. Hence it by no means fol¬ lows that Christ was actually in the desert with the children of Israel. Nor will it any more serve the cause of our opponents that this rock is called u spi¬ ritual,” since that rock might be denominated spiri¬ tual, although it was material ; for the same reason that the manna was called spiritual meat, and the water spiritual drink ; because they were the figure and representation of meat and drink and of a rock, truly spiritual, or because they had a spiritual refe¬ rence to him; — agreeably to what John writes (Reve¬ lation xi. 8), the great city which spiritually is call¬ ed Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was cru¬ cified,” that is, Sodom and Egypt in a spiritual sense. What he states of the rock following them ought to be understood of the water which, after the rock had been struck, issued out of it, and for a long way followed the people through the wilderness, which before was destitute of running water, or at least of such as was fit for drinking. To this the Lord al¬ ludes by the prophet Isaiah (xliii. 20), “ The beasts of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls, because I give waters in the wilderness, and ri¬ vers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen.” See also Psalm Ixxviii. 15^ 16, and ev. 41. With 113 Ohap.l.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. With respect to the second testimony, (e Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted,” it cannot be concluded from these words that the apostle meant to affirm that Christ was actually tempted in the wilderness ; as may he perceived from a similar mode of speaking ; — for if some person were to say, be not disobedient to the magistrate, as some of our ancestors were,” you would not understand the same individual magistrate to be intended in both cases. Now if there are found in the scriptures forms of speech of this kind, wherein a similar declaration is made in reference to the person who is mentioned a little before, without a repetition of the name, it is only in cases wherein no other person besides him who is expressly named can be understood. An example of this you have Deut. vi. 16, i( Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted [him] in Massah.” But in the apostle’s words under consideration, some other person besidesChrist may be understood, as Mo¬ ses, or Aaron (Numb. xxi. 5), since this temptation was practised against them, especially against Moses. For what Christ is now to us, they were then, in some respects, to the Israelites ; particularly Moses, who is also said (Deut. xxxiii. 5) to have been king in Is¬ rael, (which is to be Christ, or anointed of God), and indeed he is called Christ [their anointed], Habakkuk iii. 13. There is nothing then to forbid that God should be understood here, whose name the apostle might omit, because it was sufficiently known from the his¬ tory who it was that had been tempted. — Thus in like manner the author of the epistle to the Hebrews (chap. 114 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV, (chap. iii. 16) states in a similar case, u Some, when they had heard, did provoke,” God or Lord being understood 2r. Upon what testimony is it attempted to be proved that Isaiah saw the glory of Christ ? On that of John (xii. 41) ; u These things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him.” What answer do you make to this ? First ; that these words are not necessarily to be referred to Christ appears from hence — that they may be understood of God, the Father. Nor is there any thing in the words immediately following to show that Christ is here spoken of. For it must be observed that the following, or forty-second verse, does not agree with the next preceding, or forty-first verse, but with the thirty-seventh, as may easily be 21 In connection with the explication of this testimony it may deserve notice, that Grotius states that in the Codex Alexan - drums it is not <£ let us not tempt Christ,” but “ God.” But Epiphanius ( adversus heereses, lib. i. torn. iii. edit. Petaviance) observes, that this passage was corrupted by Marcion, who substituted *ov xp?ov (Christ), for rov ku^iov (Lord). And in¬ deed it is most probable that in the first copy the reading was rov yc vo to v, which the Codex Alexandrhius has interpreted rov © iov (God), hut which Marcion and the present common copies have converted into Christ. M. Ruarus. Thomas Aquinas understands here God; but Haymo, Mo¬ ses, who was a type of Christ, and who might likewise he called Christ, or anointed. See Psalm cv. 15. Consult also Nic. Corramius Ord. Prcedic.-, and Erasmus on the place. A. W ISSOWATIUS. It is besides to be observed, that the iEthiopic version ex¬ pressly reads Cod; for it thus renders the passage: El no tentarent Deum dixit iis ; et tentarunt eum, et destruxerunt cos serpentes. It is moreover to be remarked, that in this version the .word God is wanting in 1 Tim. iii. 1G. B. Wissowatius. seen 1 15 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. seen by comparing them together. The intermediate passage, which speaks of God alone, is to he read as in a parenthesis. Secondly ; let it be granted that the words of John do refer to Christ: it might truly be said that the glory, that is to say the future glory, of Christ, was seen in that glory of God which Isaiah beheld ; since it was in some measure permitted to prophets to behold future and even long distant events, on which account they were called seers. For he saw the glory of God with which the earth is said to be filled. And this happened literally and perfectly when God was revealed to the whole world by Christ ; in which revelation was comprised the glory of both. Nor can it be doubted that this vision was literally and perfectly, or in a