to whom I deny the use of the ship, should sail over to the continent? Were I, in addition to all this, to employ magnificent promises and atrocious threatenings, should I not be called a dissembling and unjust man, who was mocking those unhappy servants whom I hated, and was seizing an opportunity of treating them with cruelty? But this is precisely the kind of conduct which Amyraut ascribes to God: From which it is evident how egregiously he extols the Divine Mercy in procuring the salvation of the whole human race; and in what manner he teaches us, that God acts towards us without the least dissimulation and in perfect sincerity!!"

As the preceding elucidations of the political and religious creed of the early French Protestants have been derived principally from such sources as have not been pointed out by the learned Mosheim, I here quote from him the following Propositions, in which he has briefly and judiciously summed up the peculiar doctrines of the Universalists:

"That God desires the happiness of all men, and that no mortal is excluded by any divine decree, from the benefits that are procured by the death, sufferings, and Gospel of Christ.

"That, however, none can be made a partaker of the blessings of the gospel, and of eternal salvation, unless he believe in Jesus Christ.

"That such, indeed, is the immense and universal goodness of the Supreme Being, that he refuses to none the power of believing; though he does not grant unto all his assistance and succour, that they may wisely improve this power to the attainment of everlasting salvation.

"And that, in consequence of this, multitudes perish through their own fault, and not from any want of goodness in God."

one.

I am also much pleased with the candour and moderation which breathe in the following observations on this topic, and which are the more remarkable as proceeding from Dr. Maclaine, a Presbyterian Calvinist: "This mitigated view of the doctrine of Predestination has only one defect; but it is a capital It represents God as desiring a thing (that is, salvation and happiness) for ALL, which, in order to its attainment, requires a degree of his assistance and succour, which he refuseth to MANY. This rendered grace and redemption UNIVERSAL only in words, but PARTIAL in reality; and therefore did not at all mend the matter. The Supralapsarians were consistent with themselves; but their doctrine was harsh and terrible, and was founded on the most unworthy notions of the Supreme Being. And, on the other hand, the system of Amyraut was full of inconsistencies: Nay, even the Sublapsarian doctrine has its difficulties, and rather palliates than removes the horrors of Supralapsarianism.

"What then is to be done? From what quarter shall the candid and well-disposed Christian receive that solid satisfaction and wise direction, which neither of these systems is adapted to administer? These he will receive by turning his dazzled and feeble eye from the secret decrees of God, which were neither designed to be rules of action, nor sources of comfort, to mortals here below; and by fixing his view upon the mercy of God, as it is manifested through Christ, the pure laws and sublime promises of his Gospel, and the respectable equity of his present government and his future tribunal."

But Dr. Maclaine was not aware, that in the last paragraph he has given a good description of Arminianism, or he would not thus have committed himself. His decided partiality for the Dutch Calvinists is apparent throughout his annotations on Mosheim's History; for, in whatever part any mention is made of the persecuted Remonstrants, he shews that he has little acquaintance with their principles or their conduct, except such as he collected from the statements of their enemies. But when he delivers his own opinion about the bigoted conduct of the Calvinistic opposers of Amyraut, he was less guarded in his expressions; and, after informing his readers, that neither Supra nor Sublapsarianism, nor even "the system of Amyraut full of inconsistencies," has furnished them with " worthy notions of the Supreme Being," he advises them "to turn their dazzled and feeble eyes from the secret decrees of God, and to fix them upon the mercy of God, as it is manifested through Christ [in] his Gospel," &c. Now this is exactly the course which Arminius wished every man to pursue; and the sole crime with which his adversaries could justly charge him, after all their subterfuges, was this,-his paramount desire for all men to leave under the Divine management "the secret things which belong unto the Lord our God alone," and to engage them in the study of "those truths which are revealed, and which belong unto us and to our children for ever." (Deut. xxix, 29.)

D.Page 167.

WILLIAM TWISSE, D. D. was born at Spenham Land, near Newbury, in Berkshire, in 1575. He received a good classical education at Winchester School; and, after passing through his early academic degrees at Oxford, with considerable reputation, was chosen Fellow of New College, in that University. His great learning, and popular talents as a preacher, gained him high applause.

He remained at the University till he was chosen, by King James I. to attend the Princess Elizabeth, as her Chaplain, to

the Court of the Elector Palatine, to whom she was given in marriage, in 1613, and who was the nephew of Maurice, Prince of Orange, and of the Duke of Bouillon, the latter of whom, on account of the Calvinistic connections of his family, expelled from the Divinity Professorship, at Sedan, the celebrated Daniel Tilenus after his conversion to Arminianism. While the Doctor was in attendance at the Court of Heidelberg, he. witnessed one of the most extraordinary and baneful effects of the Synod of Dort which can be imagined.

King James, as an important branch of the family, sent a deputation of respectable British Divines to that Synod, for the double and undisguised purpose of condemning the Remonstrants, (but especially Vorstius, whom his Majesty had long before exposed to the world as an arch-heretic,) and of assisting the Prince of Orange in his design of usurping the liberties of the United Provinces, and assuming the supreme authority. The Elector Palatine sent his Heidelberg Divines for the same family purposes; and the Duke of Bouillon employed all his influence with the chief pastors among the French Reformed, one of whom, though not permitted to appear at Dort, sent a violent, but very superficial, letter to the Synod, in which he assured them, that he condemned Arminius and his followers, though he had never heard them, and knew little about their writings. But it was a part of King James's infelicity, that his deepest designs, though displaying considerable ingenuity in their formation, frequently miscarried, or only partially succeeded. Thus the Remonstrants and Vorstius were condemned (unheard) at the Synod; but Prince Maurice was not crowned King of the Netherlands. The failure of this part of the Prince of Orange's scheme was a circumstance about which our great historian, Camden, expressed his great satisfaction: but though that was ultimately its fate, yet, at the period to which we allude, (when Dr. Twisse resided at the Court of Heidelberg,) its success was, to all human appearance, inevitable and certain.

