argu by what else soever occurs in it, offered occasion of "JOHN SELden.” JAMES I. Tillesly's Animadversions upon Selden's History of Preface, This year James Montague, bishop of Winchester, departed Tithes. this life. He was son to sir Edward Montague, of Boughton, printed in Northamptonshire, bred in Christ's, and afterwards master 1621. of Sidney-college in Cambridge. This prelate had a great share in the king's esteem, published his majesty's works, and wrote the preface. He was first preferred to the see of Bath and Wells, and from thence to Winchester. He lies buried in the cathedral of Bath, which church he in a manner rebuilt at his own charge. John Overal, bishop of Norwich, died about this time. He was master of Catherine-hall, and king's professor of divinity in Cambridge. He was a strong genius, made a great improvement in study, and was reckoned one of the most learned controversial divines of his time. Fuller. Dr. Hall's return to England on the score of ill health. To return to the synod of Dort: Dr. Hall, finding the air unfriendly to his constitution, got his majesty's leave to disengage, and come to England. He excused his going off in a speech, in which he laments his being unserviceable upon the score of his indisposition, expresses his esteem of the synod, and his regret in parting with them. But though his health was sunk, his oration is lively and florid, as the reader may see in the records. Hall was succeeded by Thomas Goad, doctor of divinity, and chaplain to archbishop Abbot. The president See Records, received him with the compliment of a speech, in which, among other things, he made a panegyric upon the king for his care of the synod, and not recalling one divine till he had furnished another. num. 106. In the hundred and forty-fifth session, the Belgic Confession was brought in to be subscribed by the Dutch, and publicly Cæterum uli approved by the foreign divines. In this form of belief there sint locorum was one article which clashed directly with the constitution of ministri, the English Church. It was the thirty-first, where it is atque aqua verbi Dei eandem illi lem omnes ABBOT, expressly affirmed, "That the ministers of the word of God, in Abp. Cant, what place soever settled, have the same advantage of characbem ter, the same jurisdiction and authority, in regard they are all potestatem of them equally ministers of Christ, the only universal bishop, tatem ut qui and head of the Church." tum auctori sint æque omnes Christi versalis et capitis ec clesiæ mi This article being a broad censure of the government of the unici illius Church by archbishops and bishops, was opposed by the British episcopi unidivines, and particularly by bishop Carleton, who publicly protested against it. This protestation, though admitted, and possibly entered upon record, was not so far considered as to receive an answer. In what form this exception was couched, the reader may see from the bishop's declaration, published upon his return into England. His words are these: nistri. Syntagm. Confess. Belgic. Confession. p. 179. Bishop protestation "When we were to yield our consent to the Belgic Confession at Dort, I made open protestation in the synod, that in the synod whereas in the Confession there was inserted a strange conceit in behalf of episcopacy of the parity of ministers to be instituted by Christ, I declared our dissent utterly in that point. I showed, that by Christ a parity was never in the Church: that he ordained twelve apostles, as also seventy disciples: that the authority of the twelve was above the other: that the Church preserved this order left by our Saviour. And therefore, when the extraordinary power of the apostles ceased, yet this ordinary authority continued in bishops, who succeeded them, who were by the apostles left in the government of the Church, to ordain ministers, and to see that they who were so ordained should preach no other doctrine: that in an inferior degree the ministers, who were governed by bishops, succeeded the seventy disciples: that this order hath been maintained in the Church from the times of the apostles. And herein I appealed to the judgment of antiquity, and to the judgment of any learned man now living; and craved herein to be satisfied, if any man of learning could speak to the contrary. My lord of Salisbury is my witness, and so are all the rest of our company, who spake also in the cause." 718. The Dutch divines' excuse for living with out episcopacy. To this the bishop subjoins; That in a conference with some divines of that synod, he told them, "The cause of all their troubles, was because they had no bishops amongst them, who by their authority might repress turbulent spirits that broached novelty, every man having liberty to speak or write what they JAMES I. list and that as long as there were no ecclesiastical men in authority to repress and censure such contentious spirits, their Church could never be without trouble." To this their answer was, "That they had a great honour for the good order and discipline in the Church of England, and heartily wished they could establish themselves upon this model but they had no prospect of such a happiness; and since the civil government had made their desires impracticable, they hoped God would be merciful to them." By the way the States, upon their revolt from the king of Spain, destroyed seven sees, and applied the revenues to the public service. The names of them are these; the bishopric of Haarlem in Holland, of Middleborough in Zealand, of Lewarden in Friezland, of Groningue in Groningen, of Deventer in Overyssell, of Ruremonde in Guelderland, and the archbishopric of Utrecht, to which the bishops of the other sees above-mentioned were suffragans. Thus, it is possible, the gain of sacrilege prevailed to break the apostolical government. Those at the helm might be averse to the continuing episcopacy, for fear some part of the old endowments should