sures for their mutual defence, but repelled the Swiss from their alliance, on account of the differences subsisting between these reformed and themselves on the subject of the sacrament. It was also a part of their deliberations, to provide a scheme of rites and government for the reformed churches; but this design proved abortive. In the considerations which Mr. Scott has introduced on the question, how far it was lawful for the protestant princes and states to defend themselves, by force of arms, against their superior lord, the emperor, and the decrees of the diet, he remarks, that 'The situation of the princes and states, with respect to the emperor, appears to have differed essentially from that of individual subjects under a persecuting government, whose duty we must, on scriptural principles and from scriptural examples, conclude it to be, to confine themselves to petitions, protestations, and the intercession of more powerful friends, and, where these fail, to commit themselves to God, and patiently suffer for his sake. And on these grounds, even the most conscientious of the princes became satisfied, and Luther concurred with them, that they would be justified in opposing force to force, for the defence of their own rights, and of the civil and religious liberties of their subjects, in case the emperor should attempt to execute, by arms, the edict of Augsburg. Indeed I know not on what ground the contrary principle, that the emperor and the other catholic princes had a right to dictate to the protestant states, and that these were bound either to submit to their dictates, or to bear patiently such punishments as they should be pleased to inflict, can be maintained, except it be the assumption, that the church of Rome was entitled to that universal sovereignty which she claimed, and might require, and could give authority to, all faithful princes to enforce her decrees.-Let not, then, all this be confounded with the case of subjects taking upon them to inquire, whether an actual law is just, before they consent to obey it: the point maintained is, that the German princes were not, in this sense, the emperor's subjects: and likewise the real question here is, not whether an existing law were just, but what the law of the case really was. So much it seemed needful to say, upon what was to the reformers, at this period, a question of deep and painful interest: and I have thought it due to those illustrious characters thus, as I hope, to demonstrate that they were liable to no imputation of treason or rebellion, in determining, if actually attacked, to defend the civil and religious rights of themselves and their subjects by force of arms.' pp. 105, 108, 109. This question is one which offers great difficulties to a serious mind seeking its solution, and, whether considered in the abstract, or in reference to practical exigencies, must produce great hesitation, and probably distrust, whatever be the alternative adopted. Mr. Scott's considerations, however, are VOL. XXVII. N.S. 3 C much less profound and discriminating than the case requires. Granting that independent states may resist by force the actual violence of aggressors, and that the protestant princes were justifiable in opposing their arms to the oppressions of the emperor on civil grounds, the question still occurs, Whether the Christian religion, in the profession of its principles, authorises this kind of defence. Mr. Scott has, it would seem, decided the question affirmatively. But is there that difference which he assumes, between the case of subjects of a particular state, and that of independent states themselves? His decision is given on the ground, that no allegiance was due to the emperor from the protestant princes. But, in religion, do the subjects of any state owe allegiance to civil rulers? Is there really that difference in the cases which is thus supposed? If the princes were justifiable in their resistance because there was no allegiance due from them to the emperor, who had no right to dictate to or control their faith, may not the resistance of individuals, where no allegiance on the ground of religion is due, be lawfully asserted? We do not presume to determine this question, and offer these suggestions merely for the purpose of shewing the very insufficient manner in which the case has been reviewed by Mr. Scott. None of his remarks will satisfy the inquirer who is interested in the discussion of the question, Whether the Christian religion is to be defended, and the religious rights of its professors vindicated against an aggressor, by force. Within a short time of each other, and soon after the diet of Augsburg, died the Swiss reformer Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, and the Elector of Saxony, Of these distinguished persons, Mr. Scott has taken due notice. The former two were coadjutors in the reformation in Switzerland; and Zuinglius is entitled to honourable mention, as having preceded Luther in opposing the errors and corruptions of the Romish church, and in explaining the Scriptures to the people. His notions of reformation were not only formed earlier than Luther's, but they were much more comprehensive, and his views of the Lord's supper were in accordance with the scriptural representation of its nature and design; while Luther held fast, to the end of his life, the grossly erroneous notion of that ordinance which was so consonant to the Romish doctrine, as to be satisfactory to the partizans of popery. It is a painful consideration, that the uncharitable spirit of Luther should have been so strongly directed against these Swiss reformers on account of the more simple view which they had taken of the ordinance he permitted himself to utter remarks of a harsh character on the occasion of their reinoval, for which he has : not escaped the censure of Mr. Scott. Of Zuinglius, his notice might have been enlarged; but he has given a very striking and edifying account of the last days of Oecolampadius, and has further enriched his pages by inserting entire the correspondence between the Waldenses and this zealous and pious reformer. To assist our readers to understand the nature of an article of which they may find mention made in some of the works which they may have occasion to peruse, we copy a description from Sleidan, which is translated by Mr. Scott into his history, Albert had been elected to the archbishopric of Mentz, on the express condition that he should pay the charges of procuring his own pall from Rome; for, three archbishops having died within a short time, the expense fell too heavily upon the chapter, since each pall cost about thirty thousand florins before it was got home. To reimburse himself, Albert applied for a bull for indulgences, which the Pope granted on condition that half the money raised should be applied to the rebuilding of St. Peter's church at Rome.