spiritual sense, to be realized at a future period; that is, in the time of Christ. For John asserts that these things were then fulfilled which Isaiah had formerly foretold in this vision. Moreover, these words of John, “when he beheld his glory,” properly refer to the quotation first made from the prophecy of Isaiah : and the following words, “ when he spake of him/' to the quotation last made. For when Isaiah spoke the words first quoted by John (verse SS), “ Lord, who hath be¬ lieved our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed ?” he saw, in the prophetic spirit, that “ excellent glory,” as Peter calls it, of Christ, which he was to attain after his sufferings, and was foretold of him (Isaiah lii. 13 — 15; liii. 1, &c.). But when Isaiah uses the words afterwards quoted by John (ver. 40), “he hath blinded their eyes,” he spoke 116 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. spoke of Christ in his own person (Isaiah vi, 9, 10); otherwise it would appear useless tautology in these words of the evangelist, if both particulars refer to one place in Isaiah. For to what purpose would it be to say that Isaiah spake of Christ, when he beheld his glory? Could he avoid speaking of him, when he is stating that he had seen his glory ? These words then, when he spake of him,” refer to that passage of Isaiah wherein he speaks of Christ in direct terms, and without the vision of his glory ; which certainly could not be the passage whence the first testimony was taken : it must, therefore, necessarily have been that adduced subsequently22. From what testimonies of Scripture is it attempted to be proved that Christ became, as it is said, incar¬ nate ? From the following : — First, John i. 14, where, ac¬ cording to the common version, we read, 64 And the word was made flesh/’ Secondly, Philipp, ii. 6, 7, 8, u Who (Christ) being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to he equal with God, hut made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, being found in fashion as a man.” Thirdly, 1 Tim. iii. 16, u God was manifested in the flesh.” Fourthly, Heb. 22 Some copies instead of “ his glory” read “ the glory of God.” This is the reading of Christopher Froschover’s edi¬ tion printed at Zurich A.D. 1559. The like will lie found in Robert Stephens’s great Bibles. That it was the glory of God the Father which appeared to Isaiah is maintained by Chry¬ sostom, Theophvlact, Guido Perpiniau, Monotessaro, and Al¬ cazar on Revelation iv. 2, 3. And. Wissowatius. ii. 16, Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. I 1 7 ii. 16, i( For verily he took not on him the nature of * angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. ” Fifthly, 1 John iv. 2, u Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God.” Sixthly, Heb. x. 5, £t When he cometh into the world he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me/’ What answer do you make to the first of these testimonies ? That it is not here asserted that God became, as they speak, incarnate, or that the divine assumed a human nature : since it is one thing to say that 66 the word was made flesh,” and another to assert, in their phraseology, that God became incarnate, or that the divine, took upon it a human nature. For the word is not God himself, that is, the supreme God; nor does the phrase 66 was made flesh” (the term flesh being understood, as it is here, of a mortal man) sig¬ nify to be made or to be bom a man : but every man is said to be made or to be born who before had no nature. And if the Word was, strictly speaking, made flesh (and nothing obliges us to depart from the proper meaning of the terms), either it was actually a person before it was made flesh, or it was not : if it was a person, then certainly, after being made flesh, that is, being made another substance, it must have ceased to be that substance, and consequently that person also, which it was before : — it was not there¬ fore the one God ; much less could it have been the one God, if it was not any real existing person. And it is declared in this passage, not only that the person of 118 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. of the Word was made in the days of the writer, but also what it was made, when it was made, — namely, flesh ; that is to say, a nature subject to sufferings and death, which is the property of all mortal men. Besides, the phrase the Word was made flesh” may also be rendered, (c the Word was flesh.” This is asserted by a writer of the last century, who, unques¬ tionably, was eminently skilled in the Greek lan- guage — Joachim Camerarius, in his observations on this place : and is likewise evident from other pas¬ sages wherein the word eysvsTo (here translated “ was made”) is rendered by the verb was. Thus in this very chapter, ver. 6, “ There was a man (eysysro avdf>M7roc) sent from God — also Luke xxiv. 19, u Which wtis a prophet” (6$ sysvsTo o.vr\p Trpotpyjrrjc) . See also Luke i. 5 ; Acts ix. 19 ; 2 Pet. ii. 1, &c. For the Greek verb yivo^oti signifies equally to be and to be made. But that the language of John cannot be understood to speak of the incarnation contended for, is shown by the order of his words : because it were exceedingly harsh to say that the Word assumed a human nature, after what he had before stated respecting it, and which took place sub¬ sequently to the nativity of the man Jesus Christ ; — such as, that John the Baptist bare witness of him — that he was in the world — that his own received him not — and that to as many as received him he gave power to become the sons of God. How then is the phrase “ the Word w'as made flesh” t6 be understood ? That the Word, although endued with as much di¬ vinity 119 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. vinity as the language of John