never since answered by the Presbyterians, either Scots or English. Next after, comes the Directory, or new form of worship,* accompanied with an ordinance of the Lords and Commons on the third of January, for authorising the said Directory or form of worship; as also, for suppressing the public Liturgy, repealing all the acts of Parliament which confirmed the same, and abrogating all the ancient and established festivals,† that so Saint

"What do they mean by Directory for Worship &c. Do they intend thereby some established set rule for publique prayer, administration of the sacraments, and other parts of God's worship and service? Believe me, then, they did wisely in expressing their meaning in such an unwonted phrase; for otherwise their covenant, for this very clause sake, would never have been indured by thousands that were most greedy in swallowing it. And here I cannot but smile to think, how hard the contrivers of this solemn league were put to it to find a title for their new-intended form of worship. They durst not for their ears, those that had any, call it a set form of service or publique prayers and administration of the sacraments; that had come too near the title of the English Common-Prayer Book: and rather than they will make use of that Protestant title, or come near it, they chose to borrow a complete Papist title from Parsons, or Radford, or Peter Camus, or some other of that Romish rabble, (for I cannot recall any other that ever used that title but them,) and call it a Directory for Worship, &c. But how yet to make sense of bringing the Churches of God, &c. to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Directory for Worship, &c. is past my skill. And so much for the nonsense of these words,-a little of their nonequity. What an unjust and unreasonable thing it is, for us of the Churches of England and Ireland, or those of the Church of Scotland, to swear that we 'will indeavour to bring the churches of God in the three Kingdoms, to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion, confession of faith, form of 'church-government,' &c. when the church of Scotland hath a good while since amongst themselves, solemnly covenanted, and sworn in their covenant, subscribed at Edenborough, Anno Dom. 1581, That they will per'severe in the doctrine and discipline of their church, and that they will according to their calling and power defend the same all the days of their life, ' under pain of all the curses in the law, and upon the hazard of body and 'soul in the day of the dreadful judgement.' So that to make good this part of this present league, of bringing the churches of God in all three Kingdoms to a nearer conjunction and uniformity in confession of Faith, and discipline, than they are already in, either they of the church of Scotland must recede from their former vow and covenant in altering their doctrine and discipline, to bring it nearer to ours of the churches of England and Ireland; or else we of the churches of England and Ireland must wholly yield up and submit our doctrine and discipline to be altered according to theirs of the church of Scotland: Both which seem very unjust and unreasonable, especially without any necessary, and indispensible cause shewed why either should be done. For why may not the churches of God in the three Kingdoms, still retain their several distinct confessions of faith, aud forms of worship, &c. which they have ever retained since their several reformations to this present, and that not with a few or small blessings from God attending them, as others of his approving the same? Why should we swear to rob our churches of such justifiable and honourable liberty, which God hath ever indulged his churches in several Kingdoms? Or if we must have but one confession of faith, and form of worship, &c. in all three Kingdoms, why should not ours of the church of England be thought as worthy to be that one, as theirs of the church of Scotland? Ours had the honour to be published to the world and approved by other reformed churches divers years before theirs saw light; and bath, since the publication" of both, had the approbation of more learned and religious men by far than ever theirs had.-The Anti-confederacy, or the Hypocrisy of the late Covenant. 1643.

+To modern readers, who are accustomed to observe the ancient festival of Christmas, the following extracts will sound somewhat harshly.—“ Dec.

Sabbath (as sometimes they called it) might be all in all. The insufficiency of which Directory to the ends proposed in the same, pronounced the weakness of the ordinance which authorised it; and the excellency of the public Liturgy, in all the parts and offices of it, was no less learnedly evinced by Dr. 25, 1654. CHRISTMAS-DAY. No public offices in churches, but penalties on observers, [those who observed the day,] so as I was constrained to celebrate it at home." EVELYN'S Diary.

