munities from dividing into numerous inefficient branches. Of these liberal and really Catholic tenets, Grotius and Archbishop Laud were the zealous, but not the only promoters. This scheme of Christian pacification, it is seen, did not pretend to abolish the confessions of particular Churches, but to prepare some common ground to be occupied by all Protestants who acknowledged CHRIST JESUS as their Head, and who were willing, on a few well-defined terms, to own their dissenting brethren as members of Christ's body. It had obtained the approbation of nine-tenths of the Protestants of Europe, when, unfortunately, the open and undisguised attempts of the British Calvinists to obtain complete domination over their more moderate brethren marred the whole plan, and reminded the great body of the Lutherans about the dreams of universal empire, in which nearly all the Calvinists in Europe had previously indulged, (pages 246–266) and the realization of which, many of them thought, was then commencing in Great Britain. See the letters of Vossius and Grotius, quoted in pages

To this conclusion of my long yet important notice respecting the generous attempts of the English and some of the Dutch Arminians, which, had I been so inclined, I might have amplified to good effect with quotations from Episcopal divines, the most ample and philanthropic,* I append the following reflections from the Preface to Bishop BURNET's Exposition of the Thirty Nine Articles: "As my small reading had carried me

*The following quotation from one of the numerous productions of an eminent Whig Divine, Bishop Hoadley, whose opinions on this point were rather too diffusive, will afford a fair specimen of the benevolence and phi lanthropy of several of his cotemporaries: The other part of the complaint made by the Bishop of Oxford,] relates to the uniting almost all differing sects in one visible communion. Though I do not call to mind that 1 have expressly and directly laid down any thing to this purpose, yet I cannot forbear to say, Blessed be they who have contributed to so great a work! I will not trouble the Bishop with citations from those many in past ages who have declared their opinions concerning the framing of public offices in such manner, as to admit men of very different opinions into the external communion of the Church. I will not transcribe those known passages of Mr. Hales, or Mr. Chillingworth, in which they have most expressly contended for this. I will only mention two now living, who have spoken as plainly, in general terms, as any upon this subject. The one is the present Right Reverend Lord Bishop of Carlisle, who speaks thus, in his own person: I always did, and always shall, heartily wish; and, if it were in my power, I should endeavour, that all the Liturgies of the Church were reduced to as great a simplicity and pluinness as might be.' The other is our present most Reverend Metropolitan, who declares, in the most general words, that it has never gone well with the Church of Christ, since men have been so narrow-spirited, as to mix the controversies of faith with their public forms of worship; and have made their Liturgies, instead of being offices of devotion to God, become tests and censures of the opinions of their brethren.' I will add to these one more, and that is the Right Reverend he Bishop of Oxford himself, in this very Charge, p. 10: Somewhere or other, there must be a very great fault, when any one of the meanest believers is excluded from communion, who desires to embrace it on the terms which God hath prescribed.''

further in that controversy [concerning Predestination] than in any other whatsoever, both with relation to ancients and moderns, and to the most esteemed books of all different parties,*

To an Arminian, the Bishop's previous recital of the authors, whose works he had consulted, will be interesting: For, with the exception of those adduced in the first paragraph and another individual, all those great men had espoused the benign and scriptural doctrines of General Redemption:-"The first and indeed much the best writer of Queen Elizabeth's time was Bishop JEWELL; the lasting honour of the See in which the providence of God has put me, as well as of the age in which he lived; who had so great share in all that was done then, particularly in compiling the Second Book of Homilies, that I had great reason to look on his works as a very sure commentary on our Articles, as far as they led me. Frota him I carried down my search through REYNolds, Humphreys, Whitaker, and the other great men of that time.

