the Center of a World from this consideration he cannot imagine that our great Creatour should be so greedy of a little of our corrupt breath as to purchase it with a fall from Heaven This would be to disgrace our Lord from the dignity of a Benefactor to the vileness of an unskilful Tradesman who buys vile ware and pays for it infinitely more than it is worth Indeed I have hardly patience to answer this abominable Blasphemy to see a foolish Philosopher thus horridly to affront his Creatour and in this witless Buffoonry to ridicule the infinite satisfaction of his blessed Redeemer because he cannot make it agree with his system of Physicks But pray let him consider that we do not think the dignity of our nature or the beauty of our World inclined God who has no respect of persons to work our Redemption this was only the effect of his infinite mercy which we can never enough admire and praise And besides what signifies the largeness and gloriousness of the Heavenly Bodies in comparison with Mens Immortal Souls The Sun is the most glorious Body we see and yet a Fly is a more noble Creature than that The sensitive Soul that this is endowed with advances its excellence far above any the most glorious inanimate being that can be imagined But the immortal Soul of one Man is of more dignity than all the Corporeal Creation and if there had been no other way to redeem Mens Souls that were lost but by the destruction of all the other Creation 't would not have been unbecoming the divine Wisdom to have destroyed all them to have redeemed these because these are of infinitely more value than they But it may be that the Authour thinks there are an infinite number of Worlds all stocked with rational Creatures of it may be much more dignity than we so that it was not worth God's while to take care of such insignificant Creatures as we are Now we know nothing of these great Bodies and for what use Providence designed them besides for the benefits we receive from them and therefore Men talk at random when they ascribe any other to them But supposing there were rational Creatures in ten Millions of Earths that were moving round their respective Suns must God less take care of our World because he has a great many more to take care of This is to attribute a foolish weakness to the Deity and to think it is with him as it is with some Parents who when they have a great number of Children do not love any particular Child so well as if they had but that alone or but fewer Certainly God bears a Fatherly Love to all his Creatures and will provide whatsoever is necessary for them 't is not his providing for innumerable other Creatures that can hinder him from providing for us his Omniscience cannot be distracted by innumerable Operations and his infinite Power and Love can and will do all things that are necessary for us So that if it be requisite to repair the forfeited Souls of Mankind that a Person of the Godhead should make an infinite satisfaction for sins against an infinite Majesty and which do deserve an infinite punishment 't is not the gloriousness of the other Worlds which should hinder him from doing it for his Fatherly compassion reaches to us as well as them and he would not stick to use these means for our Redemption if no other could effect it But the Authour says that then Christ has paid infinitely more than the ware was worth like an unskilful Tradesman as he calls him I shall not now dispute whether God could have pardoned the sins of the World any other way than by the blood of God 't is enough for us to know that God has done it only by these means and to be sufficiently thankful to him for it And when the Authour or any of his Party shall think fit to engage upon a dispute of satisfaction the Pens of those excellent Defenders of our Religion of late against Popery will not be silent in this dispute if they shall think fit to begin it though all the Tribe down from Servet to this Authour will not be able to shake any part of the Treatises on this subject by the most Excellent Grotius and the Bishop of Worcester But because the Authour here offers nothing but his bare assertion and because I have in part answered this objection already in the fifth Chapter I shall proceed to his next Argument which is That it is not supposable that our Lord should require a belief in his Divinity because it was not required of some of the first Embracers of Christianity such as Philip's Eunuch and the like who were baptized into the Christian Faith he says without any knowledge of his Divinity It is very certain we do not find in Scripture any set Form to be recited by all Persons to be baptized that declares an express belief in our Saviour's Divinity but such a Declaration has been the Custom of the Church in the most early times and therefore though the Scripture do not assert any such Declaration yet such a silence especially considering the compendious way of writing in the Authours of these Books cannot conclude that there was no such form used by them or that all that were to be baptized did not give an express assent to and belief in the Doctrine of the Trinity It is most certain they were baptized with a form of words which does imply that Doctrine viz. In the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost So that unless we will suppose that they were baptized into names which they did not understand which we cannot suppose any reasonable Men should they must understand the meaning and purport of these names and so have a belief in the person as well as in the Doctrine of our Saviour For how can we suppose but that when any new Converts to Christianity should see others baptized before them into these three names of Father Son and Holy Ghost they should never trouble themselves to know who they were If they were Jews they would by this be afraid of running into the Gentile Polytheism and would be sure to be well instructed in this matter for fear of Idolatry If they were Gentile Converts to hear this form without any farther Instruction they would be apt to think this was but to keep in their own Religion still and only to retrench the number of their Gods from 300 to 3 which would be still as much contradiction to the Principles of their Conversion as their former Tenets So that we must needs think that the Apostles did explain this form of Baptism to all that were baptized how suddenly soever and did inform them what these three Persons into whose names they were baptized were and how they were consistent with the unity of the Deity which would give them the full notion of the Doctrine of the
commonly been attributed to Castellio though 't is apparent it is not Castellio's by the Reflection that is made upon his Translation of the Scripture He wrote likewise a Treatise of the Sacraments and a Book de Resurrectione Corporum published by Crucellaeus Whatever other Designs he had projected and whatever Books he wrote fell into his Nephew Faustus's hands who made all the possible haste he could to Zurick to secure his Books and Papers fearing least it should fare with Laelius as it had done before with David George Faustus Socinus the Nephew of Laelius was the Son of Alexander Socinus and of Agnes the Daughter of Burgesius Petruccius Prince of Siena by which he was related to Three Popes Pius II. and III. and Paul V. He was born December 5. 