would be Advocates for Mahomet or his Religion have very little Reason for their Pretences to Sobriety or Liberty of Conscience which is no otherwise granted by them than as it's subservient to their secular Interests And touching that ingenious Gentleman who under the plausible Covert of the Reasonableness of Christianity hath lopt off so many of the most Essential Parts of Christ's Religion as to defend no more of it than that Grand Impostor Mahomet would have done he has I think done no service at all to Christianity and it must be acknowledged that those English Socinians who write so Honourably of Mahomet his Design and Religion may be more justly look'd on as Pensioners of the Great Turk than the learned Opposers of Socinian Heresies can be represented as the Grand Pensioner of the World The CONCLVSION THESE are some of those Methods which the Arminians the Foreign and English Socinians have taken to Instill and Propagate their Errours which for the Help of the less studied I will reduce to the Following Heads Sect. I. These Gentlemen not being able to comprehend some of the most Important Points of Christian Religion because of their Mysteriousness do reject them as Contradictious and Unreasonable On this Ground the Socinians Explode the Doctrines of the Blessed Trinity and Incarnation Christ's Satisfaction and that Mystical Vnion which is betwixt Him and Believers And the Arminians Oppugn the Absolute and Eternal Decrees together with the Irresistible Operations of Grace in the Conversion of Sinners But that they may the more consistently Prosecute their Design they find themselves necessitated to Frame such an Idea of God as comes short of a Being Infinitely Perfect and thus lead their Followers into Atheism Chap. 1. Sect. II. The Erroneous finding in their corrupt Hearts an Innate Antipathy against Justification by the Righteousness of another do endeavour to establish a Righteousness of their own To compass thus much the more Learned knowing that there is an Eternal Law of Right of which no one Precept or Rule is or can be Abrogated or Repealed whilst God is an Holy Just and Righteous God and Man a rational Creature do hold that this is the Law by which all Men shall be judged at the last day Only those who have believed Jesus to be the Messiah and have taken Him to be their King with a sincere Endeavour after Righteousness in obeying his Law shall have their past Sins not imputed to them And shall have that Faith taken instead of Obedience that is their Faith shall be taken for a Compleat Performance of this Law where by Imperfection is stretched to the utmost length of Perfection But the more unlearned to escape this Rock have vacated the Penal Sanction of the old Law and erected a New which threatens no Sins but final Unbelief and Impenitence with Eternal Death who must hold that no other Sins but Unbelief and Impenitence are in their own Nature mortal and deadly deserving everlasting Misery or at least by setting up this New Law to the End imperfect Obedience may answer their New Rule they must make all their Deficiencies which by the Eternal Law were Sins to be no Sins at all and thus framing their Rule to our Imperfections instead of Christ's Righteousness they constitute one of their own for Justification And to make out these things they give us a New Scheme of Divinity more suited to the Socinian than Gospel Rule though it must be acknowledged that these Gentlemen and some others nearly allâ—ed unto 'em by Principles observing â—ow unsuccessful the Candour and Sincerity of Foreign Socinians hath been in owning the Genuine Import of some Phrases which because expressive of what they approved not they rejected these Gentlemen have imposed a wrong sense on em and in the Controversies about Christ's Satisfaction retained their Use and pervert the Truth in this important Article of our Holy Religion Cap. 2. Cap. 3. Sect. 8. Pag. 82 c. Sect. IV. That the Foreign Socinians and Arminians might the more easily propagate their Errors they did at first appear under the Character of Men found in the Faith using Orthodox Terms and Phrases and subscribing the commonly received Catechisms and Confessions of Faith whereby they gain'd great Reputation amongst the Orthodox Thus was Blandrata who as Calvin saith had nothing but Pride and Ostentation to recommend him esteemed by Men of Eminence and Soundness in the Faith as the Atlas that bears the Church on his Shoulders And thus other Men also of little Learning great Industry instigated by greater Pride have by their Flatteries and deceitful Subscriptions to Orthodox Confessions insinuated themselves into the Hearts of well-meaning People and lead 'em into Errors of a most pernicious â—â—endency as hath been cleared in sundry Instances throughout Chap. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 7. Sect. V. The English Socinian wanting both the Learning and Candour of their Brethren beyond the Seas are not willing to abide by their Confessions or Catechisms nor are they prepared to emit any of their own Composure and therefore they do studiously labour to conceal what it is they are for and bend their strength against the Truth and turn themselves into any shape may they thereby advance their Designs If it be their Interest to profess they are of the Church of England or to plead the Cause of Mahomet and reduce the Christian Religion to one Article found in the Turkish Alcoran they do it And it must be confessed that by their refusing to give Divine Worship to Jesus Christ they have put it out of their Power to prove themselves to be better Christians than the Mahometans are no wonder then that they are sometimes for acting the Part of a Quaker and again for pleading the Cause of the Papists but any thing every thing rather than an Orthodox Christian For as they cannot be held by Subscriptions neither are the Blessed Sacraments sacred enough to bring 'em under Obligation These are with them but Incantations Charms Spells Norman Knots c. and seeing no spiritual Blessing is in their Opinion annexed to the Right partaking of a Sacrament it cannot in any Christian Kingdom whatever be a Test to keep them out of the Government so wisely have they ordered their Affairs in matters Religious that however it goeth with them in the next World it may be well with them in This. See how these things are cleared Chap. 4. Sect. 1 2.4.10 Sect. VI. And that they may the more easily impose their Dotages upon the Vnlearned They represent the Principles believed by the Orthodox to worse than Judaism or Mahometanism and as bad as Egyptian and Roman Paganism Crying down Learning and a learned Ministry and most bitterly reviling their Judicious Adversaries How virulently have they treated the Reformed Divines in France and Holland And with what Contempt and Scorn have they fall'n upon the Learned Clergy not only Dr. Bull but amongst many others on my Lord of Worcester who may be justly styled Malleus Socinianorum And when this Art fails 'em they tack about and on a sudden pretend a Zeal for Learning claiming a Right in the Anti-Nicene Fathers and the first Reformers such as Luther and Calvin and will have it that the Great Hugo Grotius is theirs But their pretence are without the least shadow of Reason Vid. Ch. 4. Sect. 3.5 6 and such as are neglected by the more Learned of their own Way Sect. VII To the End they may prepare a Place for their Dagon their Care is to cast what Reproach they can on the Blessed Trinity which they can't more effectually do than by pleading for a Trinity of Essences or a Plurality of Gods which was the Master-piece of the Italian Combination What Pranks these prevaticating Hereticks played I have briefly intimated a Conspiracy which in its Tendency was not very different from that entred into by Vaninus and twelve more who went into divers Parts of the World on purpose to propagate Atheism as Gualterius the Jesuit as I have some-where Read doth in his Cronological Tables report That there is a Combination of the same Nature with the Old Italians entred into by the English Socinians who-ever will consult their Writings will see but little Reason to doubt of it And when I come to shew what Methods have been taken to corrupt and subvert the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction I hope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to show that some have as industriously acted their Part as if they had been in a Combination to bring that blessed Doctrine into doubt which was a Branch of the Contrivance of Laelius Socinus Paruta Ochinus and their Partizans Chap. 4. Sect. 8. There is one thing more to be observed it is this Sect. VIII That notwithstanding their grievous out-cries against the Gospel of our Lord Christ because of the Mysteries which are in it they have their Trinity and Mysteries too Only they are not so sublime nor so clearly revealed in Scripture as what we believe and tho' full of Contradictions yet without Scruple received by ' em 'T is true they strugled hard to bury in an Eternal Oblivion the Terms Trinity Incarnation c. because as they said not found in the Letter of the Sacred Text which if they could have done we should have heard nothing of their Trinity But failing of Success here as they retained the Term Trinity so they substituted in the Place of a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead a Trinity of Somewhats of their own Invention Ch. 4. Sect. 9. I shall trespass no further on my Reader in the Repetition of what is done and as for what else I have more to do if God permit and Prudence directs I shall take my Time FINIS
time Further their vacating and making void the Fourth Commandment which is attended with a neglect of the Lord's Day is an in-let into all manner of Vice and the very Notions they frame of God to support their other Errors are such as lessen the Fear Men ought to have of God's Judgments And as Dr. Edwards hath well observed Socinus by denying the Divinity and Satisfaction of Christ hath plainly over-turn'd the Foundation Preser against Socin p. 42. 43. upon which the Christian Church and Religion have been built and by his other Methods hath given a shrew'd blow to all Religion whatsoever whether Natural or Revealâ—d so that an unwary Reader by perusing his Writings may find himself an Atheist before he well perceives how he comes to be so as he saith in another Case viz. His Opinion against Hell Torments that he had so contriv'd the Matter Vt lector prius sentiat Doctrinam istam sibi jam persuasum esse quam suaderi animadvertat When I most impartially weigh these things I mean their deceitful Attempts to ensnare the Unwary to favour their Opinions their Contemptuous Treatment of the Blessed Mysteries of the Gospel and its Advocates together with their assuming to themselves the Character of being the most Rational Divines and Men of Excelling Piety and Holiness even when none do more contradict the plainest Maxims of Reason and lay a surer Foundation for the utmost Immoralities When I lay these things together I am so far from thinking as those great Men do who represent them to be the fairest Adversaries that I rather incline at least to fear that the Account given of them by the despised Lubbertus which I will lay down in his own Words is most true They are saith he Arrogant and Proud who measure all things by vaâ—n Glory and empty Names of Honour when they see that those who in other Disciplines invent some new Notions to be Commended they think it will be Laudable in them to Innovate in Sacred Theology And being unskill'd in true Divinity they despair of gaining a Name by Explicating or Defending the Orthodox Doctrine But burning with a desire of Praise they disturb every thing that they may be Famous and had rather be talk'd of for breaking of Churches than grow old without Fame in the true and Orthodox Religion When they perceive other Learned Men to be preferr'd before them they are angry and what is most base they Dissemble and Counterfeit the Orthodox Religion pretend to a Zeal for defending sound Doctrine Lubbert Praef. ad lib. de Jesu servat cont Socin p. 2. swear to our received Confessions and Catechisms and with their own Hands subscribe to what they swore and yet they with utmost Endeavours oppose the Sound and publickly embraced Doctrine and craftily instill a new and wicked One into their Disciples and carry about Calumnies against the Orthodox Thus much touching the Methods used by Foreign Socinians to insinuate and spread their Errors I will in the next place show how exactly they are followed by the Remonstrants and then acquaint the Reader with the Arts of out English Socinians SECT V. The Arminians imitate the Socinians They pretend an Agreement with the Orthodox THE Arminians to the end they might with the greater Success insinuate their Errors do also their utmost to cover them Nothing therefore they say can be found amongst their Assertions but what is conform to the Holy Scriptures the Heidelberg Catechism established A. D. 1578. by a Synod of Dort for the publick use of their Churches the Belgick and other Reformed Confessions Armin. Epist ad Hypolit Arminius in his Epistle to Hypolitus à Collibus protests that he never either in the Church or University taught any thing but what was according to the Holy Scriptures the Belgick Confession and Heidelberg Catâ—echism In a Letter to Johannes Matthisius These things which I have at this time delivered as they do agree with the Holy Scriptures so they are not contrary to our Confession and Catechism for which reason I do the more freely express my self In another to Sebastian Egbert I do publickly preach to a numerous Auditory and frequently dispute when my Reverend Collegues are present at which times I have used the greatest freedom in the Answers I