Testament itself) to spread Unitarian ways of thinking about religion. Its teaching therefore deserves special attention.

The key-note to the whole system of Socinian doctrine seems to lie in the text: "This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent"; and the Christian religion is defined at the outset as a way of attaining this eternal life, divinely revealed in the Scriptures (especially the New Testament), which certain proofs show to be true, which are easy to understand, and which contain all things necessary for salvation. Throughout the book, therefore, the proof of its teaching is drawn from the Bible, and only in a few instances are orthodox doctrines opposed on the ground that they are unreasonable.

Man is by nature mortal, and the only way for him to gain eternal life is by knowledge of God and Christ. It is of the utmost importance, then, that this knowledge be correct, else our hopes of eternal life would be imperiled. We must therefore know that God is only one in person, for belief in the Trinity may easily destroy the faith in one God; and we must also know that Christ is by nature a true man, though not a mere man, for he was miraculously born. On these two main heads there are long arguments against the orthodox view.

We must also acknowledge Christ as God, being one who has divine power over us, and one to whom we are bound to show divine honor in adoration, and whose aid we can ask in any need; adoring him for his sublime majesty, and seeking aid of his divine power. Those who do not do this are not Christians. Jesus was sinless, and wrought miracles. He rose from the dead, thus assuring us that we shall rise also; his resurrection is therefore much more important than his

death, though by dying for us sinful men he showed us the way to return to God and be reconciled to him.

The Holy Spirit is not a person in the godhead, but a power of God bestowed on men from on high.

There is no such thing as original sin, or predestination; and men are justified in the sight of God only through their faith in Christ, who now lives in heaven, making continual intercession for us, whence he will come to judge the living and the dead.

There is only one sacrament, the Lord's Supper, which is & memorial rite. Baptism is only an outward rite by which converts to Christianity publicly acknowledge their faith in Christ. Infant baptism is unscriptural, though those that practice it without trying to force it on others should not be condemned or persecuted. The Church is a company of Christians who hold and profess sound doctrine.

These teachings, which are all given in the ordinary cat' echism form of question and answer, are those that would seem most striking to a modern reader of the first edition of the Racovian Catechism. Later editions greatly enlarged and somewhat changed this first edition; but these teachings remained substantially as given. It may be noted that the Catechism is in close harmony with the Apostles' Creed, so far as that goes; and indeed Socinians were always wont to appeal to that as against the later creeds. It is noteworthy also that, except for the subject of baptism, little is found of the peculiar teachings of the Anabaptists or the Arians, though in limited localities or under individual ministers Socinians still adhered to these. If the Catechism is far from being orthodox, it is also far from modern Unitarianism. Yet the root of the matter was there; for in its freedom from the authority of the creeds, in its free and scholarly way of explaining scripture, in its appeal to

し

し

reason and its emphasis on right conduct (both of these much more emphasized in the later editions), and in its tolerance of different opinions, it came close to the fundamental principles of the Unitarianism of the twentieth century.

The true character and worth of a religion, however, can not be learned from its catechism or its creeds, any more than the character and worth of a man from his skeleton. If we would truly know what Socinianism was, we must consider not only its theory but its practice. We should need to attend its services of religious worship, hear its sermons, hymns, and prayers, observe the earnestness and devotion of the people to their religion, and above all note what effect it had upon their daily life, and what kind of characters it produced. Unfortunately we can not do that, for as we shall soon see, Socinianism in Poland came after a century to a tragic end. Yet fortunately there have been preserved to us some detailed accounts of their church customs, and many comments upon their characters. We know, therefore, that the Socinians, both in Poland and in exile, were a very sincerely devout people. They observed Sunday very strictly, holding two or three services on Sundays and holy days, to which the members often came from long distances; and there was also preaching on Wednesdays and Fridays, and frequent days of fasting and prayer were observed. Every nobleman's house had its chapel, and domestic worship with scripture and prayer was held twice daily. They held the Lord's Supper very sacred, and counted it a great deprivation to be kept away from it; and they emphasized the importance of private devotional life. When members of their church therefore were scattered or distant from church privileges, great pains were taken to send them ministers from time to time to preach and administer the Lord's Supper.

Their moral standards also were very strict and strictly observed; and it was a regular part of their church discipline to watch carefully over one another's characters and admonish one another like brothers and sisters. If a member did wrong and did not show repentance for it, the matter was dealt with in the church meeting; and if he persisted he was forbidden to come to the Lord's Supper. Though they did not adopt the Anabaptist doctrines into their Catechism, many of them followed the Anabaptist traditions in the conduct of their lives. Indeed they strove to make their churches as nearly as possible like the first Christian churches, and they tried literally to follow the teachings of Jesus. They looked watchfully after the wants of their poor, the widows, and the orphans. They would not fight, nor go to law, nor avenge injuries, nor hold serfs; they were peaceable, patient, gentle, forgiving, unostentatious, and they lived exemplary lives. In many respects they resembled the Quakers, though their more extreme views and practices were not adhered to always and by all their members, and tended to become modified in the course of time; yet a clear Anabaptist strain always persisted, and to the very end some refused to bear arms or to hold civil office. This is the general testimony of both their friends and their foes. We have already seen how eager they were to spread among others the faith which they held; and we shall see in the next chapter how ready they were to suffer the loss of everything rather than forsake it. In fact, a recent Catholic historian says that Polish "Arianism" was the most interesting page in Polish religious history, and that no other confession in Poland can count so high a percentage of authors in the seventeenth century; and that one reason why their numbers did not become larger was that their demands were too strict.

}

CHAPTER XVIII

THE DECLINE AND FALL OF SOCINIANISM, AND ITS BANISHMENT FROM POLAND,

1638-1660

The last chapter told the happy story of how Socinianism, in spite of many obstacles, overcame them all and rose to a position of widespread influence in Poland. All the while it was gaining strength, however, clouds were gathering below the horizon which were eventually to break into a storm which should overwhelm in ruin not only Socinianism but at length all of Polish Protestantism. We must now go back to trace this other story from its beginning.

The rise of Protestantism in Poland reached its height with the Union of Sandomir 1 (Consensus Sandomiriensis) in 1570, and the power of the Catholics in the affairs of the nation was then at a low ebb, with only a minority in either house of the Diet. Shortly after this the orthodox Protestants proposed to put all "Arians" under the ban; but to this the Catholics would not consent, since it would seem to imply an increased recognition of the other Protestants. This Union was repeatedly confirmed among the orthodox Protestant bodies for twenty-five years, though the Minor Church was persistently excluded from it. Further than this however, orthodox opposition no longer attempted to go. The trouble was instead to come from the Catholic side, and it was initiated under Cardinal Hosius, a man of 1 See page 134.