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
about the Holiness and Rnighteousness of God cannot but profess to believe that there is no Justification to be had in the sight of God wâ—â—o it a perfect Righteousness and to the end they may the more easily quiet an awakenâ—d Conscience without the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness they either hold that the Law of Works is Abolished and a New Law Erceled A New a mere easie Law so siamâ—d and squar'd to their corrupt Natures as to make their Defective Obedience a perfect Gospel Righteousness fully answering the New Rule they have invented Or affirm That their Faith though it falls short of the Law is nevertheless counted by God for a compleat Performance of it as a late Author supposed to deny the Divinity of Jesus Christ hath expressed it in his Reasonableness of Christianity who saith The Law of Works is that Law which requires Perfect Obedience without any Remission or Abatement The Language of this Law is Do this and Live Transgress and Die. P. 20. Those that Obey are Righteous those that in any part Disobey are Unrighteous and must not expect Life the Reward of Righteousness But by the Law of Faith Faith is allowed to supply the Defect of full Obedience and so the Believers are admitted to Life and Immortality as if they were Righteous P. 22. The Moral Law which is every where the same the Eternal Rule of Right obliges Christians and all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works But Christian Believers have the Privilege to be under the Law of Faith too which is that Law whereby God justifieth a Man for Believing though by his Works he be not Just or Righteous i. e. though he come short of Perfect Obedience to the Law of Works God alone does or can justifie or make just those who by their Works are not so which he doth by counting their Faith for Righteousness i. e. for a compleat Performance of the Law So far this Learned Author who in Opposition to the former that destroys the Old and invents a New Law so framed as to turn our Defective into a Perfect Obedience doth first by Reasons Invincible Establish the Law of Works in all its Parts and then adds a New Law unto it and God's Gracious Esteeming our Faith as fully answering the Law of Works and so stretcheth our Defective Faith to the utmost length of Perfect Obedience As the one brings down the Law to our Imperfection the other raises our Imperfection to the same height with the Law But so long as the Law of Works remains in its Strength there can be no New Rule brought down to make Sin cease to be Sin or turn a Defecrive into a Perfect Obedience And so long as the All-knowing God Judges of things as they are Imperfect Faith can never pass at his Tribunal for a Compleat Performance of the Law there must be then a Perfect Righteousness fully answering the Law of Works or no Justification And it 's more easie as well as more conform to Holy Scripture to believe That the Righteousness of Christ which consists in a full Performance of the Law of Works is given to all that have Faith and by Donation is really made theirs and being really theirs may be justly esteem'd to be theirs and they justified by it But these Men if not mistaking yet surely misrepresenting the old Doctrine as covered with innumerable Absurdities do not only drive their Admirers off from Examining it but so sill their Minds with Prejudices against it as to make them willing to take up with any thing rather than with the Truth especially in a Case so pleasing because somewhat of their own is made their Justifying Righteousness CHAP. III. The deceitful Methods used by Hereticks a cause of Error more generally proposed The approaches of Socinus and his Followers towards the Orthodox The real difference there is between them in Fundamentals A Reflection on these Methods Arminians take the same course c. SECT I. The deceitful methods used by Hereticks more generally proposed Their rise in the Apostles days The deceitful Methods used by some Men of great Learning is another Cause of the growth of Error THERE being some Foundation-Truths so fully clearly and distinctly reveal'd in Holy Writ as to command the Assent of the Church Vniversally in all Ages excepting that in which the Christ an World became Arian they who have been their chief Opposers have retained the Words and Phrases by which those Truths have been transmitted down unto us and introduced their particular Opinions by an Heterodox sense they have fixed on them And when suspected that they might the more effectually conceal their Errors have subscribed sound Catechisms and Confessions whereby they have had the fairer opportunity to instil their Dogmata into the minds of Youth and other less studied Persons and under the Notion of being firm Adherers to the common Faith have engaged them to a closure with the unsoundest Parts of their Heretical Scheme In the Apostles days they who err'd from the Faith attempted by good words and fair speeches to seduce the simple Rom. 16.18 And Irenaeus who lived near that time Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans describing the Hereticks of that Age Digres de 〈◊〉 â—heol Helmstad Râ—g Syn◠〈◊〉 pag. â—88 as Calevius observes tells us that they speak like unto the Orthodox This was the way Arius after he was driven from Alexandria for his Heresie took to be restored to the Emperour's favour tho' he retained his Error yet subscribed a found confession of Faith as 't is reported by Socrates in his Ecclesiastical History Lib. l. c. 25 c. Pelagius when conven'd before a Provincial Synod at iâ—iospolis in Pelaestine at which Fourteen Bishops were present but not his Accusers August â—eâ—ract lib. 2 〈◊〉 47. 