At the time of the Revolution, Unitarian principles in England were on the advance, both as to explicitness of statement and extent of currency. The preparations for this change have been indicated. It obtained in a decided form to no great degree, but its influence was felt beyond its definite boundaries. According to the Toleration Act, Antitrinitarians were as much precluded from publicly celebrating worship after the Revolution, as Presbyterians and others had been before; yet, by the close of the 17th century, it is said, Unitarian meeting-houses were erected.[249] Some Presbyterians, perhaps, rather of an Arian than of a Socinian type, at that period diverged from orthodox paths; but it is stated that on the whole these opinions “were more prevalent in the Church than among the Dissenters.”[250] The republication of _Biddle’s Tracts_, and the issue of new works, published anonymously, going far beyond the theological point Biddle had reached, promoted the denial of our Lord’s Divinity. The series was zealously supported, if not prepared by the well-known Thomas Firman, who, though an Unitarian, remained a member of the Church of England.[251] The modern assailants of orthodoxy, catching the rationalistic spirit of the times, dwelt upon what they conceived to be the unreasonableness of the doctrine of the Trinity, and urged the absence in Scripture of the scholastic terms in which the doctrine is commonly defined. They charged the Fathers and the Schoolmen with corrupting Christianity; then directing their attention to the doctrine of the Redeemer’s Deity, they insisted much upon His proper humanity, upon His trustfulness, devotion, and obedience. [Sidenote: 1693–8.] If, said the Unitarians, Christ be God, none can be greater than He, yet He says, “The Father is greater than I.” If Jesus Christ were truly God, they alleged, it would be blasphemy to call Him the sent of God; heedless of the allegation, on the other side, that if He were simply man, it would be blasphemy to ascribe to Him Divine names, attributes, and honours. Arguments were also adduced against the doctrine of the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost. A violent attack also was made, in a distinct publication, on the character of Athanasius, with the object of damaging the theological belief which that great Father of the Church so zealously upheld.[252] Books of this description, vindicating opinions under a legal ban, excited the indignation both of Church and Parliament. A work, bearing on the heterodox side, written by a Divine of the Latitudinarian school, led to his being deprived of the Rectorship of Lincoln College, Oxford,[253] and a vote was passed by the Commons dooming to the flames an attack on the doctrine of the Trinity.[254] [Sidenote: THE TRINITY.]