*

reasonable to suppose, that his plan for converting the Papists and ameliorating their condition, will be viewed with complacency: by modern Calvinists, many of whom are violent sticklers for what is commonly styled CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.†

The sentence, therefore, on which I have bestowed these prolix animadversions, would be far more correct, if it were thus expressed: "At the decisive "crisis of the Civil War in England, CALVINISM went along with sedition, fanaticism, innovation, democracy, oppression, licentiousness, and disorder;— "while ARMINIANISM went along with loyalty to the lawful sovereign, "enlarged toleration in doctrinal matters, veneration for the ancient laws "and institutions of the kingdom, the consolidation of Christianity, and a "studied regard to the important interests of the Church Universal; the "great body of English Arminians being generally as favourable to the due "liberty of the subject as to the just rights of the monarch."

I have shewn, in page 550, what were the real views of Grotius respecting the Papists, both in early life and in his old age. And in some of the intermediate notes (619–630) I have elucidated his endeavours to destroy the increasing influence of Popery, by his pacific method of infusing into the diseased body the only means of a radical cure,-the introduction of purer and more scriptural principles." Archbishop Laud's endeavours were of the same healing complexion, and had a similar benevolent direction. But the Church of Rome was then too crafty to admit of renovating medicines, and to this day she manifests the same politic reluctance.

I can easily understand the policy of those consistent advocates of Catholic Emancipation, who invent a plausible pretext for an indirect vet "feasible scheme of Protestant inoculation," for conveying into the body of the Romish Church healing and renovating principles. Thus the late right honourable William Pitt defended an amélioration of the condition of the Irish Papists, on account of the answer which he had received from certain Popish universities respecting the nature of spiritual allegiance to the Roman Pontiff. Such a great and well-informed statesman could not be deceived by that unsatisfactory reply; but he employed it as a politic pretence on which to ground the healing measures which it was his wish to promote. But I never could understand how it was possible for any man, especially a Protestant minister of the gospel, to justify the sweeping kind of Catholic Emanci pation which has lately become popular among certain classes, on the abstract right of every man not only to worship God as he pleases, (which privilege has been long enjoyed by all religious denominations in these realms,) but likewise on that of the eligibility of every man to the highest offices in the State, whatever may be the religious tenets which he professes. When men argue for such an abstract right as the latter, in reference to the Roman Catholics, they argue for " the unalienable right" of a madman to possess a sword, though they know the first purpose to which he applies it will be the destruction of his fellow-creatures. The most noisy of those who reason thus, would, on a change of circumstances, be among the violent remonstrants against the large and noxious concessions to the Papists for which they now contend. We have a remarkable specimen of this convenient tergiversation in EVELYN'S Diary, under the date of October 29, 1687. It is known to every one, that the Common-Hall Orators of the city of London, in the days of Archbishop Laud, talked as largely and astutely against any indulgence to Papists, as some of their successors have argued for it: Yet a few years afterwards, when our Popish King James the Second and his Queen honoured the city with a visit in state, the Pope's Nuncio was invited with their Majesties, as Evelyn quaintly informs us : "An Anabaptist, [Sir John Peake,] "a very odd ignorant person, a mechanic I think, was Lord Mayor. The "King and Queen, and Dadi, the Pope's Nuncio, [were] invited to feast at "Guildhall. A strange turn of affairs, that those who scandalized the "Church of England as favourers of Popery, should publicly invite an emissary from Rome, one who represented the very person of their Antichrist!" Such mutations of conduct as this will be constantly exhibited, in the course of mundane affairs, while men argue and act upon untenable principles.

! Dr. Peter Heylin has, in the Life of Dr. Laud, given an account of the concessions which, according to report, the Archbishop was willing to make to the Roman Catholics; but he

