able, and yet it is characteristic of the Socinian tone of thought, that supernaturalism was pushed to an extreme; that the arguments of natural religion, even for the being of God, were held in light esteem, and Revelation was declared to be the source of our knowledge, even in the case of the first truths of religion. Revelation, it was held, may contain things above reason, but nothing contrary to reason; and this canon was so applied in the interpretation of the Bible, that various doctrines, especially the Trinity, were excluded on the ground of their alleged inconsistency with intuitive knowledge. The prime characteristic of the Socinian theology was the denial of the divinity and satisfaction of Christ. He is a teacher and legislator, the appointed head of a spiritual kingdom; but while his prophetic and kingly offices are held, his priestly or expiatory function is denied, or it is limited to the work of intercessory supplication. The church doctrine of original sin is materially modified. The image of God in man is said to be identical with his dominion over the lower orders of creation, and the effect of the first sin is made to be the propagation of physical mortality. The doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked is substituted for that of eternal punishment. The separation of ethics from religion, the disjunction of ethical character from Christian faith, was a characteristic tendency of the Socinian type of thinking, and a corollary of the extreme, but one-sided supernaturalism, to which we have adverted. The logical and exegetical ability of the Socinian leaders gave a wide currency to their doctrine. When persecution arose against the Unitarians of Poland, in consequence of the Catholic Reaction and the acts of the Jesuits, many fled into Holland, and came into friendly relations with the Arminians. Some also joined the churches of the Mennonites. It was the ingenious and formidable attack of Faustus Socinus upon the Anselmic.

PROJECTS OF REUNION.

481

theory of the Atonement, which gave rise to the treatise of Grotius, and indirectly occasioned a modification of the orthodox doctrine, which has found a wide accept

ance.

The difference between the Lutheran and Calvinistic creeds was not so great as to preclude efforts to unite the two parties. The chief hindrance to their success was the intolerant prejudice of rigid Lutherans, especially after their triumph over the Philippists, the adherents of the milder theology of Melancthon. The abandonment of Lutheranism by several of the German states, among which was the Palatinate, and the oppression to which Lutheran preachers were sometimes subject, in consequence of the adoption of Calvinism by their rulers, embittered the opposition to a union. Earnest and longcontinued efforts in this direction were made, from the early part of the seventeenth century, by the theologians of Helmstadt, of whom Calixtus was the most eminent.2 The Huguenot Synods of France were distinguished for their liberal and friendly course in reference to negotiations with the Lutherans.

Projects for the reunion of the entire body of Protestants with the Roman Catholics met with no better success. On various occasions, as at Augsburg, in 1530,

1 The Form of Concord (1580, Hase, p. 570) sets forth the Lutheran theology, in opposition to the system of Melancthon, and in contrast with Calvinism. It denies Synergism and all power in man to coöperate in his conversion: but it also denies irresistible grace, attributes the rejection of Christ to the resistance of man to the Holy Spirit, and affirms the universality of the offers of the Gospel. Everything like Reprobation is excluded. This logically amounts to conditional predestination, which was really the Lutheran doctrine in the 17th century. This was the first point of difference with the Calvinists. The other points were the Lutheran Consubstantiation, with which were connected the communication of divine attributes to the human nature of Jesus, and the ubiquity of his body; together with the use of pictures and other minor peculiarities of the ritual.

2 For an account of these successive efforts, see Hering, Gsch. d. kirchl. Unionsversuche seit d. Ref. (2 vols.), 1836. Niedner, pp. 787, 819 seq. Gieseler, IV. iii. c. I. i.

8 Gieseler, IV. i. 2, iii. §§ 51, 52.

on the occasion of the Diet, in the Conference at Ratisbon, and in the Augsburg Interim, the Catholics had evinced a disposition to make concessions. The Emperor, Ferdinand I., recommended conciliatory measures to the Council of Trent in 1562; and, failing in his purpose, he encouraged the theologians near him, in particular George Cassander, by their writings and personal intercourse with leading Protestants, in different countries, to labor for the reconciliation of the two contending parties. The position of Erasmus, that the creed should be confined to fundamental articles, and that no agreement should be required on matters of less moment, was substantially taken by most of the advocates of reunion. Cassander proposed to go back to the Scriptures, and to the Church of the first five centuries. Calixtus adopted the same principle. Irenical movements of this character are specially interesting from the part that was taken in them, by two of the ablest men in the Protestant body, Grotius and Leibnitz. The latitudinarian tendency of Erasmus, and the conciliatory spirit and opinions of Melancthon once more found strong representatives. The persecution which Grotius suffered at the hands of his Protestant brethren, the Calvinists of Holland; his observation of the rigid attachment of the Protestant sects to minor peculiarities of doctrine, and their bitter theological strife among themselves; his sorrow at the distracted condition of Europe in the early part of the seventeenth century, and at the calamities resulting from the wars of religion, inclined him to set a high value upon the restoration of ecclesiastical unity. His intercourse with moderate and enlightened Catholics in France confirmed this disposition. The differences among Christians appeared to him small in comparison with the points on which they were united. The tendencies of thought peculiar to him as a statesman, a scholar, and a theologian, conspired to make him an advocate of com