That violent republican, Edmund Calamy, who was a member of the Westminster Assembly preached a sermon before the House of Lords, from Matt. xii, 25, at their monthly fast in 1644, which was appointed that year to be held on Christmas-day. In reference to this appropriation of the day to fasting instead of feasting, Calamy said: "This day is commonly called the Feast of Christ's Nativity, or Christmas-day; a day that has formerly been much abused to superstition and profaneness. It is not easy to say, whether the superstition has been greater, or the profaneness. I have known some, who have preferred Christmas-day to the Lord's-day. I have known those who would be sure to receive the sacrament upon Christmas-day, though they did not receive it all the year after. Some persons, though they did not play at cards all the year long, yet they must play at Christmas; thereby, it seems, to keep in memory the birth of Christ. This, and much more, hath been the profanation of this Feast. And truly I think, that the superstition and profanation of this day is so rooted into it, as that there is no way to reform it but by dealing with it as Hezekiah did with the brazen serpent. This year, God by his providence has buried this FEAST in a FAST, and I hope it will never rise again. You have set out, right honourable, a strict order for keeping the Fast; and you are here this day to observe your own order, and I hope you will do it strictly. The necessities of the times are great; never more need of prayer and fasting. The Lord give us grace to be humbled on this day of humiliation for all our own and England's sins, and especially for the old superstition and profanation of this Feast!"

*"But these new employments no way diverted him from his former tasks; for, according to his wonted method, he continued to address remedies to the increasing mischiefs of the times, and published the tracts of Superstition, Idolatry, Sins of Weakness and Wilfulness, Death-bed Repentance, View of the Directory; as also, in answer to a Romanist, who, taking advantage of the public ruin, hoped to erect thereon trophies to the Capitol, his Vindication of the Lord Falkland, who was not long before fallen in another kind of war." FELL's Life of Hammond.

In this laudable manner did Dr. Hammond defend the Church against two of its inveterate enemies, the Papist and the revolutionary Presbyterian, For his successful refutation of the latter, his memory has been undeservedly maligned by those individuals who, through their injudicious excuses, "do allow the sanguinary deeds of their fathers." Among these Mr. Orme is very conspicuous: In his Memoirs of Dr. Owen he states the controversy which arose between Hammond and Owen respecting some of the opinions of Grotius then recently deceased; he then informs us, that his hero" successfully establishes what he had formerly asserted" on the subject of dispute; and adds, "Hammond rests the defence of his hero, on his work De Satisfactione,' and on the denial, that his posthumous work on the epistles was not properly his, as it contained sentiments contrary to his declared opinions in his life. Without pronouncing a positive opinion on the subject of dispute, it must be admitted, that Grotius afforded strong reason for suspecting that he either did not believe, or that he considered the doctrines referred to, as of inferior importance. Dr. Hammond, the opponent of Owen on this occasion, was a man of talents, learning, and character. He was one of the warmest defenders of his church, and a most devoted servant of Charles, its royal head; to whose love of power and of Popery, he had no serious objections. His New Testament shews him to have been a considerable critic, though influenced by strong systematic prejudices. His controversial writings discover more of learning than of judgment; and amark a greater deference to the authority of Fathers and Councils, than to that of Christ and his Apostles.'

Hammond, then newly made a Chaplain in ordinary to his Sacred Majesty; which though it might have satisfied all equal and unbiassed men, yet neither learning nor reason could be

This ungracious attack upon Grotius I shall take another opportunity to repel. One circumstance, however, is very evident: Mr. Orme has, in the judgment now delivered, proved himself to be as ill-informed about the facts in the case of Grotius, as about those which relate to Dr. Hammond. His remarks on this great man's" deference to the authority of Fathers and Councils" receive an easy reply in the notes, pages 395 and 430; but when he says, that Dr. Hammond's deference" to these human authorities was "GREATER than to that of Christ and his Apostles," he begins to act the part of a public defamer, and to blame what he does not understand. Mr. Orme, and others of his class, cannot be too frequently reminded, that when the great and learned divines of our Church produce authorities from the Ancient Fathers for the doctrines which they advance, they exhibit the greatest proof of their diffidence and humility in not obtruding upon other men the crude inventions of their own spirits, but those evangelical doctrines which have received the suffrage of Christian Antiquity. When the Denomination of christians to which Mr. O. belongs shall be able to produce and substantiate such a claim as the following, by Bishop Atterbury, he and his friends may be allowed to become competent witnesses in this case, and to deliver their unbiassed testimony respecting the quantum of deference that is due to Fathers and Councils; till that period arrives, he must submit to be told, that, on this subject, "A LITTLE LEARNING is a dangerous thing!" Bishop Atterbury says: "Ye are the sons of a clergy, whose undissembled and unlimited veneration for the holy scriptures hath not hindered them from paying an inferior, but profound regard to the best interpreters of scripture, the primitive writers; in whose works, as none have been more conversant than they, so none have made a better use of them towards reviving a spirit of primitive piety in themselves and others. And their searches and endeavours of this kind have been blessed with a remarkable success: For, as to the earliest and most valuable remains of pure antiquity, (such are those of Barnabas, and Clement, and Ignatius, and Polycarp,) I may safely venture to say, 'that the members of this church have done more towards either bringing them to light, or freeing them from corruption, or illustrating their doctrine, or asserting their authority, than the members of any 'church, or indeed of all the churches in the world."