1539. at Siena being but Fourteen Years younger than his Uncle and he being now dead and Faustus having gotten his Books and Papers into his hands he returns into Italy being now at the Age of Twenty Three Years and spends Twelve Years in the Court of the Duke of Florence And now whilst Faustus kept close in Italy the Vnitarian Cause was carried on by others and not a little by Castellio by publishing to the World Ochinus's Dialogues of which Faustus Socinus says His sense of our Saviour Christ was plainly expressed and inculcated though Castellio in his defence said he only published them as a Translator being wont to get his Livelihood by translating Books Neither were the Vnitarians themselves wanting to carry on their design for in the Year 1566 there was a Book printed at Alba Julia with this Title Demonstratio falsitatis Docrina Pauli Melii reliquorum Sophistarum per Antitheses unà cum refutatione Veri Turcici Christi And afterwards another entitled De falsâ verâ unius Dei Pat. Fil. Sp. Sanct. Cognitione supposed to be wrote by Laelius Socinus though Sandius denies it from the difference of the style c. And about the same time Jacobus Acontius published his Book call'd Satane Stratagemata which did considerable Service to the Vnitarians In the Year 1568 there came out a Book set out by the Ministers and Seniors of the consenting Churches in Transylvania De Mediatoris Jesus Christi hominis divinitate aequalitatéque in which speaking of the Trinity they say The Three-One God of Antichrist is buried and say It was wickedly done of the Roman Church to condemn those famous Fathers Berillus Samosetanus Arius Donatus Helvidius Artemon c. And in the Year 1569 They publish another of the Kingdom of Christ and Anti-christ with a Treatise of Paedo Baptism and Circumcision the Conclusion of which Book is this Whosoever does truly believe that the Pope is Anti-christ does truly believe that the Trinity and Infant Baptism and the other Sacraments of the Papists are the Doctrines of Devils The next Year being the Year 1570 Faustus Socinus published his first Book of the Authority of the holy Scripture in Italian afterwards turned by himself into Latin and set out under the Name of Dominicus Lopez at Sevil 1588. and again set out by Vorstius at Steinfort 1611. in which Book says a Learned Man instead of making good the Scripture's Authority against Atheists he weakens it among Christians In the Year 1574 he leave the Duke's Court and comes to live at Basil where he spends three Years in furbishing up that Model of Divinity which was left him by his Uncle Laelius for he himself by his own Confession was able then to add but little to them For in his Answer to the defence of Puccius he says he understood not much of Greek and but little or nothing of Hebrew And indeed Forterus's Lexicon was his whole Treasure of Hebrew Knowledge which he was forced to recur to upon all Occasions His Knowledge in Logick was but small at best and he had wrote several of his Books before he had any Knowledge at all of it In the Year 1577. He published his Disputation de Jesu Christo Servatore which he had with Jacocâ—bus Covetus Pastor of the French Church at Basil And in the Year 1578. he published another Disputation of the state of the First Man before the Fall against Francisus Puccius In his Book de Christo Servatore he revived first of the modern Vnitarians Abelardus's Heresie of the Redemption and Satisfaction of Christ making the Merits of Christ to be purely exemplary In the Year 1578. he sets out Castellio's Dialogues of Predestination Election Free-will and Faith and writes a Preface to them under the feigned name of Faelix Turpio Vrbevetanus His Explication of the first of St. John was wrote about the Year 1562. as he himself says though not published till afterwards In the Year 158â— he sets out his Synopsis of Justification from which the Remonstrants since have borrowed so much But in this Year there happened the great Schism among the Vnitarians concerning the Adoration of Christ especially between Blandrata and Franciscus Davidis the Ministers of Alba Julia siding with the one and those of Claudiopolis or Clausburg with the other Upon this Blandrata invites Socinus into Poland to be Moderator in this difference and gets Socinus to lodge in the same house with Fr. Davidis Blandrat during his stay bearing all his Expences So that within a few Months afterwards followed that famous Conference held at Clausburgh concerning the Invocation of Christ which was afterwards Printed in the Year 1594. After the end of which Conference Franciscus Davidis being very stiff in his Opinion and his Antagonists exaggerating the Wickedness of it he was forthwith imprisoned by Order of the Prince of Transylvania and afterwards in a few Months was either made away there or died From hence was raised a great Clamour by the Anti-Adoration Party against Socinus and Blandrata that they had been the Authours of this Persecution which was so much credited that they lost their Esteem with many This forced Socinus to write an Apology to the Transylvanians the Followers of Franciscus Davidis to shew that Franciscus drew this Calamity upon himself That contrary to his Promise given to him and Blandrat he had procured several things in the Synod of Thord to be decreed against the Invocation of Christ and once when he preached in the great Church he expresly asserted That it was the same thing to pray to Christ as to pray to the Virgin Mary or any other of the dead Saints After the Death of Franciscus Davidis the Anti-Invocation Party in Transylvania were not quiet but did resolutely maintain That as Christ by Nature was not God so without Idolatry he could not be worshipped and for this side of the Controversie there appeared strenuously Franciscus Davidis's Son Palaeologus Glirius Sommerus and others who in their Books and Discourses did grievously accuse Socinus and Blandrata Socinus not being easie under all these Contradictions and Accusations forthwith leaves Transylvania and being now 40
very well convinced of but I never heard of her Hypocrisy before or at least to have it commended too And truly if what our Authour would make us believe be true that she entertains the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds only in complaisance to the Papists when in reality she disbelieves them she is guilty of the most abominable Hypocrisy in the World 'T is true indeed she uses the Apostles Creed only in those Offices he speaks of because they are the most ancient and the shortest and therefore the fittest for these occasions but yet by the words of the Apostles she understands the substance of what is contained in the other which she looks upon as Comments upon this But however to be sure her use of it in those Offices does not shew her to disbelieve the other Creeds any more than the use of the Athanasian or Nicene in the other Offices of the Prayer-Book shews that she disbelieves the Apostles One would have thought that her using all three did shew her belief of all three for that I am sure is the more natural consequence and not that her using one in one place does shew that she does not believe the other two she uses in other places Well but this may be in compliance with the Papists that she uses them But how does he prove that Has he any 〈◊〉 that the Compilers of the Common-Prayer designed any such thing Do the Rubricks Canons Articles or any other Publick Authority of the Church say any thing like it Till the Authour could have found some such grounds to have gone upon he had better have kept his foolish surmise to himself and not so senslesly have taxed the best Church in the World with such a wicked compliance But what more ample satisfaction could our Church have given to the World of her believing these two Creeds and the Injunction of the same to all her Members than by what she has done She recommends all the three Creeds in her Articles and tells us they ought throughly to be believed for they may be proved by most certain warrants from holy Scripture In her Rubricks she has ordered the Athanasian Creed to be used upon all the great Festivals of the year instead of the Apostles by which it is plain she looks upon it at least an Equivalent to it And this is to be said by the Minister not as something Declaratory to the People but as something they do assent to and in his words do they openly profess as appears by the Rubricks ordering the People to stand at this Creed as at the Apostles which is a token of their assenting to and of their making an open profession of what is then read Now can we suppose that the Church should exact so solemn a profession of the Faith contained in this Creed upon these great days if she did not expect they should believe what they so solemnly profess If the Authour can believe this he should never tax the Orthodox again with the Absurdity of their Faith The Nicene Creed is ordered to be said every Sunday and Holiday and in the Communion Service just before the receiving the Blessed Sacrament if a Sermon does not intervene in the same manner the other Creeds are recited And can we suppose that the Church should oblige her Members to make such an Hypocritical Confession at a time when she supposes them to have the best thoughts and the most pious Resolutions and to seal