and rules of the first centuries; and the Fathers, as they are called, before Augustine, assigned no limitation to the grace and good will of God. The French, although at first they seemed to favour the decisions at Dort, yet soon afterwards, because those decisions were very offensive to the papists among whom they lived, began to think and to teach very diversely from them. Among the Germans, neither the churches of Brandenburg, nor those of Bremen, would suffer their teachers to be tied down to the opinions of the Dutch. Hence the liberty of free thought respecting grace and predestination, which seemed to be wholly extinguished and suppressed at Dort, rather acquired life and activity from the transactions there; and the Reformed church soon became divided into Universalists and Semi-Universalists, Supralapsarians and Infralapsarians'; who, though they dislike each other, and sometimes get into contention, yet are prevented, by various causes, from attacking and overpowering one another by open war. What is very noticeable, we have in our own times seen Geneva itself, the parent, nurse, and guardian of the doctrine of absolute decrees and particular grace, not only become kind and gentle towards the Arminians, but also herself almost an Arminian.

§ 13. The Gallic church, while it remained inviolate, thought proper to deviate in many particulars from the common rule

[Universalists are those among the Reformed, who teach the universal grace of God towards all apostate men; and consequently, also, a universal atonement, and a call to all men. They are, however, divided into two classes. Some ascribe to the means of grace which God affords, sufficient power to enlighten and sanctify all men ; and teach, that it depends on the voluntary conduct of men, whether the grace of God shall produce its effects on them or not. These, who are sometimes called absolute (unconditional) universalists, are by Dr. Mosheim denominated simply universalists. Others maintain, that God indeed wishes to make all men happy, but only on the condition of their believing; and that this faith originates from the sovereign and irresistible operation of God, or from the free, unconditional, and sovereign election of God. These, who are

The

sometimes called hypothetical (conditional) universalists, and who scarcely differ, except in words, from the Infralapsarians, are by Dr. Mosheim denominated Semi-universalists. Supralapsarians, to which class belonged Beza, Francis Gomarus, and Gisbert Voetius, not only teach unconditional election, but they place this election anterior to the purpose of God to create men, and their apostacy. The Infralapsarians, on the contrary, make this unconditional election to be subsequent to the foreseen apostacy. Both these last are also called, [in distinction from the universalists,] Particularists. But it is to be hoped, that when sound interpretation shall become prevalent in the reformed churches, these parties, which are the unhappy offspring of a disputatious spirit and of ignorance of the original languages, will at length entirely cease. Schl.]

of the Reformed; and this, as appears from many proofs, principally from this one cause, that it might in some measure be relieved from a part of the hatred under which it laboured, and from that load of odious consequences which the papists charged upon the Genevan doctrines. Hence the books of the theologians of Sedan and Saumur, which were composed after the synod of Dort, contain many things quite similar and kindred, not only to the Lutheran sentiments concerning grace, predestination, the person of Christ, and the efficacy of the sacraments, but also to some opinions of the Romanists. The commencement of this moderation may be traced back, I think, to the year 1615, when the opinion of John Piscator, a divine of Herborn, respecting the obedience of Christ, was tacitly received, or at least pronounced void of error, in the council of the Isle of France, notwithstanding it had before been rejected and exploded in other French councils. Piscator supposed that our Saviour did not satisfy the divine law in our stead by His obedience; but that He, as a man, was bound to obey the divine will, and therefore could not, by keeping the law, merit any thing with God for others. It will be easy for those who understand the papal doctrines to see how much aid this opinion affords to the papists, in confirming the sentiments they commonly inculcate respecting the merit of good works, the power of man to obey the law, and other points'.

5 Jo. Aymon, Actes de tous les Synodes Nationaux des Eglises Réformées d France, tom. ii. p. 275, 276.

See Aymon, loc. cit. tom. i. p. 301. 400. 457. tom. ii. p. 13. Jac. Benign. Bossuet, Histoire des Variations des Eglises Protestantes, livr. xii. tom. ii. p. 268. To Bossuet thus tauntingly reproaching, as is his custom, the changeableness of the reformed, Jac. Basnage appears to have replied, not solidly, in his Histoire de l'Eglise, tom. ii. p. 1533, &c. [There manifestly was some change in the views of the French divines, in regard to Piscator's sentiments; for they, repeatedly and expressly condemned them in several of their synods, and afterwards yielded up the point. Hence Basnage could not deny the fact. But was this change of opinion any way reproachful to the French clergy? Bossuet thought

it was: but candid men will judge otherwise. Tr.]

7 [Dr. Maclaine is much offended with Dr. Mosheim, for intimating that Piscator's opinions afforded support to the popish doctrines of the merit of good works, man's ability to obey the law, &c. And, indeed, it is difficult to see the connexion, supposed by Dr. Mosheim. It is also true, as Dr. Maclaine states, that Piscator's doctrine by denying that even Christ himself could perform any works of supererogation, cut up by the roots the popish doctrine, that a vast number of common saints have performed such works, and thus have filled that spiritual treasury, from which the pontiffs can dispense pardons and indulgence to an almost un-` limited extent.-Piscator held that Christ redeemed us, only by his death, or by his sufferings; and not as was

This small beginning was followed by other far more important steps; among which some were so devious, that the most modest, and the most averse from contention, among the French themselves, could not approve them".

