ARTICLE II.

CONFERENCE AT HAMPTON-COURT.-ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF THE PURITANS -CONTROVERSY ABOUT PREDESTINATION-LAMBETH ARTICLES-THE MILLENARY PETITION-JAMES ISSUES A PROCLAMATION-AND APPOINTS A CONFERENCE-ITS PROCEEDINGS-AND result-DISSENTIONS AMONG THE REFORMERS IN HOLLAND-THE GOMARISTS-THE ARMINIANS-THE BELGIC CONFESSION-DISTINGUISHING TENETS OF THE TWO PARTIES-THEY APPEAL TO THE SECULAR POWER-THE STATES OF HOLLAND ISSUE A DECREE -KING JAMES INTERFERES-VORSTIUS CHOSEN PROFESSOR AT LEYDENJAMES ACCUSES HIM OF HERESY-HE JUSTIFIES HIMSELF-HE LEAVES LEYDEN “THE RIGOROUS RESOLUTION -BARNEVELT ACCUSED-JAMES ADVOCATES THE CAUSE OF THE GOMARISTS-PRINCE MAURICE TAKES POSSESSION OF THE BRILL-ARREST OF BARNEVELT AND THE OTHER ARMINIAN LEADERS-SYNOD OF DORT-JAMES SENDS DEPUTIES FROM THE ENGLISH CHURCH-THEIR INSTRUCTIONS-SUBJECTS OF DISCUSSION IN THE SYNODPROTEST OF THE ENGLISH DEPUTIES-FATE OF BARNEVELT AND HIS COMPANIONS OPINIONS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND DECISIONS OF THE SYNOD.

It has been observed in the former reigns, that, from the very beginning of the reformation, there was always a party, who endeavoured to push it on farther than the laws would permit. What they aimed at was, to introduce the calvinistical plan, both as to doctrine and discipline. They first appeared in Edward VI.'s reign, but made very little progress. Their banishment under queen Mary gave them an opportunity of improving themselves in the art of reforming, when they were instructed by the mouth of John Calvin himself. At queen Elizabeth's accession to the crown, they returned home with the rest of the exiles, and were promiscuously admitted into both the universities; being jointly promoted to some of the best dignities in the church. The Act of Uniformity, indeed, now and then gave them some disturbance: but, having the advantage of powerful friends at court, they weathered out the storms raised against them. Towards the latter end of queen Elizabeth, their number, being very much increased, made them less cautious in their behaviour. They attacked episcopal government, and ridiculed the character, in several abusive and virulent

pamphlets; and, at the same time, read their puritanical lectures in both the universities, especially in Cambridge, where Dr. Whitaker and Mr. Perkins, two of their champions, about the year 1594, put the whole university in a flame about predestination: and, in a little time, the debates ran so high, that Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, took upon him to compose matters. His method was, to call together a synod of divines,' who met at Lambeth, and came to the fol- Nov. lowing resolutions: 1°. That God has from eternity 10. predestinated some, and reprobated others: 2o. That only God's will, and no foresight of faith or merits, is the motive of predestination: 3°. That the number of the predestinate is fixed, and can neither be increased nor diminished: 4°. That the reprobate are necessarily damned: 5o. That justification cannot be lost totally or finally: 6°. That a man possessing justifying faith is certain of his salvation plerophoria fidei: 7°. That all have not saving grace: 8°. That all men are not called or drawn by the Father: 9°. That men have not free-will to be saved.2 I cannot say, how far these articles are agreeable to the church of England. However, the archbishop and his synod, with several divines of figure, subscribed to them; and so did the university of Cambridge: and the puritans were so stiff in their defence, as in a manner to make them part of their creed. Archbishop Whitgift is charged, upon this occasion, with imposing a doctrine upon the church of England, which it never made profession of; and some of the protestant writers tell us, he narrowly escaped a premunire, for calling a synod, and making decrees in prejudice of the queen's supremacy."

1 [These divines were Bancroft, afterwards bishop of London, Dr. Richard Vaughan, elect of Bangor, Dr. Tyndall, dean of Ely, Dr. Whitaker, and some others of the Cambridge predestinarians.-T.]

