of good and evil angels, and the resurrection of the body.

It is somewhat doubtful, however, what the Pharisees meant by the last doctrine. According to Josephus, it was no more than a Pythagorean resurrection, that is, of the soul, by its transmigration into another body, and being born anew with it. From this resurrection, he says, they excluded all who were notoriously wicked; being of opinion, that the souls of such persons were transmitted into a state of everlasting woe. As to inferior crimes, they held, that they were punished in the bodies which the souls of those who committed them were next sent into.

There seems, indeed, to have been entertained amongst the Jews in our Saviour's time, a notion of the pre-existence of souls. How else could the disciples ask concerning the blind man, “Who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was porn blind?” (John ix. 2.) And when hey told Christ that “some said he was Elias, Jeremias, or one of the prophets," Matt. xvi. 14.) the meaning seems to be, hat they thought he was come into the world with the soul of Elias, or some other of the old prophets, transmigrated nto him.

To the same doctrine has been attriuted Herod's alarm, when he heard of Tesus, that "John the Baptist was risen rom the dead:" that is, that John's soul was come back to the world in his person. It as been objected to this, that Herod vas a Sadducee. (Compare Matt. xvi. 6. vith Mark viii. 15.) But infidels are ften orthodox in the moment of trepilation and alarm, as is well known to ave been the case with Voltaire. The uthor of the Book of Wisdom seems also ɔ allude to the same notion, (chap. viii. O.) where he says, " Being good, I came ato a body undefiled."

It does not appear, however, that these otions were at all peculiar to the Phaisees; and still less, that in them conisted their doctrine of the resurrection. t is a well-known fact, that the resurection of the body was commonly beeved among the Jews, even in the most egenerate period of their history. This ; manifest from the story of the seven rethren, who, with their mother, were ut to death by Antiochus Epiphanes in ne day, (2 Mac. vii.; xii. 43, 44.); to which story the writer of the Epistle to he Hebrews, in chap. xi. 35, clearly alides, saying, “ Others were tortured, not ccepting deliverance, that they might

obtain a better resurrection." And when Martha, the sister of Lazarus, was told that her brother should rise again, she answered, “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day," (John xi. 23, 24.) which implies, that this doctrine was at that time a well-known and acknowledged truth. Luke also says expressly, that the Pharisees confess the resurrection, (Acts xxiii. 3.) And Paul, speaking before Felix of his hope towards God, says, " Which they themselves (the Pharisees) also allow, that there shall be a resurrection, both of the just and unjust." (Acts xxiv. 15.) If the doctrine of the resurrection, as held by the Pharisees, had been nothing more than the Pythagorean transmigration, it is beyond all credibility that such testimony would have been borne of it.

The peculiar manners of this sect are strongly marked in the writings of the evangelists, and confirmed by the testimony of the Jewish authors. According to the latter, they fasted the second and fifth days of the week, and put thorns at the bottom of their robes, that they might prick their legs as they walked. They lay upon boards covered with flint-stones, and tied thick cords about their waists. They paid tithes as the law prescribed, and gave the thirtieth and fiftieth part of their fruits; adding voluntary sacrifices to those which were commanded. They were very exact in performing their vows. The Talmudic books mention several distinct classes of Pharisees, among whom was the Truncated Pharisee, who, that he might appear in profound meditation, as if destitute of feet, scarcely lifted them from the ground; and the Mortar Pharisee, who, that his contemplations might not be disturbed, wore a deep cap in the shape of a mortar, which would only permit him to look upon the ground at his feet. Thus did they study to captivate the admiration of the vulgar; and under the veil of singular piety, they often disguised the most licentious manners.— [Calmet's Dict. by Taylor. Stackhouse's History of the Bible, vol. v. pp. 122, 413. Jennings's Jewish Antiq. book i. chap. 10. Horne's Introduction, vol.i. pp. 166—170.]