this their Hypocrisy with no less than immediate Perjury If she did do this instead of being the best she would be the most wicked Church in the World this one Injunction would serve to set against forty Romish corruptions but in truth the Romanists had never Forehead enough to object this against her so that it seems the Hereticks upon occasion can outdo the Jesuits in this qualification for this Authour by this one Calumny against the Church has said enough to silence all the lying Slanders of the Jesuits down from Sanders and Parsons to the little Scriblers in the late Reign As to his saying speaking of the Convocation last year that it will be a great disappointment to his Majesty and his good People if such an opportunity prove fruitless I cannot so well understand what he means if he means fruitless towards the incouraging his Opinions or for the taking away of these Creeds I believe it was more than his Majesty or any of his good People ever thought of or would have been satisfied with if it had been done nor could any but the Authour be so simple to imagine that when the State so lately by an Act of Parliament had excluded the Anti-Trinitarians even from the Benefit of Toleration that they should be let into the Church by an Act of Convocation THE END SOME REFLECTIONS UPON THE Naked Gospel As it is last Published and Owned By D r BVRY SInce these Papers were in the Licensers hands the Bookseller told me it would be expected I should say something to the Book Dr. Bury has since Published under his name so much altered from what it was before I do not think this is absolutely necessary to do in point of justice to the Authour for I have not concerned my self at all who was the Authour of that Book I only took care to Answer the False and Heretical Doctrines I found there which were like to do any mischief in the World which might still do harm enough for all its Authour's retractation It is his first Book that requires an Answer and not this last for that is such a poor Toothless Adder the poison of which is so much drained out that we may venture it any where without an Antidote Indeed 't is easy still to discern here the Tracts of the Heresy in his former Book but now they appear so thin and discoloured that the Reader whose gust lies the Socinian way will throw aside this insipid Heterodoxy for something of the same kind that is more substantial Here is still for the most part the old Heretical Body with here and there an Orthodox Limb so that his Book looks now like one of our old Saxon Idols half Man and half Monster Now whatever of his Erroneous Opinions he has altered or retracted in this last Book I shall not concern my self with them at all and truly I am glad he is come to own them to be such I shall only make a transient Remark or two upon those places in this Edition where instead of recanting he has multiplied his Heterodoxies But by the way it will be worth while a little to consider the Apology the Doctor makes for his first Book in his Preface to this He says this was drawn up against the sitting of the late Convocation at a time he had not patience to be silent in to enlarge some of their minds with a more comprehensive Charity with an intention to communicate what he had wrote to the members of that
Years old goes for Poland and there joyns himself to the Congregation of them that following Servet do pray to Christ as the Son of the Eternal God but not the Eternal Son Who as Socinus says in Poland and in the great Dukedom of Lithuania are called Arians and Ebionites And here he formed the remaining part of his Heresie which differs so much from that of the other Vnitarians before Socinus For whereas Servetus and his Followers were content only to destroy the Doctrine of the Trinity and to retain the other Points of Religion he was for innovating in all and in a strict sence for teaching another Gospel Thus he taught that the Principle and Foundation of Faith was in a Man of himself Soc. Tract de just That justified Persons are in a State of unsinning Perfection Syn. 2. de just Dial. de just p. 14. That Mortality was necessary to Man if he had not sinned Part. 3. de Serv. Chris c. viij That Adam had not the Promise of Eternal Life nor could he avoid his Fall Resp ad def Pucc de prim Hom. stat Lib. Suas quod regn Pol. c. p. 56. That Christ was a new Legislatour and gave Moral Laws which were not so before de Offic. Chr. p. 4. de Conv. Diff. V. N. Test p. 33. That Christ abrogated all the Judicial Precepts of the Law as well as the Ceremonial de Off Chr. p. 5. that notorious Offenders are not to be punished with Death ibid. That the Lord's Supper is not a Conveyance of Grace but only an Act of Commemoration Tract de Coen Dom. That Baptism is not necessary for Christians that it was a Rite only of John and not of Christ de Bapt. Aq. c. xvi That it is a thing indifferent whether Children be baptized or no or any other that it is not a sin if they be but it ought not to be enjoined ibid. cap. 17. That the Messias was not promised to all the Jews Frag. de justif jux fin nor were they at all obliged to believe that the Messias should come ibid. That Christ did not suffer and die for us to rescue us from Punishment but only to shew us an Example how we ought to suffer for Righteousness sake Rel. Chr. brev Inst p. 87 88. brev Disc de rat Sal. p. 15. That Christ was called our Saviour because he manifested the Terms of Salvation to us de Chr. Serv. c. 1 5. That he is called a Mediatour not because he reconciles God and us but because he was Embassadour from God to us to reveal his Will Rel. Chr. Inst p. 85. That Christ ascended up into Heaven before he entered upon his Prophetick Office to be informed of God's Will and therefore in Scripture when 't is said Christ came down from Heaven 't is to be meant of his Descent after this Ascension Rel. Chr. Inst p. 127. in Disp cum Erasm Joh. Christ was not God before his Glorification which was after the Ascension and then he was so only by Office and Immortality Anti-Wiek cap. 6. Rel. Christ Inst p. 25. That Christ was mere Man and the Holy Ghost only an Attribute Ibid. These and many more are the Heterodoxes of his Books which the Socinians do at this day maintain and others there are which are more covertly delivered in Socinus's Books though more expresly asserted by his Followers such as the denying an Eternity of Torments and the rising again with the same Bodies the Hints of which also they took from Socinus so that in him was in a manner wholly perfected the Heresie which does still go under his Name 'T is true the Anti-Adoration Faction who were the Followers of Franciscus Davidis and Symon Budnaeus did a long time stifly oppose him but in the Synod of Brest in the Confines of Transylvania he so cunningly managed the Matter that though he chiefly pretended a Dispute for the Adoration he brought the adverse Party to receive his Notions of the Death and Sacrifice of Christ of Justification and of the Corruption of Mens Nature which they had lately condemned Afterwards he drew over to his Opinion the famous Vnitarian Petrus Statorius a Man of a great Popular Eloquence who made Socinus's Doctrines go down more easily with the People by his Pulpit Harangues He himself too by a strange artifice brought over to his Heresy every day many of the better quality several the Courtiers and Nobility that happened to abide at Lubernick and several of the younger Clergy that were not well grounded in their Religion And none of the Vnitarians after a while objected against this new mode of Socinus but only Nemojevicius and Czechovicius who resisted him strenuously for a time and Nemojevicius after a while too assented to him and Czechovicius though he held out to the last seeing no body to abett him was forced to be still So that within four years time all the whole Church of the Vnitarians did subscribe to the Doctrines of Socinus which they had so lately almost universally Condemned Thus was this Heresy perfected after so many struglings among the Vnitarians themselves which is swallowed down so crudely and without consideration by many in our Ages that make pretence to the greatest Reason and Cautiousness Socinus lived several years after the general Reception of his Doctrines and died in the year 1604. The other Vnitarians that have been famous since Faustus