Some of the members of our national Senate have said many things on this subject, which, if the Journals report aright, require great correction: They have referred very fallaciously to the conduct of Holland and the North American Republic, as patterns by which we ought to regulate our practice. The very intolerant enactments of some of the United States of America, preclude any allusion to the whole as a proper guide in this respect. The following information with regard to Holland may, however, be worthy of perusal; it is an extract from Batavia Illustrata, by BURRISH, who says: "There are very great numbers of Roman Catholics in the United Provinces; notwithstanding their religion, as Sir William Temple observes, is not immediately protected by the laws of the Republic. The same author has assigned the reason of this, which is, that the States believe the Roman Catholic religion must make men bad subjects, whilst it teaches them to acknowledge a foreign power superior to that under which they live: and accordingly they have made several penal laws to prevent the growth of it. But as each Province has reserved to herself the liberty of regulating religion within her own jurisdiction, these penal laws of the States General have never been put in execution. In Holland especially, neither prudence nor policy would permit them to exclude so large a body as the Roman Catholics out of the general toleration; and accordingly they are very numerous in the great towns of that Province, where the magistrates give them an equal protection with other dissenters. At Amsterdam, they have not fewer than twenty four chapels. There are great numbers of the same communion in Rotterdam and several other cities. But they are most numerous in the villages, insomuch that a miller, smith, or any other mechanic, being a Protestant, is sure to be a beggar if he settles in the country: For the priests never fail to enjoin their whole communion to neglect him. This perhaps may seem strange to the English reader, who considers Holland as a Reformed country, and a principal bulwark of the Protestant Religion: but I speak upon good grounds, and, amongst many proofs which I might bring of the truth of what I advance, I choose to instance the Remonstrance made to the States General, in 1725, by the deputies of the general Synod, who represented the growth of Popery in the most pathetic terms, and affirmed, that since the year 1650, the number of Roman Catholics, in the seven provinces, was increased three hundred and fifty thousand, of which they had authentic proofs. This is plain evidence both of their great numbers, and the assiduity of the priests in their profession: For, considering how many of both sexes the monasteries and nunneries take off who engage in vows of celibacy and virginity, and that great numbers actually leave the United Provinces yearly upon these accounts, to settle in the religious houses of the adjacent countries; it will be difficult to account for so large an augmentation, without the help of new conversions. As necessary, however, as it may seem to restrain the growth of Popery, it would be difficult if not impossible to effect it without some degree of persecution; and therefore the States will act in it with the utmost caution. But were they less delicate, in vain are penal laws whilst the city and village schouts remain the overseers and prosecutors of criminal affairs; for these will ever dispense with the practices of the priests for a sum of money, which they are always in a condition to furnish upon such an occasion."

Without any allusion to these mal-practices in the Dutch administration of justice, which will find no parallel in Ireland, we may advert to the principle of Popish caste which pervades the whole of that intolerant system wherever it is allowed to hold dominion over the consciences of the populace, If these arts of exclusion were practised in a country in which Popery received only a limited toleration, it may not seem difficult to imagine the degree of tyranny exercised by the Popish ecclesiastics over the Irish people, who are involved in ignorance. Yet the enormities conceived by the most inventive imagination, will scarcely equal the real acts of tyranny from that impure source, which are conspicuous in Ireland, even at this enlightened period.

relates this affair in a manner very common with him when he had no certain data upon which to proceed. However, if the

The following quotation from Dr Gauden was published under the Protectorate, and faithfully depicts the dangers that accrue both to princes and people when no such bulwarks are raised against Popery as those which the Church of England affords. Though at that period through Cromwell's prohibition they were rendered inefficacious, yet, in the hands of able episcopal divines, they have in more than one important crisis of our history proved under God the real defence of the nation against Popery. This quotation likewise confirms the account which Burrish gives of the Dutch mode of tolerating the Papists: "Since experience shews us in England, that many subjects, by the scandal of our divisions, are turned Atheists, Papists, Socinians, Anabaptists, Familists, Seekers, Ranters, Quakers, any thing, yea nothing as to true religion, which consists in piety, equanimity, charity, the love of God and our neighbour, what shall hinder those that hereafter may be in sovereign power, and exposed to many temptations, to take the same freedom when they list, and to profess Popery or any thing when religion is left to their choice and indifferency,-there being no public worship, catechism, articles or canons, to which all agree as the card and compass of religion, by which both prince and people may safely and unanimously steer their course towards heaven in a christian consent and harmony, [and which would be] much more punctual and explicit than that is of owning only one God, which the Turks do, and one Lord Jesus Christ, which all heretics and schismatics do. Which sad fate of a prince and people, who are every day to seek and choose or change their religion, cannot befal England without sore conflicts and many bloody bickerings; the temper of the English being not so dull and phlegmatic and overawed, as that which possesseth some Dutchmen and Almaines [Germans], whose zeal for trade and gain (besides their social drinking, which begins and ends all their differences,) makes them more capable to endure different professions of religion among them, so far as they do not endanger the civil peace, nor obstruct their blessed commerce. Yet even these churches and states have some settled form and profession of religion in doctrine, worship, and discipline."