more

The extracts from Dr. Hammond which have been already quoted, will stand as proofs, that he possessed no mean share of imagination. Concerning this accomplished divine, who is here said to have displayed “ learning than judgment," Mr. Orme further says, "He had no serious objections" to his royal master's "love of power and of Popery." On this point I join issue with Mr. Orme, and challenge him to shew, that Dr. Owen, who is depicted by him as the first and greatest champion of constitutional liberty in England, had at that early period made any such liberal concessions in favour of religious toleration, or had pleaded with such propriety the just liberties of subjects, as Dr. Hammond has done in the porduction against the Papists which Bishop Fell describes at the commencement of this note. Yet this is far from being the sole instance of the doctor's aversion to arbitrary power and Popery.

Few of my readers will require to be told, that, at the commencement of the Civil War, the Papists insinuated themselves as church-members or as preachers among all the new-fangled sects and parties, and inflicted a serious injury on Protestantism, by inculcating this doctrine, "that the only remedy for all existing evils and differences, was, their adherence to an infallible head and guide in matters of faith." Lord Falkland wrote an essay against "the Infallibility of the Church of Rome." A Roman Catholic attempted to refute this able pamphlet in a Treatise Apologetical, in which the following is one of the specious arguments which he employs: "Besides, if we [the Papists] were to yield, to whom were it to be done? There is a world of distracted sectaries now in this kingdom, all sprung from the same roll, or from

heard in the new assembly; or, if it were, the voice thereof was drowned by the noise of the ordinances. For on the 23d of

the rule of faith which is common to you all, of which one sort imagines there is no Papacy, and these were the first ring-leaders of all the rout; another, that there is no episcopacy; a third, that there is no clergy, but that layelders is all in all, and must rule the roast; a fourth, that there is no church nor church-government at all, but that the church is like a school of philosophers, where every man may believe and do what he pleases without being accountable to another or any obligation of conformity: And, peradventure, the inquirer was one of this number, together with his confederate, Mr.Chillingworth; a fifth sort, that there is no Trinity; a sixth, that there is no sacrament, or at least none necessary or effectual. Is it not fit, think you, that these divided christians should come and write laws to others, or punish any man for non-conformity? Nothing more improbable! It is a comedy, to see Dr. Featly a Protestant, and Page a Puritan, make catalogues of heretics; and, when they have done, can find no way whereby to exempt them selves, nor give a reason why they themselves should not be of the number, as much sectaries as any others of the catalogue!"

De

Dr. Hammond engaged in a reply to this Popish performance, and produced his View to some Exceptions, in 1645. The Preface says: "The sad effects of the present differences and divisions of this broken kingdom having made peace, and unity, and infallibility, such precious desirable things, that if there were but one wish offered to each man among us, it would certainly, with a full consent, be laid out on this one treasure, the setting up some Catholic umpire or days-man, some visible, infallible definer of controversies; the pretenders to that infallibility,having the luck to be alone in that pretension, have been looked on with some reverence, and, by those who knew nothing of their grounds or arguments, acknowledged to speak, if not true, yet seasonably; and having so great an advantage upon their auditors, and so a fair probable entrance, by that inlet of their affections, to their minds, they began to redouble their industry, and their hopes; and, instead of the many particulars of the Romish doctrine, for which they were wont to offer proof in the retail, now set all their strength upon this one in gross." scribing the arts of his author, he adds: "By all this, [I am] endeavouring to lay grounds for all men to judge, how little truth there is in that so epidemical persuasion, that there is no middle betwixt asserting an infallible judge and the falling headlong into all the schisms and heresies of this present age. My conscience assuring me, that the grounds on which the established Church of England is founded, are of so rare and excellent mixture, that as none but intelligent truly christian minds can sufficiently value the composition, so there is no other in Europe so likely to preserve peace and unity, if what prudent laws had so long ago designed, they now were able to uphold: For want of which, and which only, it is, that at present the whole fabric lies polluted in confusion and in blood, and hopes not for any binding up of wounds, for restoration of any thing that looks like christian, till the faith of the reformed English have the happiness to be weighed prudently, and, the military sword being timely sheathed, the power and laws of peace be returned into those hands which are ordained by God the defenders of it." He commences the refutation of some of the Papist's arguments in favour of burning heretics, in the following manner : "As for that of burning men here for religion, you seem unwilling to be tried by antiquity in this point, Because,' say you, 'antiquity did not all it might, but left somewhat to posterity to add. Yet, sure, this was a little unlucky that your additions to antiquity should be of this bloody complexion. Christ's addition to the ancients was, to love and bless and pray for enemies, not to retaliate injuries upon any terms: and your improvement of the ancient doctrine and practice is of somewhat a distant making; your Sermon on the Mount, (EBAL, it seems,) to your disciples, is persecuting and massacring of friends which never provoked you, but by not being entirely of your opinion." He concludes his remarks on this part of his adversary's argument, in the following words: "Then, if you will make the comparison to go no farther than ourselves, what shoals of persons. (far enough from the teaching illegal things, even

