§ 23. During this period also arose, among the Presbyterians, the party called Antinomians, or enemies of the law; which has continued to our day, and has caused at times no little commotion. The Antinomians, are over rigid Calvinists, who are thought, by the other Presbyterians, to abuse Calvin's doctrine of the absolute decrees of God to the injury of the cause of piety. Some of them, (for they do not all hold the same sentiments,) deny that it is necessary for ministers to exhort christians to holiness and obedience to the law; because those whom God from all eternity elected to salvation will themselves, and without being admonished and exhorted by any one, by a divine influence, or the impulse of almighty grace, perform holy and good deeds; while those who are destined by the divine decrees to eternal punishment, though admonished and entreated ever so much, will not obey the law; nor can they obey the divine law, since divine grace is denied them: and it is, therefore, sufficient, in preaching to the people, to hold up the Gospel and faith in Jesus Christ. But others merely hold, that the elect, because they cannot lose the divine favour, do not truly commit sin and break the divine law, although they should go contrary to its precepts and do wicked actions; and therefore it is not necessary that they should confess their sins, or grieve for them that adultery, for instance, in one of the elect, appears to us, indeed, to be sin or a violation of the law, yet it is no sin in the sight of God; because one who is elected to salvation, can do nothing displeasing to God, and forbidden by the law 1.

celebrated work: Gospel truth stated and vindicated,) vigorously assailed the Antinomians, are stated, though with some errors, by Peter Francis le Courayer, Examen des Defaults Théologiques, tom. ii. p. 198, &c. Amsterd. 1744. 8vo. [See also Bogue and Bennet's Hist. of Dissenters, vol. i. p. 399, &c. and Hannah Adams' Dictionary of all religions, art. Antinomians. One of the chief sources of Antinomian opinions was, the received doctrines of substitution, If Christ took the place of the elect, and in their stead both obeyed the law perfectly, and suffered its penalty, it was hard for some to see what further demands the law could have upon them,

§ 24. Certain wise and peace-loving persons, moved by the numerous calamities and sufferings of their country arising from the intemperate religious disputes, felt it to be their duty to search for a method of uniting in some measure such of the contending parties as would regard reason and religion, or at least of dissuading them from ruinous contentions. They, therefore, took middle ground between the more violent Episcopalians on the one part, and the more stiff Presbyterians and Independents on the other; hoping, that if the contentions of these could be settled, the minor parties would fall by their own arms. The contests of the former related partly to the forms of Church government and public worship, and partly to certain doctrines, particularly those on which the Reformed and the Arminians were at variance. To bring both classes of contests to a close, these mediators laboured to bring the disputants off from those narrow views which they had embraced, and to exhibit a broader way of salvation. And hence they were commonly called Latitudinarians'. In the first place, they were attached to the form of church government, and the mode of public worship established by the laws of England, and they recommended them exclusively to others: yet they would not have it believed, that these were of divine institution, and absolutely necessary. And hence they inferred, that those who approved other forms of church government, and other modes of worship, were to be tolerated, and to be treated as brethren, unless they were chargeable with other faults. the next place, as to religion they chose Simon Episcopius for their guide; and in imitation of him maintained, that there are but few things, which a christian must know and believe, in order to be saved. Hence it followed, that neither the Episcopalians, who embraced the sentiments of the Arminians, nor the Presbyterians and Independents, who adopted the sentiments of the Genevans, had just reason for contending with so much zeal and animosity: because their disputes related to unessential points, which might be explained variously, without the loss of salvation. The most distinguished of the Latitudinarians were the eminent John Hales and William Chilling

or what more they had to do with it. Tr.]

