SECTION III. THE SOCINIAN CONTROVERSY. Ir disssenters engaged in the preceding controversy, of this a dissenting minister was the author. The title, which we have given to it, may appear to some to convey an invidious reflection; but as the epithet unitarian, for which these persons contend, appears to others an equally invidious assumption that the believers in Christ's deity deny the divine unity, it could not be expected that we should entitle this the unitarian controversy. The latter epithet would also fail of conveying any information, whether it was the socinian, sabellian, or swedenborgian idea of the divine unity and the person of Christ which was maintained by those who opposed the orthodox doctrine; nor would it give a hint of the dispute concerning the atonement and merits of Christ, or the divine influences, which were all contested at the same time. To us, therefore, truth and reason recommended a term which was most comprehensive, least likely to suggest false ideas, and which could convey no more uncandid reflection than the term calvinistic, as it merely designates a system maintained by a celebrated writer. If we have too often seen Christians dispute about nothing, here we behold them contend for every thing. For as the person of Christ is, to the believers in his Deity, the golden hinge on which turns all that is valuable in his religion, so they who denied his divine glory, opposed also his mediatorial performances, his atonement, justification by his righteousness, his presence with his church now, and the hope of being present with him immediately after death. The followers of Socinus, maintaining that theirs are the sentiments of the Scriptures, suppose, of course, that they were those of the first Christians. But as they evidently are not discernible in the first ages of what is usually termed by ecclesiastical historians the orthodox church, their admirers claim the Ebionites as the first witnesses for the truth. It would be endless to relate all the opinions which have been formed of this early sect, who are represented by the ancients as divided into two parties, as they are regarded by the moderns in two opposite points of view; some honouring them as the genuine Christians, while others reprobate them as the earliest jewish corrupters of the Gospel. Arius was, however, the first celebrated opponent of the equality of the Son with the Father; but notwithstanding the tendency which his system now betrays towards socinianism, the favourers of his creed would formerly have rejected with horror the thought of degrading Christ to a level with ourselves. The Paulinists, or Samosatenians, though denominated by some the fathers of the modern socinians, were indeed erroneous concerning the person of Christ; but they were too much inclined to the gnostic doctrine of a derived and temporary deity, to rank properly with those who consider Jesus Christ as a mere man. Lælius Socinus, or Sozzini, who has given a name to the opponents of Christ's deity and atonement, was born at Sienna, in Tuscany, in 1525, and bred to the profession of the law. Having discovered many things in the religion of his country contrary to the Scriptures, he abandoned other pursuits to study the sacred writings in their original tongues, and after having travelled among the protestants, he settled at Zurich. He soon communicated his doubts concerning the divinity of Christ, and other important doctrines of the reformed church to his new connections and to some of his relations, who still remained at the place of his nativity. These doubts produced in the mind of his nephew Faustus Socinus a persuasion of the falshood of the common creed of catholics and protestants; so that when the uncle died, in 1562, he took possession of his manuscripts, and compiled from them his book entitled " de Jesus Christo Servatore." He then retired into Poland. Among other adversaries to the doctrine of the Trinity who arose at this time, Michael Servetus, a Spanish physician, has acquired an unfortunate celebrity by the circumstances of his death. He published a work on the errors which prevailed concerning the Trinity,and having travelled into France, and settled as a physician at Vienne, in Dauphiny, he printed secretly, in 1553, his "Christianity restored." That kind of genius, which plans a new system of religion, was in him accompanied with ardent zeal for its establishment; but the hopes, which he had indulged in consequence of the extensive and powerful connections which he had formed, were blasted by the storm of persecution. He was seized and thrown into prison, and when he escaped and fled to Geneva, he was there condemned as a heretic and burnt alive. Mosheim, who rejects as a fable the history which socinians have given of their denomination, says, * Hist, sæc. 16. sec. 3. part. 2. cap. 4 sec. 7. that at the reformation many rushed into extremes, and formed sects which papists, lutherans, and calvinists equally joined to condemn. Those who denied the Trinity and divinity of Christ, fled into Poland, where for many years they lived peaceably in communion with the protestants, and assisted in their ecclesiastical councils. But when the avowal of their sentiments kindled dissention, the diet, in 1565, obliged them to separate and form a distinct communion. The palatine of Podolia, having built the city of Racow, permitted them to settle there, where they printed the Racovian catechism, a new version of the Scriptures, and other works in defence of their principles'. The name of anabaptists, by which they were called, they wished to exchange for that of unitarians, but they were by no means in unity of sentiment. Though all maintained that Christ was a mere man, they were divided concerning his miraculous conception, and the propriety of paying to him religious worship, for which Faustus Socinus was the inconsistent but strenuous advocate. When Francis Davides superintendant of the socinian churches in Transylvania, opposed this as idolatry, he was resisted by Socinus and the heads of the communion with so much violence, that the prince of Transylvania threw him into prison, where he died in 17592. y Their principal publication, which comprises the works of all their most eminent writers, is entitled " Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum," in six volumes folio, of which the two first contain all the writings of Faustus Socinus. z This act of persecution is passed over silently by those who keep up a constant deafening outcry against the murderous Calvin, for his conduct towards Servetus. If it be alledged that Socinus left Davides to the civil power, the same excuse may be made for The socinians, having been driven from Poland with such sufferings as rendered their persecutors infamous, sent out emissaries to seek an asylum ; but no European nation (says Mosheim,) could be persuaded to grant a public settlement to a sect which denied the divinity of Christ. In England, indeed, socinian sentiments had made their appearance soon after the reformation; but John Biddle was Calvin. When it is asserted that this reformer ruled in Geneva, so that the acts of the government were his own, it may be replied, that the government once banished Calvin himself, who declared, before Servetus came to Geneva, that it would not be in his power to save him; so that his influence was little more than that of the Socinians in Transylvania, who had acquired such an ascendant that the man whom they persecuted was sent to die in a jail. Calvin laboured to dissuade a stranger, who was viewed with horror, from coming to a place where the laws, which had been enacted long before by the emperor, would consign him to the flames*; but the socinians saw their brother, the superintendant of their churches, hurled from his honours to a dungeon, and what efforts did they make to save him? The death of Servetus, which was cruel indeed, was inflicted for what all the reformers, as well as Calvin, deemed damnable heresies, worthy of death, the blasphemy of degrading the incarnate God to an ordinary man, his death to mere martyrdom, and his worship to idolatry. But the socinians, who are supposed to outstrip all others in libéral principles, hunted Davides to prison from political motives, lest the odium under which they laboured should be augmented. Socinus publicly stigmatised the adherents of Davides as semi-jews, and urged the unfortunate man to renounce his error; but privately he acknowledged (as in all reason and consistency he was compelled to do) that it was a mere nothing, nay no error at all, but a proof of stronger faith ; so that Davides was made a sacrifice not to honest bigotry, but to mere finesse. The aggravated guilt of Socinus is, indeed, no excuse for that of Calvin; but it may suffice to expose the conduct of his followers, who adduce the crime of the latter, as a proof of the blackness of his character and of the intolerant tendency of his doctrines. * Mosheim ubi supra. |