ascribes to it, was as to its substance a man, no less obnoxious than other men to sufferings, afflictions, and death. For the Scriptures frequently employ the term flesh in this sense, as is evident from those passages wherein God thus speaks (Gen. vi. 3), u My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh . ” Also Isaiah xxxi. 3, The Egyptians are men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirit. ” And the author of the epistle to the Hebrews (v. 7), u In the days of his flesh which he uses for the time when he was mortal, or indeed for that during which he suffered, and when the infirmity of his nature chiefly appeared. Nor is it to be wondered at, that the word flesh should designate that which is weak, since, as Peter (1st Epist. i. 24) asserts from Isaiah, (C all flesh is grass What reply do you make to the second testimony, from Philipp, ii. 6, 8 ? That it does not comprise that for which our ad¬ versaries contend. For it is one thing to assert, as the apostle does here, that “ being in the form of God” he (( took upon him the form of a servant,” and another to say that the divine assumed a human nature. The form of God cannot mean here the (nature of God, since the apostle states that Christ emptied himself (saurov sxevccos) of this form : but God cannot in any respect empty himself of his nature. Neither does the iC form of a servant” denote human nature, because 66 to be a servant” refers to the ex¬ ternal 120 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. ternal state and condition of a man. Nor ought it lo be overlooked that the word form is used but in one other passage in the New Testament, (Mark xvi; 12,) where it is employed in this sense, importing not a nature, but an external appearance : the words are, Jesus “ appeared in another form unto two of them.” But does it not appear from the words which the apostle subjoins a little further on, “ being found in fashion as a man,” that he had, as our adversaries express themselves, become incarnate ? By no means : for these words have no such mean¬ ing. We read in the Scriptures (Judges xvi. 17), concerning Samson — that he should “ be like any man.” And Asaph (Psalm lxxii. 6, 7) threatens those persons whom he had denominated 66 Gods, and chil¬ dren of the Most High,” that they should “ die like men concerning whom it is certain it could not be said, in the language of our adversaries, that they had become incarnate. How then do you understand this entire passage ? To this effect : — That Christ, who, while in the world, like God, wrought wonderful works; whom, as God, all things obeyed, and who received divine wor¬ ship, became, when the divine will and the salvation of men required it, like a servant and slave, and like men endued with no divine power ; — I say, like, not actually, as was the case of old with Samson, but re¬ sembling a man in appearance and fashion; he being inwardly and actually full of divine energy when “he humbled 121 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross,” that is, evidently to the punishment of a slave 2h What do you reply to the third testimony (1 Tim. iii. 16), C( God was manifested in the flesh ?” First, that it may be shown from the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac, and Arabic versions, that the word God was wanting in many ancient copies. Neither did Am¬ broses know any thing of it. So that the entire pas¬ sage may be referred to the (e mystery of godliness'-4 mentioned immediately before. Nothing certain can therefore be concluded from this passage. But se¬ condly, even though the word God were inserted here, there is no reason why it might not be referred to God the Father; since these things might truly be affirmed of the Father, — that he was manifested in the flesh, that is in Christ and the apostles, or by Christ and the apostles, who were flesh. And as to what is read further on, according to the common version, ce received up into glory,” it is in the Greek sv 5o£vj) u in glory,” that is, with glory, or gloriously. What then is the meaning of this place ? That you may the better comprehend it I will re- 23 See, among others, the Annotations of Erasmus, Piscator, and Grotius on this place. Ben. Wissowatius. 24 That this passage was falsified by Macedonius bishon of Constantinople, aNestorian under the emperor Anastasius, is asserted by Liberatus archdeacon of Carthage, Tomo ConcilA. Hincmarus archbishop of Itheims writes to the same effect, that the word S-tn was inserted by the Nestorians. Inter Opv.se. lv. c. 18. Besides the manuscripts above cited, it is wanting in the Armenian version. Sec also Erasmus on the place, and the various readings of CurceUaeus. A. Wissowatius. G cite 122 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. cite the whole passage, leaving the term God. not¬ withstanding its being suspected, among the words of the apostle. te God was manifest in the flesh, justi¬ fied in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” The meaning of this is, that very great mysteries appeared in the religion delivered by Christ ; that God revealed the hidden secrets of his will by weak men, obnoxious to various afflictions ; that by the spirit with which he filled those weak per¬ sons he caused men to acknowledge that he was just and true, and on this account to believe what was an¬ nounced by them in his name ; that the same secrets of his will were at length perceived by the angels, and w'ere preached not to the Jews alone but also to he Gentiles ; that the world believed in God, and re¬ ceived him in a most distinguished manner and with the highest glory — which was done when all men glorified the word of the Lord, as wre read Acts xiii. 48; 2 Thess. iir. 1. What answer do you make to the fourth testi¬ mony, from Heb. ii. 