mental tone, exclusively religious; that of the latter, exclusively moral.

Protestantism and Socinianism have this, too, in common; that as the former checked its own developement, and left to later sects, that sprang out of its bosom, the task of carrying out its own principles; so Socinianism bequeathed to a later period the work of its own consummation,—namely, the entire abandonment of those elements of supernaturalism, which, in its origin, it had not wholly rejected.*

Having now pointed out the historical connexion, between the Protestant and the Socinian systems of doctrine, we shall proceed to state a few historical details. Poland, as hinted above, was the first seat of the Socinians. Here, nearly contemporaneously with the Reformation of Luther and of Calvin, the religious system, which denied the dogma of the Trinity, had penetrated. However much the opponents of the latter doctrine, were in hostility with the partisans of the Reformation, they tolerated each other, lived in mutual concord, and formed together one Protestant community; a fact, which it is by no means difficult to account for, since the enemies to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, rendered timid from their small numbers, were for a long time cautious in avowing their sentiments. So soon, however, as their numbers were sufficiently increased, and they had assured themselves of the protection of some powerful patrons, they were no longer able to maintain silence, or to confine their sentiments to a mere whisper. At the synods of Pinczow and Petricow, the two parties separated from

* Moehler here makes an allusion to the Rationalists, who completed the work of destruction, begun by the Socinians.-Trans.

each other, in the years 1563 and 1565; and, everywhere held in abhorrence, alike by Catholics and Protestants, the Socinians, under the name of Unitarians, formed a separate sect, for the moment, undisturbed from without, yet inwardly divided by the most various opinions. Under these circumstances, Faustus Socinus repaired to them, and succeeded, by degrees, in uniting their discordant views respecting Christ, and in setting aside the anabaptism advocated by the Unitarians. Henceforward the Unitarians exchanged their name for that of Socinians.

In the year 1638, however, their tranquillity was disturbed in Poland also. They saw themselves, partly owing to their own fault, deprived of their school, their church, and their printing-press, in Racovia, where their chief settlement existed; till at last, chiefly at the instigation of the Jesuits, they were forced to emigrate. The political confederacies of the Unitarians with the Swedes, who had penetrated into Poland, very much contributed to excite general indignation against them. Under the guidance of their leaders, Schlichting, Wissowatius, Przypkovius, and Lubienisky, they endeavoured now to establish settlements in Transylvania, (where already, in the sixteenth century, by means of the Italian physician, Blandrata, Unitarian principles had taken root), and also in Silesia, Prussia, Brandenburg, the Palatinate, and the Netherlands. It was only in Prussia and the March of Brandenburg, that they succeeded in founding some unimportant congregations; for, the general abhorrence for their principles, and for all attempts to propagate them (even, as in Manheim, where they thought themselves secure), opposed great obstacles to their progress. In the Netherlands, though individual Unitarians were tolerated, they were not

allowed to form congregations at least. The greater part went over, by degrees, to the other Christian communities, among which they lived dispersed. It was in Transylvania only, that the sect maintained itself.

The chief sources of information for the history of Socinianism, are the numerous writings of Faustus Socinus, who made use of the papers bequeathed to him by his uncle; the writings of John Crell, Jonah Schlichting, John Lewis Wollzogen (the works of all these writers are found in the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum), and of several others.

Among the Socinian catechisms, the larger one of Racovia, edited by Moscorovius and Schmalz, in the year 1605, and that by Ostorod, a Socinian preacher at Buscow, near Dantzic, are particularly distinguished. (Rak. 1604.) A regular symbolical writing the Socinians do not recognize; although the Racovian Catechism may pass for such.

§ LXXXVIII.-Principles of the Socinians, as to the relation between Reason and Revelation, and the functions of the former in the interpretation of Holy Writ.

It is our first duty to state the views of the Socinians, as to the sources of all religious and moral knowledge. They assert, that, through his own powers, man arriveth at the knowledge and distinction of good and evil ;* and, on the other hand, they think that the idea of God, and of divine things, is conveyed to man only from without, to wit, by instruction. In accordance

* Faust, Socin. Prælect. theol. c. 2; Bibliotheca Fr. Pol. tom, i. fol. 537; Volkel. de verâ Relig. lib. iv. c. 4.

† Faust. Socin. de auct. Sta. Script. Bibl. Fr. Pol. tom. i. p. 273.

with this theory, they represent the Divine image in man, as consisting in the dominion of the latter over animals. This is avowedly the meanest view, which it is possible to entertain of the affinity to God in man; a view, which renders it utterly inconceivable, how, when God announces Himself, or lets Himself be announced, from without, man would be even capable of receiving the doctrine on the Deity. Clearer, and yet withal more frivolous and powerless, the one-sided moralizing tendency of Socinianism could not well appear, than in these conceptions, which evidently have in view to represent the ethical principle, as the primary and most deeply-seated idea in man; and the religious principle, on the other hand, as something subordinate, only extraneously annexed to the mind, only to be grasped by the finite understanding, like the geography of Peru, for instance, and therefore, in a manner, accidental. Thus, while Luther assigns to morality a mere temporal, perishable, earthly value, Socinianism, in the most direct opposition, allots the highest place to it. In the sequel, we shall also see, that the religious is made to minister entirely to the ethical principle. Not less do we, here, recognize the instinctive force, which urged Socinianism to carry out that opposition, that it formed against the elder Protestantism; the latter, in its extreme sects, representing the divine idea in man (as, for instance, the inward light, the inward Christ of the Quakers), to be so all-powerful as to need no extraneous aid, for its rise and developement in human consciousness; while, on the other hand, the Socinians will deduce this divine idea solely from an external source. The truth is on neither side. Rational nature, the religious, intellectual, and moral capability, is innate in man; but, in both respects, it needs the out

་

ward excitation, proceeding from a being of a like spiritual essence, in order to unfold its own energy, and consummate its own history.

One would be inclined to suppose, that, in virtue of these principles, the Socinians would have adhered literally to the sense of any record of revelation, and have embraced it, with unhesitating faith; since they denied to man the capacity, as it were, for any ulterior criticism of such, or the divine similitude, in the true sense of the word. But, in such an expectation we should be totally deceived. There are not, indeed, wanting numerous passages, that inculcate an unconditional submission to Holy Writ;* but the very reverse is practised, and the maxim is not only enforced, but clearly avowed; that any thing contrary to reason, that is to say, to the understanding of the Socinians, must not be considered as a doctrine of our records of revelation. Hence the memorable declaration of some Socinians, that in cases, where a Scripture text does not harmonize with what they denominate reason, they should rather invent a sense, than adopt the simple and literal signification of the words. Hence we find,

* Faust. Socin. Ep. iii. ad Mat. Radec. Bib. Fratrum Pol. tom. i. fol. 386. "Equidem contra id sentio: Nihil in iis Scriptis legi, quod non verissimum sit......Præstat, mi frater, mihi crede, cum in aliquem Scripturæ locum incidimus, qui nobis falsam sententiam continere videatur, una cum Augustino hâc in parte ignorantiam nostram fateri, quam eum, si alioquin indubitatus plane sit, in dubium revocare.' Faustus, after having observed, that if we wish to charge on Holy Writ any untruth, we can do this only through reason, or other grounds, says, "Ratione vix ullo modo fieri id potest, cum Christiana religio non humanæ rationi ullo pacto innitatur."

† Bengel (in Suskind's Magazine, No. xv. p. 128) has excellently proved, that the Socinians, in the interpretation of Holy Writ, adopted as a rule, a negative use of reason. The passages relative hereto, ex