The leaders of the Evangelical Movement in the Church of England till the end of the nineteenth century can, for convenience sake, be divided into three groups: the Awakeners, the Pastors and Organizers, and the Ecclesiastical Controversialists. The main concern of the first was to awaken the inert and indifferent population by preaching of sin and judgment, of forgiveness and eternal life; that of the Pastors and Organizers was to guide awakened and conscience-stricken people in the paths of righteousness, and to organize their resources for more efficient service to God and man; that of the Ecclesiastical Controversialists was to stem the rising tide of Tractarianism and Biblical criticism which seemed to them to be endangering the purity of the Gospel and to be leading the Church into false paths. It was under the leadership of this last group that the Evangelical Movement became definitely “Low Church” (at first, in distinction from the Latitudinarians, it had been relatively “High Church”) and what today would be called “fundamentalist.” If it be remembered that these groups were not hard and fast, that the Awakeners were pastors and that the Organizers were awakeners, and that the Ecclesiastical Controversialists were trying to be both, they will serve to indicate the general phases of the movement.

When the American Civil War began, the Southern dioceses of the Protestant Episcopal Church organized a Confederate Church. Contrary to sentiment in the other popular Protestant denominations, there was in 1861 little hostility between the Confederate and Northern leaders of this Church. As the war progressed, however, bitterness developed until in 1865 at the close of the war many wanted to retain separate church organizations. Despite these animosities, some bold spirits succeeded in bringing about the reconciliation of the dioceses of the Church. The story of this reunion has been told before, but new material recently made available warrants a new analysis.

I propose, in this essay, to present some of the more significant highlights of the Reformation in Hungary. Significantly, little is known with regard to what transpired within the borders of what was the last frontier of the Reformation in eastern Europe. If what Lindsay says is true—and it is definitely—, i.e., “The rise, continuance, and decline of these Churches (in Bohemia, Hungary and the neighbouring lands) are so inseparably connected with the peculiar social and political conditions of the countries, that no adequate or informing account of them could be given without largely exceeding the limits of space at my disposal,” the task should have appeared all the more engaging. The fact is, however, that the difficulties of mastering the Hungarian language have stood as a perpetual barrier to any intensive study of the Hungarian Reformation among scholars outside the land, and those within have devoted lamentably little energy to the task of attracting the attention of the outside world.

The intricacies of Mormon polytheism are a perpetual surprise to the student of American thought. But a second surprise awaits the historian who attempts to trace the roots of this American polytheism. It is that Mormon doctrine moved not from ordinary Trinitarian thought but from an original position in which extreme monistic tendencies were dominant. There are three stages in this transition: an original monism, a reversal to tritheism, and the expansion of this into polytheism.