16? That it contains not even the resemblance of what is called an incarnation ; since the writer does not say that Christ took, (as some translate the word, and as it is commonly understood,) but taketh, or rather taketh hold of,” which by no means designates a past action, such as incarnation would be, but one that is present and continued r. Nor does the author r [ “ For verily he taketh not hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. — Marginal rendering of the verse in the authorized English version. Teansl.] say OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST, 2> Chap. 1 .] say u human nature,” but a the seed of Abraham/* which among the Hebrews implies a plurality, and in the sacred writings denotes those who believe in Christ, as may be seen Gal. iii. 29. What then is the meaning of this passage ? The writer intends to assert that Christ s never called the saviour or redeemer of angels, but of the children of Abraham ; that is, of believing human beings: whom, as with an out-stretched arm, he eman¬ cipates from their bondage to the fear of death. What answer do you make to the fifth testimony, from 1 John iv. 2 ? That it contains nothing whatever respecting what is termed the incarnation : for the words which some interpreters render “ come in the flesh,” areki the ori¬ ginal a come in flesh” (evo-xgiu). Nor does John write that u the spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in flesh is of God but that u that spirit which confesseth Jesus Christ, who came in flesh, is of God.” The meaning of these words is, that that spirit is of God, which confesseth that Jesus, — - who lived on earth subject to the greatest weaknesses of flesh, underwent the most ignominious death, and was so far destitute of the human glory and power which the Jews looked for in their Messiah, — was the Christ, the promised king of the people of God. For he here tacitly declares the cause why the false pro¬ phets of that time objected to acknowledge Jesus for the Christ25. . What 23 It may in this place be considered, what kind of anti~ christs, or false prophets, the apostle had in view. He had o 2 stated 124 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. What do you reply to the sixth testimony, from Heb. x. 5 ? That there is no mention made here of what is termed an incarnation. For, first, it may be said of any person whatever, that God had fitted or prepared for him a body ; and indeed these words (Psalm stated before (chap. ii. 18, 19), that they had gone out from them. Now if we consult the records of antiquity it will ap¬ pear that these were Cerinthians, who denied that Jesus Christ was come in flesh, or that Jesus was the Christ, or Son of God ; hut taught, as we may everywhere read in the writings of the ancients, that the Christ was immortal, and had descend¬ ed from heaven into Jesus, who was only a mere man; that in. the time of his passion the Christ had flown away, and that it was Jesus alone, who was mortal, that had suffered. But whether these things comport best with our opinions or with those of our adversaries, we leave to every one to judge. More¬ over, the ancients testify that John, in his writings, took up his pen against these persons.. It is to such persons also, who deny that the Son of God was a real man, that Ignatius the martyr, bishop of Antioch and the disciple of John, refers, when, in his Epistle to the Romans, he breaks out in the following words : — “ What does it profit me if any one praises me, but blas¬ phemes my Lord, while he does not confess that he wore flesh ? He who does not confess this, wholly denies him, as one who bore about with him a dead carcase.” And again in the same Epistle : — “ But if these things were done by our Lord in ima¬ gination only, or in appearance, then am I also chained in imagination. And why should I deliver myself to death, to the stake, to the sword, or to wild beasts ? But I, who am near the sword, am near God, and endure all things solely as a fellow- sufferer with him, being myself fortified by the consideration of his being a perfect man, whom some ignorant persons deny.” These and other fragments of a similar kind Theodoret has collected together and transmitted to us in his Eranistes or Po- lymorphus : and we are uncertain whether, besides these, there be extant any other undoubted writings of Ignatius. In like manner also, another disciple of John, Polycarp bishop of Smyr¬ na, uses this language against the heretics of his time ; that “ Jesus Christ was come in flesh.” Ben. WissowATrus. (Psalm 125 Chap. 1 .] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. xl. 6) are in their primary meaning to be under¬ stood of David, as the Psalmist himself shows : but no one will affirm that he had become incarnate. In the next place, these words, when applied to Christ, may be interpreted of his immortal body, which God had fitted for him26; especially if by his <( coming into the world,” which is mentioned here, be understood his entrance into the future world, wherein are the palace and temple of Christ, acting as our sovereign and priest, —concerning which I have already spoken. There is nothing to require, nor will the use of the phrase in the Scriptures permit, that this coming into the world should be understood of his nativity: for if by the term world we under¬ stand the present world, that person is said, in the Scripture meaning of the words, to have then come into it, who has entered upon any public office among men. What then is the meaning of this passage ? That God had fitted and prepared for Jesus such a body as was suitable and proper for the performance of his office of high priest in heaven V, y 16 Why not, rather, of a mortal body, susceptible of suffer¬ ings ? For it follows, “ Lo, I come to do thy will, O God.” This profession of obedience comports better with the days of his flesh than of his glory Hence, by coming into the world, may here be well understood his entrance on his public office amono- men, as stated at the close of the above answer, M, fluARUS. What if we understand it of both? For now also, in the heavenly temple, he acts as a priest, or executes the will of God towards believers. A. Wissowatius. 