have return'd to Objections Besides I have a private College at which thirty Students or more attend and yet never hath there been the least mention that I ever uttered any thing contrary to the Holy Scriptures or our Confessions and Catechism although some of my Collegues whose Zeal is such for the Purity of Doctrine that they would never have been silent had they whereof to accuse me have been instigated thereunto And whereas it 's spread abroad that I direct my Pupils to Read the Writings of the Jesuits and Coornhertius the slander is so gross that I cannot find softer Words to express it by than to say It is a down right Lye for I never advis'd so much as one to any such thing But this indeed I do after the Reading of the Scriptures which I do most earnestly press yea more than any other as the whole Academy can testifie I do direct to the reading of Calvin's Commentaries which I praise much more than Helmichius himself ever did as he hath confess'd For I do esteem them to excell all others so much in the Interpretation of Scriptures that there are none to be compared with them in the Bibliotheca Patrum that there was a more excellent Spirit in him than in any other As for Common Places I Recommed his Institutions to be read after the Catechism as containing the best Explication of it For the truth of this I can bring a multitude of Witnesses In a Declaration of his Sentiments made to the States of Holland and West-Frâ—ezeland wherein are the Reasons why he declin'd to give any Answer to the Questions propos'd by Lansbergius Fraxinus and Dolegius Deputies from the Synod of South-Holland and by Eogardus and Rolandus Deputies from the Synod of North-Holland his endeavour is to show an Agreement between his Notions in each of the controverted Articles and the Belgick Confession and Catechism I will give you what he saith touching the Grace of God in Conversion and the Justification of a Sinner in the sight of God What concerns the Grace of God I do first of all saith he believe it to be that gracious and free Affection whereby God doth take pity on a miserable Sinner by which he doth in the first place give his Son that whoever believes in him may have Everlasting Life then doth he justifie him and give him the Privilege of a Child by Adoption even a Right to Salvation 2. This Grace is an infusion of all the Gifts of the Holy Spirit which are for the Regenerating and renewing of the Vnderstanding as well as Will and Affections such as Faith Hope Charity c. without which Gifts of Grace no Man is able
in his Bodecherus Ineptiens his answers to Homnius and his Apology oft strenuously endeavour'd to clear himself and Remonstrants from the charge of Socinianism yet in his answer to the Specimen of Calumnies and elsewhere is bold enough to own that he cann't condemn them as guilty of Heresie Episcop Resp ad specim Calum ad Caâ—al The reason saith he why we are not fully perswaded that the Socinians are to be condemned for Hereticks are these 1. Because it 's certain that in the Holy Scriptures neither expresly nor by manifest Consequence was any Anathema denounced against such as err'd only as the Socinians do 2. That they seem to have some weighty Reasons for their Error securing them from a Pertinacious adherence thereunto and consequently from the Fault of Heresie The Reasons that seem to favour them are 1. Many places in Holy-Writ at first view appear to be for them 2. That what is urged against them from the Holy Scriptures Councils or Writings of the Orthodox are either so confounded by the variety of Interpretations given by the Orthodox themselves or feebly prest or so as to be accommodated to Socinian Errors 3. They who write against them freely yield that the Socinian Notions are more conform to Humane Reason than their own 4. That in every age from the first rise of Christian Churches they mention Christians not a few even Doctors and Bishops Eminent for Learning and Holiness of Life that have thought and spoke differently of this matter And many wholly ignorant of the Eternal Generation of the Son of God from the Father even most of the Fathers before the Nicene Council such as Irenaeus Justin Tertullian Oreign and many others 6. Because there have arisen incredible Dissentions Inexplicable Questions Innumerable Controversies not only about the Doctrine it self but the terms and words used to explain it which after utmost endeavours they could never understand 7. Because out of Justin the most ancient Writer who lived next the Apostles times a Martyr for the Truths of Christ they have reason to believe that the most Primitive Church held Communion with them who profess'd to believe that Christ was but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a meer Man begotten only of Man and made Christ by Election These are some of the Reasons adduced by Episcopius but learnedly answered by Dr. Bull for Vindicating their refusal to condemn the Socinians as Hereticks in which abating the words Error given the Socinian â—nd Orthodox given to their Adversaries he insinuates as if the Socinians had the better of it in the Controversie What the Orthodox offer to explain their Sense is said to be with so much obscurity and Confusion that it 's not easie to be understood they are divided amongst themselves and give different Interpretations of Texts are loose in their Arguing and do oft in their opposition fall in with their Adversaries whilst on the other hand the Socinians have the Holy Scriptures in their first appearances and the most reason the Orthodox themselves being Judges and all the Fathers till the Council of Nice for them all which is about the very Doctrines wherein the Socinians differ from the Orthodox But touching the Points wherein the Socinians fall in with the Orthodox the Calvinists are not to be compared with them We cannot saith Episcopius forbear giving in our Testimony on behalf of Sociâ—â—s Episcop Bâ—decher Inepti p 65. and let the whole World if they please consider it He disputes most closely giving the Adversary scope enough granting whatever may be without prejudice to Truth and his Cause Where he is to press hard upon him there he fastens his Foot and with much Pungency brings home his Arguments to the Conscience he will rather urge plain Scripture than insist on other Hypotheses and brings Reasons without prejudice and not argue after the manner in the Calvinian Schools nor hide himself in Clouds of Sophistry nor seek Evasions but hasten to the Merits of the Cause So far Episcopius whose farther endeavour is contemptuously to expose the Calvinistâ—s having just before boldly asserted that the Socinians do really agree with the Orthodox touching the substance of these following Doctrines viz. The Authority Perfection Episcopius ubi sup Perspicuity the Reading and Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures the Nature Properties and Actions of God the Creation of Men and Angels Providence and Predestination the Precepts Promises Lords Prayer Discipline Church c. In all these things saith Episcopius as to what belongs to their substance Socinus agreeth with the Orthodox And about these very points lyeth the Vitals of Socinianism even their denying the necessity of the Old Testament their confirming the whole of Christian Religion to the New as if Christ had never been foretold Praefigur'd or Promised in the Old The Scripture's so perspicuous that we may attain to the saving knowledge of them without the help of the Holy Spirit That there is but one Person in the Nature of God That God is not Immense Omnipotent Omniscient as in the Holy Scriptures 't is declared and asserted That Man was not created in Knowledge and Righteousness that the Image of God on Man lyeth only in having Rational Faculties and Dominion over the Creatures That in his first make he was Mortal and should have dyed tho' he had never sinned That future Contingents cannot be known by God himself That on the admitting the Infallible Praescience of all things Future there could be no withstanding the Calvinian Doctrine of Praedestination That the Precepts given Adam were adjusted to the Infant state of Mankind and were imperfect that Jesus Christ gave new and more perfect Laws That he enlarged the Obligation of some of the Moral Laws abolished others and added three new Moral Precepts to the Old given by Moses That the Promises of the Old Testament were only of Temporal Blessings and that Men under it were not sav'd as we are under the New by Faith in the Messiah Whatever Episcopius means by the Socinians Agreement with the Orthodox these are the Doctrines of Socinus and his Followers most opposite unto and inconsistent with what is held by the Orthodox and cannot be sound and true in the Judgment of Episcopius himself unless he himself be a Socinian And sure I am that whatever they suggest to the contrary about their being in suspence and doubt in this Partitâ—cular they look on the Socinians to be good Christians as appears further by their holding Communion in Acts of Religious Worship with them amongst the Mennistâ—s What I have taken out of these Arminian Writers doth as any one may easily perceive make it clear that it hath been their as well as the Socinian Method by the use of Orthodox Phrases and Subscriptions to sound Catechisms and Confessions of Faith to hide for a while their erroneous Opinions and when they have gainâ—d a Reputation with the People then to open themselves and appear above board slily insinuating a New and
wrong Sense on Orthodox Terms and Phrases To clear this I will only observe That as they will have the Term Instrument when spoken of Faith in Justification to signifie the same with Condition whereby there is a great Turn made in Controverse as the Arminians Improve it so they impose on the Phrases Vice nostra Loco nostro a Sense most contrary to their ancient and constant Meaning It's well known that Socinus Crellius and their nearest Followers did concur with the Orthodox about what was the Genuine Imports of those Phrases holding that they signified a Proper Surrogation where one is put into the Place State or Condition of another sustaining his Person and one with him In conspectu fori Sabrogatam sapit naturam ejus in cujus Locum Sabrogatur These Phrases taken in this Sense the Socinians stoutly opposed loading the Orthodox with all the horrid Consequences which slow only from an Assertion that Christ did take on him the Condition of the Sinner in every little Circumstance or Accident But my Lord Bishop of Worcester hath cleared the Maxim of Surrogation from the least Pretence of such a Charge by distinguishing Inter Naturam Primordialem Accidentalem and proving that Sarrogatum sapit tantum naturam Primordialem non Accidentalem That in this Sense the Orthodox Universally understand these Phrases Vice nostra Loco nostro is so manifest that whoever is acquainted with their Writings can't but acknowledge it And it 's no less Evident from the Scriptures That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for when it 's said Christ Suffered for us signifieth a Proper Surrogation which is Essential unto Satisfaction made to Punitive or Vindictive Justice However there are a set of Men of the Arminian Tang who will have it That Vice nostra or Loco nostro signifie no more than nostro â—â—co that when it 's said Christ dyed in our stead the meaning is Christ dyed to besâ—â—â—ad us and only that the Blessed Effect of his Death might be made ours Another expresseth it thus If Christ dyed for our Benefit so as some way or other by Virtue of his Death and Sufferings to save us from the Wrath of God this for ought he knows is All that any body means by his dying in our stead By such Practices as these it is that many are unawares ensnared into divers Pernicious and hurtful Errors First to the entertaining corrupt Apprehensions about Christâ—s Satisfaction and then to a downright denyal of it whence it is apparent that the Arminian Errors lead the way to the Socinian as the Socinian do to the Abomination of the Deist Thus much may suffice touching the Methods taken by Forreign Socinians and the Arminians to instill and propagate their Doctrines I will go on in the next place to consider what Arts are used by our English Socinians to spread their Heresies CHAP. IV. Some of the Various Methods taken by the English Socinians to Insinuate and spread their Errors Detected SECT I. The English Socinians can't agree in any one Particular Formula of Faith or Catechism Sundry Differences amongst themselves in Matters of Importance Their Unanimity in taring up the Foundations and commonly received Systems of Divinity IT being the Expectation of our English Socinians that Consid â—n the explic of the Trin. p. 32. if we attack the Doctrine of their Books or describe their Opinions we do it out of their own Writings not from the Books of Forreigners I will confine my self in the Account I give of them to their own Prints First then it must be observed That the English Socinians have not made such Advances in their New Divinity as to be able to give a distinct Idea of what it is they do Believe The Reason is Obvious To Invent 〈◊〉 Improve a New Religion which they who Reject the Old must do if they will have any is not Easy Nor is there a Man amongst them Great enough to Prescribe to the Party And the Fondness Hereticks have for their own Particular Notions is such as will not suffer them to Part with any thing of their Own for the sake of a Scheme or System of anothers Composure Though Mr. Biddle did some Years ago Emit a Confession Reprinted 1691. and a Catechisme yet I cannot find that the English Socinians do Adhere thereunto any more than the Followers of Socinus beyond the Sea's have done to the Racovian Catechisme which as My Lord of Worcester