For his part in these services, Frederick the Fifth, the Elector Palatine, very naturally considered himself entitled, in return, to some effectual assistance from his relations. Soon after the conclusion of the Synod of Dort, the crown of Bohemia was offered, by the Protestants of that kingdom, to this young Prince, in consequence of some dissension between them and their fellow-subjects, the Roman Catholics. His competitor for the kingdom was Ferdinand, Arch-Duke of Austria, who was soon afterwards elected Emperor of Germany. Brandt informs us, (book 52,) "This matter [the offer of the crown] seemed to have been long concerted; for it is said, that the Advocate Olden Barnevelt opposed it when he was in the ministry, and that he had been heard to presage, with great concern, its

dismal issue.

The Elector Palatine had likewise been earnestly' dissuaded from accepting the crown of Bohemia, and forewarned of the unpleasant consequences, by the Electors of Mentz, Triers, Cologne, and Saxony, the Duke of Bavaria, and the Landgrave of Hesse, at Catsnellebogen. Among those who promoted this design, are reckoned Prince Maurice and the Duke of Bouillon, and particularly his own consort, the Electress, [daughter of the British Monarch,] who is stated to have employed the following expressions to him: 'Had you 'the courage to become suitor to the daughter of a King, and have you not now the heart to accept of a crown?' Concerning Prince Maurice it is related, that, hearing of a certain nobleman, at Heidelberg, having propounded this question, Ought the Elector Palatine to be advised to accept of the crown of Bohemia? he rejoined, I would have asked that gentleman, Is there any green cloth to be purchased at Heidelberg?' And when some one enquired, for what purpose he would have asked that question, the Prince replied, To make caps for the heads of those men who asked such foolish questions! The Elector, having resolved to improve such a favourable opportunity, accepted the crown which was offered to him by the Bohemians, and proceeded to Prague, the capital of that kingdom, where he and the Electress were crowned with great pomp and ceremony. But his father-in-law, James, King of Great Britain, an enemy to all wars, was decidedly opposed to his acceptance of the crown, and said, 'It was a rash and too 'precipitate a resolution, proceeding from bad counsel.' He ordered, that his son-in-law should not be styled King in the public prayers, but only the Elector Palatine." But the British Monarch's refusal of assistance to his son-in-law may be traced to another more potent cause than his love of peace, to his absurd tampering with the Court of Spain, of which proud house Ferdinand the Second, poor Frederick's rival, was a powerful branch.

King Frederick, immediately after his coronation, published a manifesto, in which he stated the reasons which had induced him to accept of the proffered kingdom. Many persons, however, were surprised to find in it the following sentiments concerning religion, especially when they proceeded from a man who, through his agents at the Synod of Dort, had scarcely a year before professed sentiments the most co-ercive, and whose immediate predecessors had expelled the Lutherans from the Palatinate: "Now, in these latter times, and among so many "different opinions in matters of faith and religion, it has been effectually discovered, that, according to the contents of the "Holy Scriptures, and agreeably to those established principles of doctrines, which are of the greatest antiquity, men "will not be led, driven, or forced, with respect to conscience;

“and that, whenever such force or co-ercion has been "attempted, though in the most private manner, it has always "produced pernicious consequences, and occasioned great revo"lutions in the most considerable kingdoms and provinces,"

66

Abraham Schultetus, as one of the Palatine deputies at Dort, the preceding year, had been most violent in his conduct against the Arminians; but, in the capacity of Chaplain to the new King, he then directed his talents to a more grateful occupation to serve his royal master. In the treatise entitled Curriculum Vitae, or "A Relation of the course of his Life," Schultetus says, "King Frederick, having promised liberty of con"science to all the people of his kingdom, strictly observed "that promise as long as he was possessed of the crown; and " he did not retain any church for the exercise of his own re"ligion, except that of the Castle at Prague, which he purged "from Popish idols."-Brandt says, This purgation was made at the pressing instance of the said Schultetus, who, in a sermon, which he preached for that purpose, in the chapel belonging to the Court, said, that such images, which he called idols, ought neither to be made nor worshipped, nor the worship of them tolerated.' He afterwards published his sermon, which gave grievous offence, not only to those Bohemians that were Papists, but even to the Lutherans themselves, who allowed the use of images. The Divines of Wurtembergh, Tubingen, and Leipsic, and those of Mentz and Ingolstadt, wrote in defence of images; but Schultetus was vindicated by one Theophilus Mosanus. Some persons have thought, that this abolition of images ought not to have been thus attempted at the commencement of King Frederick's reign; but that they should first have been rooted out of the people's hearts, and then cast out of their churches. It was likewise believed, that this unseasonable zeal gave a check to the King's affairs, and alienated the minds of many." On the 15th of April, 1620, the confederacy was renewed between the kingdoms of Hungary and Bohemia; on which occasion, Schultetus, before King Frederick and the Deputies of the two kingdoms, maintained in his sermon, that fraternal love and unity might be ' established between the Lutherans and the Calvinists, not'withstanding their disagreeing on a few points; and that he 'was well assured, from the word of God, that the sanctity of 'mutual prayers, and the sincerity of brotherly love, found 'more favour in the sight of God than all the contentions about the ubiquity and the carnal manducation of Christ's body.' This would have appeared very tolerant and catholic, had it been uttered fourteen months before, at the Synod of Dort; but as it now seemed to be spoken only to serve a political purpose, it did not captivate the Lutherans. Indeed, the grand instance of Calvinistic intolerance at that Synod was long remembered