2r If the preceding note be approved, this answer ought to be altered ?2(> OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. You have hitherto explained in what manner cur opponents attempt to prove concerning Christ, from the Scriptures, things which in reality they do not ascribe to him : — show me now in what manner they reason falsely from those things which the sacred writings do actually attribute to him ? The passages of Scripture from which they draw erroneous conclusions, either relate directly to Christ, or are referred to him in some accommodated sense. Which are the texts that relate directly to Christ ? They are those wherein it is said concerning Christ, that he was God, was one with God, or equal with God ; that he was the Son of the living God, was God’s own or only-begotten Son ; that he was the first horn of every creature ; that he had all things which the Father had; that he was the everlasting Father, _ . - -- - - . . . — ■ - - ■ . — altered in this manner, or in words of similar import, [such a body] “ as might be sacrificed and offered for the human race.” i\I. ItUARUS. Some conceive that there is much force in 2 Cor. viii. 9, in favour of the doctrine of the incarnation. “ Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be •rich.” But, net to notice that these words, though read as they are commonly translated, may with propriety be explain¬ ed in the same manner as Philipp, ii. /, 8, has been above, it is to be observed that the original text is wruxivn <7cXov) says in an exclamation, o§ios pav, o 3-us p»v. So also Psalm xxi. 1, a S-ioj o 9-io; and innumerable other places.” Traxsl.] absurdity. Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 129 absurdity. If any one should hold out the cloak of a distinction of natures, I have already removed that, and shown that this distinction can by no means be sustained. It is moreover to be remarked, that the word God does not occur in the last text in the Sv- m nae ; and Erasmus states that the passage stood thus hi the old manuscript of Cyprian (/ Idvers . Jud. ii. 6); that Hilary also read it so under Psalm cxxii. ; and that Chrysostom does not seem to have read it other¬ wise 2lb All therefore that is asserted is, that Christ is over all blessed for ever ; that is over all the Fa¬ thers and Israelites, concerning whom the apostle is writing : and indeed it is not Paul’s custom to call Christ God, but Lord. If however he do apply tire title God to Christ in this passage, lie does it in that sense in which he calls him the one Lord, made by God. For Christ is called God in this sense in Psalm xlv. 6, 7, u Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever ; the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness ; therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the 29 Erasmus, although he retains the word God, shows that a better reading may he given of this passage, and that the con¬ cluding words do not necessarily refer to Christ. He states that after the words “ of whom is Christ according to the flesh," a full stop or colon ought to be placed : and that the re¬ mainder of the sentence is a doxology, or ascription of praise addressed to God the Father — “ God, who is over all, be bless¬ ed for ever.” The Greek text greatly favours this rendering, as Curcellteus rightly observes in his various readings of the New Testament; as does also Grotius, in his annotations on tke passage. B. Wissowatius. Oil ISO OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. TV, oil of gladness above thy fellows to which words of the Psalmist it may with reason be perceived that the apostle here alludes50. But Paul seems himself, in this passage, to intimate that distinction of natures, when he says that Christ was of the fathers u according to flesh ?” By no means : for the words {C according to the flesh” are in no instance put in opposition to any di¬ vine nature or substance, but only to spirit', or to some spiritual property ; as appears from the third verse of this very chapter, where Paul calls the Jews his kinsmen (C according to the flesh,” putting them in opposition to kinsmen and brethren, not certainly according to a divine nature, but according to the spirit, — —just as be elsewhere styles them, “ Israel ac¬ cording to the flesh.” For the same reason he says that Ishmael was born of Abraham according to the flesh, contrasting him with Isaac, bom according to the spirit. But not to seek our examples from other quarters alone, the same apostle, in this very Epistle to the Romans, thus explains this distinction in rela¬ tion to Christ himself ; as he opposes his descent ac¬ cording to the flesh to his descent according to the spirit, when he says (chap. i. 3, 4), “Who (that is, the Son of God) was made of the seed of David ac- . 