Observes was so far from Pleasing all that the New Editions were with some Important Alterations And whoever will Consult what hath been Written by our Gentlemen since 1690 will see that they Pretend not to give a Particular Summary of the Positive Parts of their Religion 'T is true they Generally Profess a Zeal for the Apostles Creed One of 'em tells us That he Resolves his System into the Creed of the Vniversal Church Some Thought supâ—â— Dr. Stel. Vindic. p. â—8 which by Reason of it's Antiquity but especially of the Authority of its Doctrines is Rightly called the Apostles Creed and Admitted of all Christians notwithstanding their Implacable Hatreds and Divisions Thus they Confining themselves to Generals leave us in the Darkâ— about the Particular Articles of their Faith besides their Presences about the ANTIQUITY of this Creed are as hath been Unanswerably Proved by the Learned Vossius most Weak and without the least Shaddow of Reason and their Sense of it if in favour of their Anti-Trinitarianism Contrary to that Received in the Churches ever since its first Composure whereby we are as much at a loss touching the System of their Faith as if they had said nothing at all of it We will therefore Look into the Brief Hystory of these Vnitarians Letter 1. p. 3. as they call themselves and see what they say there Sir In Answer to Yours Demanding a Brief Account of the Vnitarians called also Socinians also their Doctrine concerning GOD in which only they differ from other Christians the Remonstrants PROFESSEDLY Agreeing with them in other Points of Faith and Doctriney and the Defence they usually make of their Haeresie They Affirm GOD IS ONLY ONE PERSON not THREE They make our Lord Christ to be the Messenger Minister Servant and Creature of GOD They Confess He is also the Son of GOD because He was Begotten on Blessed Mary by the Spirit or Power of GOD Luke 1.35 But they Deny that He or any other Person but the Father is GOD Almighty and Eternal The Holy Ghost or Spirit according to them is the Power and Inspiration of GOD Luke 1.35 Tho' we might Reasonably Expect a very Particular and Exact Account in this History of what they hold yet they stick in Generals Referring Us to the Remonstrants for a Catalogue of all besides their Renouncing the Blessed Loctrine of the Trinity so that we are still where we were before we saw this History For as the Remonstrants do not PROFESSEDLY Agree with them in the other Points of
Account thereof The Ministers and Elders of the Church at Vilna were much movâ—d at Calvin's writing against him and therefore after they had reprovâ—d him do advise him to reconcile himself unto Blandrata who was to their Knowledge Ubi sup 258. a most sincere Man free from the least Suspicion of Errors For they believed not a word of what Calvin had said to the contrary However Calvin persists in the Opinion he had of Blandrata and can by no means be taken off from exposing his Heresies and evil Practices expressing his Trouble to observe him by his crafty method to get such an Interest in the favour of so eminent a Person as his Anonymous Friend was In his Letter to Stanislaus saith he I cannot but observe how all men in a manner as if they had been under a Fascination admire Blandrata 't is you alone who begin to suspect the Truth of what is said of him but that you may obtain a more certain Knowledge of him I must tell you that Valentinus Gentilis whose wild Notions I have confuted is of the same Faction and another Blandrata altho the one will not give place unto the other If his Frauds his Ensnaring and crafty Courses had not been taken notice of in Poland it might have been more tolerable but I am amaz'd to think that a Man who hath nothing else but Pride and Ostentation to recommend him should get such a Reputation amongst you as to be esteemed the Atlas that bears the Church on his Shoulders In his Answer to Felix Cruciger and his Collegues and other faithful Pastors and Ministers in Lesser Poland There is oâ—e thing I cannot but suggest unto you saith he that they who did with so much Humanity and Respect entertain Blandrata were not so cautiâ—ns and wary nor did they consult your Reputation as they should have done and am more surprized that some of the Chiefest Rank are greatly offended because I did as it became me discover the Man I beseech you not to believe that I have hastily taken up any Reports I have written a Narrative which will clear the Truth of Matter of Fact And to the Ministers and Elders of the Church at Vilna Tho you saith he have no Suspicion touching Blandrata his Errors and Practices yet with me he is clearly convicted and so he is before this Church Ye believe not what I say why then should I believe what you say You have much time to spare to call Synods about such Tristes You admire him as if he had been an Angel dropt down from Heaven but he is in other Nations a Man of no Account A brief History of him I will give you and lest you should have no regard to what I say it is attested by the Elders of the Italian Church with us and by the Renowned Peter Martyr The History they give of him is to this purpose 〈◊〉 â—â—orge Blandrata a Physician demeanâ—d himself amongst us for some time very peaceably and with much Temper desirous of Instruction so that we innocently receivâ—d him into our Number At length he began to talk as if he designed to call in question the Article of Christ's Divinity and privately spread this Notion amongst the more ignorant Then would he weary Calvin with his Enquiries and seem abundantly satisfy'd with his Answers but carry'd it so that at last Calvin discover'd his persidious and deceitful Courses and his Carriage to be such as made it necessary for the Senate to deal with hâ—m where altho he was convicted of notorious Falshoods against Calvin yet never blush'd His intimate Friend and Companion was Johannes Paulus Alciatus who said that we worship three Devils much worse than all the Popish Idols because we hold Three Persons There arose a fresh Complaint of the Italian Church against him for using Clandestine Arts to ensnare the Vulgar to a Closure with his Dotages Thus this Man a real Enemy to the Fundamental Doctrines of Christian Religion the great Patron of Socinus and his Partizans to the end he might the more effectually propagate his Errors pretends a Zeal for the Truth joyns himself to the Orthodox subscribes sound Confessions gains a Reputation amongst the châ—efest of the Orthodox for being sound and sincere This deceitful Method of â—landrata hath been exactly observ'd as by many of the same Principles abroad so by the Socinians in our Country who notwithstanding the Contradiction there is in the Doctrines by Law established to their Tenents and the strict Subscriptions required of all that enter into the Ministry get into the Church and fix their Communion there That they may pave the way for the Consciences of others their Attempts are to make the Subscription to the Thâ—rty-nine Articles to signify nothing The Belief of the Athanasian Creed not requiâ—ed by the Châ—ef Eng. p. 2. Those Thirty-nine Articles say they are not Articles of Faith but Peace As several of her most learned Bishops have declared and in a word the Title of the Articles says as much and the Preface before them And yet in the Title 't is declared that these Articles were agreed upon for the avoiding Diversities of Opinion and for the Establishing of Consent touching true Religion And in the Preface 't is declared That the Articles do Contain the True Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods word And the Charge his Majesty gives is That no Man shall either Print or Preach to draw the Article aside any way but shall submit to it in the Plain and full meaning thereof And shall not put his own sense or Comment to be the Meaning of the Article but shall take it in the Literal or Grammatical Sense So that whatever any Bishops have declared The Import of the Title and Preface is That the Subscribers Agree in Believing the Doctrines contained in the Articles to be True that the Articles taken in the Literal and Grammatical Sense are agreeable to God's word How can a Socinian then subscribe the first Article where 't is said There is but One Living and True God and in Unity of this Godhead there be Three Persons of one Substance Power and Eternity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Doth this Article contain in it the Truth If it doth the Socinian Principle is False If it doth not they subscribe to a Lye And tho' the Church did not Require the Belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity as delâ—vered in the Athanasian Creed as Necessary to Salvation Yet seeing it Requires the Belief of this Doctrine as True they who deny this Doctrine can't without being guâ—lty of grossest Hypocrisy subscribe it But what can't a designing English Socinian do Thus you see that tho' the Thirty-nine Articles are as expressly against the Dogmata of our â—nglish Socinians as words can make them yet can they not keep an English Socinian out of the Church And having broken their Subscriptions they go on to tell us Trinitar Scheme
Frieseland for the supp essing all Socinian Prints and Conventicles which they sent out in pursuance of the Supplication made unto them by the Deputies of the Synod of South and North Holland approved of by Triglandius Heidanus and Cocceius Professors at Leiden I say in this Apology he doth his utmost by using Orthodox Phrases to make their Errors look as though they differd but little from the Common Faith For saith he 't was never in our thoughts to deny the Unity of the Trinity that we do with our whole Heart Believe and openly own the Father Son and Holy Ghost to be One that we confess Christ to be God ascribing to him that Divinity which appertains to the Son of God the like of the Holy Ghost And whereas we are charg'd for Denying Christ's Satisfaction Apol. pro verit accusat p. 12. if it be meant of the thing which in the Holy Scriptures is assigned unto it we do most firmly believe that Jesus Christ to the end he might obtain for us the Remission of Sins hath so far satisfied the Divine Will P. 24. that there is nothing wanting to a most full and Compleat Satisfaction As to the Merit of Christ if by it they mean his Perfect Obedience and Righteousness we do freely confess that Christ's Obedience for our obtaining Eternal Life doth much more abound to us than Adam's Sin to our Condemnation Apol. 25. not excluding our Obedience which all that have received Faith and the Spirit of Christ have more or less whose Defects are through the Grace of God supplyed by Christ's most Compleat and Perfect Obedience We acknowledge that we are Sinners Apol. p. 53. and fall very short of the perfect Rule of Righteousness and therefore sly unto Christ that we may be justified by him without the Deeds of the Law nor do we by the Faith of Christ destroy the Law as it respects Moral Precepts which is the true Righteousness but establish it That Conversion is by the Power of the Spirit we never denied unless as held by such as make Men to be but as Stocks utterly rejecting and banishing from the Christian Religion all Vertue and Vice Reâ—â—ards and Punishments P. 26. leaving it destitute of all Encouragements to true Piety P. 87. We trust not to the Strength or Power of our own Will knowing that unless it be excited cherished and helped by a Heavenly Power we cannot so much as Will much less Perform any thing and seeing we can neither begin P. 65. nor finish any thing without the help of God's Grace we lift up our Prayers and Thanksgivings unto God â—or do we deny the Resurrection P. 76. but with the Apostle we have our Hope in God touching the Resurrection of the â—â—â—d both of the Just and Vnjust believing that the Just shall be raised to the Joys of an Eternal Life and the Unjust to the Punishment of Everlasting Fire wherefore knowing the Terrour of the Lord we perswade Men. â—ruâ—peorius a â—niâ—ht and Counsellor of the Flector of â—randenlurg Przipâ—â—v Apol. 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—cen in his Apology for afflicted Innocence directed to the Fâ—â—â—lar and Supreme Prince of Prussia seems to speak as Ortho loxly as any one could wish For saith he we with due Honour receive the Doctrine of the Triatry the Father Son and Holy Spirit in whose Name we are Baptized Concerning the Divinity of our Lord We acknowledge him to be properly and truly speaking the only Begotten Son of God not meerly because of the I ominion and Omnipotence given to him but because of that Divine Nature which he received by the voluntary Generation of his most loving Father in which the Character and Image of the Divine Sub stance of the Father shines and so we Worship Adore and Invoke him as the True God even by Nature in a proper Sence now and for ever Blessed Then of the Holy Ghost he says Nothing can by any Man be said so sublime concerning the Holy Spirit which we do not willingly admit so that the Name and Title of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ remain peculiar to the Omnipotent Person of the Father Then concerning the Merit of Christ's Death We acknowledge the Merit of the Death of Christ and our Redemption effected by his most precious Blood poured out but so as that the Grace and Favour of Forgiveness remain owing to his most merciful Father He is positive that touching Magistracy they confess with the Apostle Paul that the Magistrate is the Minister of God to Punish by the Sword evil Doers and protect the Innocent and that they are not to be removed out of the Church of Christ that in the other Articles of Religion they hold nothing Blasphemous Heretical or Absurd not daring to deviate in the least from the Apostle's Creed and Holy Scriptures Whoever considers that what is here delivered by this Author is done Apologetically to put a stop to the troubles they endured or at least to get 'em mitigated cannot but concur with me in concluding that He uses these Orthodox Phrases to the end He and they might be esteemed as Men Sound in the Faith far from holding the Heresies they were charged with and therefore no way deserving the Severities that were only due to Blasphemous Hereticks and yet as we shall hereafter shew as there is a mixture of Unfound Expressions even in the Places where he speaks thus of the Trinity and Christ's Divinity so doth he otherwhere deny these Doctrines â—nyedinus Superintendent of the Vnitarian Churches in Transilvania in his Preface to his Explication of those places in the Old and New Testament produced by the Orthodox to prove the Trinity doth positively aver Enjed. Praesâ—ad explicat Loc. V. N. Test That the whole they believe is owned by Papists Lutheran and Calvinist Namely That Jesus Christ called the Son of God the Father Almighty Maker of the Heavens and the Earth even he who was conceived by the Holy Ghost and Born of the Virgin the Man Christ Jesus is the One and only Mediator between God and Men by whose Death Salvation is procured for us and through whom both Jew and Gentile have Access to the Father and in whose Name by the Holy Ghost we obtain a Pardon and an Assurance of Eternal Life This is the summ of the New Testament-Doctrine and the Faith which we constantly Profess and Defend And who dares deny it Do the Papist Lutheran or Calvinist No by no means I could easily add many other Socinian Authors speaking after this very way as if they Dissented not from the Orthodox in any Important Points But these being enough to Evince the Truth of my Assertion I will go on to shew that notwithstanding these seeming Approaches towards the Truth they are at the utmost distance from it denying those glorious Doctrines they would be thought to embrace SECT III. The real Distance there is between the Socinian and Orthodox That
