« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
of this Introduction, he will discover reasons why my apparent bias in this last respect ought to secure me from undue censure.
V._SUBJECTS DISCUSSED IN THE NOTES. I now proceed to advert to a few of those discussions which occur in the notes, and to which the title of this work will have called the attention of
readers. . A perusal of the long note (pp. 679–693,) on the origin and progress of English Arminianism, will convince every man of candour of the falsity of the proposition upon which I have ventured to animadvert, " that in England, CALVINISM went along with Civil liberty, and ARMINIANISM the contrary, and that in Holland it was at the same time the
reverse. The notes, in pages 704–709 and 780, respecting Bishops Hall and Davenant, and the note on 798 (in which an allusion is made to Dr. Hall as the Bishop of Norwich,) will add strong confirmation to the one already quoted, and will inject serious doubts into the minds of those who have been accustomed to reckon those two celebrated divines as rigid Calvinists to the very close of life.
In the account which Mr. Farindon has given of the conversion of “the ever-memorable Hales of Eton” from Calvinism to Arminianism, he has introduced a circumstance respecting EPISCOPIUS, which has exceedingly puzzled Mosheim, and other writers. The evidence adduced in pages 577–9, will prove, I hope satisfactorily, that MARTINIUS was the individual, through whose reasoning Hales “bade John Calvin Good Night!"
The reputed POPERY of Arminianism receives some explanation in pages 677–9, 267, and 526.-Some particulars respecting ARMINIUS and his system are related in pages 466, 478–83, 548, -552, 621, 801, and 828.-Curious acceptation of the the term “Pelagianism,” p. 780.-Remarks on unchristian rebellion, pp. 561-4, 364-6, 728, 385, and 270.—Conversions to Arminia anism, 305, 394, 535, 577, 687-91, 704, 713, 780, 788, 800 and 803.
CONTRAsts are instituted-in page 285 between the death-bed scene of Grotius, and of Rivet his most acrimonius accuser ;336341, between the execution of Archbishop Laud, and Mr. Love who exulted at that great Prelate's death ;—753, between the conduct of Vossius, and that of the brave Grotius, towards Archbishop Laud in his troubles ;-482 between the Divinity of the schools and that of the scriptures ;-413—16, 790, between the tolerant views of Dr. Hammond and John Goodwin, and those of Dr. Owen ;-761, 765—75, between the amplitude of Fundamental Articles of religion devised by the Arminians, and those of the Calvinists ;-296—306, 512, 518, between the prophesying, humour of the Calvinists, and the common sense of the Arminians ;-643, between extempore prayers, and written forms ;-606, between the French Calvinists and Dutch Armi. nians ;--223, between the Remonstrants, Du Moulin, Amyraut, and Twisse ;-678 between the labours of the Conformists in the Popish controversy, and those of the Puritan Clergy ;-674, between marriage and celibacy ;-710–6, between the political principles of the English Arminians and Calvinists ;—380—1, between the suppleness of Dr. Owen, and the firmness of Meric Casaubon ;-and 636, between Grotius and Selden.
The genius and tendency of Calvinism are well portrayed by Grotius in page 271–8, and by Dr. Hammond 690~2.- Calvi. nistic Revolutionary reveries, 512, 515, and 528.-Westminster Assembly of Divines 400-9, 435, 443, 464-72.- Preparations for the Assembly by the Du Moulins 392.-Remarkable deficiency of the Calvinists in a knowledge of the Ancient Fathers, 450, 524, 534, 686.-The craft of the English Puritans, immediately prior to the civil wars, in joining the articles of the Irish Church with those of the Church of England, in argumentative array against the Arminians, 565.-Description of the Calvinists in those days, 271, 359, 463, 512, 528, 705, and 786.--Presbyterian discipline 445, and intolerance, 448, 467.-Contests between the Presbyterians and Independents, 313, 342, 386, 448, 606 and 733.-Dr. Twisse's curious Predestinarian arguments, &c. 476–81, 490_2, 406, 444; his obligations to the Jesuits, 477, 526; and his prophetical enthusiasm, 506, 510, 512.-A Parliamentary chaplain, described by himself, 457—8. The Long Parliament 406, 444.Scotch Presbyterians, 347-9, 365.- The French Calvinists, 265, 721.-Synod of Dort and its consequences, 425, 572, 587, 592, 710, 738.–The capacity in which the British Deputies appeared at that Synod, and their private disputes, 398, 565, 710.-Dury's pacific labours, 608—10, 617, 748 ; his prophesying humour, 617, 734–9.-Sir Henry Vane's prophecies, 513, 516—8.-Animad"Vérsions on some of Richard Baxter's assertions, 251, 294, 302, 323, 330, 352, 360, 379, 401, 640, 678, 747.-An almost universal and voluntary infliction of self-punishment, in the year 1662, on the high Predestinarian ministers, 788.