2 [The articles, which are generally known as " the Lambeth Articles," may be seen in Fuller, lib. ix. 230; Wilkins, iv. 347; Strype's Whitgift, 461; and Collier, ii. 644. See also Heylin's Hist. Presbyt. lib. x.-T.]

3 [Heylin, ibid. Collier, ii. 645. See, however, Dr. Baro's letter to the primate, with his explanation of these articles, in Strype's Whitgift, 466, 467, and Append. 201.-T.]

In this manner the reformers were divided when king James ascended the throne; and the puritans, having a great confidence in his education, hoped the best 1603 from him. Wherefore, in the year 1603, they signed APRIL a remonstrance, called the Millenary Petition, to which a thousand of their clergy put their hands. What they insisted upon, in general, was, a farther reformation of the church; to be heard in a conference; or to have their grievances redressed. In particular, their complaints were concerning the cross in baptism : baptism by females: the cap and surplice: the words priest and absolution: church music: the ring in marriage lay chancellors: holydays: those words, with my body I thee worship, as favouring idolatry; with several other exceptions of the like sort. A conference,

[The Millenary Petition, so called from the supposed number of its signa. tures (in reality, they were only seven hundred and fifty), was ranged under the four distinct heads of "Church Service," 66 Ministers," Benefices," and "Discipline." Under the first, besides the points mentioned in the text, it demanded the abolition of confirmation, of all interrogatories ministered to children in baptism, of all popish opinions, and of all bowing or reverence at the name of Jesus: it required that an examination should precede, and that a sermon should accompany, the administration of the communion; and it called for an abridgment of the liturgy, for a better observance of the Sabbath, for the establishment of uniformity in matters of doctrine, and for the removal of all but the canonical Scriptures from the public service of the church. It then proceeded as follows:

"II. Concerning Church Ministers :--That none hereafter be admitted into the ministry, but able and sufficient men, and those to preach diligently, and especially upon the Lord's day: That such as be already entered, and cannot preach, may either be removed, and some charitable course taken with them for their relief, or else to be forced, according to the value of their livings, to maintain preachers: That non-residence be not permitted: That king Edward's statute, for the lawfulness of ministers' marriage, be revived: That ministers be not urged to subscribe, but, according to the law, to the articles of religion and the king's supremacy only.

"III. For Church Livings, and Maintenance :-That bishops leave their commendams; some holding prebends, some parsonages, some vicarages, with their bishoprics: That double-beneficed men be not suffered to hold, some two, some three benefices with cure, and some, two, three, or four dignities besides: That impropriations, annexed to bishoprics and colleges, be demised only to the preachers' incumbents, for the old rent: That the impropriations of laymen's fees may be charged with a sixth, or seventh part of the worth, to the maintenance of the preaching minister.

"IV. For Church Discipline:-That the discipline and excommunication may be administered according to Christ's own institution, or, at the least, that enormities may be redressed, as, namely, That excommunication come not forth under the name of lay persons, chancellors, officials, &c.: That men be not

to this purpose, had been desired by the puritans, in the late reign; but some reasons of state induced the

excommunicated for trifles and twelve-penny matters: That none be excommunicated without consent of his pastor: That the officers be not suffered to extort unreasonable fees: That none, having jurisdiction, or registers' places, put out the same to farm: That divers popish canons (as, for restraint of marriage at certain times) be reversed: That the longsomeness of suits in ecclesiastical courts (which hang sometimes two, three, four, five, six, or seven years) may be restrained: That the oath ex officio, whereby men are forced to accuse themselves, be more sparingly used: That licences for marriage, without bans asked, be more cautiously granted.