Confession to admit of a Conciliation with them How zealous soever Arminius was to be taken for a Calvinist none more eagerly endeavoured to subvert the very foundations of the Doctrines embraced explained and defended by Calvin There is so much craft and yet open contradiction to be found in his as well as in his Followers Writings that I see no reason to doubt of the Truth of those things related of him and them in the Preface to the Acts of the Synod of Dort Pras ad Ecles p. 3. where it is affirm'd that Corvinus ingenuously confessed in a certain Writing in Dutch that Arminius defended many things against his own Judgment that Gomarus humbled him by producing a Paper of his own Writing Pag. 10. in which he had asserted That the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed for Righteousness in the Justification of Man in the sight of God but Faith it self or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere The very Act is by God's gracious Acceptation that Righteousness of ours whereby we are justified before God What Gomarus here asserts to the silencing of Arminius is no more than what he himself Pleaded for in his answer to the one and thirty Articles and may at any time be seen in some of his other Writings SECT VII They separate from the Calvinists BUt their separating from the Apprevers of the Heydelberg Catechism Belgick Confession and Acts of the Synod of Dort even when they communicated with the Menonists and Socinians is an uncontroulable Evidence of their renouncing the Calvinian Doctrines and of the favourable Opinion they have of the Mennonistical and Socinian Heresies In their Letter to Madame de la Hague they give several reasons for their Separation Epist pag. 628. which I take to be the effect of much deliberation and advice for Conradus Vorstius Epist p 540. in his Letter to Stephen De Ryeger to whom having blam'd him for want of Courage to appear on behalf of the Remonstrants Cause which the Lutherans universally and more moderate Papists approved he imparts their purpose of entring a Protestation against the Synod and of separating openly from the Contra-Remonstrants A matter not yet ripe enough to be divulged which yet he had communicated to Huberus In a Letter of an Anonymus to Episcopius it is reported from an old Acquaintance of Episcopius that the Remonstrants did ill to abandon Communion with the Reformed and at the same time list Socinians amongst their Brethren to whom Anonymus as himself assures us Vid. Epist N. N. ad Episcop p. 690. made no other answer than this He knew not that there was any such intimacy between the Remonstrants and Socinians but the reason of the separation was because the Reformed express'd no greater dislike of Manichaeism and were so much for Persecution Poelenburg tho he brings in many odious Charges against the Contra-Remonstrants yet one Principal Argument for their Secession is grounded on their Dissent from the Doctrines contain'd in the Heydelberg Catechism and Belgick Confession which he thinks they must be thought to approve if they joyn with them in the Sacrament of Baptism and the Lords Supper What shall I think of them saith Poelenburg who hold Communion with the Contra-Remonstrants Catech. Heydeth Quaest 65. 66. who offer either themselves or Infants to be Baptized by them and joyn with the Prayers at Baptism for seeing as the Heydelberg Catechism will have it the Sacraments are Seals of their Faith how can ours ours I take them to be who in judgment and heart are with us tho' bodily present with the Adversary How I say can ours desire the Sealing and Confirmation of that Doctrine they can by no means approve And seeing in the Celebration of the Communion we declare an Unity in Faith and mutual Charity how can we profess to hold Communion in that Doctrine we are perswaded is altogether false Doth not the Apostle command us to abstain from all appearances of Evil Is it not a vile thing to profess to believe that to be true which we do really judge is false Is it not a thing most abominable to turn the Blessed Sacrament which the Lord hath made the Bond of Love and mutual Fellowship into a Banner of Schism and Division So far Poelenburg who hath many other Arguments against Communicating with the Contra-Remonstrants in his Epistolary Disquisition whether the Remonstrants may lawfully joyn themselves to the Assemblies of the Contra Remonstrants But this little I have out of him being sufficient to show that their separation is an impregnable evidence of their rejecting the Doctrines contain'd in the Heydelberg Catechism and Confession I will go on to give an impartial account of the Charitable Opinion they have of the Heresies of Socinus and the Mennonists which will farther evince how far they were from a Closure with the Calvinian Doctrines even when they would be thought sincere in their Subscriptions to them SECT VIII Their good Opinion of the Socinians and Conjunction with the Mennonists FEstus Homnius just before the Synod of Dort met sends forth a Specimen of the Belgick Controversies and in it shewing how far in some Momentous Points of Christian Faith the Remonstrants differ'd from the Belgick Confession doth in several instances make it manifest that they agree with the Socinians particularly in denying the Simplicity Vnchangableness Infinity and Praescience of God that no knowledge is to be had of God but by Divine Revelation thereby destroying all natural Religion that the Doctrine of the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead is not only contrary to common sense but plainly opposite to Divine Testimonies In these and several other particulars the Agreement between the Arminians and Socinians may be gather'd from what Festus hath taken out of their own Writers such as Vorstius Welsingius Episcopius and Arminius himself The Synod of Dort soon meeting after this Specimen was published a complaint is brought against it to the Synod however the Synod confirming the opposed Catechism and Confession and strictly enjoyning subscription to them and their own Acts the Remonstrants compose and emit a Confession of their own which the Learned â—odecherus A. D. 1624. very diligently examines and comparing it with the Racovian Catechism the Writings of Faustus Socinus Smalcius Ostorodius and many others of that Party doth in many instances with much clearness show a Parallel between the Socinians and Remonstrants to be so exact as to move the Reader to conclude that the Confession of the one was taken out of the Writings of the other Polyander Rivet Walaeus and Thysius Professors at Leyden do not only prefix their Approbation to Bodecherus but within two Years after they censure the Remonstrants Confession wherein they are very positive that under the pretence of Peace Censur Praef â—ope finem they would introduce Socinianism Thus much is in the close of their Censure of the Preface and in several places of the Book
a Person or not About the Invocation of Jesus Christ whether a Duty or not So that from any thing hath been Published by â—em we can't be sure that any two of them are of the same Religion Howbeit altho' they can't Agree what Religion to be of they are most Vnanimous in Determining what to be against it being their Master-piece to Quarrel with our Confessions and Catechisms Destroy our Systems and Tare up old Foundations One saith He can't find any Satisfaction or Consistency in any of our Systems Praes to Reas of Christian Another Complains that there is no Catechism yet Extant that he could ever see or hear of from whence he could Learn the True Grounds of Christian Religion Praes to Bid. Catechism as the same is Delivered in the Holy Scriptures The Examiner of Mr. Fdward's Exceptions runs higher Declaring that the Obscurity p. 4. â— Numerousness and Difficulty of Understanding Systematical Fundamentals Promotes Deism and Subverts the Christian Faith These are some of their ways SECT II. The English Socinians do studiously Endeavour to Conceal the Religion They are of THat they may make it the more Difficult for us to Know what it is they are for they Hide themselves under the Comprehensive Name of Vnitarians and Anti-Trinitarians whereby they Reserve to themselves the Liberty of setting up either for Arians Photinians Jews Mahometans or Deists who Call themselves Vnitarians nor will they when hard Put to it Undertake the Defence of any One no not of Socinus himself altho' they hold what is Peculiar to men of his Spirit Tho' they say That Jesus Christ was the Son of God Some The. p. 4. only in a sense of Consecration and of Mission and consequently that his Unity with the Father is not an Essential and Natural Vnity but a meer Moral and Relative Vnity which consisting in the Equality of Works not of Essence which is Absolutely Incommunicable c. When this is Socinianism all over p. 18. yet are they not Socinians any more than they are Papists Lutherans or Calvirists Answer to Dr. Wallis Four Letters p. 16. They do not Profess to Follow Socinus but the Scripture If Socinus has at any time spoken Erroneously or Vnadvisedly or Hyper bolically 't is not Socinus who is their Master but Christ When they Pretend to tell us what they are it 's so Mysteriously that no one can tell what to make of ' em They are Christians they thank God they Side with Truth Some The p. 18. and take Shelter in the Bosom of that Catholick Church which stands Independently upon any thing that goeth under the Name of a Party But where shall we find such a Church Not among Ebionites Nazarenes Meneans Alogi Arians or Socinians All these go under the Name of Parties Wherefore seeing they Renounce the Fundamentals of Christianith as Embraced by us they must be Acknowledged to wrap themselves up in some Mastery Or to have no Catholick Church to Shelter themselves in To Compleat the Mystery They are upon Dr. S's Terms heartily of the Communion of the Church of England but Independently upon any Faction whatsoever It 's like we have Anti-Trinitarians as well as Trinitarians in the Communion of the Church of England which is not more Possible nor less Mysterious than that the Denyal of the Trinity should fignify the Affirmation and Belief of it However giving them this 't will unavoidably sollow that two Distinct Parties as contrary to each other as Light and Darkness do constitute the Church And such of us as want their Sagacity are Tempted to conclude that so long as they are against the Doctrine of the Trinity they are Anti-Trinitarians And if they think we are a Faction we know them to be so If therefore they are not of the Orthodox Party except they believe with Teague that my Lord Duke is neither Dead nor Alive they must be of the Anti-Trinitarian Faction and yet be heartily of the Communion of the Church Independently upon any Faction whatsoever That is to say they are of a Communion made up of but two Parties vid. Trinitarian and Anti-Trinitarian without being in Communion either with the One or the Other But do we what we can seeing they Profess to Believe there is but One Person Only in the God-Head they must be we count Anti-Trinitarians and the Belief of the Trinity being essential to our Christianity as Christianity is to Church Communion t is as impossible for any One to be of the Communion of the Church whilst an avowed Anti-Trinitarian as it is to be a Christian without the Essentials of Christianity We can't therefore Comprehend How these Men can be of the Churches Communion If they have a Distinction to solve this Difficulty it must be a monstrous Mysterious One Whether Intelligible or Contradictions let them Judge Touching their Sincerity in the using these Methods I will not concern my self knowing that however it be it 's clear that their Design is to Conceal their Religion which I confess is their wifest Course seeing it is such as can't bear the Brightness and Glory of the Light SECT III. The English Socinians judge more Charitably of the Salvation of Jews and Turks than of Orthodox Christians whom they make to be as Bad as Egyptian and Roman Pagans WHen I first made Enquiry after the Reason why these Gentlemen declined a Defence of the Foreign Socinians and Refused to be Described from their Books I was of Opinion they thought themselves Unable for so great an Undertaking But on a more close Examination I am convinced that this is not the Only Reason there is another namely this They can't Extend their Charity so far towards us as Foreign Socinians have done How ill soever I have Proved the Forreign Socinians to be it must still be Acknowledged that not only in Learning but in Temper they greatly Excel the English And tho' they look'd upon the Orthodox to have Erred from the Truth yet esteemed them not to be either Idolaters or Hereticks or out of the Way to Salvation Ruarus in an Epistle to Mersennus Ruarus Epist 56. p. 260. doth clear us from the guilt of Idolatry tho we Worship the Divinity of Christ as Eternal which he esteems an Error For saith he Who is there of our own way that dares arrogate to himself so perfect a Knowledge of the Divine Nature that another more sharp and acute than himself may not Convince him that in some respect he had Framed a False Idea of God Socinus in his second Answer to Volanus enters his Protestation against the making us Hereticks Partic. 5â— His words are Altho' I hold that Christ before he was Born of Mary had no Existence yet do I Confess him to be God even to be True God in Opposition to a False and Imaginary God And altho' I Deny Christ to be that God who Created the Heavens and the Earth yet do I not make them