Among the numerous periodical pamphlets of a salutary description which are now published at a low price every week, I am glad to find a popular abridgment of Fox's Book of Martyrs, which will serve to counteract in the public mind that spurious kind of liberality towards modern Papists to which I have adverted at the commencement of this note. On this subject Dr. WORDSWORTH has observed, with great truth, in the preface to his Ecclesi astical Biography: "I am not ignorant of what has been said also by Dr. John Milner's predecessors, in the same argument, by Harpsfield, Parsons, and others. But these writings have not proved, that Johu Fox is not one of the most faithful and authentic of all historians. We know too much of the strength of Fox's book, and of the weakness of those of his adversaries, to be further moved by Dr. John Milner's censures, than to charge them with falsehood. All the many researches and discoveries of later times, in regard to historical documents, have only contributed to place the general fidelity and truth of Fox's melancholy narrative on a rock which cannot be shaken.'

No one has stated "the continual plots and attempts of the Romanists against the established church and government of England, ever since the Reformation," with greater brevity and clearness than Sir W. Dawes, Bart. afterwards Lord Archbishop of York, who tells us, in "a Sermon preached at St. Mary's church in Cambridge, on the 5th of November, 1705 :"

"What endeavours did the Romanists use, (Pope Clement the Eighth by his Bulls, and the priests and other his creatures, by the influence which they had over any of the subjects of England,) to hinder King James's accession to our throne? And when they found that that would not do, they immediately contrived a desperate design for seizing the King and Prince Henry his son, even before his coronation. Which failing likewise, they soon contrived another, which they thought it was not possible should miscarry, the Gun-powder Treason Plot.-A plot so base, so barbarous, so

áccount of those concessions were correct, every man who is familiar with the progress of Lutheranism in Germany, will perceive, that they do not yield so much to the Roman Catholics devilish in all its circumstances as hardly any age or history can parallel; and withal so cunningly contrived, so secretly carried on, so plentifully encouraged by those who pretend to have the keys of heaven in their keeping, that, had not the special providence of God interposed for its discovery, we, in all probability, had not been here this day to worship God in the pure way of the Church of England: Nay, perhaps the Reformation all over Europe had been, long before this time, rooted up and destroyed.

"In King Charles the First's reign, when the Papists boasted most of their loyalty, and when, to do them right, many of them did shew themselves better than the principles of their religion in this respect, (Oh that they would do so in many more!)-even then, I say, we are not to learn, who first fomented the war in Scotland, even an holy Cardinal, [Richelieu]; who inflamed the troubles in Ireland, by a most horrid massacre of the Protestants; who conspired to take away the King's and Archbishop's life in England; who acted among the rebels in disguise; who kept a council at London and transmitted intelligence to Rome; and by whom it was resolved, that the King's death was for the good of the Catholic cause. Lastly, who submitted to, courted and fawned upon the usurped powers, and gave them to understand, that they might be much surer of them than of the Prelatic party. "All the reign of King Charles the Second, how were we continually alarmed with fears and apprehensions of Popish conspiracies! What shrewd suspicious circumstances at least were there, that the Papists had had a hand in the firing of London! What plain proof of their designs upon the King's life, and the subversion of our religion and government! And when, at last, that unhappy prince began to open his eyes, and see the danger which he was in from them, a sudden, seasonable death for them, not very like a natural one, sealed up his eyes for ever.

"I need say very little of the next reign: POPERY and ARBITRARY GOVERNMENT were then barefacedly forcing themselves in upon us : And this learned body especially, as also her sister of Oxford, had their rights, liberties, properties, and (above all,) their most holy religion, invaded with so much violence, and were put into such imminent danger of losing all that was most dear and valuable to them, that it would be a severe and intolerable reflexion upon us to speak as if we had the least need to be reminded of that time. "King William's reign was one constant struggle against Popery and arbitrary government, both dangerously threatened by a zealous bigot to both, -the French King! And when the Papists found that they could not be too hard for him in open combat, how pitifully, how basely did they contrive a secret assassination! How dishonourably did the French King deny his right and title to the crown, which for a present convenience he had owned; and set up and maintained a pretended prince against him!

"And even now, in the happy reign of our gracious Queen [Anne,] how zealously is the same pretence kept up, and the hopes of the Popish party here buoyed up with it! How vastly doth the number of Popish priests, those sure fore-runners of mischief, increase daily! What more than ordinary care has been taken of late, to reprint old Popish books; to set forth new ones; to give pretended answers to the writings of our most eminent divines against Popery; to draw schemes of catholic unity; and, in one word, to use all means that they dare to seduce her Majesty's subjects from their religion, and then, by necessary consequence, from their duty and allegiance to her!

