« PreviousContinue »
already made mention; and his correspondence with the Rev. Joseph Mede on this subject is introduced (pp. 494-546,) with the ulterior view of affording my readers a good opportunity of forming a judgment concerning the alleged innovations by Archbishop Laud in the public worship of the church. Mr. Mede had publicly defended bowing towards the altar, and other rites revived by Bishop Andrews, (p. 532,) long before Laud had attained any influence at Court: In the letters, therefore, which passed between him and Dr. Twisse, both of whom were accounted more excellent and moderate than their cotemporaries, the case of reputed novel ceremonies is discussed with the greatest coolness ; and every thinking man will soon decide for himself, whether those innocent observances deserved to be represented in such an obnoxious light as they have generally been, or to be charged exclusively to the black account of one to whom they do not appertain. Mr. Mede's testimony on these topics is the more
valuable, because he is generally depicted by modern Dissenters cas A PURITAN, though, by a perusal of the notes in pages 741,
487, and 525, the reader will 'feel some hesitation about the particular class under which he ought to be ranged.
All 'this discussion about rites is preliminary to a history of FUNDAMENTAL ARTICLES of Religion, the devising of which in that age engrossed the attention of the greatest and most philan. . thropic individuals in different Protestant communities. Omitting · particular mention of those devised by the enlightened Catholics, Cassander, Erasmus, Wikelius, and others; I commence (pp. 546 4-809,) with a notice of the acts of pacification by Arminius, Du Moulin, M. A. De Dominis, Grotius, Laud, Dury, and Mede, and conclude with those of Cromwell's Coinmittee of Fundamentalists, the Officers of the Republican Army, Milton, and the new race of Arminians in the depressed Church of England who were reproachfully called “ Latitudinarians,” but whose liberal and benevolent principles had taken deep root during the Inter'regnum. I have been purposely diffuse on this important topic, that I might demonstrate the extreme aversion of all the high Predestinarians to such broad foundations of Christian concord, and might contrast the narrowness of the most famous of the Calvinistic schemes of FUNDAMENTALS with those of the more liberal Arminians. It was with a feeling of well-founded cons fidence, that I knew I could take hold of one of the most objec. tionable of the reputed English Arminians, Archbishop Laud, and could prove the great superiority of his benevolent views to those of the most admired of his Calvinistic cotemporaries. Like every youthful student who knows nothing of Layd except what the most popular of our historians have delivered,* I had imbibed
• Thus, for instance, the Rev. John Wesley, with whose writings I was familiar when quite a boy, gave, in 1777, the members of the Established
early prejudices against him, and considered the following: description of him and of his noble predecessor on the scaffold, though the composition of an eminent writer, as greatly overcharged : “ The two ministers that stood in the gap betwixt the “ conspiracy and the government, (and who were only cut off, " as appeared by the sequel, to clear the passage to the King “ himself,) were the Earl of Strafford and Archbishop Laud: So “ that their first attack was upon the Earl, and their next upon " the Archbishop, under the notion of evil councillors. Upon the « common charge of Popery and ARBITRARY PROCEEDINGS, their “ impeachments were carried on by tumults; and these brave “men were rather baited to death by beasts, than sentenced with “any colour of law or justice: And as they lived, so they died, “the resolute assertors of the English Monarchy and Religion6 the Earl of Strafford in May, 1041, but the Archbishop was kept “ languishing in the Tower till January, 1644. And their crime
Church, and then the Dissenters, the following wholesome advice and reproof, in his Calm Address to the Inhabitants of England, on the subject of the American war:“ How is it that any of you, who fear God, are not afraid to speak evil of dignities, to speak evil of the Ruler of your people, as well as of those that are put in authority under him? Do you believe, that Michael the archangel durst not bring a railing accusation against Satan? And dare you bring or retail a hundred railing accusations against your lawful governors ? Now, at least, humble yourselves before God, and act more suitably to your character. Wherever you are, far from countenancing, repress the base clamours of the vulgar, remembering those awful words, If any man among you seemeth to be religious, (rather be ever so religious,) and bridleth not his tongue, that man's religion is vain.
