Place's) opinion concerning the imputation of the sin committed by the parents of the human race. This theologian of Saumur, the colleague and intimate friend of Amyraut, in the year 1640, denied the doctrine, then generally inculcated in the Reformed schools, that the sin of the first man was imputed to his posterity; and maintained, on the contrary, that each person's own inherent defilement and disposition to sin was attributed to him, by God, as his crime; or, to use the language of theologians, he contended that original sin was imputed to men, not immediately, but only mediately. This opinion was condemned as erroneous in the Synod of Charenton, A. D. 1642; and was confuted by many theologians of great respectability among the Swiss and the Dutch'. And De la Placé, influenced by the love of peace, did not think proper to offer any public defence of it. But neither his silence, nor the condemnation of the Synod, could prevent this doctrine from commending itself to the minds of very many of the French as being reasonable; or from spreading, through them, into other countries. In the number of those who were

Aymon, Synodes des Eglises Réformées de France, tom. ii. p. 680. [Quick's Synodicon, vol. ii. p. 473. He maintained hereditary depravity, which he accounted criminal, and a just ground of punishment; but denied the imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity. Tr.-Placæus advanced his opinion, in his Theses Theologica de Statu Hominis lapsi, ante Gratiam, 1640: which are inserted in the Syntagma Thesium Theologicar. in Academia Salmuriensi disputatarum, pt. i. p. 205, &c. He was understood by some, to deny all imputation of Adam's sin. He was first brought into trouble on the subject in the year 1645; when Ant. Garissol, a divine of Montauban, and others, accused him before the national synod of Charenton. Amyraut, though he adhered to the common doctrine, defended him but his opinion was disapproved by the synod. Many censured the decision of the synod, as being hasty and unjust because Placæus was condemned, uncited and unheard, his opinion being misappre hended, and Garrisol his accuser, being allowed to preside in the synod.

Placæus himself was so cool, dispassionate, and peaceful, that he defended his assailed reputation by no public writing, but patiently waited for the meeting of a new synod; until, at last, the unceasing outcry of his opposers, in 1655, compelled him to publish a new Disputation, de Imputatione primi Peccati Adami; in which he showed, that the synod did not understand his doctrine: since he denied merely the immediate imputation of Adam's sin, (an imputation arising from the sovereign decree of God,) and not the mediate imputation or one naturally consequent on the descent of men from Adam. Yet this explanation did not satisfy his excited opposers. Andrew Rivet, Samuel Maresius, and Francis Turretin did not cease to assail him and by instigation of the last named, the belief of immediate imputation was settled as an article of faith, by the church of Geneva, in the year 1675. See Weisman's Historia Eccles. sec. xvii. p. 919. Schl.]

5 See Christ. Eberh. Weismann's Hist. Eccles, sæc. xvii. p. 817.

disposed to gratify the papists at the expense of the religion of their fathers, many have placed Lewis Cappel, another divine of Saumur; who, in a long and elaborate work, attempted to prove that the Hebrew vowel points were not inserted by the inspired writers, but were added in more recent times. This indeed is certain, that his opinion pleased the Romanists, who thought it very useful to weaken the authority of the sacred Scriptures, and depress them below the unwritten word [or tradition]. It was, therefore, the more earnestly and learnedly opposed by great numbers of the best Hebricians, both among the Lutherans and the Reformed'.

§ 16. All these divines, though they incurred much odium, yet obtained the approbation of very many, and have been pronounced uncensurable by the candour of subsequent times: but those were less fortunate, who have been already mentioned, as openly meditating a union of the French Reformed church with that subject to Romish sway; and likewise those who attempted so to explain or shape theology as would render the transition to the Romish party shorter and more easy. To this class belonged Lewis le Blanc, a divine of Sedan, and Claude Pajon, a minister at Orleans; both of whom were eloquent, and men of great penetration. The former, with great perspicuity, so treated various controversies which divide the protestants from the papists, as to show that some of them were mere contests about words, and that others were of much less importance than was commonly supposed. Hence he is much censured to this day by those who think great care should be taken, lest, by filing down and lessening too much the causes of disagreement, the truth should be exposed to danger'. This acute man left behind him a sect, which, however, being very odious to most persons, either conceals, or very cautiously states its real sentiments.

6 In his Arcanum Punctationis Rerelatum; which, with his Vindicia,may be found in his works, Amsterd. 1689. fol. and in the Critica Sacra Vet. Test. Paris, 1650. fol.

7 See Jo. Christ. Wolf's Bibliotheca Hebraica, pt. ii. p. 27, &c.

8 In his Theses Theologica: which are well worth reading. The copy

before me was printed at London, 1675, fol. but there have been a number of editions of them.

9 See Peter Bayle, Dictionnaire, tom. i. article, Beaulieu, p. 458, &c. [His whole name was Lewis le Blanc, Sieur de Beaulieu. See the notice of him, above, note (5) p. 76. Tr.]