August, Anno 1645, another ordinance comes thundering from the Lords and Commons, from the more effectual execution of

from teaching at all,) were in Queen Mary's days, whole hecatombs at once, offered up to your fury. So remarkable are your proceedings herein, that Í fear it was not a jest of him that said at Geneva, Servetus occidendus est, ne apud exteros ecclesiæ nostræ male audiant ; That Servetus was to be burnt, that their churches might not hear ill abroad,' that is, that the Papists might not be scandalized; which if it were the consideration that moved in that matter, then have you more blood lying at your door, than what you have spilt; even that which, in care and caution, those, whom you recriminate, shed by your example, and that you might not be scandalized at their mercy and lenity. This were, I confess, an ill excuse to them [the Calvinists] that were so careful to transcribe that bloody lesson, (and which is worse, if you will have mine opinion, they have no better,) but yet will be an argument that you are not over fit to accuse them for it. ERASMUS among you, and CASTELLIO among us, were, about the beginning of the Reformation, very bitter against such dealing. The former you may see in his notes upon St. Jerome, (Ep. ad Læt., t. i, p. 39,) where he can hardly allow them the name of Christians that fight for religion, (kill for religion,) though against the Turk; as if war were wont to make christians, cum ipsi Turcam in pectore geramus,' when the very using of this violence is a prime piece of Tureism. The latter wrote a book on purpose against that practice. I wish the whole christian world of both parties would suffer themselves to be represented by a couple of such meek and honest proxies. Be you pleased to convert as many as you can to the doctrine of neither killing nor damning, and I will promise you to do the like; and that will be better employment for us than this debate. And, because examples are the most popular arguments, I will help you to one of this nature and leave you to apply it: Nero went through Greece a-contending in the Musica Certamina, with all that pretended to that skill. If he had the better of it, he was crowned; if not, he took care that they that had the better of him were put to death. The issue of it was, that they that had skill did on purpose play as ill as they could; he conquered wherever he came, was crowned when he was there, and, when he was gone, was counted a madman."

On the subject of toleration, his sentiments are thus on record against his Popish antagonist: "Your restraint or exception is, that where a kingdom is in a peaceable possession of Catholic religion, there it is no cruelty to in'flict these punishments on the teachers of new doctrines.'-And for this, you. say, there is reason, which cannot probably be contradicted; but you are so very uncourteous and contemptuous to us as not to think us worthy to partake of the least syllable of such reason, unless that must go for one,— that wicked men aim at temporal contents, and are consequently with-held by temporal punishments,' which shall be acknowledged a reason, when difference in opinion appears to be an impiety of so much design, and when all whom you call heretics, are, by you, proved to be worms of the earth, deep worldly designers also. For truly, I confess, to all those things which are committed by any who may justly be presumed to commit them against conscience, for some worldly interest, I should give my willing suffrage that some temporal bitterness should be apportioned; that so seeing their error, and finding temporal pains instead of temporal advantages to be their portion, they may be disciplined to better and more honest thoughts. Nay, if the doctrines tend to liberty, I mean either as Mahomet's did to all kind of voluptuous living, or that other liberty, the shaking off the yoke of civil obedience to the magistrate set over them by God, (of which some of your friends, and some others that call themselves reformed, but in my opinion are very far from it, have been guilty,)—it is then lawful to co-erce such innovators, if the prudence of the state shall think fit. But difference in opinion, (though it be in a kingdom never so peaceably possest of the Catholic religion,) if it. tend not to any of these dangers, nor be convincible of those impieties and designs, WILL BY NO REASON OR CONSEQUENCE BE INVOLVED IN THAT NUMBER. His adversary endeavoured to give a less exceptionable view of his sentiments, by saying, " My sense is, that religion may not be PLANTED by arms,