PHILADELPHIAN SOCIETY (The), was founded by Jane Leadley, an English mystic and enthusiast of the latter part of the 17th century. By her visions, predictions, and flattering doctrines, she gained a considerable number of disciples, among whom were some persons of learning. She embraced similar notions with the

celebrated Mad. Bourignon (see Bourignonists) on the doctrine of divine influences; and made no doubt but that all dissensions among Christians would soon cease, and the kingdom of the Redeemer become truly glorious, if all who bear the name of Jesus, without regarding the forms of doctrine and discipline which distinguish particular communion, would join in committing their souls to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, by his divine impulses and suggestions. She went further, and declared that she had a divine commission to proclaim the near approach of this glorious event. This assertion she delivered with the utmost confidence, that her Philadelphian Society was the true kingdom of Christ, in which alone the Divine Spirit resided and reigned. She also maintained the doctrine of universal salvation, the final restoration of all fallen intelligences. Another sect of Universalists was founded by Mr. James Relly, at the Philadelphian Chapel, in Windmill Street, Finsbury, London; and have been therefore called by Dr. Evans, Philadelphian Universalists.-See Rellyanists and Universalists.

PHILIPISTS, the followers of Philip Melancthon, the amiable Reformer, were sometimes, tho' improperly, so called, for he was far from wishing to form a sect.

PHILISTINES, an antient nation, situated on the borders of Canaan, remarkable for their gross idolatry; but M. Grégoire mentions some Christians in America, to whom he very improperly gives the same title.-See Mareschalistes.

PHILOPOFTCHINS, a Russian sect, nearly resembling the Theodosians, which

see.

They are remarkably abstemious, and the married people call one another brethren and sisters.[Pinkerton's Greek Church, p. 332.]

PHILOPONISTS. See Tritheists. PHILOSOPHISTS, another name for the sect of the Illuminati, and particularly for the infidel triumvirate who plotted the ruin of Christianity, Voltaire, Diderot, and D'Alembert. The former being weary (as he said) of hearing that twelve men propagated Christianity through the world, was determined to shew that far less were sufficient to overturn it. The private watch-word of the party was, Ecrusez l'infame, (Crush the wretch)-meaning, as is asserted, our Lord Jesus Christ, the great object of their hatred and aversion. [Barruel's Memoirs of Jacobinism.] PHOTINIANS, the followers of Photinus, Bishop of Sirmium in the fourth

century. He taught, that Jesus Christ was conceived of the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary :-That a certain divine emanation, or ray of divinity (which he called the Logos, or Word descended upon this extraordinary man: That, on account of the union of the Divine Word with his human nature. Jesus was called the Son of God. E also taught that the Holy Ghost was be a distinct person, but a celestial virtueor rather the divine energy. He was codemned in several councils, degrade from the episcopal dignity, and died exile, a. D. 372.—[Mosheim's E. H. vol. p. 425.]

PHRYGIANS, or CATAPHRYGIAN those Montanists who resided in Phryg See Montanists.

PICARDS, the Adamites of the 1 century, a sect of wild enthusiasts, went naked, as is said, in their religi assemblies. They were so called fr one Picard, a Bohemian, who cal himself the New Adam.-See Adamites.

PIETISTS, (Catholic.) The Brethre and Sisters of the Pious and Christ Schools, founded by Nic. Barre in 167 were so called. They devoted themsel to the education of poor children of b sexes.-[Mosheim's E. H. vol. v. p. 17

shoc

PIETISTS, (Protestant) a denom tion in the 17th century, which owed origin to "the pious and learned Spene as Dr. Mosheim calls him, who for private devotional societies at Frank in order to cultivate vital and pract religion; and published a book, ent "Pious Desires," which greatly prom this object. His followers laid it de as an essential maxim, that none be admitted into the ministry but the who not only had received a proper cation, but were also distinguished their wisdom and sanctity of man and had hearts filled with divine k Hence they proposed an alteration in schools of divinity, which embraced following points:-1. That the Schola Theology, which reigned in the academ and was composed of intricate and putable doctrines, and obscure and usual forms of expressions, should totally abolished. 2. That Polemical vinity, which comprehended the con versies subsisting between Christians different communions, should be eagerly studied, and less frequently trea though not entirely neglected. 3. T all mixture of philosophy and but science with divine wisdom,