66

"These, with such other abuses, yet remaining and practised in the church of England," continue the petitioners, we are able to shew, not to be agreeable to the Scriptures, if it shall please your highness further to hear us, or more at large by writing to be informed, or by conference among the learned to be resolved. And yet, we doubt not but that, without any farther process, your majesty, of whose christian judgment we have received so good a taste already, is able of yourself to judge of the equity of this cause. God, we trust, hath appointed your highness our physician, to heal these diseases: and we say with Mordecai to Esther, Who knoweth whether you are come to the kingdom for such a time?'-Thus your majesty shall do that which, we are persuaded, shall be acceptable to God, honourable to your majesty in all succeeding ages, profitable to his church which shall be thereby encreased, comfortable to your ministers which shall be no more suspended, silenced, disgraced, imprisoned for men's traditions, and prejudicial to none but to those that seek their own quiet, credit, and profit in the world. Thus with all dutiful submission, referring ourselves to your majesty's pleasure for your gracious answer, as God shall direct you, we most humbly recommend your highness to the divine - Majesty, whom we beseech, for Christ his sake, to dispose your royal heart to do herein what shall be to his glory, the good of his church, and your endless comfort." (Fuller, lib. x. 22; Collier, ii. 672; Howell, ii. 89).

James seems to have been irritated both at the substance and the manner of this and other similar petitions. In a proclamation, issued in October, 1603, he denounced the seditious violence of those spirits, "whose heat tending rather to combustion than reformation," had urged them upon their present course. He was aware that the church, however perfect in its original institution, was not proof against the corruptions of time and the frailty of man. He had heard of abuses and scandals; and had long since determined to make them the subject of inquiry, in a council of prelates and divines. But his purpose had unfortunately been misconstrued. Presuming on what he never intended, men. like these and other petitioners, had taken occasion to pour out invectives against the clergy, to contemn the authority of the courts, and "to gather subscriptions of multitudes of vulgar persons, craving that reformation, which, if really necessary, was more in his heart than theirs." These proceedings were as unbecoming to christian modesty, as they were dangerous to the people. Let it be known, then, that it was still his intention to inquire into the state of religion, and to correct whatever might be amiss: but let his subjects, in the meantime, trust to his princely care; let them "avoid all unlawful and factious manner of proceeding;" and, above all, let them rest assured that whilst, on the one hand, he was resolved to reform all real abuses, so, on the other, he was determined "to preserve the estate, as well ecclesiastical as politic, in such form as he had found it established by the laws" (Wilkins, iv. 371, 372; Strype's Whitgift, 568).—The inquiry here promised by James was the object of the conference mentioned in the text.-T.]

VOL. IV.

C

1604

queen not to hearken to it. But now a king sitting upon the throne, who was a man both of great erudition, and of no less curiosity, took a resolution to compliment the petitioners with a conference. Accordingly, orders were given out to the managers of both parties, to meet at Hampton-court, in January. The cause of the Church of England was managed by Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, Bancroft bishop of London, Matthew of Durham, Bilson of Winchester, Robinson of Carlisle, Dove of Peterborough, Babington of Worcester, Rudd of St. David's, and Watson of Chichester. To these were joined several deans, viz., Andrews, Overall, Barlow, Bridges, King, and Field.1 On the other part, were four able divines picked out of the two universities, viz., Dr. John Reynolds, and Dr. Thomas Spark, from Oxford; Mr. Chadderton, and Mr. Knewstubbs, from Cambridge; to whom was added Patrick Galloway, minister of Perth in Scotland.2 The king and privy-council were also present. Several warm debates happened between them; some whereof were too trivial and too tedious to be inserted. Among other things, the puritans required that the thirty-nine articles might be made more useful, and better fitted for the increase of piety; and that the nine Lambeth articles might be added to them. The king spoke frequently to several points, relating to baptism; and was of opinion, that baptism was not absolutely necessary; and, by consequence, was not for lay-baptism. He was very much for supporting the episcopal character, and took notice of what was common in most people's mouths, "No bishop, no king." He cleared the bishop of London, concerning certain books he had allowed of between the clergy and Jesuits, alleging, that it was permitted by order of council. Towards the close of the conference, the

1 [King was only archdeacon of Nottingham: Field was not dean till afterwards. Four other deans, however, were appointed, though not present on the first day; namely, those of Christchurch, Worcester, Windsor, and the Chapel Royal. Fuller, 1. x. 7.—T.]

2

[Galloway was admitted only in quality of an auditor (Ibid. 10). I should add that the disputants on both sides were nominated by the king.-T.]