Socinus have been but as the Schoolmen to Lumbard have commented only upon his Text and only more audaciously sometimes explained his notions The first Vnitarian of note after Socinus had formed his Heresy was Georgius Enjedinus an Hungarian Superintendant of the Socinian Churches in Transylvania and Moderator of the Gymnasium at Clausburg He was a follower of Socinus in most of his Doctrines only in the matter of Invocation which Socinus endeavours to disswade him from in a long Letter to him A. D. 1596. He wrote the celebrated Socinian piece upon the Texts of the old and new Testament upon which the Trinity is grounded though the other Tracts attributed to him are doubted Ostorodus was another Disciple of Socinus he was a Saxon by Birth the Son of a Lutheran Minister he was Master of a School for some time in Pomerania but being found to be heretical in his Principles he was deprived of that and so in the year 1585. he came into Poland where he was some time Minister of the Vnitarian Church of Gâ—dan His most famous piece is his Institutions which he wrote in Dutch Next was Johannes Volkelius born in the Province of Misnia in Saxony His chiefest piece is his five Books de verâ Religione or his Institutions of Socinianism which was excellently answered by Maresius Ernestus Sonerus a Norimberg Physician Professor of natural Philosophy and Medicine at Altorf he was the Master of Crellius He wrote the famous Heretical piece against the Eternity of Hell Torments Entituled Demonstratio
Fathers the true Christian justifying Faith CHAP. IV. Credulity not an excess of Divine Faith What deference is to be paid to General Councils That they cannot err à piè Credibile They are the best expedients of Vnity CHAP. V. The belief of Christ's Divinity one of the difficulties in the planting the Gospel The belief of this frequently incouraged by our Saviour The belief of Christ's Divinity useful to Religion 1. By gaining Authority to his Laws 2. By improving our love and gratitude 3. By assuring us of pardon CHAP. VI. Our Saviour's Titles not Hyperbolical Not called the Son of God as a great Mountain is called the Mountain of God c. He is not the Son of God as Angels are The splendor of his Nature no bar to our being certain of his Divinity CHAP. VII The Authour's Testimony of Constantine concerning the Doctrine of Christ's Divinity examined Constantine ' s judgment of Arianism The supposition of a plurality of Worlds no Argument that the Eternal Son of God should not dy for the sins of this No Argument against the Trinity because it is not said expresly in Scripture that every one to be baptized must believe in it The Ancient Christians before Baptism always instructed in this Doctrine A Testimony out of Justin Martyr examined A Testimony of Leonas in Socrates examined CHAP. VIII Another Testimony of Constantine examined In what sense our Saviour's Original is unknown How Melchizedeck is a Type of Christ. The Authour 's saying that the Evangelists do confound the Genealogies on purpose to puzzle us considered A Vindication of Bishop Alexander's contest with Arius A Citation out of Socrates concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 examined Athanasius's explication of the Trinity defended Not absurd to believe a mystery Account of the proceedings of the Council of Syrmium No necessity that Christ having two Natures should have two Persons His being but one Person does not make him have but one Nature An account of the Condemnation of Eutyches An account of the Heretical Council at Ephesus that restored him The wickedness of the Eutychians in that Council The reason of the honour done to Leo in the Council of Chalcedon The favour granted to the Eutychians by Basiliscus no Argument against the Orthodox Doctrine Monothelitism not owing to the Doctrine of the Trinity An Account of the rise of it CHAP. IX To assert our Saviour's Divinity does not dishonour him by making him comprehensible An Account of the saying of the Council of Antioch which the Authour alledges The Arians were never the less such for all their subscriptions to the Council of Nice A Vindication of Athanasius's flying to Julius the Roman Bishop and of Julius An account of the Council of Sardica Athanasius purged from his pretended Crimes A Schism between the two Churches did not arise from the disagreement of the Arians with the Orthodox at Sardica The troubles in the Church not imputable to the Orthodox Doctrine The prevailing of the Orthodox Doctrine did not proceed from the greatness of the Bishop of Rome Nor from the ignorance of the Ancient Roman Church A Vindication of Theodosius's Decree for the establishing the Orthodox Doctrine Of Charity to Hereticks from the example of Alexander The ill consequences of Heresies though not foreseen yet imputable to it Arian and Socinian Expositions of Scripture unreasonable to make the greater compellations of Christ stoop to the smaller CHAP. X. Of the Authour's Reflection on Dr. Hammond's Treatise of Fundamentals The Doctrine of the Trinity agrees with the Authour's first qualification of matter of Faith viz. To be sufficiently understood by the meanest capacity His second qualification considered that it must be the express word of God The Trinity proved by Scripture His third qualification considered Eternal Life promised to the belief of our Saviour's Divinity The use and necessity of Creeds in the Church The promise of eternal Life not only made to the belief of the Resurrection Why this promise was made so expresly to that CHAP. XI The necessity of Mens rising with the same numerical Bodies evinced from Reason Scripture and Antiquity The Authour 's first Argument answered His second His third His fourth ENQUIRY II. The Orthodox extend Faith no further than the Scripture does They do not exalt Faith above holiness Taking hold on Christ by Faith imputed righteousness c. not phrases purely Calvinistical but used by the Ancients We do not advance Faith above Charity How far our Charity to Hereticks is to extend The behaviour of the Ancient Christians to Hereticks We do not advance Faith above Reason The use of the word mystery in prophane Authours in Scripture and Fathers We use the word in the same sense it is used in Scripture ENQUIRY III. The unfairness of the Authour in laying his charge against the Orthodox and making it out against the Papists The Doctrine of the Trinity not prejudicial to our Lord's honour in hindring the progress of the Gospel Not prejudicial to the Tranquillity of Christians Minds nor to the peace of the Church Conclusion That the Church of England does recommend the three Creeds to our Belief The Authour's Arguments to the contrary answered His reflection on the late Convocation considered CONTENTS OF THE REFLECTIONS ON THE New Edition THE Authour's excuses for his first Book considered His new Explication of the Trinity The Council of Alexandria did not condemn the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Substantia proper words to explain what is meant by them and the Latins did understand by one what the Greeks did by the other The same shewn of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Persona None but the Hereticks refused these words The Doctor 's Explication of the Trinity downright Sabellianism How Sabellius Explained the Trinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not explained by the Ancients by being the Wisdom of the Father Nor the Holy Ghost by being an Energy Neither St. Austin nor Dr. Sherlock of our Author's Opinion AN ANSWER TO THE PREFACE THE Authour in this by as much as can be gather'd from him goes upon two Arguments to overturn the Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity the first is Because as he pretends the Disputes about this have been the decaying of Christianity and the prevailing of Mahometanism in the East the second is Because as he says this Doctrine is contrary to the great Simplicity in which the Gospel was deliver'd and which it does recommend In the proof of the first of these he spends half his Preface and indeed has got through four of his long Columns before he comes to any thing that looks like a Conclusion from his Premises Soon he is admiring the swift Progress of Christianity through the World notwithstanding the Power and Malice of its Adversaries and the Meanness of its Propagators and soon again he is as humble an Admirer of the good fortune of Mahomet's Religion and withal makes this most