was to

most carefully avoided; (i. e. that Pagan philosophy and classical learning should be kept distinct from, and by no means supersede, Biblical Theology.) But 4. That, on the contrary, all those students, who were designed for the ministry, should be accustomed from their early youth to the perusal and study of the holy scriptures, and be taught a plain system of theology, drawn from these unerring sources of truth. 5. That the whole course of their education was to be so directed as to render them useful in life, by the practical power of their doctrine, and the commanding influence of their example.

Such in substance is Mosheim's account of the meditated reforms in the public schools. But it was not intended to confine these reforms to students and the clergy. Religious persons of every class and rank were encouraged to meet in what were called Biblical Colleges, or Colleges of Piety, (we might call them prayer meetings) where some exercised in reading the scriptures, singing, and prayer, and others engaged in the exposition of the scriptures; not in a dry and critical way, but in a strain of practical and experimental piety, whereby they mutually edified each other. This practice, which always more or less obtains where religion flourishes, (as, for instance, at the Reformation) raised the same sort of outcry as at the rise of Methodism; and those who entered not into the spirit of the design, were eager to catch at every instance of weakness or imprudence, to bring disgrace on that, which, in fact, brought disgrace upon themselves, as lukewarm and formal Christians. "In so saying, Master, thou reproachest us also."

This work began about 1670. In 1691, Dr. Spener removed from Dresden to Berlin, where he propagated the same principles, which widely spread, and were well supported in many parts of Germany by the excellent Professor Francke and others. This raised a considerable controversy, in which the Pietists were charged with many errors: of these the chief was, that " divine influence is necessary to the right understanding of the scriptures;"-a proposition, which is either false or true, as it is differently understood. For if it be referred to a literal, critical, or even mystical, understanding of them, it is manifestly false, and certainly was not maintained in this sense by any judicious Pietist: but they taught, that without such help, no man can enter into the spirit of them,-no man can

relish or enjoy those parts which relate to the divine life, and the experience of the Christian: for so saith St. Paul :“The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." See 1 Cor. ii. 12—14.

Another thing which gave great offence was, that they renounced the vain amusements of the world. "Thus, dancing, pantomimes, public sports, theatrical diversions, the reading of humorous and comical books, with several other kinds of pleasure and entertainment, were prohibited by the Pietists, as unlawful and unseemly; and, therefore, by no means of an indifferent nature."

Instead, however, of proving these things agreeable to the word and will of God,instead of shewing how all these were consistent with loving God “ with all our heart, and soul, and strength," these systematic triflers fled to the scholastic question, "Whether any human actions are truly indifferent?"—that is, neither right nor wrong: a method that proved not only the weakness of their cause, but their own consciousness of its weakness; for this was one of those scholastic enquiries, which the Pietists justly rejected as useless and impertinent. The will of God is to Christians the only rule of morals, and to this it is evident that they dared not appeal.

The term Pietist, which at first was given to these good people in derision, "was afterwards," says Mosheim, "applied to all who, distinguished by excessive severity of manners, or who, regardless of truth and opinion, were only intent upon practice, and turned the whole vigour of their efforts towards the attainment of religious feelings and habits." This sentence, very unworthy of Dr. Mosheim, is neither consistent with itself nor with fact. If they were "only intent on practice," how could they turn " their whole vigour towards the attainment of religious feelings and habits?" Or, if their "whole vigour were turned to these, how could they be only intent upon practice?" But that they were regardless of truth, is manifestly false: for, as Dr. Haweis observes, "no men more rigidly contended for, or taught more explicitly, the fundamental doctrines of Christianity;" particularly in the articles of justification by faith and sanctification.