"Our Divines were much diverted in the end of that reign from better enquiries, by the Disciplinarian Controversies; and though what WHITGIFT and HOOKER writ on those heads was much better than all that came after them, yet they neither satisfied those against whom they writ, nor stopped the writings of their own side. But as waters gush in when the banks are once broken, so the breach that these had made proved fruitful. Parties were formed, secular interests were grafted upon them, and new quarrels followed those that first began the dispute. The coutests in Holland con cerning Predes ination drew on another scene of contention among us as well as them, which was managed with great heat. Here was matter for angry men to fight it out, till they themselves and the whole nation grew weary of it. The question about the morality of the Fourth Commandment was an unhappy incident that raised a new strife.-The controversies with the Church of Rome were for a long while much laid down. The Archbishop of Spalato's works had appeared with great pomp in King James's time, and they drew the observation of the learned world much after them; though his unhappy relapse and fatal catastrophe made them to be less read afterwards, than they well deserved to have been.

"When the progress of the House of Austria began to give their neighbours great apprehensions, so that the Protestant religion seemed to come under a very thick cloud; and when, upon that, jealousies began to rise at home in King Charles's reign, this gave occasion to two of the best books that we yet have: The one set out by Archbishop LAUD, writ with great learning, judgment, and exactness: The other by CHILLINGWORTH, writ with so clear a thread of reason, and in so lively a style, that it was justly reckoned the best book that had been writ in our language. It was about the nicest point in Popery, that by which they had made the most proselytes, and that had once imposed on himself, concerning the infallibility of the Church and the motives of credibility.

"Soon after that, we fell into the confusions of civil war, in which our Divines suffered so much, that while they were put on their own defence against those that had broken the peace of the Church and State, few books were written but on those subjects that were then in debate among ourselves, concerning the government of the Church, and our Liturgy and Ceremonies.-The lisputes about the decrees of God were again managed with a new heat. There were also great abstractions set on foot in those times, concerning Justification by Faith; and these were both so subtile, and did seem to have such a tendency not only to Antinomianism, but to a Libertine course of life, that many books were writ on those subjects.-That noble work of the Polyglot Bible, together with the collection of the critics, set our Divines much on the study of the Scriptures, and the Oriental tongues, in which Dr. PocoCK and Dr. LIGHTFOOT were singularly eminent.-In all Dr. HAMMOND'S writings one sees great learning; and a solid judgment; a just temper in managing controversies; and, above all, a spirit of true and primitive piety, with great application to the right understanding of the Scriptures, and the directing of all to practice.-Bishop PEARSON on the

so I weighed the [seventeenth] Article with that impartial care which I thought became me; and have taken a method which is, for aught I know, new, of stating the arguments of all sides with so much fairness, that those who knew my own opinion in this point, have owned to me, that they could not discover it by any thing that I had written. They were inclined to think that I was of another mind than they took me to be, when they read my arguings of that side. I have not, in the explanation of that article, told what my own opinion was; yet here I think may be fitting to own, that I follow the doctrine of the Greek church, from which St. Austin departed, and formed a new system. After this declaration, I may now appeal both to St. Austin's disciples and to the Calvinists, whether I have not stated both their opinions and arguments, not only with truth and candour, but with all posssible advantages.

it

"One reason among others that led me to follow the method I have pursued in this controversy, is to offer at the best means I can for bringing men to a better understanding of one another, and to a mutual forbearance in these matters. This is at present the chief point in difference between the Lutherans and the Calvinists. Expedients for bringing them to an union in these heads, are projects that can never have any good effect: Men whose opinions are so different, can never be brought to an agreement:* Creed, as far as it goes, is the perfectest work we have. His learning was profound and exact, his method good, and his style clear; he was equally happy both in the force of his arguments, and in the plainness of his expressions.