Convocation and therefore he penned it with less caution than was necessary for what was to be exposed to every vulgar Eye Now is not this a pretty excuse after so long hammering out The Doctor writes a Socinian Book wherein he condemns the belief of nineteen parts in twenty of all the Christians in the World only to enlarge the minds of the Convocation with a more comprehensive Charity This would have been a pretty piece of comprehensive Charity indeed to have damned all the Members of the Catholick Church for so many Ages for worshipping a Creature for God out of pure tenderness to Socinian Consciences Well but he penned it with less caution than if it had been to be exposed to every vulgar Eye Now I should have thought it had been requisite to be more exact in composing what was to be viewed by the more judicious and that it had been a little too presuming to offer a parcel of uncorrected stuff to so learned an Assembly I am sure 't is but a course Complement of the Authour 's to those learned Gentlemen to write what was to be read by them at that rate as he would not care should be view'd by every vulgar Eye But though we should let this Excuse pass for some of his uncouth Expressions or little slips in his Quotations and Chronologies c. I am afraid it will never bear him out for all the premeditated Heresy of his Book Though he be ready to own that there are some scattering Sphalmata in that Treatise yet I believe he would be loth to have it thought one Total and Uniform Erratum Are all his Chapters about the Socinian Notions of Faith nothing but slips in the penning Are so many Arguments against our Saviour's eternal Generation nothing else Are all his scandalous Reflections upon the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Assertors of it his malicious Censures upon so many good and holy Counsels only owing to the want of a little caution in the writing If this be so 't is impossible to know any Author's mistakes from his general Design for if it was not the Doctor 's design to invalidate the Truth of Christ's Divinity he designed nothing at all for there is not one Chapter in his whole Book but some how or other tends that way But he designed he says only to communicate his Book to the Members of the Convocation this is a very fine excuse indeed to make that venerable Body whose business it was to detect and condemn all Heresies to become Patrons to his but however this is but an usual piece of Socinian Confidence not unlike that of the Editor of the Racovian Catechism who dared to dedicate so Heretical a piece to so Orthodox a Member of the Church as King James the First But why this to the Convocation Whom of his stamp did he find there that he could dare to communicate such a Book to This is such an infamous scandal to those great Representatives of our Church that he can never atone for to presume that ever they would steer their Actions by the direction of such an Heretical Treatise as that What would a Foreigner upon reading this Plea be apt to think of the Members of that August Assembly that the Doctor should design that Book for their use which the University as soon as detected condemned to the Fire But after all What constat is there that he designed this to be handed only to those Members Which by the way can be no excuse neither for such a private handing to all the Members of such a publick Body gathered from all the different parts of the Nation is as effectual a spreading of his Heresy as any publication whatsoever But I say What constat is there that he designed only this Why truly none at all but only his saying so and how far his word will go in this matter I cannot tell 'T is plain the Copies of his Book were not essayed to be spread till the Lent after the Convocation was broke up The Gentlemen in Oxford to whom he delivered Copies were not all Members of that Body and the 500 which Litchfield in his Deposition said he printed were more far than the number of which the Convocation did consist Those Copies which were sent to the Bookseller and afterwards upon the dislike of the Book recalled were not I presume all designed to be sold to Convocation Men. Nay if the good Providence of God and the watchful Care of some of our excellent Governours in the University had not interposed we might have had every yound Lad in the University to have gotten one of these wicked Books into his Study So that 't is ridiculous evasion for the Author to say in the Title page of this Edition that the Book is now first published by him for he published it as much as he could before he put the Copies of it into the Publishers hands which was all he could do for his part and that they were stopped there was owing to the Intervention of other Authority And so much for the Doctor 's excuses to pass by his saucy Treating of the late Convocation by the reproachful names of Uncharitable Stubborn Stiff c. which is such Billingsgate stuff as is like calling Whore first to fasten those ill names upon them to avoid if he can the deserved one of Heretick upon himself I now come to speak a word or two to the Errors of this New Edition And those I think mostly lie within his Chapter of the Trinity which is the only New one in his Book for all his others are but the old Heresy pared away and something better varnished over than before And indeed in this Chapter there is something New for there is such an explication of the Trinity as no mortal ever heard before Here is a mixture of Platonism Hobbism and Sabellianism with some other peculiar Notions of the Doctor 's own jumbled together Quantum mutatus ab illo Is this the Author that has been declaiming so much against Mysteries and the explaining of Mysteries and has at last stuffed us out a Chapter with so much mystical Jargon But after all this second Notion of the Doctor 's is no farther distant from Socinianism than a Trinominal Deity is different from him that is personally one without such nominal Distinction or just so much as the Doctrine of Sabellius differed from that of Samosetanus or Photinus Now the first thing that the Doctor does to advance this Notion is to be angry with the terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Substance and Person He says it was proposed in the Council of Alexandria That all Persons should forbear those Terms tho' I do not find any such thing was proposed there There were indeed some Rules given for caution in using them because they said the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not used in Scripture and the Apostle used the word 〈◊〉
each other not by any particular modality but by a true and real subsistence But when the Doctor makes the Son to be only Reason he can only make him an accident or at best but a Modality of the Father For if he only be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or what answers to it the internal Conception of the Father's Mind he would be only an Accident or Attribute or Mode or what else you 'll please to call it but would be far enough from that which the Church has all along called a Person And therefore the learned Fathers in the Church have been always careful to distinguish between this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the prolative or enunciative word and the essential and substantial one For the Son is not therefore called the word because he is the Reason of the Divine Mind or the Father but because he is generated of the Father without Passion For they explained this Generation by the production of a thought or word which was not produced by division or separation of parts which implies Passion but in a certain manner incommunicable to all Corporeal Beings So when the Doctor makes the Holy Ghost to be only the Power or Energy or Action of God what is this more than what the Socinians contend for and the Samosetanians and Followers of Simon Magus were Condemned for Nazianzen says that the Simonians thought the Holy Spirit was only an Energy and Leontius tells us that Paulus Samosetanus held the like Besides if the Holy Ghost be only an action with what propriety of speech can he be said to act or do With what tolerable sense can an action be said to speak and the Spirit said unto Peter Act. 10. 