Page 270.—“_The noblest and first‐created_,” _&c._—This opinion of the Hermit may be supposed to have been derived from his master, Origen; but it is not easy to ascertain the exact doctrine of Origen on this subject. In the Treatise on Prayer attributed to him, he asserts that God the Father alone should be invoked,—which, says Bayle, is “encherir sur les Hérésies des Sociniens.” Notwithstanding this, however, and some other indications of, what was afterwards called, Arianism, (such as the opinion of the divinity being received by _communication_, which _Milner_ asserts to have been held by this Father,) Origen was one of the authorities quoted by Athanasius in support of his high doctrines of co‐eternity and co‐essentiality. What Priestley says is, perhaps, the best solution of these inconsistencies;—“Origen, as well as Clemens Alexandrinus, has been thought to favour the Arian principle; but he did it only in words and not in ideas.” _Early Opinions_, _&c._ Whatever uncertainty, however, there may exist with respect to the opinion of Origen himself on this subject, there is no doubt that the doctrines of his immediate followers were, at least, Anti‐Athanasian. “So many Bishops of Africa,” says Priestley, “were, at this period (between the years 255 and 258), Unitarians, that Athanasius says, ‘The Son of God,’—meaning his divinity,—‘was scarcely any longer preached in the churches.’” Page 271.—“_The restoration of the whole human race to purity and happiness._”—This benevolent doctrine,—which not only goes far to solve the great problem of moral and physical evil, but which would, if received more generally, tend to soften the spirit of uncharitableness, so fatally prevalent among Christian sects,—was maintained by that great light of the early Church, Origen, and has not wanted supporters among more modern Theologians. That Tillotson was inclined to the opinion appears from his sermon preached before the queen. Paley is supposed to have held the same amiable doctrine; and Newton (the author of the work on the Prophecies) is also among the supporters of it. For a full account of the arguments in favour of this opinion, derived both from reason and the express language of Scripture, see Dr. Southwood Smith’s very interesting work, “On the Divine Government.” See also _Magee on the Atonement_, where the doctrine of the advocates of Universal Restoration is thus briefly and fairly explained:—“Beginning with the existence of an infinitely powerful, wise, and good Being, as the first and fundamental principle of rational religion, they pronounce the essence of this Being to be _love_, and from this infer, as a demonstrable consequence, that none of the creatures formed by such a Being will ever be made eternally miserable.... Since God (they say) would act unjustly in inflicting eternal misery for temporary crimes, the sufferings of the wicked can be but remedial, and will terminate in a complete purification from moral disorder, and in their