promise and union among ecclesiastical parties. It is not surprising that now he was charged with Socinianism, and now accused of being a Roman Catholic. He employed his vast erudition in the endeavor to soften Protestant antipathies to the Catholic Church and its doctrines. He wrote a treatise to prove that the Pope was called Antichrist through a misinterpretation of the Apocalypse. In this and in other publications, he assumed the position of an apologist for the Catholic theology.2 In his idealized interpretation, he finds it possible even to accept transubstantiation; he does not consider the use of images in worship absolutely unlawful, though he regrets the abuses connected with it; he thinks that the invocation of saints and prayers for the dead are not inadmissible; and finds great advantages in episcopal government, and in the primacy of the Pope. Even the interference of the Popes with the election of Emperors, has a ground in the fact that the Popes may be considered the representatives of the Roman people. Grotius gives a place to tradition in the exegesis of Scripture. His real position is, that the propositions on which all Christians can unite, are to be ascertained by a universal council, composed of all parties, and that the conclusions

1 Grotii Opera (Basel, 1732), iv. 457 seq.

2 Votum pro Pace eccl. contra examen A. Riveti, Ibid., p. 653, Via ad Pacem eccl., Ibid., p. 535, etc.

8 He denies the universal validity of the Decalogue under the new dispensation. He appeals to the commandment respecting the Sabbath, which Luther, Calvin, Melancthon, Zwingle, and the other Reformers, united in denying to be so far obligatory that the observance of one day in seven is, on the ground of it, required of Christians. Calvin, Institutes, ii. 8, 29, 34. Luther, Catechismus major, in Hase, Libri Symbolici, p. 424. Melancthon, Loci Communes, (Erlangen, 1828), pp. 123, 124. Zwingle thinks it better to mow, cut, hew, or to do other necessary work which the season demands, after divine worship, than to be idle; "for the believer is above the Sabbath." Werke, i. 317. Such work is recommended in the acts of the Synod of Homberg, in Hesse, on the same grounds. Hassenkamp, Leben F. Lamberts, p. 42. The Puritans asserted the perpetual validity of the fourth commandment, only that the day is changed by divine authority. On the history of the observance of Sunday, see Hesse, Bampton Lectures (1860). Hallam, Const. Hist., ch. vii.

of such a council are trustworthy. The canon of Vincent of Lerins-that what is accepted always, everywhere, and by all, is Catholic truth-is laid hold of by Grotius to serve as a basis for his scheme of comprehension and latitudinarian orthodoxy.1

In the latter part of the seventeenth century, Spinola, another theologian from the Court of Vienna, who had been a Franciscan General in Spain, signalized himself by a pacific undertaking similar to that of Cassander. In the course of his labors at the Hanoverian court, in behalf of syncretism, as the projected union of the diverse religious bodies was termed, he had much intercourse with the Lutheran theologian, Molanus; and a correspondence arose between Molanus, and, afterwards, Leibnitz, on the one side, and Bossuet on the other.2 Leibnitz conducted a long correspondence also, much of which relates to the same subject, with the Landgrave Ernest, of HesseRheinfels, who had gone over to the Catholic Church, in 1652.3 The position taken by Leibnitz closely resembles that of Grotius. Each brought vast stores of learning, and a marvelous outlay of philosophical acuteness to the task of harmonizing conflicting dogmas. Leibnitz found the dogma of transubstantiation harder to deal with than any other article of the opposing creed; but in the alembic of his subtle criticism, discordant opinions were made to assume a likeness to one another. He lays great stress on the foundations of religion, and declares that the question whether the love of God is necessary for salvation, is incomparably more important than the question whether the substance of the bread remains in the Eucharist, or the question whether souls must be purified before

1 That Grotius died, as he had lived, in the Protestant Church, is proved, if proof were necessary, by the narrative of the Lutheran clergyman who attended him in his last hours. See Bayle's Dictionary, art. "Grotius;" and Luden, Hugo Grotius nach seinen Schicksalen u. Schriften (Berlin, 1806), p. 338 seq. 2 Von Rommel, Leibnitz u. Landgraf Ernst von Hessen-Rheinfels. Ein ungedruckter Briefwechsel, etc. 2 vols. (Frankfort, 1847).

8 On the part taken by Leibnitz, see Hering, ii. 276 seq.