20. The Holy Ghost said uno them at Antioch Act. 13. How can an action or energy be said to search all things to make intercession for us to divide to every man severally as he will to reprove the World to guide us into all truth 'T is the nature of an Action to be acted but it can in no propriety be said it self to act But the Doctor says this Doctrine is stated by the Fathers as he has done it I hope by his Fathers he does not mean such as the Ministers of Alba Julia call so the famous Fathers Berillus Samosetanus Photinus c. and indeed some of these we have shewn to have explained the Trinity something at this rate but none of the Orthodox ones that I know of say any thing like it But he says St. Austin the Oracle of the Schoolmen states it thus whom Dr. Sherlock follows in his Book of the Trinity I know St. Austin in his Books de Trinitate if he means those has a great many strange Platonick Notions which I confess I do not understand and which perhaps St. Austin himself had no clear conceptions of when he wrote them but however there is enough in those Books to shew that St. Austin never designed such a nominal distinction in the Trinity as this Authour does What Dr. Sherlock says on this matter I have not time now to consult though when I read his Book I don't remember he gave any Countenance to this Opinion nay on the contrary some have been displeased with that Learned Doctor for making too great a distinction between the Persons of the Trinity not for making them three Names or Modus's as our Doctor does but for making them three distinct Minds or Spirits which are one by mutual Consciousness But what though these great Men should speak more nicely than ordinary of these Mysteries though they should wade deeper into them than other men The great Genius's of these admirable Persons and the strength of their natural reason will help to bear them out but I would advise our Authour to a little more cautiousness he poor Gentleman may be out of his depth before he is aware and therefore I am sure 't is his best way to keep within the ordinary Compass FINIS A Short HISTORY OF SOCINIANISM THE Heretical Persuasion of our Blessed Saviour's being only mere Man and the consequent Doctrines which ensue thereupon have of late Years been called Socinianism from the two Socinus's the most famous Inventors and Propagators of this Doctrine in the last Age for though the Heresie it self as to some parts of it was much older yet it had been altogether unknown for many Ages till by the Books of Servet the Socinus's and some other Hereticks in the last Age it was revived The first that set up this damnable Doctrine was the Heretick Cerinthus who lived in the Apostlick times and was Contemporary with St. John the Evangelist He asserted That Jesus was mere Man as others were and that he did not excell the rest in Justice or Wisdom or Prudence The Confutation of this Heresie was a special motive to St. John to write his Gospel or at least to be more express than the rest of the Evangelists in asserting our Lord's Divinity Ebion the Scholar of Cerinthus followed after his Master in this Heresie and propagated his Doctrines in Asia Cyprus Rome and elsewhere he asserted That Christ was but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only common and mere Man This Heresie in the Second Age was propagated by one Theodotus Scytes or the Currier who taught likewise That Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mere Man and was excommunicated by Victor Bishop of Rome for this Blasphemy Artemon followed Theodotus who said That Christ was mere Man only more excellent in Vertue or Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than the Prophets Against this Artemon there was a famous Book wrote which Eusebius mentions in which it was proved That the Ancient Christians did not believe his Doctrine as he pretended and in which the Authorities of Justin Martyr Miltiades Tatian Clemens are brought to confute him Sixty years after his Death in the Third Age about the Year 270 Paulus Samosetanus disseminated this Doctrine and asserted That Christ had only the common Nature of Man He was condemned in the Council at Antioch 272. Much about this time or somewhat before Sabellius broached his Heresie not much unlike the rest of these he held That there was but One Person in the Deity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under Three Names which does in effect as St. Basil says upon this account deny Christ's Divinity Arius who followed after and made such a noise in the World with his Heresie whatever his thoughts might be yet he did not expressly assert Christ to be mere Man but only to be a Creature produced in time yet one that had a Being long before his conception in the Womb of the Virgin and therefore he cannot so properly come into the List of these Hereticks But soon after the Nicene Determinations against Arius Photinus one of the
old Cerinthian Race starts up who was Bishop of Sirmium and asserts again That Christ was mere man and had no Being before the Ages and That he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had his sole Beginning from the time he was conceived in the Virgin 's Womb. These were the chief Propugners of this Heresie in the Primitive times there being none of any considerable note after these for then almost all the Heresies ran into Arianism Nestorianism Eutychianism c. the prevailing Heresies of the succeeding Ages And indeed this Heresie seemed to be quite lost till Petrus Abelardus in the Twelfth Century did revive it He about the Year 1140 was a famous Philosopher and Divine and Professor at Paris he asserted That he could comprehend the Godhead with humane Reason totum id quod Deus est humanà ratione comprehendere and wrote such things of the Trinity of the Generation of the Son and the Procession of the Holy Ghost and innumerable things of the like nature as were unheard of by Catholick Ears he affirmed The Holy-Ghost not to be of the Essence of the Father and denied Original Sin and the Satisfaction of Christ Which are all the true Characteristicks of the Socinian Heresie These were the most remarkable of this sort of Vnitarian Hereticks till the time of the Reformation and the first then that stood up for this Heterodoxy was Michael Servetus a Spaniard by Profession a Physician who having travelled into Africa and being instructed in the Principles of Mahometanism set up for the Vnitarian Doctrine in Europe He in the year 1531 published his Book Entituled Lib. 7. de Error Trinitatis which was printed at Basil This Book was filled with innumerable Blasphemies and impious Mockeries upon the Holy Trinity upon which account most of the Copies of it were soon after publickly burnt at Frankford But notwithstanding this they were privately handed about so that many that were inclinable to a separation from the Romish Errours were poysoned by this Book into worse And therefore Philip Melanchton writes a Letter from Lipsick 1539. to have the Senate of Venice put in mind of suppressing his Heresy But Servet in the mean time uses all imaginable diligence to disseminate his Doctrines and to this end goes from place to place practising Physick under the feigned name of Michael Villonovanus when he wrote a Book of Syrops and as Munster says a Comment on Ptolemies Geography He afterwards wrote some other Heretical Pieces alike blasphemous with the other as one Entituled A Dialogue de Restitutione Christianismi quoted by Bullinger an Apology to Melanchton and the Ministers of Geneva Calvin c. in which Books Calvin in his Confutation says plus centum c. he more than a hundred times over calls the Holy Trinity the three headed Cerberus a Diabolical Phantasm the Monster Gerion the illusion of Satan c. His Book of the Restitution of Christianity which was a large Volume he published at Vienna Allobrogum where for the same he was cast into Prison but he escaped from thence to Geneva where he was discovered and afterwards condemned and burned in the year 1568. by the desire of the Evangelick Cantons The next follower of Servetus and the fore-runner of Socinus was Valentinus Gentilis born at Consenza in Italy who agreed with Servetus in his Doctrine that the Father was the only Divine Essence but asserted that the Son was essentiated by him and made another God as likewise the Holy Ghost