"Upon the restoration of the Royal Family and the Church, the first scene of writing was naturally laid in the late times; and with relation to conformity.-But we quickly saw that Popery was a restless thing, and was the standing enemy of our church: So as soon as that shewed itself, then our Divines returned to those controversies; in which no man bare a greater share, and succeeded in it with more honour, than Bishop STillingfleet, both in his Vindication of Archbishop LAUD, and in the long-continued disputes concerning the idolatry of the Church of Rome. When the dangers of Popery came nearer us, and became sensible to all persons, then a great number of our Divines engaged in those controversies. They writ short and plain; and yet brought together, in a great variety of small tracts, the substance of all that was contained in the large volumes writ both by our own Divines and by foreigners. There was in these a solidity of argument, mixed with an agreeableness in the way of writing, that both pleased and edified the nation; and did very much confound, and at last silence, the few and weak writers that were of the Romish side. The inequality that was in this contest, was too visible to be denied; and, therefore, they who set it first on foot, let it fall: For they had other methods to which they trusted more, than to that unsuccessful one of writing. In those treatises, the substance of all our former books is so fully contained, and so well delivered, that in them the doctrines of our Church, as to all controverted points, is both clearly and copiously set forth."

*When the Elector Palatine, Charles Lewis, was through the interest of Cromwell restored to a part of his hereditary dominions, (p. 613,) he proved himself to be well acquainted with the original cause of the misfortunes of his ancestors, who, by banishing the Lutherans out of the Palatinate, (p. 751,) and by offending the same denomination of Christians in Bohemia, p. 244,) had excited the indignation of all moderate men, and had communicated an almost incontrollable impulse to Calvinism, the vibrations of

And the settling on some equivocal formularies, will never lay the contention that has arisen concerning them: The only possible way of a sound and lasting reconciliation, is to possess both parties which did not cease till they had affected one-half of the Protestants of Europe, and involved them in long and sanguinary conflicts, either foreign or domestic. In avoiding the indiscretions of which his predecessors had been guilty, he adopted an opposite course of conduct to theirs, and tried to effect a reconciliation between those two religious parties. No one will be surprised at the judicious manner in which this attempt was made, when he is told, that the young Elector had, during his residence in England, been on terms of intimacy with Dury. In the re-settlement of the University of Heidelberg, he called to his assistance the famous Hottinger of Zurich; of whom his biographer says: "At that period [1656] he was engaged in devising means for the establishment of concord between the Calvinists and Lutherans, a project which was then zealously patronized by the most serene Prince. Hottinger, therefore, proposed some pacific theses, in the discussion of which this object might be promoted; but the event did not answer the anticipations and warm wishes of all good men. This union was prevented by the same obstacles as those which formerly impeded it,party animosities that cannot be reckoned pious, and the itching of some dispositions that feed on quarrels much in the same way as the cameleon feeds on wind."-On this subject Frederick Spanheim, who was the first Professor at Heidelberg after that city was restored to the Elector, communicates the following information: "The manner in which the Leipsig Conference was conducted, during this century, in the year 1631, where the whole dissension returned to the three points, was the same as that adopted by Charles Lewis, the Elector Palatine, at the time when I was Professor at Heidelberg, whose pacific purpose was completely overturned in 1658, principally by a virulent book in German, the production of J. C. Danhawerus" who was the Lutheran Professor at Strasburg.

6

On this passage Bayle observes: "It is certain that a union would have been long since produced between the Lutherans and Calvinists, had it depended on PRINCES; but as that affair depends upon the DIVINES, it never yet could be effected, and in all probability it never will. It is not I who form this judgment in general of these gentlemen; it is one of their own body, and he who can best speak of it from experience. He [Peter JURIEU in his treatise De Pace ineunda] says, that the secular magistrates, and not the clergy, ought to be the principal parties to commence and conduct this union. For while the Divines are exceedingly tenacious of their own opinions, they manifest little equity for those of others. In the conferences which shall be held for producing peace, disputes eoncerning the truth of the dogmas must, on no account, be permitted: For single combats do not terminate wars, but rather foment them. In such discussions, peace is not the thing sought, but victory No one will ever confess that he is conquered; and if he perceive himself to be overthrown or laid prostrate, so far is he from being rendered more inclinable to concord, that, on the contrary, angry and indignant, he retires from the contest with the greater ferocity; because, in the issue of it, he has not been prosperous.-Let the Divines be the advocates, and plead; let the magistrates hear, and act as judges under the authority of Princes. But, prior to any disputation, the Divines of both parties should bind themselves by oath to yield obedience to the judgment finally pronounced by the representatives of their Princes, and not to engage in any hostile attempts against the peace which shall be concluded.' """-See the Works of Arminius, vol. i, p. 454.