2 Gilbert Burnet's History of his men times, book ii. vol. i. p. 186, &c.

worth, whose names are still in veneration among the English3. With them were joined Henry More, Ralph Cudworth, Theophilus Gale, John Whichcot, John Tillotson, and various others. The first reward for their labour which these men received, was, to be called Atheists, Deists, and Socinians, not only by the papists, but also by the English dissentients. But on the restoration of the English monarchy under Charles II. they were advanced to the highest stations, and received general approbation. And it is well known, that the English church at the present day [1753,] is under the direction, for the most part, of such Latitudinarians. Yet there are some among the bishops and the other clergy, who following rather in the steps of Laud, are denominated the High Church and Ecclesiastical Tories *.

$ 25. On the restoration of Charles II. to the throne of his father in 1660, the ancient forms of ecclesiastical government and public worship returned also, and the bishops recovered their lost dignities. Those who preferred other forms, or the Nonconformists as they were called in England, expected, that some place would be assigned to them in the church but their hopes were quickly disappointed. For Charles again placed bishops over the Scotch, who were so religiously attached to the Genevan discipline; and likewise over the Irish. And afterwards, in the year 1662, all those who refused to subject themselves to the rites and institutions of the English church, were by a public law separated wholly from its communion'.

3 An accurately written life of the very acute John Hales, was published in English by Peter des Maizeaux, London, 1719. 8vo. A Latin and more full history of the life of Hales, we have ourselves prefixed to his History of the Synod of Dort, Hamb. 1724. 8vo. A French life of him, not entirely correct, is in the first volume of Chillingworth's book, immediately to be noticed, p. 73, &c. A life of Chillingworth, in English, was composed by the same des Maizeaux, and published, London, 1725. 8vo. A French translation of it is prefixed to the French version of his very noted work: The religion of Protestants a safe way of salcation, printed at Amsterdam, 1730. in 3 vols. 8vo. Such as would acquaint themselves

with the regulations, doctrines, and views of the Church of England in later times, should acquaint themselves with these two men, and in particular,should carefully study the above named work of Chillingworth.

Rapin Thoyras, Dissertation on the Whigs and Tories; in his History of England, [French edition,] vol. x. p. 234-[" See an admirable defence of the Latitudinarian divines, in a book entitled: The Principles and Practices of certain moderate divines of the Church of England (greatly misunderstood) truly represented and defended, London, 1670. 8vo. This book was written by Dr. Fowler, afterwards bishop of Gloucester." Macl.]

5 Dan. Neal's History of the Pu

From this period till the times of William and Mary, the NonConformists experienced various fortune, sometimes more pleasant, and sometimes more sad, according to the disposition of the court and the government; but at no time were they so happy as not either to feel or fear persecution. But in the year 1689, William III., by an express act of parliament, freed all dissenters from the established church, (except Socinians,) from all liability to the penalties to which they were by law exposed'. He also permitted the Scottish nation to live under their Genevan regulation, and delivered them from the jurisdiction of bishops. This, therefore, may be regarded as the commencement of that liberty and freedom from molestation which are still enjoyed by the sects that dissent from the public rites of the English church; but it was also the commencement of those numerous parties and sects which spring up from year to year in that fortunate island, often as suddenly as mushrooms, and which distract the people with their new inventions and opinions.

§ 26. In the reign of this William III., A. D. 1689, arose a very noted schism in the English episcopal church, which, quite down to the present times, no means have been able to

ritans, vol. iv. p. 358. [ed. Boston, 1817. p. 396, &c.] Rapin Thoyras, Histoire d'Angleterre, tom. ix. p. 198, &c. David Wilkins, Concilia Magno Britannia et Hiberniæ, tom. iv. p. 573, [This was the famous Act of Uniformity, which required all clergymen, not only to use the liturgy, but also to swear to renounce and condemn the solemn League and Covenant, Presbyterian ordination, and all efforts for changing the present establishment. In consequence of this Act, about 2,000 ministers, chiefly Presbyterians, were turned out of their churches, because they could not conform to the law. At the same time, all the old laws against conventicles, neglect of the parish churches, &c. were revived; and these made all Non-Conformists liable to civil prosecution.