"I shall only add the secret arts that the Romanists have always used, to divide us amongst ourselves, by keeping up, ever since the Reformation, a pretence of the necessity of a yet farther and purer reformation, and thereby hindering us (Oh that our Dissenters would be so wise, as to see aud disappoint this their contrivance!) from uniting upon one bottom; by creeping into the assemblies of our Dissenters, nay even into their pulpits, and their blowing the coals of contention, between them and the Church of Eng land," &c. Every reader will add, “ May this nation never again be cursed with the prevalence of Popish superstitions and practices!"

as the pious and moderate Melancthon was inclined to concede to the Elector of Cologne. But Dr. Heylin's statement is an

* Grotius often refers to the pacific measures of the benevolent Melancthon. As a practical illustration of his conduct, the following account of his labours in Cologne, undertaken at the request of Herman de Vida, the Popish Archbishop of that city, who had formerly been a persecutor of the Protestants, will be perused with interest:

"He had before desired the Elector of Saxony to send Melanchthon to him. Accordingly, the latter set out about the end of April 1543, and drew up, in conjunction with Bucer, a plan of reformation, which was read to the Archbishop, and examined attentively by him. They gave him up certain things, that were not consonant to the doctrine of the Protestants, and which made Luther complain of Melanchthon and Bucer, as conniving on that occasion. The Elector of Saxony was no less dissatisfied with this conduct, though the Landgrave [of Hesse] told him, that he must not promise himself the work would be completed at once. The Archbishop desired to have all such privileges retained as were not impious, and every order should preserve its privileges. He did not intend to abolish Episcopacy. It was proposed by Herman, as may be gathered from Melanchthon's letters, and as appears more evidently from Chrytæus, book xvi. to retain as many of the ancient ceremonies as had nothing of impiety in them; together with the dignity, liberty, and all the rights and prerogatives of Colleges; in order that there might be an example set of a moderate and pious regulation in his Cathedral. However, the event shewed, that it is extremely difficult to discover a medium where things are so greatly corrupted. Hence all this care and caution proved ineffectual; and the retaining of the pomp destroyed all the increase with regard to the purity of doctrine. In the plan for a reformation published by him, he made no mention either of Luther or the Pope. And he couched his expressions with regard to the Lord's Supper in such a manner, that the Zuinglians might approve of it. Luther approved of his not being mentioned in it; he being sensible that his name might have offended people; but then he condemned the other parts of this cautious conduct, and was furiously enraged against Melanchthon; and would possibly have never been appeased, had not Melanchthon laid the blame on Martin Bucer; and if the Elector of Saxony had not endeavoured to prevent an open rupture between them. 'Melanchthon was not ignorant of Luther's displeasure, which afflicted him to such a degree, that he had thoughts of leaving Wittenberg, if he should be obnoxious to Luther; or that (which indeed was talked of) he should be publicly refuted by him. However, by the pious forecast of the Elector of Saxony, and Pontanus's meditation, Luther was softened, and allowed of 'Melanchthon's excuse, the latter saying, that it was not he, who drew up the article of reformation, with regard to the Sacrament, in Colen; and that he had not concealed from Bucer such particulars as he thought were wanting in it; but that no regard had been shewn to his remonstrance: Hence Luther's anger was turned, with greater fury, against Bucer.' The Popish clergy opposed the plans of the Archbishop, and applied themselves to the Pope and the Emperor. The Pope excommunicated and deposed this eminent ecclesiastic, and by the aid of the Emperor Charles V, compelled him to resign his See in 1547. Seckendorf says: "The various ranks of his subjects declared they would stand by him; and things now wore such a face, as if violence would ensue. However, the good old man complied with the persuasions of the Counts Manderschied and Nuenarius, the chief noblemen in the Archbishopric: Pitying his people, and desirous not to let them be involved in the calamities of war, he submitted spontaneously, and absolved them all from their oath of allegiance. He died six years after, on the thirteenth of August 1552, in the place of his birth; and, as Sleidan observes, of the death he desired: for he had frequently wished, either that he might have an opportunity of propagating the doctrine of the gospel and settling the Churches in his dominions ou a right foundation, or that he might lead a private life. And upon his friends afterwards suggesting to Yy