This, at first sight, appears strange language to be employed by a French Protestant minister, who was compelled, by the Revocation of the Edict of Nantz, to become a refugee in Holland. But, though both he and Bayle were favourable to the most enlarged RELIGIOUS TOLERATION, they, in common with all sincere friends of this MEASURE, perceived a still greater beauty in CONCORD or UNITY, wherever it was to be attained on the liberal plan devised by Grotius, Laud, Mede, Dury, and other benevolent paci

with a sense of the force of the arguments that lie on the other side; that they may see they are no way contemptible, but are such as may prevail on wise and good men: Here is a foundation laid for charity: And if, to this, men would add a just sense of the difficulties on their own side, and consider that the ill consequences drawn from opinions are not to be charged on all that hold them, unless they do likewise own those consequences; then it would be more easy to agree on some ficators. In the greater part of the European States, and especially in those whose principal resources lie in agriculture, the multiplication of small sects and "the itch for separation" might have been prevented, at the commencement of the Reformation, by the strong measures to which Jurieu has here alluded, and to which recourse was had in the kingdoms of Denmark and Sweden, and in some of the larger German States. Whoever has perused the life of that renowned patron of General Redemption, the great and good HEMINGIUS, and is acquainted with the attempts to introduce into Denmark the Lutheran Book of Concord at that early period of the Reformation, will know that the uniformity,-both in worship and generally in doctrine, through all the regions of the ancient Scandinavia,-which, according to Dr. E. D. Clarke's Travels, exists at this day in its original and engaging simplicity, was not accomplished without great difficulty, and could not at first be maintained without a degree of severity, which infringed the rights of private judgment. That difficulty is vastly augmented in those States in which schisms and sects have been suffered to abound. A fair specimen of which may be seen in the long and fruitless effects of successive Prussian Princes, to effect a reconciliation between the Lutherans and Calvinists in their dominions. Though scarcely any other than these two religious denominations are recognized in Prussia, such was the pertinacious bigotry of the Divines of both parties that, only during the reign of the present monarch, have they been compelled to live in amity, and mutually to admit each other's members to the holy rites of christian communion at the sacred altar of their common Lord and Saviour. (See page 250.) Such a plan of mutual communion, in a commercial country like Great Britain and Holland, would be still more difficult of accomplishment, if not totally impracticable, after the sectarian spirit had been allowed for a length of time to indulge itself, as I shall have occasion to shew in the second volume, when I shall also briefly describe some of the salutary effects which commerce has produced on the frame of civil and religious society. In this latter view Bishop Burnet's reasoning in the text is exceedingly appropriate, and not at variance with that of Bayle and Jurieu.

After the labours of John Goodwin, one of the first and most liberal works in favour of such religious toleration in England as we now enjoy, was composed by an Arminian, the famous Dr. Jeremy Taylor, concerning whom Bishop Heber most justly observes :

"Of the importance and value of his admirable Liberty of Prophesying at the time of its first appearance, some opinion may be formed by recollecting, that it is the first attempt [in Great Britain] on record to conciliate the minds of Christians to the reception of a doctrine, which, though now the rule of action professed by all christian sects, was then, by every sect alike, regarded as a perilous and portentous novelty. There is abundant proof, indeed, in the history of the times in which Taylor lived, and of those which immediately preceded him, that (much as every religious party, in its turn, had suffered from persecution, and loudly and bitterly as each had, in its own particular instance, complained of the severities exercised against its members,) no party had yet been found to perceive the great wickedness of PERSECUTION in the abstract, or the moral unfitness of TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT as an engine of religious controversy. Even the sects who were themselves under oppression, exclaimed against their rulers, not as being persecutors at all, but as persecuting those who professed the truth; and each sect, as it obtained the power to wield the secular weapon, esteemed it also a duty, as well as a privilege. not to bear the sword in vain.'