;

$ 17. Claude Pajon appeared to explain and to adulterate that part of the Reformed religion which treats of the native depravity of man, his power to do good, the grace of God, and the conversion of the soul to God, by the principles and tenets of the Cartesian philosophy, which he had imbibed completely. But what his opinions really were, it is very difficult to determine and whether this arises from his intentional concealment of his real sentiments, by the use of ambiguous phraseology, or from the negligence or the malice of his adversaries, I cannot readily decide. If we believe his adversaries, he supposed that man has more soundness and more ability to reform himself than is generally apprehended; that what is called original sin cleaves only to the understanding, and consists principally in the obscurity and defectiveness of man's views of religious subjects; that this depravity of the human understanding excites the will to evil inclinations and actions that it is to be cured, not by the powers of nature, but by the influences of the Holy Spirit acting through the medium of the divine Word; that this Word, however, does not possess any inherent divine power, or any physical or hyperphysical energy, but only a moral influence; that is, it reforms the human understanding in the same manner as human truth does, namely, by exhibiting clear and correct views of religious subjects, and solid arguments, which evince the agreement of the truths of christianity with correct reason, and their divinity; and, therefore, that every man, if his power were not weakened and prostrated by either internal or external impediments, might renew his own mind by the use of his reason, and by meditation on revealed truth, without the extraordinary aid of the Holy Spirit'. But Pajon himself asserts, that he believed and professed all that is contained in the decisions of Dort, and in the other confessions and

1 See Fred. Spanheim, Append. ad Elenchum Controversiarum; Opp. tom. iii. p. 882, &c. Peter Jurieu, Traité de la Nature et de la Grace, p. 35, &c. Val. Ern. Loescher, Exercit. de Claud. Paionii ejusque Sectator. Doctrina et Fatis, Lips. 1692. 12mo. [Spanheim was a more candid adversary of Pajon,

than Jurieu. Weismann, (loc. cit. p. 942.) follows Jurieu for the most part, and is too severe upon Pajon; who had no other aim than to guard against fanaticism and enthusiasm, and probably viewed the word of God with higher reverence than many of his opposers did. Schl.]

catechisms of the Reformed; complains that his opinions were misunderstood; and states, that he does not deny all immediate operation of the Holy Spirit on the minds of those who are converted to God, but only that immediate operation which is unconnected with the Word of God; in other words, that he cannot agree with those who think that the Word of God is only an external and inoperative sign of an immediate divine operation. This last proposition is manifestly ambiguous and captious. He finally adds, that we ought not to contend about the manner in which the Holy Spirit operates on the minds of men; that it is sufficient if a person holds this one pointthat the Holy Spirit is the Author of all that is good in us. The sentiments of Pajon, however, were condemned not only by the Reformed divines, but also by some synods of the French church in 1677, and by a Dutch synod at Rotterdam in 1686.

:

§ 18. This controversy, which was in a measure settled and ended by the death of Pajon, was propagated in many books and discourses throughout England, Holland, and Germany, by Isaac Papin, a Frenchman of Blois, and sister's son to Pajon. Throwing off all disguise, he ventured to express himself much more coarsely and harshly than his uncle. He declared that the opinion of his uncle was this: That man has even more power than is necessary to enable him to understand divine truth that for the reformation and regeneration of the soul nothing more is required than to remove an unsound state of the body by medical aid, if such a state happens to exist, and then to place before the understanding, truth and error, and before the will, virtue and vice, clearly and distinctly, with their appropriate arguments. This, and the other opinions of Papin, the celebrated divine of Rotterdam, Peter Jurieu, among others, confuted, with uncommon warmth, in the years 1686, 1687, and 1688. They were also condemned by the synod of Boisle-Duc in 1687; and still more severely by the synod at the Hague in 1688; which also ejected the man from the Reformed church. Provoked by this severity, Papin, who, in

2 See the tract which Pajon himself composed, and which is inserted in Jac. Geo. de Chaufepied's Nouveau

Dictionnaire, Histor. et Critique, tom. ii. art. Cenc, p. 164, &c.

other things, manifested fine talents, returned to France in the year 1689, and the next year revolted to the Romish church, in which he died in the year 1709. Some think he was treated unjustly, and that his opinions were misrepresented by his mortal adversary Jurieu, but how true this may be, I cannot say. A defence of the Paionian sentiment was likewise attempted, in 1684, in several tracts, by Charles le Cene; a French divine of a vigorous mind, who has given us a French translation of the Bible. But as he entirely discarded and denied the natural depravity of man, and taught that we can regenerate ourselves by our own power, by attentively listening to divine truth, especially if we enjoy also the advantages of a good education, good examples, &c., hence some contend, that his scheme of doctrine differs, in many respects, from that of Pajon 5.

§ 19. The English church was agitated with most violent storms and tempests. When James I., king of Scotland, on the death of Elizabeth, ascended the throne of England, the Puritans, or friends of the Genevan discipline, indulged no little hope that their condition would be meliorated, and that they should no longer be exposed to the continual wrongs of the Episcopalians. For the king had been born and educated among the Scotch, who were Puritans. And his first move

3 See Jurieu, de la Nature et de la Grace; and in other writings. Jo. Möller, Cimbria Litterata, tom. ii. p. 608, &c. and others. [According to Möller, loc. cit. Papin's Scheme of doctrine, grew out of his Cartesian philosophy. He supposed that in creating the world, God so formed and constituted all things, that he never has occasion to interpose his immediate agency, unless when a miracle is necessary. Of course, that the conversion of sinners is brought about, as all other events are, by the operation of natural causes. Tr.]

* It was published after the author's death, Amsterd. 1741. fol. and was condemned by the Dutch synods.

See the Nouveau Dictionnaire, Histor. et Critique, article, Cene, tom. ii. p. 160, &c.

["And had, on some occasions, made the strongest declarations of his attachment to their ecclesiastical con

stitution."-" In a general assembly held at Edinburgh, in the year 1590, this prince is said to have made the following declaration: I praise God that I was born in the time of the light of the Gospel, and in such a place, as to be king of the sincerest (i. e. purest) kirk in the world. The kirk of Geneva keep pasche and yule (i. e. Easter and Christmas). What have they for them? They have no institution. As for our neighbour kirk of England, their service is an evil-said mass in English: they want nothing of the mass, but the liftings (i. e. the elevation of the host). I charge you, my good ministers, doctors, elders, nobles, gentlemen, and barons, to stand to your purity, and to exhort your people to do the same; and I forsooth, as long as I brook my life, shall do the same.' Calderwood's History of the Church of Scotland, p. 256." Mac.]