to be Hereticks who Affirm him to be so If we take the word Heretick in the most common Acceptation for one who is without the Pale of the Church in which Sense it 's manifest that Volanus himself uses the Word in this Place that they do greatly Err I firmly Believe But I do not therefore Exclude them from the Fellowship of the Saints so long as in other Respects they Persevere in the Right Way to Salvation approving themselves Obedient unto Christ Nor were they so Fond of the Mahometan Religion as not to think it a Reproach to be numbred amongst its Favourers This is sufficiently Cleared by Ruarus For whereas Beza Epist 16. â— 122 123. in an Epistle to Peter Statorius mentions Valentilis Gentilis his Accusing Paulus Alciatus for turning Turk Abraham Calovius no sooner mentions this Story in a Letter to Ruarus but Ruarus as one who Abhorr'd the Mahometan Religion Epist 47. p. 225 226. doth what he can to Vindicate Alciatus from so Vile a Calumny Most Worthy Sir saith he to Calovius Forgive me that I attempt to Free you from a Mistake in a Point of History It is about what is Reported of Paulus Alciatus and Nuserus closing with the Turkish Religion as if they had abandon'd Christianity and had taken up with the Alcoran I am apt to think Beza in one of his Epistles lead you into this Mistake when he mentions what Gentilis accused him of before the Magistrates of Bern. But this might be done by Gentilis only to Ingratiate himself with the Magistrates especially seeing he knew Alciatus did acknowledge only the Father of Jesus Christ to be the most High God And he himself after a sort making a Profession of Three Gods might be the more easily Induced to load him with the reproachful Charge of Turcism But whatever Gentilis imagined you know very well that Alciatus did for many Years in this City lead a Pious Life according to the Christian Rules and when he dyed he commended his Soul to Christ the Saviour Thus much hath been Attested by many and some now Living c. But tho' Socinus and Ruarus were so kind as to clear us from the Guilt of Idolatry and Heresie Reckoning us to be Members of that Church in which Salvation may be had yet so much Candor must not be look'd for from the English Socinians For They esteem us so Byassed against their Religion by Prejudices and the like Exhort to â—ice Enqu p. 3. that we use not a reasonable Diligence to obtain the Knowledge of what they call Truth and therefore we are told That as to the Jenâ—s and Turks Nâ—tes on Athanas p. 3â— who Believe and Worship the One True God and him only perhaps they are in a Nearer Proximity to Salvation than such as against sufficient Opportunities of a right Information and for Worldly Interests have Apostatized from the Christian Faith to the Athanasiam Thus they make us Apostates from Christianity further off from Salvation than Jews or Turks And that we may see what Charity they have for the Mahometans and their Religion they add Divers Historians will have it Reâ—â—lâ—â— coâ—â—â—â—â—ng the Tâ—â—â—iâ—â— and Incarnat p. 18 19. that Mahomet meant not his Religion should be esteemed a New Religion but only the Restitution of the true Intent of the Christian Religion They affirm moreover that the Mahometan Learned Men call themselves the True Disciples of the Messias or Christ intimating thereby that Christians are Apostates from the most Essentians Parts of the Doctrine of the Messiah This Plea our English Socinians make for Mahomet and his Religion Representing the Turkish Topperies to be a more Refined Christianity than that Embraced by the Orthodox brings to my Remembrance an Old Prophecy of Simler which on the Reviving of the Errors of Servetus by â—oelius Socinus Blandrata and others he wrote Anno 1568. A part of it is to this Purpose When Matters Religious are in Agitation I would not willingly Immix with them what are of a Civil Nature nor would I rashly Fore bode Evil to any Man However if we may make a Judgment of things Future by what hath heretofore fâ—ln out I am afraid this Doctrine viz. of the Socinians will prepare the way for Mahometanism and Portend Ruin to those Flourishing Countries in which it is sown c. The whole Prophecy is in the Close of that Historical Preface which Cloppenhurch hath set before his Conâ—rtation of the Compendiâ—lum â—ocinianismi supposed by him to have been Written by Ostorodius and â—oidovius but as Sandias hath it by Conradus Vortius To return The Malignity of these English Socinians runs higher they can't consent themselves to throw us into a worse state than the Turks are in Placing us in the next Rank to them But to vent their Spight they make our very Religion as bad as the Impostures and Dotages of the Egyptian and Roman Pagans Touching the Mystery of the Trinity they say There is no Parallel for it in all Trinitarian Scheme p. 7. either History or Nature but the Mysteries of the Egyptians For as the Egyptians were at prodigious Cost in making and setting up a great number of Images in and about their Temples by which Lieroglyphicks they pretended to Teach men the Secrets of Natural Philosophy But when ask'd to Explain their meaning they gave a very mean and triffling sense or a sense very absurd and false So after Trinitarians have long Amused their Disciples with Terms as mystical as the Egyptian Hieroglyphicks such as Trinity We would easily forgive them the foll of their Mysteries if their Hieroglyphick Language were not as False and Contradictory as it is Vain and Trifling A little after this speaking of the Blessed Trinity This is Egyptian all over 'T is the very Genius and Spirit of the old Mystical Hieroglyphicks That is to say Partly Foolish and Partly False Once more For my Part I never think of these whether Dotages or Impostures without such an Inclimation as I hardly Resist of applying to our Athanasian Doctors what Cato said of the Roman Augures and Aruspices He knew their pretended Learning and Discipline was the Religion Establish'd by Law warranted by Custom and Prescription and Authâ—rized by the Consent of Laws For all that 't was a Cheat so Gross and Palpable that he could not but Admire the Augures were such stark Fools or such perfect Knaves that meeting they could carry a grave look upon one another This is the Kindness the English Socinians have for the Orthodox and more especially for the Religion by Law Establisht They make us worse than Turks and as bad as Pagans as if all we teach were a Gross and Palpable Cheat. And by their Complaints of the Evils arising from Church Preferments Considâ—◠〈…〉 p. 44. and the Care and Favour of a Wealthy Mother they show they have an aking Tooth at the Church Revenues Let the Bishops Deans and Chapters
look to themselves SECT IV. The Difference there is between the English and Foreign Socinians The Foreign Socinians Represent the Principles Embraced by the Generality of the English to be Heretical tending to Mahometanism and Judaism THE English Socinians do not make us so bad but Socinus and his Partizans abroad are even with them making their Case the same with the worst of Hereticks Mahometans and Jews To clear thus much I must show what the Foreign Socinians hold touching Christ's Divinity and the Worship due unto him together with the Representation given of such as do herein differ from them When Vujekus charged the Socinians with Mahometanism Socinus in his Answer declares Resp ad Praef. Vujek p. 8. Ed. A. D. 1624. That they held Jesus Christ to be that Man who was by the Holy Ghost Conceived in the Womb of the Virgin Mary and Born of her that this Man is the only begotten Son of God whom the Holy Scriptures Recommend unto us nor is there any other besides or before him To this Man is given by God the Father such a Divine Power and Authority that the Name of God and Divine Worship is Deservedly and Necessarily perse given unto him This is their Doctrine the Foundation of their Religion the Great and Glorious Mystery of their Gospel without the Belief of which no Salvation can be had Although say they Christ never Expresly said He was the true God Sâ—â—in ubi sâ—p p. 19. yet from what he has oft declared it may Easily yea Necessarily be inferred that He is that is to say as he is really and truly Invested with Divine Power and Authority And there are several Texts in the Holy Scriptures which make it most clear that not only the One God p. 26. but that Jesus Christ also as he is distinguished from that One God is to be Adored with Divine Worship Time would fail me to enumerate the many Texts that are not only in the New Testament but also in the Old for the Worshipping Jesus Christ as distinguished from that One God with Divine Adoration They then ubi sup p. 27. who deny it to be Lawful to give Divine Worship to Two Gods whereof One is Subordinate unto the Other and wholly depends on him may as well deny the Sun shines in the clearest Day and do moreover discover their Ignorance of the Greatest Mystery of Christian Religion and if Treated with Rigor must be Deprived of the very Name of Christians That they who are against rendring unto Christ Divine Worship or oppose the Invocating him are to be Condemned for Hereticks yea for worse than Hereticks in that truly they deny unto him the Care of the Church which is the same with their Denying him to be Christ This is the Notion they have Espoused of Jesus Christ They Affirm him to be a True God a True Subordinate God entirely depending on that One Most High God A True God because this One God hath given to him Divine Power and Authority or as they sometimes Express it because God hath by his Inhabiting Word or Power given to the Lord Christ a Faculty of Knowing all things and an Ability to Relieve all Wants This Divinity in Christ they make to be the Ground and Reason of their Adoration and Invocation They do also make God's dwelling in Christ by his Spirit a Ground of Worship Socinus in the Defence of his Animadversions on the Theological Assertions of the Posnan College Cap. 8. p. 250 251. Ed. A. D. 1618. against Gabriel Eutropius tells us To justify our Adoring Christ it 's sufficient that God doth in an Eminent manner by his Spirit dwell in him speak in him give Answers whence he is called the Image of the Invisible God and they who have seen Christ are said to have seen the Father and they who Adore him do in him Adore the Father If then the Israelites who Worshiped before the Ark of the Covenant because God shewed himself in it present to them and as from his proper and peculiar Place There gave Answers and after a sort There dwelt were free from the Guilt of Idolatry much more may we be so tho' we Worship Christ of whom the Ark was but a Type or Shadow and infinitly below him This way of Arguing tho' used by a Man of Note amongst our selves was so turn'd by Vujekus and Bellarmine two Jesuits against Socinus as to Confound him That Christ is worthy of Divine Worship say they because God dwells in him Res ad Vujek p. 418. is by no means to be Allowed For then 't would follow that the whole World may be Worshiped especially the Angels and â—oly Men in whom God doth in a more peculiar manner dwell And as the Socinians do make this sort of Divinity the Reason of their giving Divine Worship unto Christ even so their Ascribing this Divinity and giving Divine Worship unto him makes the Discriminating Character Animadv in Assert p. 49. by which alone they hope to clear themselves from being of the Religion Invented by Mahomet which doth not Invocate nor Worship him No One saith Socinus who is in his Wits will affirm that False Notion Mahomet had of Jesus of Nazareth Vid. Defens Animadv p. 373. is what Paulus Samosatenus held For Samosatenus acknowledged Jesus Christ to be the True and only Begotten Son of God and our Lord affirming that he ought to be Worshiped c. which things Mahomet denyed They insist so very much on the Adoration of Christ that they esteem those who are against it to be such Hereticks as subvert the very Foundations of Christianity and deserve not the Name of Christians I do not saith Socinus see any thing throughout the whole Christian Religion of more Importance to be Published De Invocat Christ ex Epist ad Quend Tom. I. p. 353. than a Demonstration that Invocation Adoration or Divine Worship belongs to Christ altho' he is a Creature If this be but once fully proved all the strong holds of the Trinitarians will fail them For they lean on this one Foundation viz. That that Adoration and Invocation which is due only to the Most High God must be given unto Christ And on the other hand the True Power and Majesty of Christ will hereby be cleared and firmly fixt in the minds of all whereas without the Knowledge of it neither God himself nor any thing Divine can be Rightly Understood nor the way of our Salvation clearly Known but what is said in the Holy Scriptures of the Expiation of our Sins by Christ will be strangely mistaken the whole of Christian Religion brought into Doubt or at least be expos'd to a sudden Change if not to utter Ruin and the Chiefest and most Principal Foundations of our Hope and Trust in God destroyed And elsewhere he saith Socin Christ Rel. Instit Tom. I. p. 656. That they who are against the Worship of Christ cannot be Christians because in