But the most offensive of all their errors, real or supposed, was, "that no person

that was not himself a model of piety and divine love, was qualified to be a public teacher of piety, or a guide to others, in the way of salvation." This was so of fensive to the carnal clergy of the Lutheran church, who, it seems, at this time were not a few, that they raised the cry of heresy, and charged them (strange as it may seem) with making void the efficacy of the divine word!!

It must be admitted, however, that the Pietists greatly degenerated: hypocrites assumed the name to cover their guilt; and Pietists being (as since Methodists) a current term of reproach, it was applied to all zealous Religionists without exception. M. Grégoire tells a singular tale of some Pietists from Denmark and the neighbouring countries, who, in the year 1734, resolved to fly from the contagious wickedness of the world; and for that purpose, embarking upon the Baltic, sailed towards the North in quest of some island, where, as in a Goshen of their own, they might be safe. They cruised in search of Paradise in a wrong latitude; and being bad sailors, and soon sick of the dangers of the sea, were glad to land upon a small island near Stockholm, where they were permitted to settle, and where their descendants still subsist under the name of Skevi-kare, an appellation given them from a domain which they purchased. [ Mosheim's E. H. vol. v. pp. 312-324. Haweis's Church Hist. vol. iii. pp. 64-74. Middleton's Biog. Evan. vol. iv. pp. 121 -125. Life of Spener.]

PILGRIMS, in ecclesiastical history, certain persons who undertook, from religious motives, long and painful journies to the Holy Land, to Rome, or to the shrines of certain saints. The former became so numerous in the middle ages, that on their account chiefly, the Holy War was undertaken. (See Croisades.) The Mahometans display the same zeal in their pilgrimages to Mecca, as the Catholics in their journies to Jerusalem or Rome.[Morison's Dict.]

PILGRIMS, POOR, a popish order that started up about A. D. 1500. They came out of Italy into Germany, barefooted and bareheaded, feeding all the week, except on Sundays, upon herbs and roots, sprinkled with salt. They remained not above 24 hours in one place, and then went in pairs, begging from door to door. This penance they undertook for a certain time, (as three, five, or seven years) and then returned to their former avocations. [Morison's Dict.]

PLATONISTS. The Platonic philo sophy is denominated from Plato, who was born about 426 years before Christ He founded the old academy on the op nions of Heraclitus, Pythagoras, and S crates; and by adding the information be had acquired to their discoveries, he esta blished a sect of philosophers, who we esteemed more perfect than any who h before appeared in the world.

The outlines of Plato's philosophic system were as follow:-That there is o God, eternal, immutable, and immaterial perfect in wisdom and goodness; oms cient, and omnipresent. That this perfect Being formed the universe out a mass of eternally pre-existing matte to which he gave form and arrangemen That there is in matter a necessary, blind and refractory force, which res the will of the Supreme Artificer, so the he cannot perfectly execute his design and this is the cause of the mixture good and evil which is found in material world. That the soul of was derived by emanation from G but that this emanation was not im diate, but through the intervention of soul of the world, which was itself debas by some material admixture. That relation which the human soul, in its ginal constitution, bears to matter, is source of moral evil. That when formed the universe, he separated fr the soul of the world inferior souls, eq in number to the stars, and assigned each its proper celestial abode. T these souls were sent down to earth to imprisoned in mortal bodies: hence and the depravity and misery to which hus nature is liable. That the soul is mortal; and by disengaging itself f all animal passions, and rising ab sensible objects to the contemplation the world of intelligence, it may be p pared to return to its original habitat That matter never suffers annihilati but that the world will remain for er and that by the action of its animati principle it accomplishes certain pers within which every thing returns to antient place and state. This periodis revolution of nature is called the Platon or great year.