To general readers the following notes will probably appear the most interesting: Curious anecdote about Archbishop Til. litson, 785—7.-Difficulty of defining with accuracy Whigs and Tories, 812-5.-The desire of Grotius to be employed at the Court of England, and the reasons why his request was slighted, 684–6, 597, 600.-The family of Vossius, and his invitation to England and Ireland, 659–65.-Female branches of the family De Medicís, 719-781.-An account of Dr. Cosin's Devotions, 502:—The Elector Palatine and the Queen of Bohemia, 611-3, 754.–The Ancient Fathers of the Christian Church, and their great authority, 428-434, 413, 535, 685, 799.-Escape of Grotius from 'confinement, 582 ; and his fine letter on the death of his
daughter Maria, 603.- Dr. Featly's trimming conduct, 459463, 403.-Selden's conduct in the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, 470.-Bishop Atterbury on the advantages of a married Clergy, 644; and Archbishop Laud's opinion about celibacy, 674. - Ancient and modern ideas about Catholic emancipation, 693.University learning, 369–71..-Critique upon Du Moulin's Vates, 281.
: On the subject of Popery, abundant information will be found in the copious notes, pp. 549—784; and Cardinal Richelieu's finesse is exposed in pages 624-30, 734.
On various subjects connected with our national history, the reader will find some information in the following notes : King James the First, 307, 376, 510, 561, 649, 711.-King Charles the First, 376, 648, 716, 719—31, 734; and His Majesty's death, 323, 350, 377, 380, 387, 391.-King Charles the Second, 607, 820.The Electoral Family, 336, 453, 611-3, 647, 724, 784, 740, 770, 817.
Moderation of the Episcopal Church, 435, 532, 545, 654, 798. Her rites and ceremonies, 527, 432-4, 543—4, 799.-At an equal distance from Puritanism and Popery, 656, 67.-Advantages of Episcopacy, 545, 698, 702, 422.-Jus Divinum. of Episcopacy, and of other modes of Divine Worship, 792-5.- Episcopal Clergy prior to the Civil Wars, 302, 630, 333, 335, 525, 811.Employment of Ecclesiastics in the great offices of State, 585.Uniformity in Public Worship, 452, 575, 772.-Origin of Ecclesiastical Power, 436.-The observance of Christmas, 411, 419,451 ; and of the Christian Sabbath, 287, 455, 542.-Baptismal Regeneration, 395.-Conformity, 543.
The principles of Toleration, 415, 448, 452, 607, 692, 704, 707, 729, 730, 783, 791, 796, 800.—Those who oppose Popery are the greatest lovers of Toleration, 783.–Fundamental Articles, 496, 5.52, 762 772.—Those of the Bremen Divines at the Synod of Dort, 577..Vile sycophancy and intolerance of the Romish Church, 496, 558–61, 621, 624, 628.
Some of the retributive acts of Divine Providence are briefly pointed out in the notes, pp. 302, 339, 512, 466, 528, 595, 706, 788, 826-8.-Confirmation of some of Mr. Mede's conjectures, 508.-Socinianism, 641—3, 782.--Progress of Independency in England, 451.
In addition to the notes now specified, some of which will be found extremely long, others are interspersed throughout the work concerning Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Rivet, Du Moulin, Servetus, Beza, Milletiere, Paræus, Dr. John Owen, Robert Baylie, Philip Nye, Judge Jenkins, Casaubon, Junius, Lightfoot, Selden, Sampson Johnson, Amyraut, Courcelles, John Goodwin, Feuardent, Marets, Bogerman, Du Plessis Marly, Daillée, Cassander, Castellio, Prince Rupert, Duke of Hamilton, Hugh Peters, Dr. Samuel Ward, Bishop Morley, Philip Henry, John
Archer, Joshua Sprigge, Bishop Burnet, Dr. Prideaux, Professor Poelenburgh, Archbishop Sheldon, Dr. Lloyd, Samuel Hartlib, Bishop Andrews, Herbert Thorndyke, Bishop Bedell, Gomarus, Bishop Morton, Gondemar, Archbishop Tillotson, Oliver Cromwell, Gerard Brandt, Archbishop Abbot, Martinius, Crocius, De Barneveldt, Chancellor Oxenstern, Gustavus Adolphus, Prince Maurice, Episcopius, Louis the Thirteenth, Sir Richard Browne, Peter De Marca, Bishop Atterbury, Vossius, Duke of Buckingham, Bishop Juxon, the Archbishop of Cologne, Dr. Walter Balcanqual, Archbishop Dawes, Dr. Hoe Van Henegg, Bishop Hoadly, the Elector of Saxony, John Durie, Tobias Conyers, Dr. Henry More, Bishop Fleetwood, Samuel Wesley, Sir Henry Wotton, &c. &c.