good earnest they own not Christ though they dare not Openly yet Really do they deny Jesus to be the Christ Besides Vujekus upbraiding the Socinians with the Opinion and fatal end of Jacobus Palaeologus who with Johannes Sommerus Matthias Glirius and many others opposed the Adoration of Christ and was at last Burnt for his Heresies at Rome Socinus in his Reply tells them his Sense thus But as to Palaeologus Resp ad Vujek p. 42. whom they take for granted to be One of Us I answer that his being Reconciled to the Church of Rome was so far from being a Token of God's Favour unto him that it was a due Reward of his Impiety For besides his not sticking to Traduce our Party how Innocent soever as the most Arrant Knaves whom in the mean time he Blushes not to call Brethren He also was one and if I mistake not a leading Man among them who now a days affirm that Christ is neither to be Adored nor Invocated And yet they Impudently Profess themselves Christians a Device to deprave our Religion in my Opinion so Wicked that there could hardly be a Worser invented And as they could not Oppose the Adoration of Christ and Remain Christians so this their Principle leads 'em to Judaism For saith Socinus ever since I saw what Franciscus Davidis had Written against the Invocation of Christ I openly declared my Sentiments touching the Tendency of his Notion to Judaism and how it exalted Moses above Christ For this Reason more especially because if they hold that Christ may not be of Right Invocated he is not Really but only in Name Christ Socin Praef. ad Resp F. David And I Remember very well that in the Presence of Franciscus Davidis I pressed Glirius freely to tell me whether he believed Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ But he would give me no Answer c. What Socinus hath on this occasion delivered doth sufficiently evince that he Condemns not only Franciscus Davidis but all whosoever they be that are against the Rendring Divine Worship unto Christ even our English Socinians themselves if they do so for being far worse than Hereticks who in Reality deny Jesus to be the Christ and therefore can't be Christians nor clear themselves from the Charge of Mahometanism nor their Principles from a Tendency to Judaism Now that the Generality of the English Socinians do Reject the Adoration of Christ and are for giving him no other sort of Honour than they do to Men in Civil Power to Prophets or Saints in Glory is manifest from what they avouch There are Answ to Milbern p. 50. say they no Acts of Worship ever required to be paid to the Lord Jesus Christ but such as may be paid to a Civil Power to a Person in High Dignity and Office to Prophets and Holy Men or to such as are actually possest of the Heavenly Beatitudes Though some may be otherwise minded yet the Generality of them fall in with Palaeologus Sommerus Glirius Davidis and Others in their Rejecting the Adoration of our Blessed Redeemer as appears further from what is Reported of them by their own Historians who Represents their Opinion to the utmost Advantage he could page 33. intimating that the most Learned of the Ancients Reject this Invocation that Christ Himself when consulted about the Object and matter of Praver directed his Disciples to God that he forbad them to pray to Himself and that to make Christ himself the Object of Prayer is to destroy his Mediatory Office Thus much and abundantly more is urged by the English Socinians against our Adoring and Invocating the Lord Jesus Christ whereby they make themselves in the Esteem of the Foreign who are the more learned Socinians to be worse than Hereticks even Destroyers of the Chiefest and most Principal Foundations of the Christians Hope and Faith in God who in Reality deny Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ and cannot clear themselves from Mahometanism nor their Principles from Judaism Thus we see what manner of Men our Socinians are what Enemies to Christian Religion and whither their Principles do lead the Chief among themselves being Judges And when I consider what manner of Notions the most Ingenious of their way are Advancing I cannot but think on what Mersennus did intimate to Ruarus Epist Ruar 50. page 239. about the Attempts of some to bring all that part of Religion which is necessary to Salvation unto one Article There are saith he some Men and I doubt not but there are such amongst you who contend that this one Article of Faith only namely That Jesus is the Messiah is necessary unto Salvation that they who believe it may be called the Children of God that this is the One Article the Apostles urged To which others add that a Believing this Article with the Heart is not required as necessary a Confession of it with the Mouth being Sufficient That is to say if there be a rendring Obedience to the Magistrates Commands Thus we see whither Men when left to themselves will run They 'll suspect all Religion to be false and a Politick Contrivance then turn Atheists not only denying a Providence but the very Being of God Himself Mersennus writing thus much to a Grave and Learned Socinian who in his Answer taking no notice of it though very careful to rectifie the most inconsiderable Mistakes in other Instances moves me to conclude the Charge was true and the Atheistical Consequences too manifest to admit of a Penial which I the rather suggest to the end I may stir up the more sincere amongst our English Scocinians to consider the Tendency of their Notions SECT V. They fall in with the Papists in some momentous Points They imitate the QUAKERS in their crying down LEARNING a LEARNED MINISTRY and in REVILING THEIR ADVERSARIES § 1. THE Papists we confess that they may support their Temporal Grandeur and Dominating Will when pressed by the invincible Arguments of Protestants lower the Mysteries of the Blessed Trinity and Incarnation and level them with their Vnscriptural Vnreasonable and Nonsensical Doctrine of Transubstantiation rather than Hazard their Temporalties which they do by placing Transubstantiation and these Mysteries in the same Rank Now altho' the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation are most firmly believed by Protestants as supported by the clearest Revelations in Holy Writ yet the English Socinians as if their Design had been to prepare the Minds of the People Acts of Great Athanasius pag. 3. to close with the most pernicious part of Popery are bold to declare that the whole of Popery hath as much Evidence for it as these Foundations of Christianity Biddles Catechism Pres They do not only press us with the Assertion of the Popish Doctors that the Doctrine of the Trinity is Founded not in the Scriptures but on the Tradition of the Church and with the Charge that we Blasphemously make the Holy Scriptures a Nose of Wax
Insipid Profane an Human Invention grounded on no Testimony of God's Word The Popish God unknown to the Prophets and Aposiles Admonit 1. ad Polon What â—uther is brought in for is not much to the Purpose but if our Socinians have truly Represented Calvin 't is I confess a Quotation driven to the Head But when upon this account I could not but very carefully examine his Admonition to the Polonians unto which he Refers us I can find there no such Thing That the English Socinian's Truth and Candour therefore may be the more set in the Light I will bring to the Reader 's View what it is Calvin doth say on this Occasion In Câ—lvin's Theological Tractates there is an Answer to the Polenian Brethren Refuting the Error of Stancarus who held that Christ was a Mediator only with Respict to his Human Nature whereby Christ's Satisfaction Epist 1. p. â—2 and Man's Redemption are subverted and as Beza affirms a Door is opened unto the Tritheists who lead the Way to Arianism as Arianism brings in the Blasphemies of Samosatenus the Grand Idol of Socinus After this Answer there is a Irief Admonition sent to these Polonians cautioning them against a closure with I landrata â—â—xct Theol. Ed. 3. Genec A. D. 2611. p. 683. c. in making to themselves Three Gods by Imagining the Three Persons to be Three Essences But neither in the Answer nor Admonition is there a Word in Favour of the English Socinians There is also an Epistle sent to the Polonian Nobility and Gentry and to the Worthy Citizens of Cracow occasion'd by what Christophorus Trecius Stanislaus Sarnictus and Jacobus Sylvius wrote to Calvin about the Various Arts and Fraudulent Methods used by Hereticks to ensnare the People into a Denial of Christ's Divinity and a Trinity of Persons in the Unity of Essence But nothing in this Epistle to Justify the Charge of our Gentlemen it being notoriously Manifest that Calvin was for the use of the Terms Trinity and Persons In his Answer to Blandrata's Question about the Name Person he is Positive That the use of it is Necessary to Detect the Frauds of them who craftily endeavour to subvert the Foundations of our Faith And in his Epistles Calv. Epist Edit 2. A. D. 1576. p. 290. 't is more fully declared that the Terms Trinity and Persons are very Profitable to the Church of Christ as by which the true Destinction between the Father Son and Holy Ghost is more clearly discovered and Vexatious Controversies more Essectually Prevented for which Reason they were by no means to be laid aside 'T is true Calvin in his Letter to the Polonian Nobility expresses his Dislike of this Prayer Sancta Trinitas Vnus Deus miserere nostri Precatio mihi non placet says he omnino Barbariem sapit The Prayer not the word Trinity disgusted him And whereas Stancarus had wrested the Scriptures affirming that when 't is said There is One God and One Mediator GOD there signifies the Trinity That they may know thee the only true GOD that is the Trinity Whatever ye ask of the Father that is of the Trinity Calvin in Opposition to these wretched Interpretations of Stancarus saith We reject them not only as Insipid but as Prophane But what is this to his saying the Word Trinity is Barbarous Insipid Prophane the Popish God c. Or what Credit is there to be given to the Reports of an English Socinian Amongst many others Grotius is said by them to be Socinian all over This Great Man say they in his Younger Years attacked the Socinians in a Principal Article of their Doctrine Hist Sâ—â—he Let. 1 p 11. But being Answered by J. Crellius he not only never Replyed but thanked Crellius for his Answer and afterwards writing Annotations on the whole Scriptures he Interpreted every where according to the Sentiments of the Socinians There is nothing in all his Annotations which the more strict followers of Socinus his Doctrine do not approve and applaud His Annotations are a Compleat System of Socinianism not excepting his Notes on the first Chapter of St. John's Gospel which are written so Artificially and Interwoven with so many different Quotations that he hath covered himself and his Sense of that Portion of Scripture from such as do not read him carefully But to clear it that this Great Man the Learned Grotius is not theirs I will offer the following Considerations First then 't is Manifest from what Grotius himself hath oft avowed that altho' he did not Answer Crellius yet he had not changed his Opinion touching what he had written of Christ's Satisfaction In a Letter to Reigersbergius he saith thus In that I did not make Reply to Crellius I acted as I think very Prudently and according to the Advice and Desire of the Reformed Pastors in France who not having that Controversy started amongst them Praved that I would not by writing a Confutation of Crellius bring it in amongst their People And in his Letter to Vossius he adds What need is there of my Repeating what hath been already so fully done I am not afraid as he told Reigersberg of any ones comparing the Texts I produced together with those Explications and Arguments I urged to defend 'em with what hath been writ against them Nor do I in the least doubt but that an Equal Judge will determine for me And to Vossius If Crellius cannot Prove that it is Vnjust for One by his own Consent to bear the Punishment due to another which he will never be able to do the contrary being Agreeable to the Sentiments of the Wise in every Nation which in that very Book Crellius answered and since the Publishing his Answer in my Book de Jure Belli Pacis â—it de Poenarum Commun § xi I have fully shown and design to do it yet more largely in my Annotations Matt. 20.28 from Testimonies out of Hebrew Writers a Copy of which I have given to Mr. â—â—sse an English Divine who came over chiefly to make me a Visit 't will most certainly follow that neither Socinus nor Crellius had any Reason to leave the proper sign sâ—ation of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Price of our Redemption contrary to the most plain and manifest Sense of all Antiquity 2. This Great Man doth moreover provoke them to his Verity of Christian Religion for their Conviction that he had not â—harâ—d his Opinion about Christ's Satisfâ—ction If any saith he desire to know what my Judgment is about the Points Controverted between Crellius and my self since the coming out of his Book he may see it from what I have written on the fifty third of Isay 〈…〉 in my Disputation with the Jews and from what I have said in the close of my Book de Veritate The fifty third of I say he proves to be a Prophecy concerning the Messiah and gives such a Sense of Heb. 1.3 as is most opposite unto the Doctrine