30 Grotius, among others, (including Erasmus,) observes that the words here quoted from Psalm xlv. 7, 8, and cited by the apostle, Heb. i. 8, 9, ought, both in the Hebrew and the Greek texts, to be construed with the nominative rather than with the vocative case. i cording 13.1 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. cording to the flesh, and declared to be (that is, con¬ stituted) the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” Whence also it may easily be seen, that if there be any thing in the passage in the ninth chap¬ ter which should be put in opposition to the words according to the flesh,” on account of which Christ ought to be styled (C God over all, blessed forever ; 1 it is not the divine nature, hut the u spirit of ho¬ liness” that must be opposed to them ; especially as he is God over all blessed for ever, in so far as be is the Son of God, or is constituted King and Lord of all, and over alio But in what sense is Christ said to be a made of the seed of David, according to the flesh,” and u de¬ clared to be the Son of God according to the spirit of holiness ?” The apostle intimates that there were in Christ two things ; the flesh, or mortal nature of man ; and the spirit of holiness, that is, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, the Holy Spirit. In respect to the first of these, considered alone and by itself, be could not refer his fleshly origin and stock to any other persons than to David and his posterity ; but in respect to the second, in as much as he imbibed from God the Spirit of holi¬ ness with which he ivas wholly consecrated, he was con¬ stituted the Son of God. Being restored to life by the supreme power of God, who burst asunder the gates of death, he was made the celestial Lord and king of all. Where do the Scriptures testify that Christ is one with the Father ? 1 * John 132 01*' THE PERSON OF CHRIST* [6‘CCt. IV* Johnx. 29, SO ; where our Lord says, u My Father, which gave them (my sheep) me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one.,, How do you reply to this testimony } That it does not follow from what is said of Christ’s being one with the Father, that he is one with him in nature, the words of Christ (John xvii. 11), address¬ ed to his Father concerning his disciples, demonstrate : (i Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are:” and further on (ver. 22), 4t The glory which thougavest me I have given them, that they may be one even as we are one.” That Christ is one with the Father, ought then to he understood, according to the usual manner of speaking, of the unvarying agreement of mind between the Father and the Son. But that a divine nature in Christ cannot be proved from hence is evident from the place itself: for Christ asserts that the Father is greater than all, and consequently than himself, as he elsewhere expressly declares ; both because he had given those sheep to him, and because he had drawn an argument from the invincible power of God that it could never happen that his sheep should be taken from him, since there existed between himself and God, as Son and Father, the most intimate agreement. But would he, who was himself the supreme God, deduce from the power and protection cf another person, and not from himself, the proofs of those things which lie had promised? es¬ pecially when that other person also would possess all his Chap. 1.] Of-’ THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 133 his power no otherwise than as he was the supreme God? Where is Christ said to be equal with God ? John v. 18, £ things is to be understood. The Hebrew interpreters themselves give this explanation of the matter : that God, before he produced the world, made a decreefor the creation of these things, and for sending the Messiah: and adduce in support of this meaning the following axiom, That the intention is first, afterwards the execution. The most ancient Jewish interpreters do not ascend higher in treating of the descent of the Messiah ; and those of snore modern times agree with them in opinion. Among others may he consulted Rabbi Solomon Iarcni, on the cited passages • R. Moses Ben Maimon, Tract. Melachim in Misna- j.oth, cap. ult. j D. Isaac Abarbanel on Isaiah, chap. xi. ; and others whose names may be seen in a work already referred to — Disceptatio de Verho, vel Sermone Dei, which also may be consulted on these points. B. Wissowatius. cause Chap. !.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 147 cause it announced those things which pertained to him, or because it, as it were, wholly breathed and* contemplated him, or because it was the same as the Spirit which was to dwell in Christ, in as much as it predicted those very things which Christ was to an¬ nounce. This Peter himself intimates in the passage, when he adds concerning the Spirit, that u it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow/’ Christ foretold the very same things through his own Spirit ; only the Spirit being more abundant in him, his prediction was far more explicit and perfect than the predictions of the pro¬ phets. John adopts the same manner of speaking, in a contrary case, when he says ( l John iv. 3) of that “ Spirit which confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,” that it is the Spirit of Antichrist ; and he adds, “ whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already is it in the world,” that is to say, was in those Antichrists which were then the forerunners of the great Antichrist ; since that great Antichrist, of which he speaks, did not at that time exist. He thus expresses himself also because that spirit was wholly antichristian, and breathed and in culcated doctrines accordant with those which have been introduced into the world by Antichrist. For he who asserts that Jesus is the most high God himself, denies that he is the Christ of God, that is, a celes¬ tial king of God’s appointment, which is the spirit of Antichrist (1 John ii. 22). Not unlike this is the mode of speaking employed by the same writer (chap, iv. (j), u Hereby know we the spirit of truth and H 2 the 148 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV* the spirit of error ;” where it is called the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error, not because truth and error, as if they were persons, bestowed this spirit; but because the spirit of truth speaks