-This statement gives occasion to Sleidan to explain what the consecrated pall was and his account may deserve to be copied, for the display which it makes of the impositions practised by the See of Rome upon her deluded votaries." On St. Agnes' day," he says, "when in the mass said in St. Agnes' church at Rome they come to the words, Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata mundi, two white lambs are laid upon the altar, which are afterwards given to two subdeacons of St. Peter's church, who rear, and in due time shear them. Their wool, mixed with other wool, is spun, and woven into these palls, which are three fingers broad, and hang down from the shoulders to the middle of the breast before, and to the reins behind, being kept stretched by thin plates of lead, of the same breadth. When they are thus woven, they are carried to the bodies of St. Peter and St. Paul, and, after some prayers said, are left there all night. Next day the subdeacons receive them again, and decently lay them up, till some archbishop that needs one of them, or his proctor, (for they are seldom granted to any inferior prelates,) comes to demand one. This is neither a curious nor a costly commodity, and yet the archbishops pay dear for it to the Pope. Nor is any one allowed to use the pall of his predecessor, or, if translated to a new see, to retain his old one."-Well may Luther exclaim, "So well knows the Pope how to sell his cloth." pp. 353-354. -- Mr. Scott appears to us very unnecessarily to have enlarged his observations in commenting upon some parts of Dr. Robertson's character of the great Reformer. The historian remarks, that towards the close of Luther's life, though without any perceptible diminution of his zeal or abilities, the infirmities of his temper increased upon him, so that he grew Idaily more peevish, more irascible, and more impatient of 'contradiction.' This sentence, Mr. Scott confesses, would give him much more pain than any other, if there were reason to believe it correct; and he enters largely into the consideration of particulars for the purpose of invalidating its truth. But, with the representations which Mr. Scott himself has previously given of Luther's temper, those of Dr. Robertson are quite in accordance. It would certainly,' he observes, have been highly gratifying to record, that, in the closing 'period of Luther's life, the ruggedness of his temper had 'been softened down, and that his latter days were passed only in peace and love. Fidelity, however, requires us to acknowledge, that painful traces of asperity still appear, and that inflamed, and at the same time, partially, though only 'partially, excused by the irritability produced by age and 'growing infirmities.' p. 466. Mr. Scott is more successful and more consistent in other instances, in describing the qualities by which Luther was distinguished. Not only was his belief of all he taught most sincere, it was also most thoroughly practical and influential. He himself daily lived upon that bread of life which he broke to others. The doctrines which he preached to mankind, were the support of all his own hopes, the spring of all his comforts, the source of his peace of mind, of his strength for service or for suffering in the cause of God, the principles which evermore governed and animated him, raised him above the fear of man and the love of the world, and carried him, with a heroic elevation of soul, through a series of labours and dangers, never perhaps surpassed since the days of the apostle Paul. In the true genuine doctrines of the gospel, and especially in that of our being "justified freely, by God's grace, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus," and this inestimable benefit appropriated only by a living faith, and not by our own works or deservings, he found that which could alone relieve his own conscience from an anxiety amounting, at times, even to anguish, and for want of which he saw the whole Christian world around him groaning under a system of delusion, imposition, and bondage the most intolerable and ruinous: and what he had thus found to be the relief and salvation" of his own soul, he could not but proclaim to others also:-" Neither counted he his life dear unto himself, so that he might finish his course with joy, and the ministry which he had received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God." Never, probably, did there exist the man who could more truly say with St. Paul, "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom (or by which) the world is crucified unto me and I unto the world." And this assuredly, in all its parts, is the state of mind which is especially wanting to us, to give more effect to our ministrations to draw down a larger measure of the divine blessing upon them. May He, with whom is "the residue of the Spirit," indeed raise up among us-shall I say a new race of such "men of God," by whom he will indeed revive his church wherever it is de-. cayed, reform it wherever it is corrupted, unite it wherever it is divided, and extend it wherever it is not yet planted; that "the wilderness and the solitary place may be glad for them, and the desert rejoice and blossom as the rose ?" In short, the great charm of Luther's character, and that from which the other excellencies admired in him, even by those for whom this may have less attractions, derived their origin or their support, was his spirituality.' We consider Christian truth as the primary object of our regard, the knowledge of the saving doctrine of the gospel as the most valuable of our possessions; and, as the end is ever more excellent than the means, so we consider the various institutions and discipline which are related to the church of Christ, as important in subordination to the Christian doctrine itself. Religious institutions are to be appreciated as they are the means of religion. The Reformers, therefore, will, in the first place, be honoured for the exhibition of divine truth which they so fearlessly made. We agree with Mr. Scott in this estimate of them, and of their services; but we could have wished to see a more direct and full display of the principle. asserted by the Reformers, on which all their proceedings in opposition to the church of Rome were founded, and by which they are to receive their vindication-the exclusion of human authority from the obligations of men as the subjects of religion, and in reference to its entire demands. In appealing. as they did, to the Holy Scriptures, and in insisting, as they did, that every question of religion should be decided by their voice, they conferred an inestimable benefit on mankind, and gave to the world a lesson of high and solemn instruction. The forcible manner in which they urged their appeal to the Scriptures, the frequency and earnestness of their renewed submissions to its judgement, and the constancy with which they repelled the assertion, that another tribunal was competent to the decision which was required, before which it was proper that they should appear; are the pledges by which they have shewn us, that nothing is satisfactory, or ought for one moment to be allowed, but the entire exclusion of human power from dictating to the conscience doctrines of religion, and that the authority of Scriptures is sole and final. It' cannot consistently be admitted, that any part of the importance which is associated with the resistance so long and and so successfully maintained by the Reformers against the abettors of the Romish tyranny, really attaches to it, if it be not involved in their principle, that the Holy Scriptures are |