of Socinus How then could our Historian Venture to make him Socinian all over It is because Grotius wrote a Letter of thanks unto Crellius on the Publishing his Book To this I 'll give you Grotius's own Reply which is 3. An Eminent English Divine spake to me of some Letters Epist ad Gul. Gâ—te p. 8â—â— which a while ago I had written unto Crellius who writing with the greatest Candour and Civility unto me I returned an Answer with the same Respect unto him This Civility and Respect of mine to Crellius the Followers of Socinus have turn'd into an Argument for my Agreement with them and to Insinuate thus much have scattered abroad some Parts of my Letters I wish with all my heart they had Published them whole and entire Then it would appear plainly that I have not in the least altered my Judgment In another Letter to his Brother William he saith I have had some Discourse about these things with Bisterfield pag. 884. who told me he understood from you and I also have heard the same that Crellius a little before his Death should say that had he seen what I have written de Poenarum Communicatione in my Book de Jure Belli Pacis he would never have answered my Book de Satisfactione 4. That he could not be Socinian all over is Evident from what he wrote to Graswinkelius to whom he declared Epist ad Graswink p. 53â— That he did strictly Adhere to the Doctrines of the Fathers not only about the Trinity but the Two Natures in Christ satisfaction and other Points oppugned by Socinus and his Followers 5 As for his Annotations it 's not clear to me that the Socimanism which is in them is his it looks rather as if those parts were some Excerpta taken out of Socinian Commentators with a Design to Examine them And sure I am that Grotius did not only suspect Curcellaeus Fâ—ct 〈…〉 Grot. 〈◊〉 â—93 the Correcter of the Press as an Inconstant Man under the Influence of such as were no Friends to him hoping to be Restor'd to his Ministry in â—â—anceâ— but is Positive that Curcellaeus made several changes in his Annotations contrary to his mind and will In Annotatis quaedam contra meum Sensum Pag. 910. Curcellaeus mutavit quod nolim fieri However the English Socinians say That Grotius is for them even in his Notes on the first Chapter of St. John's Gospel but then they Confess He hath written them so Artificially and Interwove them with so many Quotations that he hath coverâ—d him self and his sense of that Portion of Scripture from such as do not read him carefully This is a Generous sort of Confession cunningly devised and might have passed had there not been some Learned and Careful Readers amongst us to Detect the Falshood of the Insinuation which is very Excellently well performed to the Reproach of these bold Assertors and pretendedly Wise Interpreters of Scripture These few Intimations I suppose may suffice to show what Pitiful Shifts the English Socinians are driven to for the support of their Tottering Cause wherein I confess they fail of the Learning Candor and Integrity of some Foreign Socinians If Grotius must be lookt on as a Socinian saith Gittichius who hath with a freedom Answerable to his Heat Expressed his Resentments he is a Betrayer of the Faith To this Purpose Gittichius expresses himself in an Epistle to Ruâ—rus where he charges Grotius for Writing in such a way that without putting his Words on the Rack 't is impossible to secure 'em from Error Thus it is with what he saith concerning an Appeasing of the Wrath of God against us by the Grievous Sufferings of Christ When Grotius saith that the Pardon of Sin first offered to the Israelites then to the whole World Preached by Christ Confirmed by his Miracles Death and Exaltation was Purchased for us by that most Perfect Sacrifice the Bloody Death of Christ he affirms what is most contrary to the Holy Scriptures and yet thus doth he do in his Explicating the sixth Verse of the first of the Ephesians Gittichius concludes his Epistle with this Prayer The Lord grant unto Grotius a Sounder Judgment and secure his Church from such as he is and put forth his uttermost Power that there may not be at any time such Grotius's in his Church seeing the Church is in much greater Danger from such than from any open Enemies and Antichrists Thus much Gittichius wrote to Ruarus who because of Grotius's Candour represented him a Friend to their Party but as any one may see Grotius was far from being Socinian all over SECT VII The deceitful Practices of Foreign and English Socinians Blandrata the Socinians Patron by Flatteries and Subscriptions gains a Reputation amongst the Orthodox Calvin detects his Heresies and Frauds He is reprimanded by Protestants who look on Blandrata as an Angel Calvin continues his Opposition English Socinians break through Subscriptions and profane Sacraments for the carrying on thir Designs THE English Socinians suspecting the Success of those deceitful and unrighteous Methods which they use to propagate their Errors openly tho they reject what is most valuable in their Brethren abroad yet have imitated them in what hath in the Esteem of their candid and judicious Adversaries most exposed them Thus much they have done by joyning themselves â—o the Orthodox with no other Design than to subvert the Foundations of that Religion they profess subscribe and swear unto Valentinus Gentilis and Blandrata amongst many others are famed Instances of the Truth of this Assertion but I will only observe what manner of Person Blandrata was and what were his Practices George Blandrata Vid. Socin Epist ad Blandrat p. 687. edit 1618. an Italian by Birth and sometimes chief Physician and Counsellor to Stephen King of Poland was highly esteem'd by Faustus Socinus who dedicated to him his Answer to Volanus as the great Patron of their Religion as undoubtedly he was However Blandrata did for a long while so behave himself as to obtain Applauses from the most eminent amongst the Orthodox for the soundness of his Faith and unspotted Sincerity 'T is true Calvin after some considerable Converse with him began to suspect him and at last detected some of his Heresies and the fraudulent Practices by which he attempted their Propagation But soon was he reprimanded by Men sound in the Faith and of great Worth One eminent Person rebukes him for exposing Blandratâ— his singular Friend and as a Father to him most dear Felix Cruciger a Polonian Minister after he had in an Epistle to Calvin evinced their Faith to be exactly the same with what was embraced by the Reformed at Geneva and elsewhere saith That it appear'd to em that George Blandrata did some Weeks ago seriously Vid. Cat. Ep. p. 25â— subscribe their Confession and say they we earnestly pray you diligently and prudently to consider his Case and impart to us a faithful
Consid p. 28 That they Place not Religion in Worshipping God by themselves or after a Particular Form or Manner but in a Right Faith and a just and charitable Conversation We Approve of known Forms say they of Praising and Praying to God as also in Administring Baptism the Lords Supper Marriage and the other Religious Offices We like well of the Discipline of the Church by Bishops and Parochial Ministers We have an Esteem for the Eminent Learning and Exemplary Piety of the Conforming Clergy For these Reasons we Communicate with that Church as far as we can and Contribute our Intrest to Favour her against all Others who would take the Chair We would not therefore be Understood to be Enemies to the Church nor as seeking to undermine her And that they may hold Communion with the Church in her Sacraments they have framed such an Idea of 'em as makes it easy for Men of their Opinions to joyn in the Sacraments not only with the Church of England but with Presbyterian Independent Anabaptist Lutheran or Papist They do not look on the Sacraments as Ordinances of the Gospel to which they must go that they may Partake of Spiritual Blessings In their Opinion the Person that Receives Baptism is only to Resolve and Purpose Renovation and Newness of Life Trinitar Scheme Consid p. 26 He doth say they thereby Profess he will purge his Mind and Conscience and his whole Conversation from Impurity and Wickedness And concerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper They commemorate and represent the shedding the Lord's Blood and breaking hâ—s Body for Mankind But for the miraculous Effects and Consequences ascribed to the right partaking of this Sacrament Vnitarians can find them no where but in the Books and Sermons of the Superstitious Admirers I might have said Idolaters of External Things If they had been perswaded that the Sacraments were Ordinances design'd of God for the conveying of spiritual Blessings to such as do aright partake of them then they could nor be Protestants and yet communicate in the Sacrament with Papists because their way of Administration is not right But now to serve a Turn they can take the Sacrament according to the Church of England or to promote their Cause go to Mass They are so well pleased with this Piece of Jesuitism they do it 's like find it so advantageous for the propagating their Notions that they canâ—t forbear an exposing the opposite Truth held by Protestants as most vile and ridâ—culous Trinitar Scheme Consid p. 24 The Sacraments accordâ—ng to the Sense of the Orthodox are a sort of Means which works on our Minds as Spells Charms and Incantations and such lâ—ke obtain their pretended Effects by a preternatural Power extraordinarily given to them by God or by those Spirits who preside over such Afâ—â—â—s â—â—et a Man in Black sprinkle you wâ—th some of the Churches Water or give you a bit of Bread or sup of Wine over which he hath pronounced the wonder-working Words prescribed in Mother Churches Ritual tho by Nature you are as bad as the Devil you shall presently be inclin'd to as much Good as will save you from Hell and qualify you for Heaven And this no less certainly if you are one of the Elect for else the Churches Incantation produces only a momentary Effect and a false Appearance of Good no less certainly I say than by tying the Norman Knot you may gain the Love of the Person you desire or by other Devices recorded in the learned Books so Fools esteem them of Magick you may cause Hatred raise Winds and do a thousand other Feats which have no more natural or real Agreement with those Causes that are said to produce 'em than Faith and Obedience have with a bit of Bread or with a sprinkling of Water Therefore when St. Augustine defin'd a Sacrament to be the outward visible Sign of an inward invisible Grace or Energy the good Father should have considered that this is the Definition of a Charm not of a Gospel Sacrament for a Charm is a bare outward visible Sign that has no natural or real Agreement with the Effect and if the Effect prove for the Good of the Person concerned it may be called the inward invisible Grace of such Sign or Charm As when the Effect is to beget Love or such like But if the Effect of the Charm be hurtful as to kill or such like then it must be called the Energy not the Grace of the Charm as that damning Power or Quality which our Opposers impute to the Sacrament of the Supper when not receivâ—d aright cannot be called the Grace of that Sacrament but only the Energy So that let them turn themselves which way soever they can they have turnâ—d the Gospel-Sacraments as I have said before into Charms and Spells Thâ—se are the Evincements of English Socinian Modesty whose Dâ—sign of bringing the blessed Sacraments into the greatest Contempt is manifest But what I chiefly urge it for is that hereby they prepare the Mâ—nds of their Followers to prostitute their Consciences to a Compliance with any Religion to the end they may promote their own if it may be called a Religion For when onâ—e they have debauchâ—d their Consciences so throughly that they can take the Sacrament any way without Remorse as their Notion of it leads Men to do then may the more learned of their Party profess themselves to be either Papisis or Lutherans Calvinists or Remonstrants and carry on the Socinian Design either by a clandestine Insâ—â—tâ—asion of their Errors as Blandrata and sundry others of them have done or in theâ—r Opposition to Socinus pitch on such Topicks as weaken the Truth which is done by them who assert the Persons in the Blessed Trinity to be Three distinct Essences or represent the Socinian Error to be less dangerous than really it is and the Socinians themselves to be Men of greater Learning and Probity than most of them are Such Methods as these have been taken by Przipcovius Daniel Zuickerus Forstius Episcopius Curcellaeus and many others and not altogether without Success However I must and do acknowledge Johannes Niemojevius a Polonian Knight and once a Judge tho a Socinian yet generously opposed Georgius Schomannus who pleaded for this very Principle about the Vse and End of the Lord's Supper He freely declared That in this Point he differed as much from Socinus as the Heavens are distant from the Earth Vid. Secin Oper. tom 1. p. 756. And in Defence of what he wrote against the Theses of Emanuel Vega he expressed the religious sense of his Soul by that Grief he conceived on the spreading of this pernicious Error amongst them Do we not read saith he that Faith comes by Hearing which is confirm'd and increas'd in pious Minds by the same means And shall we ascribe less to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper than to Hearing of the Word Socinus may perhaps do so but I suppose no
