giver, that the blindness of Papists alone had fashioned out of the Gospel 'a law of love,' and that so far from coming to authenticate the moral law the Saviour came to abolish it, Socinus would hardly admit any object of the Incarnation but that of instruction and example; if Luther's ubiquitarian theory absorbed the Humanity into the Divinity of Christ, Socinus rejected His Divinity altogether; if original sin was interpreted by the Reformed in a sense which outraged alike the verdict of history and of common sense, its very existence was, with equal disregard to facts, denied by their new opponents. No place was allowed to the human will in the Lutheran scheme of justification, therefore no room is left for Divine grace in the Socinian; the Wittemberg theologians could scarcely endure the very name of reason, and their Italian assailants were almost as intolerant of faith. It has already been remarked, that their conception of Christ's Mediatorial office was necessarily moulded on their humanitarian conception of His Person, and falls therefore beyond the scope of this treatise. That they approximated more closely than their predecessors among the Reformed to some details of Catholic belief is true, but their denial of a false supernaturalism was, in fact, ultimately based on a negation of the whole principle, though it of course took time for the seminal ideas of the system to attain full development.

Very different in character was the almost simultaneous revolt against Calvinistic orthodoxy named from Arminius, a theological Professor at Leyden, who died

in 1609. On the whole question of justification, Arminianism was really though not professedly little else than a simple recurrence to Catholic doctrine.' Efficacious grace was said to be determined by its voluntary acceptance, not by its intrinsic nature, and the notion of irresistible grace, however explained, was absolutely rejected. But the Arminians taught, almost in the very language of the Council of Trent, that Divine grace must prevent, accompany, and complete every good work. The views of Grotius, the chief ornament of their body, will be examined presently. Two other writers may be noticed here, Curcellæus, and Limborch.3 Both agree in insisting chiefly on the death of Christ as a sacrifice, which is a different idea from the payment of a debt; they deny that Christ in any sense endured, as the Lutherans taught, eternal death and the wrath of God. If He had strictly and fully suffered the punishment of our sins, our pardon would be matter not of mercy but of justice; Curcellæus adds, that, if His satisfaction, righteousness, and sanctity are imputed to us, there is no further ground for our observing the moral law, nor can God justly demand either faith or obedience from us. The efficacy of the sacrifice offered for the sins of all mankind is ascribed by Limborch to the will of God in freely

'Accordingly the Caroline school of divines in England were frequently stig. matized by their Puritan opponents as Arminians.

2 See the Confessio sive Declaratio Pastorum. Herdervici, 1622-4. It is an indication of their theological tendencies, that Grotius at the time of his death had it in contemplation to become a Catholic.

Curcell. Inst. Rel. Christ. Amsterdam, 1675. Limborch Theol. Christ. Amsterdam, 1730.

accepting it for that end, and to the dignity of the Person who offered it. The imputation of His righte ousness can in no other sense be true than that God, for His sake, is pleased to accept our imperfect obedience as though it were perfect, for He cannot regard us as other than we really are. The Lutheran antithesis of faith and works is unmeaning; both alike are in one sense our own, in another sense the gift of God. The object of faith is not simply the Atonement, but the whole Person and office of Christ, Prophet, Priest, and King. There is a double protest in these writers, against the extravagances of Reformed doctrine, and the Socinian negations to which they had given birth.

The next system calling for notice here is that of the Quakers, founded in this country about the middle of the seventeenth century, by George Fox. Robert Barclay is their great theologian.' This scheme of doctrine is directly opposed to historical Christianity, but, unlike most of the Protestant Confessions, is remarkable for its internal coherence. We may regard it as the natural term in a series of mystical developments, provoked by the exoteric and unspiritual nature of the Lutheran scheme of justification, which began with Schwenkfeld and Wiegel, and found a more distinct utterance in the writings of Jacob Böhme. While discarding all technical terminology not sanctioned by the language of Scripture, the Quakers taught that a seed of sin' was transmitted from Adam to all his posterity, though only imputed to those who have

1 Rob. Barclay, Theologia vere Christianæ Apologia. Lond. 1729.

actually sinned. The remedy is to be sought in the 'inward light' or grace emanating from Christ, the Light that lightens every man, and this is offered to all but forced on none; for Calvin's doctrine of predestination is declared to be most injurious to God, and to make Him the Author of sin. This 'objective revelation,' whereby God speaks to every man, does not supersede Scripture, but is superior to it, and constitutes the primary source of knowledge and rule of faith. The inward light is also the source of regeneration; and here the Quakers, in fact, touch on the confines of Catholic doctrine. The Lutheran denial of the necessity of good works is explicitly condemned; justification is described as the formation of Christ in us, producing righteousness and holiness, and this is its formal cause. The merit of good works is asserted and vindicated, and the obligations of the moral law are insisted upon. Justification and sanctification are practically identified, as in the Catholic system. And, although, as time went on, a Docetic tendency to ignore or depreciate the historical manifestation of Christ not unnaturally developed itself in the teaching of his followers, Barclay himself distinctly ascribes justification to 'the sacrifice and propitiation' of our Lord. But their extreme dislike of all theological dogma and repudiation of sacraments combined with other elements of the system to induce a disparagement, leading ultimately into a denial, of objective Christianity altogether.'

It is remarkable that Tom Paine was brought up a Quaker, and that his theories, both religious and political, seem to have been materially, though indirectly, influenced by his earlier training. Cf. Sat. Review, Oct. 28, 1865.

The last, and in some respects most remarkable, of these organized protests against the principles of the original Reformers was inaugurated, in the eighteenth century, by Emmanuel Swedenborg, the son of a Swedish Lutheran bishop. His profound hostility to the Protestant notion of justification, as subversive of morality and most pernicious to all Christian life, may be said to have given its distinctive character and aim to the peculiar system of belief he founded, which is still professed by some few of our own countrymen.' This is not the place to enter on a general examination of his theology, but I may observe that in its ulterior developments it has exploded almost every distinctive tenet of the Christian faith. A prophet who claimed to derive his message by direct revelation and visions from on high-and of Swedenborg's sincerity there cannot be a shadow of reasonable doubt-was not likely to be careful about conforming its contents to

1 True Christian Religion, containing the Universal Theology of the New Church. By E. Swedenborg. London, 1819.

2 An Expository work by a Mr. Noble was lent me some years ago by a member of the sect, in which I found every article of the Apostles' Creed, except the first, directly or indirectly denied. The correctness of the account of Swedenborgian doctrine given here has been called in question by the Rev. A. Clissold, with whom I had a correspondence on the subject in the Guardian, between Aug. 24 and Nov. 22, 1865, to which the reader may be referred. So far, however, from shaking my previous estimate of the doctrine, his letters have in every respect confirmed it; and I found fresh corroboration in the perusal of his own work on the End of the Church, where he expressly says, moreover, (p. 80) that from the Council of Nice downwards there has prevailed "under the semblance of a Catholic apostolicity a CATHOLIC APOSTASY.” There is no lack, however, of English works on Swedenborg and his teaching, and those who doubt the accuracy of my statements can easily verify them. Mr. Clissold has defended his own view in a work of four volumes, entitled The Spiritual Exposition of the Apocalypse.