Mosheim, the distinguished author of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. I., page 120, says: "The authors who have treated of the innocence and sanctity of the primitive Christians have fallen into the error of supposing them to have been unspotted models of piety and virtue, and a gross error indeed it is, as the strongest testimonies too evidently prove." The same author, in Vol.

Some of these sects took their stand on the Pauline teaching, "The law of the spirit of life in Jesus Christ hath made me free from the law of sin and death," and claimed freedom from sin, no matter what their actions. The "Brethren of the Free Spirit" carried women about with them, held midnight assemblies, and, according to Mosheim, attended these meetings in a state of nudity.

Mosheim, the fullest historian of the Church in that day, seemed to Milner a notable offender in this respect.

To answer that Jesus is historical, but The Anointed is not, is to evade the question. When Mosheim declares that "The prevalent opinion among early Christians was that Christ existed in appearance only," he could not have meant by 'Christ' only a title. There is no meaning in saying that a man's title "existed in appearance only?"

What the origin of the Hernhuters really is, seems to be a point as yet scarcely determined. Mosheim, in his Ecclesiastical History, speaks vaguely of them; and Dr. Maclaine, his English translator, has attributed to them practices and opinions which are quite contrary to fact.

Mosheim, writing on this subject, says: A pernicious maxim which was current in the schools, not only of the Egyptians, the Platonists, and the Pythagoreans, but also of the Jews, was very early recognised by the Christians, and soon found among them numerous patrons namely, that those who made it their business to deceive, with a view of promoting the cause of truth, were deserving rather of commendation than of censure.

Mosheim, the historian, to whom I have more particularly referred above, speaking of these times, remarks that "there was nothing to exclude the ignorant from ecclesiastical preferment; the savage and illiterate party, who looked on all kinds of learning, particularly philosophy, as pernicious to piety, was increasing;" and, accordingly, "the disputes carried on in the Council of Nicea offered a remarkable example of the greatest ignorance and utter confusion of ideas, particularly in the language and explanations of those who approved of the decisions of that council."

The Council of Constantinople, A.D. 553, is reckoned as the fifth general Council. It is said to have condemned the doctrines of Origen, thus summarised by Mosheim: "1. That in the Trinity the Father is greater than the Son, and the Son than the Holy Ghost. 2.

Olear. Vid. viii, 7, § 9. See also ii. 37, vi. 11, viii. 5. Philostr. i. 2, and Olear. ad loc. note 3, iv. 44, v. 12, vii. 39, viii. 7; Apollon. Epist. 8 and 52; Philostr. Prooem. vit. Sophist.; Euseb. in Hier. 2; Mosheim, de Simone Mago, Sec. 13. Yet it must be confessed that the views both of the Pythagoreans and Eclectics were very inconsistent on this subject. See Brucker, vol. ii. p. 447.

Among the Rosicrucians, light was the knowledge of the philosopher's stone; and Mosheim says that in chemical language the cross was an emblem of light, because it contains within its figure the forms of the three figures of which LVX, or light, is composed.