〈◊〉 ad 〈…〉 doth concur with the Orthodox in condemning his own Opinions but as Vossius out of St. Austin observes he dâ—d it very deceitfully Pelagianamsententiam pectore quidem ficto sed tamen Catholicos judices timens Pelagius ipse damnavit And as the same Possius adds Hierom. Epist 79. St. Hierom calls this Synod a miserable one because tho' they err'd not in Doctrines yet not discerning the falshood of the man they â—rrâ—d in the Judgment they past on him who being better known at Rome could not conceal his Treacherous Endeavours but was soon detected by the Bishops of that place Vâ—ss Hest Pelar lib. 1. Cap. 41. Hareâ—ici imitantur Catholicos fâ—eut simiae imitantur homineâ— Cyâ—â—â—ian ad Jubajanum This being the common practice of Hereticks St. Cyprian compares them to Apes saying they imitate the Orthodox as Apes do Men. Now this having been a very successful as well as a most pernicious Articice in constant practice amongst the Ancients the Socinian and Armintan Leaders whose Reputation hath been and is still so great that the respect multitudes have for them in regard to
nothing was more grievous to him than to here of a frequent repeating their Subscriptions which he compares to the Spanish and Trent Inquisition In his Apology and Answer to the one and thirty Articles said to contain the Opinions of himself and Adrian Borrius he gives a particular account how he was by his Friend betraied in too free a discovery of his dissatisfaction with the Catechism and Confession For saith he about two Months agoe a certain Minister would fain know why I was for a submitting the Catechism and Confession to the Examination of a National Synod to whom I freely replyed that my sense of the thing was included in this Syllogism viz. Every Humane Writing not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of Divine Inspiration and consequently what might contain in it Error may yea must be examin'd when it may lawfully and orderly be done in a Synod to which such Examinations belong But such are the Cathechism and Confession therefore to prove his Assumption he gave a particular instance out of the Catechism which instance as he too justly complains was soon in every bodies mouth But tho' Arminius his Friend did ill to betray him yet it 's hereby manifest that notwithstanding his pretentions to an agreement with the Catechism and Confession he did really Dissent from them The next step made to show a Dissatisfaction was by them who were to prepare matters for the Synod at which time they proposed that untill the Examination was over and all things setled there might be no more Subscriptions imposed and that the Obligation might be taken off from them who had already subscribed This Proposal was no sooner made by Arminius and Vytenbogard but the Calvinists are alarm'd and think on nothing less than that the design is to make a Change in the Doctrines of Faith Several Letters are therefore written unto the Learned in divers Countries particularly by Lubhertus unto Dr. Meivin at St. Andrews in Scotland a Copy of which is within a year transmitted out of England unto Arminius and Vytenbogard who sent a defence of themselves to Melvin showing how they were abused by Lubbertus however Vid. Praeâ—â—â—nt Illusir virâ—r Eâ—â—â—tâ— 23â— 243 confess they were for a freeing the Subscribers from their Subscriptions untill all was finished about it in a National Synod which they say was with a Caution that during this time there should be no disputing nor Preaching on the Controverted points A Recognition or Review was press'd again by the Remonstrants at the Hague Conference with a desire that they might be freed frm their Subscriptions till the Review was over In the National Synod of Dort they also urge it boldly declaring that by the Fundamentals of the Reformation and the constitution of our Churches Script Hist Remonstrant p. 20. no one ought to be censured meerly because he taught any Doctrine contrary to the Confession so long as it was not contrary to the word of God for a Confession was not the infallible rule of every Doctrine Ubi sup 41. And one of the conditions proposed by them to be observ'd by the Synod was this That in examining the matters in Controversie the enquiry be not only whether they agree or not agree with the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches as may be supposed to be in their Confessions but that in the first place and above all things they consider whether they agree with the word of God and that with respect to the necessity as well as Truth of