which, so far as I can find, appear to have sur vived him. He is said by Mr. Leigh,* to have been one "of the most scholastical among the Protestants" which, however, may be questioned; his style and manner of treating an argument being rather plain and solid, than subtil and metaphysical. If scholism be an excellence in a writer, it is certain that the elder Spanhemius, and the great Francis Turretin, have since much exceeded Zanchy in that respect. Our learned countryman, Mr. Matthew Poole, terms himt Theologus non e multis; cujus commentaria singulari eruditione atque lacumine composita, auctorem suum doctissimum referunt: "A divine of the first class; whose expositions, written with extraordinary learning and ability, prove him to have been a most accomplished scholar." Even Mr. Bayle, who never seems to have been better pleased, than when he could pick an hole in the gown of an ecclesiastic, though himself was the son of one; yet allows our author to have been 66 one of the most celebrated Protestant divines, and that few ministers have been so moderate as he." Nor must I omit the honour put upon him by our university of Cambridge, within five years after his death. One William Barrett, fellow *Account of Rel. and Learn. Men, p. 370. † Synops. Criticor. vol. iv. part 2. in Præloqu. ad Lect See Fuller's Hist. of Cambridge, p. 150.. of Gonville and Caius college, ventured, April 29, 1595, to preach an Arminian sermon, in the face of the university, at St. Mary's. I say, ventured; for it was a bold and dangerous attempt, at that time, when the church of England was in her purity, for any man to propagate Arminianism :* and indeed, Barret himself paid dear for his innovating rashness; which ended in his ruin. The university were so highly offended, both at his presumption in daring to avow his novel, heterodox opinions, and for mentioning some great divines, among whom Zanchy was one, in terms of the highest rancour and disrespect, that he was enjoined to make a public recantation in that very pulpit from whence he had so lately vented his *As every reader may not have a clear determinate idea of what Arminianism precisely is, it may to such be satifactory to know, that it consists chiefly of five particulars. (1.) The Arminians will not allow election to be an eternal, peculiar, unconditional and irreversible act of God. (2.) They assert, that Christ died equally and indiscriminately for every individual of mankind; for them that perish, no less than for them that are saved. (3.) That saving grace is tendered to the acceptance of every man; which he may, or may not receive, just as he pleases. Consequently, (4.) That the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit is not invincible, but is suspended for its efficacy on the will of man. (5.) That saving grace is not an abiding principle; but that those who are loved of God, ransomed by Christ, and born again of the Spirit, may (let God wish and strive ever so much to the contrary) throw all away, and perish eternally at last. To these, many Arminians tack a variety of errors beside. But the above may be considered as a general skeleton of the leading mistakes which characterize the sect. errors. This he did the 5th of May following. Part of his recantation ran* thus: "Lastly, I Postremo, temere hæc verba effudi adversis Johannem Calvinum, virum de ecclesia Christi optime meritum; Eum nimirum ansum fuisse sese attollere supra altissimi & omnipotentis Dei vere altissimum et omnipotent Filium. Quibus verbis me viro doctissimo, vereque pio, magnam injuriam fecisse fateor: temeritatemque hanc meam ut omnes condonetis, humillime precor. Tum etiam quod nonnulla adversus P. Martyrem, Theodorum Bezam, HIERONYMUM ZANCHIUM, Franciscum Junium, et cæteros ejusdem religionis, Ecclesiæ nostræ lumina & ornamenta, acerbissime effuderim; eos odioso nomine appellans Calvinistas, & aliis verbis ignominiæ gravissimam infamiæ notam inurens. Quos quia Ec elesia nostra merito reveretur, non erat æquum, et ego eorum famam violarem, aut existimationem aliqua ratione imminuerem; aut aliquos e nostris dehortarer, ne eorum doctissima scripta legerent. Strype's Life of Whitgift. Appendix, p. 186. I cannot help observing one more particular respecting this famous recantation, wherein the recanter thus expressed himself: Secundo, Petri fidem deficere non potuisse, asserui; at aliorum posse, &c. i. e. "I asserted, that Peter's faith indeed could not fail, but that the faith of other believers might; whereas, now being by Christ's own word brought to a better and sounder mind, I acknowledge that Christ prays for the faith of each believer in particular; and, that by the efficacy of Christ's prayer, all true believers are so supported, that their faith cannot fail" Barret asserted, rank Arminian as he was, that Peter's faith did not actually fail. But we have had a recent instance of an Arminian preacher, who avers without ceremony, that Peter's faith DID fail. The passage, verbatim, without adding a jot, or diminishing a tittle, stands thus: "Peter's faith failed, though Christ himself prayed it might not." See a sermon on 1 Cor. ix. 27. preached before the university of Oxford, Feb. 19, 1769, by John Allen, M. A vice-principal of Magdalen Hall, p. 17. rashly uttered these words against John Calvin, (a person, than whom none has deserved better of the church,) namely, that he had presumed to exalt himself above the Son of God; in saying which, I acknowledge that I greatly injured that most learned and truly pious man; and I do most humbly entreat, that ye will all forgive this my rashness. I also threw out, in a most rancorous manner, some reflections against Peter Martyr, Theodore Beza, Jerom Zanchy, Francis Junius, and others of the same religion, who were the lights and ornaments of OUR church: calling them by the malicious name of Calvinists, and branding them with other reproachful terms. I did wrong in assailing the reputation of these persons, and in endeavouring to lessen the estimation in which they are held, and in dissuading any from reading their most learned works; seeing our church holds these divines in deserved reverence." I would hope, as our articles of religion have not been changed but stand just as they did at that very time, that the church of England, in the year 1769, still considers the above great men (and Zanchy among the rest) as some of HER ancient LIGHTS and ORNAMENTS; and that she This is Arminianism double-distilled. The common simple Arminianism, that served Barret, and Laud, and Heylin, will not do now for our more enlightened divines. Whether Peter's faith failed or not, that Mr. Allen's modesty has failed him, is, I believe, what nobody can deny. |