§ 14. The divines of Saumur, first John Camero, and then Moses Amyraut, a man distinguished for perspicacity and erudition, devised a method of uniting the doctrines of the Genevans respecting the divine decrees, as expounded at Dort, with the views of those who hold that the love of God embraces the whole human race. And Amyraut, from about the year 1634, pursued this most difficult of all objects with so much zeal and with so great vigour of genius, that, to gain his point, he changed a great part of the received system of theology. His plan, which was too extensive to be here fully detailed, was substantially this: that God wishes the salvation of all men whatever; and that no mortal is excluded from the benefits of Christ by any divine decree: but that no one can become a partaker, either of the benefits of Christ or of salvation, unless he believes in Christ. And that God, in His boundless goodness, has withheld from no one the power or ability to believe but He by no means assists all to use this power so as to obtain salvation. Hence it is that so many thousands of men perish, through their own fault, and not by the fault of God. Those who embraced this scheme were called Hypothetical Universalists; because they believed that God has compassion indeed towards all, yet only on the condition that

then generally held, by both his active and his passive obedience. His arguments were, that Christ, as being a man, was bound to obey the will of God perfectly; so that he could not do more than he was under personal obligation to perform. Moreover, that if Christ had perfectly obeyed the law in man's stead; then men would not be under obligation to obey it themselves because it would be unjust in God to require obedience twice over, once from our representative, and then again from us. Besides, if Christ, in our stead, both obeyed the law, and suffered the penalty of its violation; then the law had been doubly satisfied; or God had received the obedience he required, and yet inflicted the penalty

for disobedience. Tr.]

8 [Dr. Maclaine is here out of all patience with Mosheim; and taxes him with bringing a groundless and malignant charge against the whole body of the French Reformed church. But Maclaine appears excited beyond what the occasion required. The five following paragraphs, namely § 14-18, detail the facts, in view of which, Mosheim made the assertion contained in the close of this paragraph. Let the reader carefully peruse them, and then judge how far Mosheim deserves rebuke. Tr.]

See Jo. Wolfg. Jaeger's Historia Eccles. et Politica, sæculi xvii. decenn. iv. p. 522, &c.

they believe in Christ. It is the opinion of many, that this doctrine does not differ from that maintained at Dort, except as Hercules' naked club differed from the same when painted and adorned with ribbons, that is, but slightly. But I doubt whether such persons have duly considered both the principles from which it is derived and the consequences to which it leads. After considering and reconsidering it, it appears to me to be Arminianism, or, if you please, Pelagianism, artificially dressed up, and veiled in ambiguous terms; and in this opinion I feel myself greatly confirmed when I look at the more recent disciples of Amyraut, who express their views more clearly and more boldly than their master'. The author of this doctrine was first attacked by some councils of the French [Protestants]; but when they had examined the cause, they acquitted and dismissed him. With greater violence he was assailed by the celebrated Dutch divines, Andrew Rivet, Frederic Spanheim, Samuel des Marets (Maresius), and others; to whom Amyraut himself, and afterwards the leading French divines, John Daillé (Dallaus), David Blondell, and others, made energetic replies 3. The vehement and long protracted contest was productive of very little effect. For the opinions of Amyraut infected not only the Huguenot universities in France, and nearly all the principal doctors, but also spread first to Geneva, and then with the French exiles, through all the Reformed churches. Nor is there any one at the present day who ventures to speak against it.

§ 15. From the same desire of softening certain Reformed doctrines, which afforded to the papists as well as to others much occasion for reproach, originated Joshua Placœus' (de la

1 [Schlegel expresses much regret that Dr. Mosheim neither here, nor in his lectures, more clearly showed how a disguised Pelagianism lies concealed under this scheme of the Hypothetical Universalists. And he refers us to his notes on vol. i. cent. v. pt. ii. chap. v. § 23 and 26, to show that this scheme of Amyraut, was not in reality Pelagianism, nor even Semi-Pelagianism. Tr.]

2 See Aymon's Actes des Synodes Nationaux des Eglises Réformées en

France, tom. ii. p. 571, &c. p. 604, &c. [Quick's Synodicon, vol. ii. p. 352, &c. 397, &c. 455. Tr.] David Blondell's Actes Authentiques des Eglises Réformées touchant la Paix et la Charité Fraternelle, p. 19, &c. p. 82, Amsterd. 1655.

4to.

3 Peter Bayle, Dictionnaire, tom. i. art. Amyraut, p. 182. art. Daillé, tom. ii. p. 947, &c. Art. Blondell, tom. i. p. 571, &c. Christ. Matth. Pfaff, de Formula Consensus, cap. i. p. 4, &c. and others.

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

4 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 misapprehended, 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, andFrancis 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 Weismann's Historia Eccles. sæc. xvii. p. 919. Schl.]

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