every Article For which reason let every one be by solemn Oath bound to promise that he will not in judging respect Confessions Catechisms or any other Humane Writings but only the word of God c. And that touching the Review of the Confession and Catechism every one have liberty to offer his Considerations on them without any danger of incurring a Censure Who ever will consider how vehemently they press for a Review how earnest they were for the Examining every point in Controversie without a respect to the Confession or Catechism tho' they were never made the Rule of Faith and how eagerly they sought a Freedom from their Subscriptions and from a Censure in case they objected against anything in them and will also carefully peruse their considerations against both where amongst Seven and Thirty Articles in the Confession he will meet with at least Thirty and in the Catechism where are about a hundred and Thirty Questions and Answers he will find above Threescore to fall under their sharp reflections And that in opposition to the Canons of the Dort Synod they did publish a Confession of their own Whoever will I say put all these things together and compare the Catechism and Belgick Confession with the Remonstrants Declaration cannot but be abundantly satisfied that nor Arminius nor the Remonstrants his Followers were sincere in their Protestations and Subscriptions but very corrupt and deceitful and whilst they pretended to approve of the Confession and Catechism they esteemed many things in both Dissonant from the word of God Thus much is not only the Language of these endeavours but ingeniously granted by Vtenhogard Respon Uâ—eaboe ad specim Hem. p. 6. who in hâ—s answer to Festus Homnius his Specimen professes himself to be one of them who thought it necessary who desired and pray'd that there might be a Review of their Publick Confession and an examining of it by the Word of God for this very end that what he or others thought was not so agreable with the word of God might be proposed to the common consideration of the several Churches And Episcopius in his reply to Festus Homnius his Specimen tho he falls very severely upon Homnius for bringing him in as an Asserter of what he positively denied yet yields that in the five Articles they differ'd from the Belgick Confession His words are That Opt. Fid. Fest Homn. p. 2. excepting the five Articles all that Episcopius is charged with are either about Matters frivolous next to nothing or such as differ not from the Confession Arnoldus Poelenburg in his Letter to Hartsooker opens himself in this matter more freely He is not asham'd Vid. Poeledb Hartsook p. 222. Cornelius Wigger A. D. 1597. or near that time opposed the Confession and Catechism as a Lesbian Rule that might be turn'd to either side He was suspended sets up Conventicles and stiffly adberes to his peculiar notions Vid. Epist Cor. Wig. p. 35. c. nor afraid to revive the memory of Coornhertius for whom Arminius would not be thought to have any respect and Cornelius Wiggerus as opposers of the Catechism and Confession lamenting a want of success in the many attempts made against them by divers other Persons not only Arminians but by some who were their most violent opposers such as Piscator and the like Besides it cannot be denied but that the Arminian Doctrines are too manifestly a Contradiction to the Heydelberg Catechism and Belgick
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
Men fearing God studied in Divinity and rightly judging of these things will be in this Particular of his Mind There was brought unto me when sick in Bed a Writing from Schomannus which I did no sooner read but found my Distemper to increase upon me so very much did it grief me to see such Hurtful Opâ—nions brought into our Church Opinions that disquiet the more Infirm and give Great Offence to others who are not of our way Once more If Socinus designs an Answer I wish he would not I must confess the Truth I must tell you that their Writings are stuffed which most Offensive Paradoxes to the extreme Grief of my Soul Besides this Disputation between Niemojevius and Schomannus makes it plain to me that this Notion about the Sacraments was not started 'till the Year 1588 altho' Socinus fixed his dwelling in Poland A. D. 15â—9 That when it did first arise it startled the more Pious of their own Party and that from Niemojevius his Resolution of Proposing it to the next Synod at Lublin it 's very likely the Generality were then against it so far were they from that full Agreement which our Gentlemen pretend to be almost their Peculiar Property SECT VIII An Account of the Italian Combination entred into to bring the Doctrine of the Trinity into Doubt The Chief of 'em Assert Three distinct Essences to introduce the Pre-eminence of the Father and a Subordination in the Essences of the Son and Holy Spirit These things cleared out of the Writings of Gentilis and others The late Assertion of Three Essences the same with that of Gentilis c. ALthough the English Socinians do in some Instances so very much differ from them beyond the Seas that an exact Description of them cannot