lamentable civil war in which Laud as well as Charles were beheaded, and Oliver Cromwell, a man of energy, foresight, and cunning, and one who dreaded even the shadow of the Romish religion, was placed at the head of the government, with the title of Protector of the commonwealth of England. The expectation was revived when Charles II. was raised to the throne of his father, to the immoderate joy of the people and it revived with increased confidence and satisfaction. For the king himself, as appears now from very abundant testimony 2, had already been secretly initiated during his exile in the Romish worship; and his only brother, James II., the heir to the crown, had openly apostatized from the religion of the English nation to that of Rome. But Charles was prevented from doing any thing in favour of popery by his native indolence, extreme fondness for dissipation, and an indifference to all religion, tending to extreme impiety: and James by his immoderate eagerness to consult the wishes of the Romanists, and to follow the rash counsels of the Jesuits, whom he kept about him, inflicted an incurable wound both upon the Romish religion and upon himself. For being created king, after his brother's death, he in the most open manner, and therefore most injudiciously, supported the languishing cause of popery in England and Ireland; and to do this more effectually, he fearlessly trampled upon those rights and liberties of the nation which were held most sacred and precious. Exasperated by these measures of the king, the people of England, in the year 1688, invited over from Holland, his son-in-law, William, prince of Orange; and his valour obliged his father-in-law to flee into France, an exile; and deprived the friends and promoters of the Romish religion of all hope of recovering England to the Romish church'. 2 Gilb. Burnet's History of his own times, vol. i. book iii. p. 603, &c. 606, &c. [and book i. p. 73, 74. Tr.] Dan. Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. iv. p. 223. 237. 534. [ed. Boston, 1817, vol. iv. ch. iv. p. 255, &c. Tr.] Rapin Thoyras, Histoire d'Angleterre, livr. xxiii. vol. ix. p. 160. [Hume's Hist. of Engl. ch. Ixiii. vol. vi. p. 374. and especially ch. Ixvi. vol. vii. p. 3. note: where it is proved, that Charles II. entered into a treaty with the king of France, in the close of the year 1669, or beginning of 1670, for the purpose of overthrowing the protestant religion in England, and establishing popery on its ruins. Tr.] 3 These events are very accurately described by Gilbert Burnet and Rapin Thoyras; by the former, in the second volume of the History of his own times, (which has been translated § 11. When the wiser patrons and promoters of the Romish cause perceived that little success attended violence and war, they concluded, that the reluctant minds of the protestants must be overcome by milder measures, and by covert artifices. But all of them were not disposed to adopt precisely the same course. Some resorted to public disputations between distinguished men of the two communities; indulging an expectation, which the numerous vain attempts of the preceding age could not but weaken, that in such colloquies, the more strenuous adversaries of the papal supremacy could either be vanquished, or at least softened. Others thought that contests should be avoided, and consultations rather should be held by the dissidents, in order to agree upon a compromise. Lastly, there were others who believing that the former polemics on the side of the Romish church, possessed vigour and spirit enough, but were deficient in skill, judged that new attacks should be made: and these found out new modes of reasoning against heretics. § 12. At the very commencement of the century, a.d. 1601, some distinguished Lutheran divines, by authority of Maximilian of Bavaria, and Philip Lewis, elector Palatine, disputed at Ratisbon, with three Jesuits of great fame, respecting the rule of faith and practice, and the judge of religious controversies ; subjects which embrace nearly the whole controversy between the protestants and Roman catholics. In the year 1615, Wolfgang William, prince Palatine, who had apostatized to the Romish faith, caused a rencounter at Newburg, between James Keller, a Jesuit, and James Heilbronn, a Lutheran. In the year 1645, Ulladislaus, king of Poland, called the more distinguished theologians, papists as well as Lutherans and Reformed, to a meeting at Thorn in Prussia, to deliberate amicably on the means of putting an end to the existing religious controversies which design of the king procured for this discussion, the name of the Charitable Conference. A little after, in 1651, Ernestus, landgrave of Hesse, in order to give a from English, into both French and vol. iv. ch. xi. p. 536, &c. [And Hume's Hist. of Eng. vol. vii. ch. lxx. Ixxi. Tr.] plausible air to that apostacy to the Romish camp, which he had before resolved on, ordered Valerianus Magnus, a celebrated Capuchin divine, to hold a discussion, particularly with Peter Haberkorn, a