be expected to maintain it. Thus the mitre was sent to the mint, to keep the new exchequer in cash the crosier was seized, and a staff provided instead of it. Some people love a cheap religion, and a poor clergy: a clergy without strength, either in character or circumstances. This is the way to make discipline low and easy; to check the freedom of the pulpits, and to prevent their being troublesome to the shop and exchange. To proceed: Church government was not the only point in difference between the Dutch and British divines: for these latter asserted an universality of redemption by the death of Christ. But this would by no means pass upon the majority. In short, the Arminian tenets were condemned, and the Remonstrants required to subscribe the censure of their own doctrine; and, upon their refusal of this condition, about seven hundred families were banished by an order of the Statesgeneral. A. D. 1619. At the breaking up of the synod the government presented April 29, the English divines with two hundred pounds, to bear the ex- The breaking pences of their voyage: they had likewise each of them a up of the ABBOT, golden medal, representing the figure of the synod; and, at Abp. Cant, their going off, the States gave them their letter to the king, in which, after having owned their obligation to his majesty for his regard to their Church, they make an honourable mention of these divines in general; and then add a distinguishing See Records, commendation of the bishop of Llandaff. synod at Dort. num. 107. Some queries upon the As to the authority of the synod of Dort, a few queries may be put to the reader's solution. But before I do this, I shall suppose these Dort divines to have been all presbyters, or at least to have set up their reformation upon priests' orders, conveyed by some of the episcopal college. I say, for brevity's sake, I shall suppose this, and enter upon no disquisition touching matter of fact. This being supposed, the first query is, Whether the geauthority of nuineness of St. Ignatius's Epistles is not proved beyond exthis meeting. ception by bishop Pearson? Granting this, whether that celebrated martyr, who makes the episcopal office so absolutely necessary to the Church; whether that celebrated martyr, if living, would have assisted at this synod? Secondly, Whether those primitive bishops, who drew up the thirty-seventh and thirty-ninth of the Apostles' Canons, would have allowed a company of presbyters a conciliatory character, and the claim of a supreme ecclesiastical authority? Thirdly, Whether the famous synod of Alexandria, already mentioned, that censured Ischyras and Colluthus, would have taken these divines by the hand, or held any Church correspondence with them? Fourthly, Whether by the discipline, and general practice of the ancient Church, the Dort meeting would not have been counted an invasion upon the episcopal college? Fifthly, Whether the signing the thirty-first article of the Belgic Confession, and declaring for a parity in the ministry, does not imply a revolt from the ecclesiastical authority settled by the apostles, and universally received for fifteen hundred years together? Sixthly, Whether the words "Protestant" and "Reformed,” clapped to any sect of Christians, have force sufficient to alter the original seat of Church government, to renverse the ancient discipline, and turn the spiritual legislature into a new channel? But I shall pass on, and leave these queries to the reader's determination. As to the management of the synod of Dort, it is foreign to JAMES I our purpose; and therefore I shall wave relating the partiality of their proceedings, the hard usage put upon the Remonstrants, and the squabbles among themselves: for whatever this synod may signify in some places, we have nothing to do with it. The English that appeared there were no other than four court divines: their commission and instructions were only from the king: properly speaking, they were no more than his majesty's plenipotentiaries: they had no delegation from the bishops, and by consequence were no representatives of the British Church. The next inference is, that what was done there can have no binding force upon the English communion'. About this time Frederic, elector palatine, the king's son- The Bohein-law, engaged in a very unfortunate enterprise, and, by grasp-back mians refuse ing at the crown of Bohemia, lost his own dominions. To give lege the emthe reader a short account of this matter, I must take my dinand 2. rise a little higher. In the reign of the emperor Rodolphus II., the Calvinian Confessionists in Bohemia, being apprehensive the Roman Catholics had formed a strong party against them, met in a general assembly at New Prague, in the year 1609. This meeting, though not convened by the emperor's authority, made a public protestation of their duty; and that their business was only to promote his majesty's service, and prevent the designs of evil counsellors. Upon this they wrote to the king of Hungary, the elector palatine, the dukes of Saxony and Brunswick, and other princes of the empire, requesting them to solicit at Vienna for a toleration of their religion: for their belief, as they affirmed, was the same in substance with the Augsburg confession. After this they addressed the emperor in expostulating terms; they complain how much they had been disappointed from time to time: and, in fine, take the freedom to acquaint him they intend to exert themselves in the field: but then this motion, as they said, should be only in defence of his imperial majesty, and to protect themselves from the practice of their enemies: pursuant to this remonstrance, they levied a 1 The synod of Dort has steadily declined in reputation on account of its errors, and the persecutions that attended them. It gave rise to a witty echoistic epigram, which, if I remember, runs thus : "Dordraci synodus-nodus; chorus integer―æger; 99 to peror Fer 719. |