what is of the truth, the spirit of error, what is erroneous. It may be added, that it would not at all follow that Christ had a divine nature, even though it should be proved that he communicated his spirit to the prophets ; since any one might impart to others the spirit which he received from God, as indeed Peter openly testifies concerning Christ, subsequently to his exaltation, Acts ii. S3. Where do the Scriptures assert concerning Christ that he came down from heaven, came forth from the Father, and came into the world ? John iii. 13 : i( No man hath ascended up to hea¬ ven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is or was in heaven and further on (chap. x. 36), “ Whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world.” Also chap. xvi. 28, “ I came forth from the Father and am come into the world; again I leave the world and go to the Father.” And chap. xvii. 18, u As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have 1 sent them into the world.” What answer do you make to these passages ? That the divine nature of Christ cannot be proved from them is evident from hence; that the expressions in the first testimony, u came down from heaven,” may be understood figuratively; as in James i. 17, 64 Every good and perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights,” &c. And Re¬ velation 149 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. velation xxi. 2, I John saw the holy city New Je¬ rusalem coming down from God out of heaven,” &c„ But if they ought to be understood literally, which I most freely admit, it is apparent that they were spoken of no other than the son of man, who, since he had necessarily a human nature, could not be God, nor, indeed, have existed antecedently to his birth. Add to this, that it is expressly stated, that he had ascended into heaven, that is. before he declared these things; which could be asserted of Christ not on account of his divine, but only of his human nature35. Moreover, as to what the Scriptures testify concerning Christ, that Ci the Father sent him into the world,” we read the very same thing concerning the Apostles, in the passage quoted from John xvii. 18 ; As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I sent them into the world.” Hence it is that Paul expressly states, that 66 God sent his son, made or born of a woman, made under the law :” which implies, not that Christ was sent in order that he might subsequently be born of a woman, but was sent, now that he had been born of a woman. It cannot therefore be hence inferred that 35 That Christ was in heaven antecedently to his nativity, ifc were absurd to suppose ; for he would in that case, especially if he was the creator of heaven, have descended thence with perfect knowledge and wisdom. But that he was made per¬ fect in these respects is testified not only by the Baptist, hut also by himself, (John iii. 32 ; vhi. 26, 28, 38 ; xii. 49, 50). On which point see more in the following section. Luke also (chap. ii. 52) expressly states, that, after his birth, he increased in wisdom, and in favour with God: — these therefore he had not before, or if he had he had lost them, whieh were no less ab* surd. B. Wissqwatius. 150 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. he had existed before he was born of the Virgin, or that he was endowed with a divine nature. The de¬ claration that Christ “ came forth from the Father,” imports the same thing as the phrase that he had “ come down from heaven;” from which I have just shown, that it cannot be proved that Christ pos¬ sesses the divine nature which is claimed for him. 1 assert the same concerning his “ coming into the world.” For he did not come into the world before he was sent by the Father, but rather was sent in or¬ der that he might come into the world. But it has just been proved that he was notsent by the Father in order to be born of the Virgin, but after he had been born of her. Whence also the Scriptures place his coming into the world subsequent to his nativity. Thus our Lord states (John xviii. 37), “For this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I might bear witness unto the truth.” Add to this, that John (1 Epist. iv. 1) states, in similar phraseology, that “ many false prophets are gone out into the world,” who certainly neither existed before they were born, nor had a divine nature. This last mode of speaking imports no more than this, that Christ had begun to preach publicly among mankind ; and the preceding, that he had for this purpose been commissioned by God from heaven36. Where 30 In proof of the existence of Christ before his nativity are adduced John i. 15 and 30, John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom l spake, He that, cometh after me is preferred before me? for he was before me.” “This is he of whom I said. After me cometh a man which is preferred be¬ fore 151 Chap. 1 .J OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. Where do the Scriptures style Christ the ee one Lord/’ 66 the Lord of glory,” 66 the King of kings and Lord of lords ?” In 1 Cor. viii. 6, “ To us there is — one Lord, Je¬ sus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” 1 Cor. ii. 8, “ Had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” Revel, xvii. 14, “Then shall they make war with the lamb, and the lamb shall overcome them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings.” And chap. xix. 16, “And he hath fore me : for he was before me.” But that the word (before) denotes in these passages a priority in dignity and not in time, has been sufficiently proved by Erasmus, Grotius, and Beza (who reads here, antepositus est mihi, “ he is placed before me.”) Cingallus, in the work above referred to, gives a catalogue, p. 127, of other writers, both ancient and modern, who held the same opinion. The same thing is illustrated by parallel places in Matt. iii. 11; “ He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.” Mark i. 7 j “ There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.” Luke iii. l(i; “ One mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose.” Genesis xlviii. 