divine of Giessen, in the castle of Rheinfels. Among the private disputes of this kind, the most noted of all, was that of John Claude, a learned divine of the French Reformed church, with that very superior man of the catholic church, James Benignus Bossuet, in the year 1685. All these conferences had one and the same result. Neither party could convince the other; but each exasperated, and alienated the other from itself, more than before*. § 13. The whole art and method of those who attempted a reconciliation between the protestants and the papists, consisted in efforts to make it appear, that the parties did not disagree so much as they supposed; and that there was not so much need of an argumentation [of the points at issue], as of a careful and perspicuous explanation of those doctrines of the Romish community, which were offensive to their opposers, in order to remove entirely all controversy, and unite the minds of both in 4 Whoever wishes for a fuller account of these conferences, may consult the writers mentioned by Casper Sagittarius, Introduct. in Historiam Ecdes. tom. ii. p. 1569. 1581. 1592. 1598. Claude and Bossuet, each wrote and published the history of the dispute between them. Bossuet's book is entitled: Conference avec M. Claude sur la matière de l'Eglise. Paris, 1683. 12mo. In answer to this, Claude published his: Réponse au livre de M. de Meaux, intitulé Conférence avec M. Claude: à la Haye, 1683, 8vo. [The conference at Ratisbon was between seven Lutheran and three catholic divines, and occupied 14 sessions, ending Nov. 28th. Both parties, afterwards, published the Acts of this conference: which produced further controversy, each party accusing the other of misrepresentation. See Schmidt's Continuation of Sagittarius' Introduction, p. 1569, &c.-There was a conference appointed at Durlach, in 1612, by order of Geo. Frederick, margrave of Baden, and Francis, duke of Lorrain. The latter, at the request of the Jesuits, forbade the protestants to draw infer ences from Scripture, and required them to cite only direct, categorical declarations of the Bible against the catholics. These terms the protestant divines refused and the conference ended. Its Acts were published, Strasburg, 1614, 4to.-The conference at Newburg embraced but two sessions; as Heilbronn, by advice of his friends, refused to appear at the third. It related wholly to the correctness of the citations from the fathers, in a book published by Heilbronn, entitled, Uncatholic Popery. Keller published his account of the conference, Ingolst. 1615. 4to. and Heilbronn his account, Ulm, 1616. 4to. -The conference at Thorn was occasioned by the Reformed preacher at Dantzic, Barthol. Nigrinus, who had become a catholic, and persuaded the king, that such a conference would be attended by good consequences. But the result did not answer the expectations from it. The history of the conference, and of the subsequent written discussions, is given by Christ. Hartknoch, in der Preussich. Kirchenhistorie, vol. iv. ch. 6.-See Schlegel's note here. Tr.] bonds of harmony. But in pursuing this general plan, they varied so much from each other, that it was apparent they needed to come to some agreement among themselves, before there could be ground for listening to the counsels and advice they gave. The principal man among those who exerted their ingenuity in this way, was Armand Richelieu; that very powerful French minister of state, who spared neither promises, nor threatenings, nor arguments and persuasions, in order to bring the French Reformed christians to unite with the catholics". The course pursued by this illustrious man was followed, but with unequal steps, and with less influence, by the German Jesuit, James Masenius, by Adolphus Godfr. Volusius, a divine of Mentz', Matth. Prætorius, a Prussian, by Aug. Gibbon von Burgo, an Irishman, who was a professor at Erfurth, by Henry 5 Rich. Simon, Lettres Choisies, tom. i. p. 31, 32, &c. new edit. Peter Bayle, Dictionnaire, tom. i. art. Amyraut, note 1. p. 183. art. Beaulieu, note C. p. 484. tom. ii. art. Ferry, note D. p. 1169. tom. iii. art. Milletierre, p. 1982. and elsewhere. [To Moses Amyraut, an eminent French protestant divine and professor at Saumur, Richelieu commissioned a Jesuit, named Andebert, to offer a negotiation for a union of the protestants and Calvinists. The Jesuit stated, that, for the sake of the peace, the king and his ministers were willing to give up the invocation of creatures, purgatory, and the merit of good works; that they would limit the power of the pope; and if the court of Rome would consent to it, they would create a patriarch; that the cup should be allowed to the laity; and that some other relaxations might be made. Amyrault mentioned the eucharist. The Jesuit said; no change in that was proposed. Amyraut said; then nothing can be done. Here the conference, of four hours length, terminated. See Bayle, 1. c.