be given out of the Writings of the Pratres Poloni yet it must be yielded that they are nevertheless of the Off-spring of that Faction For which Reason I will consider what Combinations have been amongst them what Shapes they have formed themselves into and what Principles they advanced to the end they might subvert the blessed Doctrine of the Trinity There was in Italy a strong Combination entred into by near Forty who form'd themselves into a Society had their Colleges and Conferences where they consulted how to bring the Doctrines of the Trinity and Christ's Satisfaction into Doubt This was saith Wissowatius about the Year 1546. The chief of their Number mentionâ—d by Sandius Narrat Compâ—nd Biblioth Antitrin p. 18. were Leonardus Abbas Busalis Laelius Socinus Bernardinus Ochinus Nicholaus Paruta Valentinus Gentilis Julius Trevisanus Franciscus de Ruego Jacobus de Chiari Tranciscus Niger Darius Socinus Paulus Alciacus c. who continued together till their Design took Air at which time they being severely prosecuted some of 'em went into Helvetia others into France Britain Holland Germany and Poland and some into the Turkish Territories where they had their Liberty only Julius Trevisanus and Franciscus de Ruego were taken and executed and Jacobus de Chiari as Lubieniescius saith died a natural Death These Men where-ever they went took all Occasions to instil their Errors which they did by offering Objections against the Truth that as was pretended they might be the more firmly established in the Faith and be more able to defend it And having sear'd their Consciences with fraudulent Subscriptions and Perjury they formed themselves into sundry Shapes not scrupling to subscribe and swear to what they neither Believed nor Intended nor did they care what Methods they used might they thereby subvert the Doctrine of the Trinity and Christ's Satisfaction That they were set at work by tâ—e Papists is no way improbable especially if we consider how at Lyons the Papists dâ—schâ—rged Valentinus Gentilis so soon as they undâ—rstood his Design was to oppose Calvin and how safely Servetus Lubieâ— Histâ—r Pâ—sâ—â— Poâ—oâ— l. 2. c. 5. p. 1â—â— c. notwithstanding his Blasphemies lived amongst them The Principle whâ—ch at first they advanced as what was most lâ—kely to bring the Doctrine of the Trinity into â—ontempt was their turning the Three Persons into Three distinct Essences and their appropriating a peculiar Preheminence to the Father Servetus who is by Stanislaus Lubieniescius in his History of the Polonian Deformation Lubiâ—n â—bi sup p. â—â— highly applauded for his Diligence in Consulting the â—lcoran of Mahomet out of which he extracted the Opinions he held about the Triniâ—y having by his Sufferings gotten a Reputation it became the Province of Valentinus Gentitis and Alciatus aâ—ter the Disperson of these designing Incendiaries to go to Geneva and try what they could do towards the carrying on that Work which Servetus had with so much Labour and Travail begun And that their Success might be the greater 't was the Care of Gentilis to clear himself as much as possibly he could from the Charge of being a Favourer either of Arius or Servetus and therefore pretends a Zeal for the True Trinity as he expresses it in a Letter to Copus Raymundus and Henocus learned Ministers in Geneva explaining his Notion thus Caâ—e Tâ—â—â—â—â— Thâ—â—â— pâ—â— 6â—0 6â—â— The Father is that one only Essence that is from it self The Word is the Brightness of the Glory of God the express Image of his Substance and in this respect distinct from the Father who is as Christ himself saith the only True God the Essentâ—â—tor that is the â—nformator Individuorum The Word is the Son and also he True God and yet not Two Gods but one and the same God Or as Aretius in his Brief Account of Valentinus Gentilis A True Trinity ought to consist of Three eternal distinct Spirits differing from each other essentially rather than personally The Father he stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himself as he is more eminently truly and properly God But the Essence of the Son is not saith he of himself but an Essentiatum derived from the Essence of the Father and is a Secondary God And what saith Servetus of this Notion Deus pâ—st Christum manâ—e â—atum in ties Essentias Divisus maneat tamen Unâ—â— Deus â—â—ia haec Dispensâ—â—io nihil â—â—â—â—o mutat Tracâ— Theoâ— p. 657. Calvin tells 〈◊〉 That he holds the Deity to 〈◊〉 divided into Three Essences and yet there is but One God For the Socinians greater Satisfaction I will givâ—â— Servetus his Sense Histâ—â— for Poton l. 2. c. 5. p. 9â—â— c. out of a Discourse he delivered some time before his Execution 〈◊〉 published by Lubieniâ—scius from the Autoâ—raph In which he having opposed the Opinion of them who affirm Three substantial Persons to be jâ— God by Nature equal to one another which he looks upon to be Blasphemy and an execrable Impiety he freely gives us his own Sentiments to this effect 1. That the Name God is Appellative signifying one to whom all Power Dominion and Superiority doth properly belong who is above all the chief of all King