So that there were not three Persons in one Essence but three distinct Essences in the God-head or rather one Primary God and two Secundary or Deisied Ones These Blasphemies he having for some time vented in the World particularly at Geneva he was by the Magistrates of that City thrown into Prison where not having staid long he of his own accord promises amendment recants his Errors and desires to be freed But the Magistrates resolved not to free him unless he will undergo the Pennance they prescribe him which accordingly he did to be stripped to his Shirt and barefooted and bareheaded to kneel down and beg pardon for his Crimes and with his own hands to throw his Heretical Writings into the Fire to be prepared for that purpose and in this Habit to be led through all the Streets of the City declaring his Repentance before all the People This having performed he petitions again for his enlargement which would not ye be granted unless he would swear not only to forbear the spreading of his Heresy but that he would never go out of the City without leave from the Senate And this too he readily did But no sooner was he freed but he little valuing his Oath flies from Geneva to his Friend Gribaldus living at a place called Farges in the Canton of Bern where he had conference with Alciat a famous Vnitarian in order to the spreading their Heresy From thence he went to Lyons to diffuse his Doctrine there from thence to Grenoble from thence to Cambray and so to Farges again where the Governour of Gaia to whose Jurisdiction Farges does belong imprisons him again but upon promise of living quietly releases him From thence he goes again to Lyons and was there imprisoned a third time by the Governour of that City but he perswading the Papists there that his Controversy was only against Calvin they thinking thereby to do Calvin a spight forthwith release him Afterwards he having spread his Poyson in France and Italy flies to Poland where he joyns with Blandrata and Alciat to infect the Polish Church Here not having staid more than two years these Heresiarcks fall out among themselves Blandrata turning down-right Arian and Alciat Mahometan so Gentilis passes to Moravia and strikes in for some time with the Anabaptists there from thence he goes for Austria and afterwards for Savoy and so roving from place to place and disseminating his Blasphemies he came at last again into the Province of Bern where being discovered he was tried for several blasphemous Positions there and being convicted was executed persisting in his Heresy to the very last blasphemare simul vivere desiit Georgius Blandrata who was another Zealous Vnitarian about this time was a Physician by Profession and propagated his Doctrines at Geneva where he had several Disputes with Calvin in whose Work is extant Responsum ad Quaestiones Blandratae but he flew from thence presently after Gentilis did suspecting that the Magistrates had a design against him too From thence he went and practised Physick in Poland and Transylvania thereby to have the better covert for his Heresy and the more easily to instill it into Persons of the highest Quality He wrote a Book in Answer to Georgius Major against the Trinity full of blasphemous Expressions such as Symbolorum de Patre Filio figmenta Deum confusum tripersonatum ex tribus Personis compositum and calls
Theolog. Philosophica quod aeterna impiorum supplicia non arguant Dei justitiam sed injustitiam He died 1612. Valentinus Smaltzius by Birth a Saxon of the Province of Thuring Rector of the School of Smigla afterwards of Lublin and at last Minister of the Congregation of Racow born A. D. 1572. He was most famous for his two pieces the one de Divinitate Jesus Christi in which he took away our Lords true Divinity and gave him a Metaphorical one such as the old Divi were supposed to have after their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other the Racovin Catechism in which he had the chiefest hand though assisted somewhat by Moscorovius and by the Catechism put out before by Sacinus and Statorius This was wrote first in Polish and Printed at Racow 1605. which afterwards Moscorovius translated into Latin and had the confidence to Dedicate it to King James I. An. 1612. His chiefest Adversaries were Smiglecius and Frantzius and Schopperus He died Crellius says 4 Decem. 1622. Johannes Crellius born at Helmetzhelm in ...... 1590. He was first Rector of the School at Racow and afterwards Minister of the Congregation His Life may be seen as it is wrote by Joachimus Pastorius and bound up among the Fratres Poloni He is most famous besides for his Comments on Scripture for his Book de uno Deo Patre answered by Bisterfield His Book of Satisfaction in answer to Grotius which was since admirably answered by the Bishop of Worcester He died 1633. Samuel Przipcovicius a Polish Knight born about the year 1590. and died 1670. He wrote several pieces which were never published vid Sand. Biblioth but the most famous piece is the Life of Faustus Socinus There is attributed to him a celebrated Piece Printed at Eleutheropolis 1630. Anonymi dissertatio de pace Ecclesiae thought at that time to be wrote by Simon Episcopius Professor of the Remonstrants in Holland Jonas Slichtingius a Bukowiec a Polish Knight was the next Socinian of note his most famous Pieces are his Confession of Faith and his Book of the Trinity and the Sacraments against Meisnerus besides his Comments in the Fratres Poloni He died at Zelichow in the Dutchy of Brandenburg 1661. Johannes Lodovicus Wolzogenius was another late famous Socinian he was a Nobleman in Austria but turning Protestant he left his Country and setled in Poland where after a time he embraced the Doctrines of Socinus His Works are many the most considerable of which are bound up with the Fratres Poloni He died 1658. Florianus Crusius a Physician Petrus Morscovius and Andreas Wissowatius were famous Socinians likewise at the same time The Socinian Doctrines had hitherto contained themselves within Poland and Transylvania and there was only some little Colony of them lurking among the Remonstrants in Holland but other parts of the World were generally free from this infection especially our Nation till in the time of the late Rebellion and Usurpation it became the sink of all Heresies And then John Bidel Master of Arts of the University of Oxford brought in this Heresy here and held a Congregation of Socinians in London He wrote two Socinian Catechisms a large one and a shorter for the use of the more ignorant which were translated into Latin by a young Scholar of his one Nathaniel Stuckey the Son of one Mr. Stuckey a Cloathworker in London He wrote likewise a Treatise against the Diety of the Holy Ghost wherein he does not follow Socinus in making him only an Attribute but a Person and one of the higher rank of Angels There were several Books of the Socinian stamp published about that time by some of the other Sectaries as one against the Eternity of Torments entituled The twelve Pillars of Hell Torments shaken c. and some other Papers of the same nature sent abroad which occasioned Dr. Hammond to write his Excellent Treatise of Hell Torments Soon after this in the year 1658. came out the Edict of John Casimire King of Poland against the Socinians wherein he Ordered the Statute of his Predecessour Vdislaus to be revived and put in 〈◊〉 force against the Vnitarians that no one under pain of Death should teach of profess that Religion but if any one would continue in that Communion they must within three years leave 〈…〉 which time should be allowed to dispose of their Effects 〈◊〉 Possessions But for some considerations or other this time was shortened and in the year 1660. they who would not renounce their Heresy were forced to leave Poland and Lithuania which accordingly many did and setled some in Prussia some in Silesia others in the Marquisate of Brandenburg and some in Holland Since which time Christoph Sandius has been the only Vnitarian of note famed most for his Nucleus Hist Ecclesiasticae his Tractatus de origine Animae and his Problema Paradoxum de spiritus Sancto Though in most points he was a Socinian yet as to the matter of our Saviour's Person he was a violent Arian He was the Son of Christopherus Sandius a Prussian and Vnitarian who was Counsellour and Secretary to the Elector of