-Beaulieu, a protestant professor of theology at Sedan, was suspected, but without grounds, of a willingness to sacrifice some doctrines, to produce a union. He had only maintained, that many of the disputes of theologians, were about words rather than things. Yet it ap pears, that marshal Turenne sounded Beaulieu, on the subject of a union. See Bayle, 1. c.-Paul Ferri was an eloquent French protestant preacher at Mentz. His enemies circulated the false report, that he was one of the protestant ministers whom cardinal Richelieu had persuaded to agree to a union of the protestant and catholic churches. See Bayle, 1. c.-Theoph. Brachet Sieur de la Milletierre was a protestant minister in France, who turned catholic in 1645, after being silenced for attempts to unite the protestant and catholic churches, on terms dishonourable to the former. He wrote and published much on the subject. See Bayle, 1. c. Tr.] See Fred. Spanheim's Stricturæ ad Bossueti Expositionem Fidei Catholica; in his Opp. Theol. tom. iii. pt. ii. p. 1042. [Masenius published some books on the subject of a union; which were answered by the protestants. Tr.] 7 He published: Aurora Pacis religiosa divinæ veritati amica: Mayence, 1665. 4to. 8 In his Tuba Pacis; concerning which, see Peter Bayle's Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, A.D. 1685. p. 1309. [He was a Lutheran minister, when he wrote the book; but he soon after became a catholic. Schl.] 9 In his Luthero-Calvinismus schismaticus quidem, sed reconciliabilis. [He was an Augustinian Eremite, who, after long wandering about, settled in Germany, and died at Erfurth, in 1676, as ex-provincial of his order, and professor of theology. Schl.] Marcellus, a Jesuit', and by some others of less fame. In more recent times, no one has entered upon such an attempt, with more foresight and sagacity, than James Benignus Bossuet, bishop of Meaux; a man of uncommon genius, and extraordinary prudence, whose Exposition of the catholic Faith, tends exclusively to show, that a short and easy way of return to the Romish religion, would be open to the protestants, if they would only judge of its nature and principles, not according to the views entertained of it by their teachers, but as it really is'. After him, John Dezius, a Jesuit of Strasburg, undertook to demonstrate the same thing, though with less success, in a book in which he endeavours to prove that there is no disagreement, or but very little, between the council of Trent and the Augsburg confession; than which, no two systems can be more 1 The Sapientia pacifica of Marcellus was, by order of the duke of Gotha, confuted by Jo. Chr. Seldius. 2 Of this little book, and its fortunes, very much might be said, not without profit. Among many others, see Christ. Matth. Pfaff, Historia Literar. Theologia, tom. ii. p. 102. Jo. le Clerc, Biblioth. universelle et histor. tom. xi. p. 438.-["It is remarkable, that nine years passed before this book could obtain the pope's approbation. Clement X. refused it positively. Nay, several Roman catholic priests were rigorously treated, and severely persecuted, for preaching the doctrine contained in the Exposition of Bossuet, which was, moreover, formally condemned by the university of Louvain, in the year 1685, and declared to be scandalous and pernicious. The Sorbonne also disavowed the doctrine contained in that book; though by a late edict we learn, that the fathers of that theological seminary have changed their opinion on that head, and thus given a new instance of the variations that reign in the Romish church, which boasts so much of its uniformity in doctrinal matters. The artifice that was employed in the composition of this book, and the tricks that were used in the suppression and alteration of the first edition that was given of it, have been detected with great sagacity and evidence by the learned and excel lent archbishop Wake in the Introduction to his Exposition of_the_Doctrines of the Church of England, &c. See also his two Defences of that Exposition, in which the perfidious sophistry of Bossuet is unmasked and refuted in the most satisfactory man ner. There was an excellent answer to Bossuet's book published by M. de la Bastide, one of the most eminent protestant ministers in France. This answer the French prelate took no notice of, during eight years; at the end of which he published an advertisement, in a new edition of his Exposition, which was designed to remove the objections of la Bastide. The latter replied in such a demonstrative and victorious manner, that the learned bishop, notwithstanding all his eloquence and art, was obliged to quit the field of controversy. See a very interesting account of this insidious work of Bossuet, and the controversies it occasioned, in the Bibliothèque des Sciences, published at the Hague, vol. xviii. p. 20. This account, which is curious, accurate, ample, and learned, was given partly on occasion of a new edition of the Exposition, printed at Paris in 1761, and accompanied with a Latin translation done by Fleury, and partly on occasion of Burigny's Life of Bossuet, published the same year, at Paris." Macl.] |