“ Are not you, who DISSENT from the Established Church, in whatever kind or degree, particularly concerned to observe this, for wrath, as well as for conscience suke? Do you imagine, there are no High Churchmen left? Did they all die with Dr. Sacheverel ? Alas ! how little do you know of mankind! Were the present restraint taken off, you would see them swarming on every side, and gnashing upon you with their teeth. There would hardly need a nod from that sacred person, (King George the Third, whom you revile, or at least lightly esteem. Were he to stand neuter, in what a condition would you be, within one twelve-months ? If other Bonners and Gardiners did not arise, other Lauds and SHELDONS would, who would either rule over you with a rod of iron, or drive you out of the land. Know the blessings you enjoy. Let common sense restrain you, if neither religion nor gratitude can. Beware of the wrath of a patient man. Dare not again to open your lips against your sovereign- (shall I say, 1-lest he fall upon you ? No; but lest he cease to defend you. Then, farewell to the liberty you now enjoy!” · I hope some of the succeeding pages of this volume will shew, that Archbishop Laud was deserving of a better and milder station, than that which is here assigned to him and to Sheldon : Both of them lived in troublous times, and had to restrain some most impetuous spirits.
But this extract is exceedingly valuable on another account: It exhibits the personal wishes and feelings of his late Majesty, on the subject of an extended Toleration. None of the biographers of King George the Third has given a prominence to this lovely trait in his character and conduct, though it is that for which all the godly part of the kingdom long held his royal name in veneration. By a diligent author, it would be found, that the materials are neither few nor meagre which serve to elucidate this interesting portion of religious history.
* was not, in truth, their being men of arbitrary principles them. “selves, but for being the opposers of those principles in others.”— But my subsequent researches convinced me of my mistake, and taught me to venerate, though not always to admire, several of those sterner virtues which the state of this nation and of Europe called into exercise, and which have generally been exaggerated to the Archbishop's prejudice. But I refrain from all further allusions to this great Prelate, as I shall have another opportunity of adverting to him, and “ to his good friend Hugo Grotius," in a succeeding part of this Introduction.-As the doctrine of FUNDAMENTALS and of a GENERAL RELIGIOUS PacifiCATION could not be introduced without some account of these two great men, and of the state of Europe at that period, I have made a large digression, (pp. 582—766,) in which I have presented the reader with many interesting particulars respecting Laud and Grotius, which have not been given by any preceding English writer.
The remaining contents of Appendix D, (pp. 800—830,) are soon specified. A brief allusion to the adulterated species of Arminianism which was imbibed and propagated by many of our English divines at the period of the Restoration, and which gave a tone to the public ministry of the English Clergy for some years afterwards, and three extracts, from Professor Poelenburgh, Bishop Fleetwood, and Bishop Atterbury,—conclude the volume.
The various subjects which I have now cursorily enumerated, are further illustrated and explained by notes, consisting of slight original observations, but principally of extracts from scarce pamphlets and treatises Several of these elucidations are now, for the first time, translated into our language. When I commenced this part of my undertaking, I resolved to borrow no part of my relation of facts from the histories and remarks of Clarendon, Burnet, Eachard, Grey, Collier, Neal, Walker, Calamy, or from the pamphlets of L'Estrange, Dr. South, Heylin's Quinquarticular History, or any other similar authority that is supposed to be in the hands of every Englishman, and that might seem to be too partial to one side or to the other. Freed from these tram'mels, and having no worldly consideration whatever to cloud my understanding or to bias my judgment, I have produced a very impartial account of those transactions which I narrate, and a correct exposition of the principles avowed by the chief actors, and generally in their own expressions. I am quite aware, that violent partizans on all sides, who derive their information from more objectionable sources, may not be inclined to concede to me even the small praise of impartiality ; and that I shall be blamed particularly for the strong opinions, to which I have given utterance, in favour of Episcopacy and of the Clergy of the Estab. lished Church. But when the reader has perused the conclusion
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 my 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 very 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 Armi. nianism, 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 Jolin 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 Armini. 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 ;336_341, 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 Arminians ;-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.-Calvinistic 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, 430, 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, 441; his obligations to the Jesuits, 477, 526; and his prophetical enthusiasm, 506, 610, 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, 7549.—Sir Henry Vane's prophecies, 513, 516-8.-Animadversions 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 Tillitson, 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, 634-6, 597, 600.-The family of Vossius, and his invitation to England and Ireland, 659-65.-Female branches of the family De Medicis, :719_731.-An account of Dr. Cosin's Devotions, 502: _The Elector Palatine and the Queen of Bohemia, 611-3, 734.—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