Brandenburgh but discovering his Perswasion was deprived of his Offices 1668. He was born at Koningsberg in Prussia 1644. and died at Amsterdam 1680. In England we have since that time been free from this infection till Mr. F n's Papers of late came out and the Book called the Naked Gospel but God be thanked the strength of these pieces is not so great as to fear from them any mighty Contagion For though they have all the Malice and Heresy they have little enough of the Wit and Reason of the former Socinians ERRATA PAg. 51. lin antepenult pro almost leg most Pag. 68. dele Q. of the. Pag. 78. Not. †leg Bas Hom de Poen Pag. 79. leg stantes ardent FINIS * S r Ralph Winwood's Remonstrance and Protestation to the States against Vorstius's Election in Wilson's Life of K. James * Debuissent ergo dicere quòd habebat uxorem quandam spiritualem vel quòd solus ipse Masculo-soemineus aut Hermaphroditus c. Serv. de Err. Trin. Lib. 1. †Alch. cap. 15. * Sand. Nucl Eccl. ad annum †Where they were Condemned by the first Council of Toledo An. 587. * Alch. Cap. 20. †A little before this time according to Bede A. D. 1612. the Supremacy and Title of Oecumenical Bishop was granted to Boniface the Third by the wicked Parricide Phocas who murdered his Master and Predecessour in the Empire Mauritius * Joh. de Oppido Vincentius Alch. Cap. 52. †And Miracles pretended to be done by them Niceph. Hist Lib. 18. cap. 41 42. * Zonaras Tom. 3. Paul Diac. Lib 18. Vincent lib. 23. †Vid. Stegmanni Photinianismum Disp 1. Q. 4. * Socinus in Matt. 5. ejusd Respons ad Jac. Palaeol cap. 4. Crell in Matt. 5. Ludo. Walsengenii Compend Christ Relig. p. 2. in edit
the Orthodox Tritheites and Athanasius Tritheitarum Antesignanum He got a great sum of Money by his Practice in the Polish Court but was at last as a signal Example of God's Vengeance murdered in his Bed by his Nephew whom he designed to make his Heir Paulus Alicatus who was the intimate Friend of Blandrata and a busy Vnitarian of this time was born at Millain a Souldier by Profession a Man of fiery Zeal for his Opinions as appears by those blasphemous Expressions he used against the Trinity For Calvin relates that he was wont to say That we worshipped in our Trinity three Devils worse than all the Idols of the Papists So that the Divine Judgment was very Remarkable in suffering him to fall away into the Mahometan Infidelity after so great Impiety Franciscus Stancarus a Mantuan was now likewise a violent asserter of the same kind of Heresy who tho' he began his Heterodoxy at first by denying only Christ's Mediatorship as to his Divine Nature yet he proceeded at last to deny the Persons of the Trinity and with Sabellius to make God only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one Person under three Names He was as Zanchius says a Learned Man but only unquiet and proud and too curious which lead him into these Errors Franciscus Lismaninus was another Heretick of this time of the same stamp he was Doctor of Divinity and formerly a Franciscan Monk who after a pertinacious spreading of his Opinions died mad Bernardus Ochinus was another promoter of the Anti-trinitarian Doctrine who as Beza says of him was something cunninger than the rest of the Vnitarians and like the Academicks would seem rather to doubt of than to define any thing For in his Dialogues against the Trinity he makes his other Collocutor to oppose the Trinity and himself to defend it tho' by such mean Arguments as always gave away the Victory to his Antagonist He was a favourer of Polygamy too as appears by his 21 Dialogue which has this Title thus made up of mirth and prophaneness To all Husbands that complain of their Wives and all Wives that complain of their Husbands Bernardus Ochinus wishes patience in Christ Jesus In which Dialogue he lets his Antagonist Telipolygamus strenuously make good his point against himself Franciscus Davidis was another very Famous one of these Hereticks who assisted Blandrata in his Book against Major he was Superintendent or Bishop as Sandius says of the Vnitarians in Transylvania but tho' he agreed with the rest of the Vnitarians in denying the Divinity of our Saviour yet he dissented from most of them about the Invocation of him and did to his Death maintain that as he was not God so he was not to be worshipped There were besides these several others that were fore-runners to Socinus or else contemporaries with him who did not agree to all the System of his Heresy which now the Vnitarians do generally maintain Such as were Nicolaus Parula an Italian a great Friend of Laelius Socinus Andreas Tricicius Modrevius a Polish Knight Adam Pastor who had several Disputes with the Anabaptists Gregorius Paulus who was first a Tritheite and afterwards an Vnitarian Petrus Statorius formerly Beza's Scholar Paulus Latomirskius and Simon Budnaeus a violent man afterwards in the anti-adoration Faction with several others But however these at best were but Labourers or Coadjutors in the building up the Socinian Heresy but the two great Master-builders were Laelius and Faustus Socinus of whom now we come to speak Laelius Socinus was born A. D. 1525. at Siena in Tuscany of a Noble Family his Fathers Names was Marianus Junior a famous Lawyer in Italy at that time his Mothers Name was Camilla the Daughter of Paulus Salvettus He was an Auditor of Servetus when he was in Italy and before he was of Age he began to model a New System of Divinity upon the Vnitarian Principles He as the Author of the Life says reading the Scriptures chiefly to further him in the Study of the Laws and relying only upon his own Judgment finds many of the Doctrines of the Church contrary to the Divine Testimony as he thought and therefore explains them without farther search according to his own Judgment He having thus for a considerable time been laying the Grounds of his Heresie travelling into England France Holland Germany he fixed his seat at last at Zurick in Helvetia yet not so but that after this he goes twice into Poland A. D. 1551 and again 1557 where he infected many of the Polish Nobility He infected also his own Brothers Celsus Cornelius and Camillus and Faustus his Brother Alexander's Son And Zanchius in his Preface to his Book de Tribus Elohim further says He for many Years pursued the Samosetanian Heresie and drew as many as he could into the same Errour and those were not a few He endeavoured likewise by many Temptations to pervert me into the same Errour and to involve me in the same eternal Destruction with himself Whilst he lived at Zurick or in his Travels he contracted some Familiarity with Melancton Brentius Musculus Bullinger and Calvin and therefore Calvin when he heard of his audacious Curiosity in Divinity wrote to him to dissuade him from it Si tibi per aëreas illas Speculationes volitare libet sine me quaeso humilem Christi discipulum ea meditari quae ad fidei meae aedificationem faciunt You may if you please fly through these aereal Speculations but suffer me an humble Disciple of Christ to meditate upon those things which serve to the Edification of my Faith And now so many of the Family of the Socinus's being perverted by Laelius the whole Family began to be suspected for Heresie which brought a storm upon all the House so that as the Authour of the Life says the Harvest was spoil'd in the springing Blade Cornelius being imprisoned and the rest being either forced to fly or afraid to profess their Opinion This Fear drove young Faustus being now but Twenty Years old not only from his place of abode but from Italy who went to live for some time at Lyons in France in the same Year in which the Magistrates of Basil digged up the Body of David George after he had been dead Three Years and burned it Laelius continued still to study at Zurick till he died which was in the Year 1562. on the 16th of May. He was the first that brought to light that notion of the Person of Christ and his Sufferings c. which the Socinians do since maintain and was forming some great Designs for the furthering his Heresie but did not live to perfect them The only Books that he published were the Dialogue between Calvin and Vaticanus against the persecution of Hereticks upon the occasion of Servet's execution in which he makes Calvin a great Instrument which Book was reprinted in Holland by some of the Remonstrant Party 1612. and has