Deity A God without a Deity is a false God because he wants Infinite Perfection a true God then hath Infinite Perfections and therefore must be the most High God except there are Perfections more High than what are Infinite But thus much they Deny tho' Christ be a true God yet he is not the Most High God He is but a Subordinate God in his Essence This then is their Notion Christ is a True Subordinate God i. e. A True God whose Perfections are Infinite a Subordinate God in his Essence whose Perfections can be but Finite and therefore can be no God at all Again 2. Christ is they say God on the Father's giving him Absolute Dominion over all things with a Power and Knowledge whereby he knoweth the Distresses of all and is able to Relieve the Distressed But seeing Nothing short of Omniscience and Omnipotence can know and Relieve and these together with absolute Dominion are Essential Properties of the Most High God How comes it to pass that Christ is not the most High God Here are the Essential Properties of such a God and yet no such God These are some of their Mysteries The Holy Ghost is an Eternal Omnipotent Increate Being but not God He is neither a Creator nor a Creature but an Omnipotent Somewhat different from Both Increate or Unoriginated Omnipotence is not sufficient to evince the Eternal Spirit to be God but a Derived Omnipotence is enough to make a Creature to be a True God Unoriginated Omnipotence is not Reason enough for the adoring the Eternal Spirit but Derived Omnipotence is a good Ground for Rendring Divine Worship to a Creature These Gentlemen you see are the Grand Transubstantiators for they can Transubstantiate a Creature into a True God and still remain a Creature they can Transfer the Essential Properties from one being to another and each Being remain the same it was before the Translation They can Order and Dispose of the Divine Properties in such a Way that they shall be insufficient to Denominate him a True God in whom they were from all Eternity and yet be Powerful enough to make him in whom they were not two Thousand Years ago to be a True God Whether these are Real Mysteries or Real Contradictions let the Prudent judge I will not treat these Over-Wise Men with that Scurrilous Language they do the Mysteries of the Holy Trinity But without Exaggeration I will proceed to Examine what they say of God the Father III. That God the Father is only the most High God is their Assertion of whom they have nevertheless form'd such an Idea as fails of Infinite Perfections So that if we pursue their Notion of a Deity to its utmost Length we must at last sit down amongst the Atheists For the clearing this I do in Concurrence with the Common sentiments of Mankind averr that what Being soever is destitute of an Infinite Perfection is not cannot be God The Essential Properties belong to the Divine Nature including Infinite Perfection that being which is destitute thereof wants what is Essential to God and cannot be the True God If then the Socinians deny any one Infinite Perfection to belong to their God it must be acknowledged that he wants what is essential unto God and is not God And that they Deny thus much is Evident from the Notion they frame of his Eternity and their Rejecting his Immensity and Omniscience I might begin with what they say of God's Eternity but I will only observe what the English Socinian saith of my Lord of Worcester's arguing from Godâ—s Eternity to prove Somewhat in the Attributes of God incomprehensible who instancing in Eternity saith If God was from Eternity he must be from himself In their Answer they tell us To say a Person Ans to the Bp. Worces Serm. p. 5. or Thing was from it self is a Contradiction It implies this Contradiction It was before it was Thus our English Socinian who adds I am sorry an Eternal God must be a Contradiction had he no way to Defend the New Mysteries but by Espousing the Cause of Atheists In Return to this Gentleman passing by what his Lordship hath said in his Consuâ—ation of him I will only observe how he doth at once expose himself and his Leaders such as Socinus Crellius c. who speaking of what is the Essence of God say it is from it self Socinus in his Institution of the Christian Religion answering the Question Tom. 1. p. 651. What ought we to know of the Nature and Essence of God saith These two Things chiefly That he is and that â—e is only One Quest What is it to know That He is Ans It is to know that he hath from himself a Divine Fuâ—piâ—â— oâ—â—r us Besides He tells us that Eternity 〈◊〉 necessarily included in God's having Divine Dominion over us from Himself and so is his Justice Wisdom and Power A little after this he further saith That when it 's said God is One The meaning is There is but one who hath Dominion over us from himself tâ—â—i Sup. p. 681. In like manner the Tenth Argument Crellius presseth to prove that the Father of Jesus Christ is the only Supreme God is this That his Nature and whatever else is proper to the Supreme God he receiv'd from Himself On this Notion of God it is that they build the whole of their Religion and on which they insist to the End they may the more effectually enervate our Arguments for Christ's being God tho' from the Father But as Socinus Crellius c. fail of their Design in that when tâ—s said God is from Himself it must be meant of God taken Essentially not Personally so this Gentleman makes the whole of the Socinian Religion to be founded on a Chimera or Contradiction For if the Nature of God his Dominion Eternity Justice Wisdom and Power be from Himself he must be before he had Dominion Justice c. What then was He He was before he was or as the English Socinian phrases it He must be a Contradiction But as I said waving the Consideration of this Contradiction and their Notion of Eternity which they make to be a sort of Time where are the successive Parts of Past Present and to Come which cannot be without a First Second and a Third and yet must be without 'em or Eternity must have it's Beginning I will urge against them their denying Immensity and Omniscience to belong to God First then they deny God's Immensity and Circumscribe his Essence within the Heavens acknowledging him to be no otherwise every where Present than as he is by his Power Providence and Works Socinus assureth us Soci Frag. Catec Tom. 1. p. 685. he could see no Reason to conclude God's Essence to be Immense because his Power was so expresly declaring That the Divine Essence is not Infinite Crellius and Smalcius hold the same Resp ad â—ranc Dav Tom. 2. p. 735. But if Gods Essence
Jesus Himself that the Belief of his being God Equal with the Father is so necessary that without it we can't be pronounced Believers The Holy Evangelist in the Account he gives of the Discourse that was between Christ and the Jews expresly declares that the Jews sought to kill Jesus because he said that God was his Father making Himself equal with God Notwithstanding which the Lord Jesus went on to the Proofs assuring them that His doing the same Works which the Father doth doth evince him to be God equal with the Father adding that the Father hath so committed all Judgment unto the Son that all Men should Honour the Son even as they Honour the Father That is with the same Honour Worship and Adoration For he that Honoureth not the Son Honoureth not the Father which has sent him which Words do plainly shew that 't is the Will of the Father That we believe his Son Jesus to be God equal with himself For a rendring the same Honour to the Son which is due unto the Father carrieth in it an Ascription of those Essential Perfections of God to him which make him to be God equal with the Father which cannot be lawfully done by any but such as believe him to be so as appears not only from the Nature of the thing but from Rom. 10.14 where it 's said that we can't call or give Divine Honour to him in whom we have not believed If then Honouring the Son as we Honour the Father be so necessary a Duty that they who neglect it do not Honour the Father a believing the Son to be God in the same Sense the Father is God is so necessary as a believing the Father to be God which is so very necessary that on the Disbelief of it Men were pronounced Unbelievers This is I confess a Parting Point between Orthodox Christians on the one Hand and the Mahometans and English Socinians on the other For if Assent to this Doctrine viz. That Jesus Christ is God equal with the Father be so necessary that without it we can't be pronounced Believers they who disbelieve it cannot be Christians whence it is that the Mahometans and English Socinians denying the Divinity of Christ and the lawfulness of rendring to him Divine Worship are for the same Reason linkâ—d together as Enemies to the Christian Religion The most learned and sober amongst Foreign Socinians being aware of this tho' they denied Christ's Deity yet urged the giving Divine Worship unto Christ as necessary to the distinguishing themselves from the Mahometans and proving themselves to be good Christians But the English Socinians falling in with Franciscus Davidis and that Party in Poland are of opinion that they must be guilty of Idolatry if they give Divine Worship to him that is but a Creature and to escape Idolatry refuse to give to the Son Divine Worship and so put it out of their Power to prove themselves to be better Christians than the Turks are or to plead their own Cause without defending the Mahometans which as I take it is the true Reason why the more Learned amongst them do write so Respectfully and Charitably of these Ishmaelites and do not only speak Honourably of the Impostor Mahomet's Design as if it had been only to reform the Christian Religion but assign the Reason of the Propagation of that Religion not to the Sword but to their Denial of the Blessed Trinity And yet it is most manifest that Mahomet a very vicious Man being under the Conduct of Sergius a Nestorian did by his Assistance invent a Religion with a Design if possible to please the Pagan Jew and Christian and considering the Ignorance and Debauchery of the People amongst whom he was He prepar'd such a Heav'n for them who observed his Alcoran as mostly suited their sensual and voluptuous Dispositions And being himself a most lascivious Wretch whilst he would by his Alcoran restrain others pretends to have an Indulgence from Heaven for the Gratification of his own Lusts Thus the Amorous Prophet being taken with the Beauty of his Slave Zeid's Wife obliged Zeid to Repudiate her bringing in the one God Chap. 33. saying When Zeid did Repudiate his Wife we married thee to her to the End there might remain no Errour among the True Believers The Prophet sins not in doing what God has permitted O Prophet we permit thee to know the Women to whom thou hast given Dowry the Women slaves which God hath given thee the Daughters of thine Uncles and of thine Aunts that have abandon'd with thee the Company of the Wicked Thou shalt retain whom of thy Wives thou shalt desire to retain and shalt repudiate such as thou shalt desire to repudiate and shalt lie with them that shall please thee Thus much out of the Alcoran where t is also said that amongst his Slaves which were many he might if their Beauty pleased him make exchanges and least his lascivious Practices should encourage his Wives to do the like with True Believers He charges his Believers not to come into his Houses without Permission and when permitted not to tarry long for that molesteth the Prophet and modest Man he is ashamed to bid them be gone The Wives of the Prophet shall have their Faces covered when they speak unto 'em they ought not to importune the Prophet of God neither to know his Wives this would be a most Enormous Sin Besides Mahomet did constantly Preach that God had sent him to confirm his Law by Force of Arms and not by Miracles This is so notoriously true that it cannot but amaze the least acquainted with the Turkish Stories to hear any Pretender to Learning affirm that Mahomet was against forcing any to a Closure with his Blasphemies Though they proclaimed Liberty to all that would submit to their Alcoran yet so far resolv'd on the propagating their Religion by Force that no Truce could prevent their using violent Methods when they had a Tendency to promote their Design whence it is that in the Alcoran the ninth Chapter entituled by the Mahometan Doctors the chapter of Punishment but by Mahomet the Chapter of Conversion beginneth not as the rest with these Words in the Name of God Gracious and Merciful because these are Words of Peace and Salvation and Mahomet in this Chapter commands to break Truce with his Enemies To kill them where-ever they shall meet them take them Slaves detain them Prisoners and observe where they pass to lay Ambush for them But if they be converted if they pray at tâ—me Appointed and pay Tithes leave them in Quiet God is merciful to them that repent Whether the lascivious and bloody Mindedness of this Mahomet and his Partizans be some of the Trifles of whom Sandius speaks who after he had given the fairest Representation of the Faith and Morals of the Turks adds Caetera quae in Alcorano invenimus sunt merae nugae I submit to the Reader it being to me very clear that they who