Daniel Neal treats particularly of these events in the fourth volume of his History of the Puritans.

7 This act, which is called The Toleration Act, is subjoined to Dan. Neal's

History of the Puritans, vol. iv. ed. Boston, 1817. vol. v. p. 386, &c. By it all dissenters from the church of England, except Papists and Antitrinitarians, by taking an oath of allegiance, and subscribing to the doctrinal part of the 39 Articles, (or if Quakers, making equivalent affirmations,) are exempted from all the penalties prescribed by the acts which enforce uniformity; and are allowed to erect houses of worship, have their own preachers, and to meet and worship according to their own views, provided they do not when met lock or bolt their doors. They are not however exempted from tithes, and other payments for the support of the established churches; nor are they excused from the oaths required by the Corporation and Test Acts, which exclude Non-Conformists from all civil offices. Tr.]

• Gilbert Burnet's History of his own Times, vol. ii. p. 23.

remove. William Sancroft, archbishop of Canterbury, and seven other bishops, all men distinguished for their learning and purity of morals, declared that they could not in conscience take the oath of fidelity to the new king, William III.; because James II., though expelled from the kingdom, was, in their view, the legitimate king of England. As no arguments could induce them to recede from this opinion, they were deprived of their offices, in 1690, by a decree of the English parliament; and other bishops were appointed in their places'. The bishops who were deposed and turned out of their episcopal dwellings, founded a new church in the bosom of the English church, differing from the rest of the church in opinions, in the form of worship, and in other respects. From the cause that

9 ["The other Non-Juring bishops were Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Norwich; Dr. Turner, of Ely; Dr. Kenn, of Bath and Wells; Dr. Frampton, of Gloucester; Dr. Thomas, of Worcester; Dr. Lake, of Chichester; Dr. White, bishop of Peterborough.' Macl.]

1["These were Tillotson, Moore, Patrick, Kidder, Fowler, and Cumberland, names that will ever be pronounced with veneration by such as are capable of esteeming solid wellemployed learning and genuine piety, and that will always shine among the brightest ornaments of the church of England." Macl.]

2 [The language of Dr. Mosheim here, would seem to imply, that the Non-Juring bishops produced a formal secession from the established church, and erected a permanent sect, which differed in doctrines and in its forms of worship, from the church of England. But it was only a temporary disagreement, whether William III. or James II. was the legal sovereign; and of course whether those bishops and priests, who were deprived for not taking the oath of allegiance to the former, or those who were appointed to fill their places, were the legitimate bishops and parish ministers. Both parties professed the same faith, adhered to the same discipline, and used the same liturgy, except that the nonjurors are said to have framed and used a prayer for king James and for their party. It was rather a political than a religious schism; and one which

necessarily terminated on the death of the pretender, and of the deprived bishops and clergy. Some principles, indeed, which were then contended for, continued to be maintained, after they became little more than points of theoretical speculation; and the believing or disbelieving these principles, soon constituted the only difference between the two parties. Tr.] "It is stated that at some period within the two or three first years after the Revolution, probably in the year 1691, or 1692, the exiled king ordered a list of the nonjuring clergy to be sent over to him: a list was accordingly made out, as perfect as could be procured in the existing state of things, considering the unwillingness, which, for obvious reasons, many must have felt to have their names appear in such a list. Out of the number whose names were thus sent over, it is related, that, at the request of the non-juring bishops, king James nominated two for the continuance of the episcopal succession, the one to derive his spiritual functions and authority from Archbishop Sancroft, the other from Bishop Lloyd of Norwich, the eldest suffragan bishop. The two appointed were Dr. George Hickes and Mr. Thomas Wagstaffe: the former was consecrated by the title of suffragan of Thetford, the latter by that of suffragan of Ipswich. The archbishop died before their consecration, and his archiepiscopal functions were performed on the occasion by the Bishop of Norwich,"