The Platonic system makes the pe fection of morality to consist in li in conformity to the will of God, the standard of truth; and teaches, that highest good consists in the contemplate and knowledge of the Supreme Being In this Divine Being, Plato admit

a sort of Trinity of three hypostases.-The first he considered as self-existent, calling him, by way of eminence, the BEING, (to on) or (to en) the ONE. The only attribute which he acknowledged in this person was goodness; and therefore he frequently styles him (to agathon) the good. The second he considered as (nous) the mind, or (logos) the wisdom or reason of the former, and the (demiurgos) maker of the world. The third he always speaks of as (Psyche) the Soul of the world. He taught that the second is a necessary emanation from the first, and the third from the second, or perhaps from both; comparing these emanations to those of light and heat from the sun.

From the above use of Logos for the second person of the Platonic Trinity, it has been thought, that St. John borrowed the term from Plato; but it is not likely that this apostle was conversant with his writings, and therefore both Le Clerc and Dr. Campbell think it more probable that he took it from the Old Testament.

The end of all knowledge, or philosophy, according to Plato, was to make us resemble the Deity as much as is compatible with human nature. This likeness consists in the possession and practice of all the moral virtues.

After the death of Plato, many of his disciples deviated from his doctrines. His school was then divided into the old, the middle, and the new academy. The old academy strictly adhered to his tenets. The middle academy partially receded from his system, without entirely desertFing it. The new academy almost enirely relinquished the original doctrines of Plato, and verged towards the sceptical philosophy.-[Enfield's Philosophy, vol. i. pp. 206-242.; vol. ii. pp. 255-257. Ency. Brit. in Platonism.]--See Academics. PLOTINISTS, the disciples of Plotinus, a celebrated Platonic philosopher, the disciple and successor of Ammonius Saccas, whose philosophy was very popular during the first ages of Christianity, and contributed greatly to debase and corrupt it, by mixing with its simple and sublime truths, the speculations of all the philosophers. Plotinus, unquestionably a man of talent, and of severe morals, is said to have been more of an enthusiast than of a reasoner; and believed the human soul to be a spark of Deity, which was to return eventually to the high source from which it came. In consistency with this principle, on the approach of his dissolution, he said to one of his

friends:-" The divine principle within me is now hastening to unite itself with that Divine Being, which animates the universe. (See Ammonians and Eclectics.) [Enfield's Philos. vol. ii. pp. 60-65.] PNEUMATOMACHIANS, (from pneuma, spirit; and maché, to fight), i. e. enemies of the Holy Spirit: a term of reproach applied to the Macedonians, which see.

POLYGAMISTS, from Polygamy, having more wives than one; i. e. at the same time. Though we know of no sect or denomination thus called, there have been some distinguished individuals who have advocated this practice; not generally, but in certain cases. In the early ages of the world, there appears to have been no law against this practice; but it is generally understood to be forbidden under the Christian dispensation. (See John iv. 18; Rom. vii. 2; 1 Cor. vii. 12-16.)

Bernardin Ochinus, an eloquent Italian Friar of the 15th century, being converted by Luther's writings, became a Protestant divine; but, among other eccentricities, maintained the lawfulness of Polygamy, at least in certain cases. So John Barbeyrac, the learned translator of Grotius in the 17th century, not only himself advocated the doctrine, but has taken pains to prove that his author (Grotius) was of the same opinion. Lycerus, a Danish clergyman of the 17th century, published a book, entitled Polygamia Triumphatrix. But by far the most celebrated and ingenious advocate of this doctrine, was the late Rev. Martin Madan, the first minister of the Lock Chapel. Though we never heard that he was charged with putting this principle into practice, he recommended it as a cure for seduction, and for keeping women without any legal compact. His doctrine was, that every man who seduced a woman should be compelled to marry her, and maintain her through life. This principle, though it would legalize concubinage, as in former ages, would completely do away the practice of keeping mistresses, and propagating illegitimate children; since every such wife, though of inferior rank, would have a claim upon her seducer, and every such child upon its father. its father. Very important objections were, however, raised against this doctrine, both from the scriptures, and from its probable effects upon society. The general equality of the sexes seems also to point out polygamy as a violation of the law of nature; for if one half of mankind were to take two wives, the other half could not