Numerous extracts are also given, in the form of explanatory notes, from BRAY's Life of Evelyn, Twells's Life of Dr. Pocock, Fell's Life of Dr. Hammond, Bishop Hall's Hard Measure, Lord Clarendon's Life by Himself, Bates's Lives, Isaac Walton's Lives, Parr's Life of Archbishop Usher, Jackson's Life of John Goodwin, Bishop Heber's Life of Jeremy Taylor, and other authentic and creditable biographical Memoirs. Several elucidations have likewise been borrowed from Burrish's Batavia Illustrata, SANDERSON's Preface to his Sermons, Pierce's Divine Philanthropy and Purity Defended, BAKER's Chronicle by Phillips, Dr. HAM. MOND's Sermons, Mede's & Lightfoot's Works, The Letters and Minor Treatises of Grotius, River's Apology, Dury's Prodromus, Sermons preached by various Puritan Divines before the Long Parliament, Twisse's Vindication, Bayle's Dictionary, Mesheim's Ecclesiastical History, Acts of the Dort Synod, Baylie's Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time, CURCELLæus De Jure Dei, BURNET on the Thirty-Nine Articles, fc.
VI.-REMARKS ON SOME OF THOSE WRITERS WHOSE
WORKS I HAVE QUOTED.
1. DR. PETER HEYLIN. It was my intention to have given a concise character of a few of the most important of those works which I have now enumerated; but the execution of this task must be deferred till the publication of the second volume. One writer, however, Dr. Peter Heylin, whose History of the Presbyterians, and Life of Archbishop Laud, I have occasionally quoted, deserves in this place a brief notice. It has been said of him, “that, in some things, he was too much a party-man, to be an Historian :" He was undoubtedly a warm writer, yet in general exceedingly correct in his relation of matters of fact, and very sincere even on those doctrinal topics in which I conceive him to have been in error. But with
all his defects of temper, and his obviously low views of the economy of God's grace, I prefer his testimony, on every affair of importance, to that of his virulent revilers; some of whom, though eulogized as “moderate men,” I have found to be guilty of the vilest misrepresentations.
I know only of a single fact in which Dr. Heylin's information is proved to have been essentially erroneous, and that is, the conversation which he reports between Archbishop Laud and "the EverMemorable Hales of Eton,” and in which the latter is said to have been reclaimed from the errors of Socinianism. Mr. Des Maizeaux, in his “ Historical and Critical Account”. of that great man, has very satisfactorily controverted Dr. Heylin's premises and conclusion: Yet, after all, the two Socinian publications, of which Hales had then been wrongfully considered as the author, afforded strong grounds for Heylin's assertion. To those who have perused the collection of letters in PARR's Life of Archbishop Usher, (Letter 181,) and similar publications, it will be unnecessary to say, that one of these pamphlets (written by Stegmau, a Socinian Minister,) was charged to the account of John Hales. The other, written by Przipcovius, a Polish Knight and a great Unitarian, was also ascribed to him by common report; and in the virulent pamphlets and minor Church-histories of that period, his Patron the Archbishop was indirectly assailed as giving some encouragement to noted heretics. Knowing all this, Dr. Heylin, who appears to have been made very impere fectly acquainted with the substance of their conversation, naturally inferred that it had been on the charge of Socinianism then current against Hales, and seized that opportunity for vindicating the eminent Prelate against Socinian imputations.
The following paragraph from “ the Life of Lord CLARENDON," who likewise relates, in a different manner, the very interesting conversation which passed between him and the Archbishop, is in reality somewhat confirmatory of Heylin's suspicions : " He was chaplain in the house with Sir Dudley Carleton, Ambassador at the Hague in Holland, at the time when the Synod of Dort was held, and so had liberty to be present at the consultations in that Assembly; and bath left the best memorial behind him of the ignorance, and passion, and animosity, and injustice of that convention; of which he often made very pleasant relations, though at that time it received too much countenance from England. He would never take any cure of souls, and was a great contemner of money; yet, besides his being very charitable to all poor people even to liberality, he had made a greater and better collection of books than were to be found in any other private library that I have seer; as he had sure read more, and carried more about him in his excellent memory, than any man I ever knew, my Lord Falkland only excepted, who I think sided him. He had, --whether from his natural temper and constitution, or from his long