20 may also be considered ; “ And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh : and he set Ephraim before Ma- nassch.” 1 B. Wissowatius. 1 [The Polish Socinians, believing that Christ after his bap¬ tism, and before he entered on the duties of his office, was taken up into heaven, in order to lie taught the great truths he was to communicate to the world, interpret the hist two clauses of John iii. 13, “ No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven,” of his literal ascent and descent on this occasion. In the last clause they put the verb in the past tense, and read the passage, “ the Son of Man who was. in heaven.” In what sense modern Unitarians understand the whole verse has been shown above, page 67, note k, to which the reader is referred. Transl.} on 152 OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. [Sect. IV. on his vesture, and on his thigh, a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords. ” What do you allege against these testimonies ? As to the first, the divine nature of Christ cannot be inferred from the apostle’s styling him the “ one Lord ;” for he clearlv distinguishes him from the one God, whom he calls the Father ; and whom alone I have already stated to be that one God. Again, the apostle shows by the expressions he uses respecting him, “ by whom are all things,” that he is not the one God ; since it appears, as I have before proved, that this preposition by (per) designates not the primary but the secondary cause, which can by no means be affirmed of him who is the one God. And although the Scriptures sometimes say of the Father, that “ all things are by him,” yet this is to be under¬ stood of the Father in a sense different from that in which it is understood of Christ : since no one can, as his superior, do any thing by or through the Fa¬ ther. For this is asserted of the Father, not because any person does any thing by or through him, hut be¬ cause all things are first ordained by his counsel and also accomplished by his power, although he may sometimes employ other intermediate or secondary causes. But this is affirmed of Christ because some one else, namely, God, performs all things by him, as I have already shown, and as appears from this very passage ; since the declaration u by whom are all things” (per quern omnia) is opposed to “ of whom are all things” (ex quo omnia), which de¬ signates the primary efficient cause. I will not re¬ peat. 153 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST, peat, what has already been stated more than once* that the expression all things refers to the subject matter of discourse, as the prefixing of the article in the G reek text evinces. Now the apostle is treating of all those things which pertain to Christians, as — not to notice the term Father, and the phrase the one Lord Jesus Christ — is demonstrated by the words to us, so often repeated, and which can desig¬ nate no other persons but Christians. Wherefore the divine nature of Christ cannot be proved from this tes¬ timony37. Withrespect to the second testimony,asthis speaks of the person who was crucified, it is evident that the divine nature contended for cannot be proved from it, since this could not be asserted of one who, in consequence of that nature, was God, but only of a man; who is styled the “Lord of Glory, ” that is, the glorious Lord, because he was by God crown¬ ed with glory and honour. For Christ is described by these terms, not so much because he was actually such at the time of his crucifixion, as because he was so when the apostle thus designates him : though at the time of his crucifixion also he was the “ Lord of Glorv” in so far as he was destined for celestial glory. In relation to the third testimony, as it treats of one who was a lamb and had a robe, and whom the same writer distinctly states to have been slain, and 37 That the expression all things (vxvrx) is hardly ever used in the Scriptures in an unlimited sense, may be seen in the Bibliotheca Ravanellis. So also, in this passage, the word must necessarily admit of limitation; otherwise God, the Fa¬ ther, would be. m* Christ. — B. Wissowatius. H 5 to 154 of the Person of christ. [Sect. IV. to have redeemed us by his blood, things which do not comport with a being who is by nature God, — -it is evident that the divine nature of Christ cannot be established by it. But all the titles which are attri¬ buted to Christ in these testimonies denote the su¬ preme authority which God has given to him over all things. What testimonies of Scripture may be adduced for Faith in Christ, and ascribing divine honour to him ? Christ himself says (John xiv. 1), 44 Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” And John v. 22, 23, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son, that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.” Also Phi- lippians ii. 9, 10, 11, 44 Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” — To these, other passages might be added. What answer do you make to these testimonies ? In respect to the first, so far is it from proving Christ to be by nature God, that it is evident it es¬ tablishes quite the contrary : for Christ makes here a distinction between himself and the one God, As to what our adversaries affirm, that faith is not to be placed in any one besides God ; this is in another place (John xii. 44) explained by Christ, when he says, “He 155 Chap. 1.] OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST.