died in 1653, at the age of 46, in the peace of Christ. see all sorts of evil, he had cherished the Ost uncompromising hostility; as many who ere yet living could attest. He had thrown These are only specimens of the sort of chaery obstacle in his power in the way both of racter among the princes of Europe, which the e success and the advancement of those whom grace of God formed at this era. The im> considered as in this point of view suspected portance of this blessing was not only great as ersons; and in accomplishing this he felt an respects their salvation as individuals, and the feigned pleasure, as doing God service. But triumph of the grace of God in their converthe time he was acting only upon hearsay sion, but also in respect of the powerful sway nd ex-parte evidence; for he avoided, with a which, in those ruder times, the personal disgree of horror, the reading of books which positions of the prince had upon the governunderstood to be surcharged with poison.ment of his states and the general opinions and conduct of his subjects. At a period when the force of public sentiment, and the restraint of international law, and the usages of a free were no visible means for maintaining the Reformation but the real conviction and illumination of the personages who swayed the sceptres of nations. Let any one compare the mischiefs done by George Duke of Saxony, with the benefits accruing from the Electors Frederick, John, and John Frederick, in their government of their states; and he must instantly admit the truth of this remark. Je began, however, to reflect, that, as a memer of the church and of the ecclesiastical orer, it behoved him to employ himself in a ore efficient manner in opposing the danger-people, were either unknown or feeble; there us efforts of those who were enemies to both. le determined, therefore, to lay aside for a me more amusing and more lucrative studies, nd as far as his indispensable engagements would permit, (for from his youth up he had never been idle,) to apply himself to the study of the Scriptures and of ancient ecclesiastical writers, whom, he was confidently persuaded, e should find interpreting the Scriptures in a videly different manner from the modern innoators. Accordingly he had recourse to the loctors and the canons of the church, with no other view than that of triumphantly exposing he errors of the new teachers, for the convicion of some whom he esteemed, but who had een misled, and for the confirmation of others in their obedience and attachment to the Caholic church. But, he exclaims, 'O God, what hall I say? When I examined on all sides and in all parts the writings of the approved docLors, and the ancient canons, I could no where ind that interpretation, and these traditions which I sought, and of which I had boasted; nor, when I applied to persons who had the authority of the fathers constantly in their mouths, could they point out any thing of the kind to me! On the contrary I discovered, not only that numberless practical abuses, repugnant to the Scriptures, and the determinations of the fathers, were defended among us, but that we had departed widely indeed from the pure Chrisban doctrine. I saw that many articles taught by the fathers, and sanctioned by councils, were now restored and brought to light again, after a long oblivion, by those very teachers whom we were denouncing as heretics; and that the reasonings, by which our doctors now opposed them, were precisely those of the ancient heretics upon similar questions, which the fathers of the church had refuted and rejected. However this was to be accounted for, I saw that it might be demonstrated from these writings, and especially from those of AugusLine against the Pelagians, that, in the principal points now in controversy, the sentiments of our writers differed little from the dogmas of the heretics; as, for instance, on the article of justification, on the cause of salvation, on We should be acting a disingenuous part if we did not advert, in the next place, to a painful and afflicting topic, suggested by the portion of history now before us,-the errors of the reformers, and of the Reformation. For there were, after all, considerable errors in the character and in some of the proceedings of the reformers. Luther was undoubtedly irascible, hasty, severe in his animadversions, far too strong in his language, and at times obstinate in his own opinions. He was, indeed, never vindictive or malicious, never crafty or insincere; but he was choleric, vehement, im petuous. He was also, in his hours of relaxation, too apt to yield to mirth and jocoseness and a cheerfulness of humour bordering on levity, and not entirely consistent with the gravity of the character which he sustained. And these failings seem to have produced, towards the close of life, a depression of spirits and an irritability which, for a season, cast a cloud over his fine powers. These occasional failings were trivial, indeed, compared with the weighty and substantial excellencies of his character; and they were acknowledged, resisted, lamented, watched against, overcome. But they were faults which are by no means to be palliated. The errors of Melancthov, Bucer, and the other reformers, were of a different class, and need not be noticed in detail. The connexion of these several defects, especially those of Luther, with the errors committed in the conduct of the Reformation is obvious. One of the most frequent was the asperity, the exaggeration, and the grossness of terms employed in controversy, which cannot be concealed, and ought not to be vindicated. The mistakes which arose, principally from human infirmity in general, (p. 511.) These and similar faults, however, sink into insignificancy before the capital error in the Reformation-the sacramentarian controversy. Here Luther and his colleagues were obstinate in the extreme, and led the German churches after them. They believed most fully, and continued to believe to their dying day, that from the words of our Lord, Hoc est corpus meum, was necessarily to be deduced the monstrous doctrine of consubstantiation; the presence in the eucharist of the actual body and blood of Christ corporally in conjunction with the elements of bread and wine, that body and blood being received by the ungodly as well as the true believer. Here Luther was the most violent of all. The same mind which mastered by its gigantic powers almost every other subject, which penetrated the mysteries of popish superstition, and which, in the general exposition of Scripture, could unravel with the utmost sagacity the varying laws of human language, and the just rules of interpreting figurative expressions, was incapable of perceiving a point which for two centuries past hardly any tyro in Scripture criticism has for a moment doubted. But this was not the worst of the case. The first proposal of the true and simple interpretation came from so suspicious a quarter, and was connected with so much enthusiasm and violence, and even folly (we allude to Carolstadt), that our reformer unhappily pledged himself at once, and without any reserve to his own view of the question; and, when once committed, maintained his opinion with a pertinacity and severity, and a want of charity, which were quite indefensible. Had a little more wisdom and love governed Luther and his associates on this topic from the first, as was really the case on almost every other, they might have imposed just as firmly their own sense on our Redeemer's words, but they would have left to the Swiss churches (to which England joined herself on this point) the same liberty which they claimed themselves: they would not have made this subordinate matter prominent and essential; nor would they have separated and estranged the Protestant communities, and exhibited them to the popish body as divided by controversy, and woakened by schism. No historical topic can be more instructive to every class of readers, and especially to those whose opinions may have weight in a revival of religion, than this lamentable discussion. The only question on which Luther lost his temper, betrayed his cause, injured the progress of reformation, grieved the Spirit of grace, and split the infant church, was that in which he was most clearly wrong: so wrong, that, after three centuries, the Lutheran and Calvinistic churches have admitted the charge, by agreeing to bury the recollection of it in an ecclesiastical union. Let those who are in danger of magnifying points of dispute be warned by this example. Let them see how prone to error are the greatest and purest minds; let them be slow in committing themselves beyond the exact prescriptions of revealed truth; and, above all, let them dread creating such points into terms of communion, and erecting a lasting division in the affections of Christians. Mark only the fatal consequences case before us. When the league of S was formed by the Protestant prince the unjust decree of the diet of Augsb most of the cities wished the Swiss t mitted as parties to it, Luther refused ground of this one speculative differ the subject of the sacrament. From t asperity, estrangement of mind, and too much prevailed; and all interco tween churches engaged in a commor and sincerely loving the same Master, off. Then, after a lapse of years, w opening for reconciliation took place, ity and insincerity were unhappily adn the partial concord of Wittemberg-i more injurious than if each party, reta own views without any dishonest com had united on the common ground of and peace. In the mean time, the C Rome gloried in the rupture, and unki jury was done to souls inquiring after that important juncture, by the plaus vantage thus given to the papal divines. if we weigh calmly the one single arising from Bossuet's use of this schi work on the Varieties of the Protest which our author has frequently refe the course of his volume; a mischie has been propagated for above a cen the circulation of that artful perform every country where the Roman Cat ligion prevails, and which, to this da of the chief supports of the whole papa we cannot sufficiently deplore the fault from which it sprung. Perhaps the most painful sentence in volume, relates to this miserable disput author says, on the occasion of recor death of Zuinglius and Ecolampadius "I regret to say that the censure h veyed applies not only to the enemie Reformation, but even to many of the ers of Luther, and in some degree to himself; for he abstained not altogeth harsh and uncharitable remarks on the of these two persons who had differed t on the subject of the sacrament.' "It is lamentable to see the length prejudice may be carried among g embarked in a common cause; and s it carried further than when their diffe but upon a minor point. Things such a pass,' says Scultetus, that (meaning of those who had embraced formation), 'could not endure the n Zuinglius and Ecolampadius, regardi as most pestilent heretics; and whate ceeded from them they condemned unheard, and unseen.' p. 125. It is but due to the truth to subjoin humiliating topic "Subsequently, however, Luther Bullinger, that, after he had met Zui Marpurg, he thought him an excelle and that he had the same opinion of padius; and that he therefore greatly 1 their death.'" "It appears to have been characte Luther, to give always a strong utter his present feelings concerning any and in that particular view which he king of his character or conduct; without pressing that limitation of his sentiments, ich certainly existed in his own mind, or at compensating view which he perhaps had other parts of the same character. This ill often, to the reader who does not allow for e circumstance, give the appearance of in›nsistency in the sentiments which he at difrent times expresses." p. 125. We will not add a word on the punishment flicted by Almighty God, for this lamentable fect of charity. The reader has seen it in e detail of the consequences of the schism self. We pass on to the last head of this division four subject: for no one can lay down the olume without receiving a new impression of 16 anti-Christian character of the Church of ome, and the important effects of the Reforration, directly and incidentally upon it. It difficult to conceive, in a Protestant and enightened period like the present, and with the backwardness of men to recal scenes of past imes, the almost incredible ignorance, imposiion, idolatry, and vice, which covered almost he whole of Christendom at the moment when Luther first drew forth primitive Christianity, rom its long concealment, to the view of an wakened and astonished world. The pope as ANTI-CHRIST himself, the opponent of the erson and glory of Christ; not of course in a vay of open infidelity, but by the corruption of the Christian faith; by a blasphemous usurbation of the authority of Christ; by a virtual ethroning of the Divine Saviour, in the merit of his blood and the efficacy of his Spirit; and by intruding in his stead the adoration of the Virgin Mary, and the intercession of the saints. Christ was considered as an angry Judge, and Mary as the fountain of grace. The sinner fled from Christ as a minister of engeance, and transferred his confidence to the irgin and the saints. The best gift of God to man, the religion of Jesus Christ, was converted into the very reverse of all the ends for which it was designed. The princes of the Roman empire, infatuated by the "cup of aboinations," to use the emphatic language of prophecy, and "given up to a strong delusion o believe the lie" of the Babylonish sorceress, agreed with one consent to give their power to the beast." Over the kings of the earth the mother of harlots reigned, partly by force and partly by artifice and craft. The light of truth was almost extinguished. The grossest ignorance as to the first principles of Christianity prevailed. Secret scepticism and even Athesm spread amongst the ecclesiastics. The few sermons delivered were declamations on vows, pilgrimages, and the merits of saints. The morals of the people from the highest to the lowest, not excepting the clergy, were sunk in the most flagrant vices: harlots, for example, were publicly escorted by the equi Ordinale in the streets of Rome, and forgotten, then superseded by the authoritative comments of the fathers, and, lastly, prohibited to the people. In the controversies of the day, not the Scriptures but the schoolmen were the sources of truth, and the arbiters of doctrine. It is, in short, impossible to conceive of a state of things more exactly fulfilling the predicted apostacy of the latter day-a state so fatally destructive and ruinous to souls, that the outward tyranny and persecution, and the resistance to the progress of knowledge and happiness, by which it was produced, are only to be considered as appendages and instruments of the spiritual defection. In such a state of corruption, we wonder not that the Church of Rome roused herself to indignation at the proceedings of Luther. Nor do we wonder that she afterwards confirmed all the charges advanced against her, by the very manner in which she conducted her defence; by her threats and favours, her bribery and contrivances, her worldly spirit and profligate political schemes-by her open disregard of all care for truth, and her trifling with the souls of men; by her assertions at one time that the differences between the doctrine of the reformers and herself were merely verbal; and her admissions and treaties at another, made with the purpose of violating them, as soon as circumstances would allow. In short, imagine only in what way a church, corrupted as the Apocalyptical visions reveal, would be likely to act when a reformation was begun; and in that precise manner will it be found that Papal Rome did actually proceed against Luther and his noble associates. It was the kingdom of darkness disturbed by the kingdom of light, and resisting the disturbance. And yet the Papacy was, in thirty short years, shaken to its very base by a feeble monk. Half Europe espoused the Reformed tenets; and of the other half, the larger part testified no doubtful indications of inquiry and desire of change. The chief leaders of the Papacy themselves were compelled by the force of truth to admit, from time to time, the existence of the corruptions of the church, and the need of reform. The Archbishop of Saltsburg, for example, after the reading of the Confession of Augsburg, told every one, "That the reformation of the mass was becoming, the liberty of meats proper, and the demand to be disburdened of so many commandments of men, just; but that a poor monk should reform all, was not to be endured." pp. 24, 25. In the year 1537, a commission was at length actually issued by Paul III. to several cardinals, to inquire into the corruptions and abuses of the Roman court-from which, though nothing whatever was ultimately done, we deduce clearly enough the actual state of the dominant hierarchy. Nor did the mighty effects on the Papacy produced by the Reformation it self. fall short of what these admissions would 1 we rather would advert to those effects on the archy, contrived by the decrees of th popedom, which, though incidental, were of of Trent to rivet the old chains by wh the greatest importance, and continue in ope- vassals had been bound, and to forge n ration unto the present day. As early as the ones. But the main and importan year 1530, Luther observes, that "the Catho-quences of throwing open truth, asse lic doctors borrowed from him, and learned to principle of the religious liberty of preach in quite a different manner than they appealing to the public only, proclai had heretofore done." Three years afterwards abuses and corruptions of the existin Erasmus, the fickle, timid Erasmus, appears as stition, proposing the fair and simpl a witness of the tacit effects of Lutheranism. genuine Christianity, maintaining the After extracts from his work on Concord, our doctrines of the merits and grace o author justly and acutely observes, exposing to view the distortions of th rule of faith and morals, and recallin the few and mighty principles and pr the Gospel;-all these effects did fo only directly but incidentally, tacitly, nuation, in a thousand secret channel principles are working still, and wi creasingly work, in proportion to the the Protestant churches, the spirit of concord which unites them, and the and conduct which they exhibit. little for the boasted infallibility of th "Almost all this, no doubt, is truly excellent: but, then, was it contrary to the doctrine of Luther? was it what his opponents had taught? was it even, as it would perhaps purport to be, intermediate between the two? Rather its being propounded in this manner by Erasmus is a proof of the extent to which Luther had prevailed in his attacks upon long established error. Erasmus himself, it is probable, would never have written or thought as he here does, had it not been for Luther. Seckendorf justly observes, that most of the posi-church; we care little for its van tions, which he thus lays down, 'might be expressed, and nearly in the same words, from Luther himself; though Erasmus was accustomed so to temper his language, that it might not directly offend against the formularies of a party which he dared not desert. His doctrine of free will, for example, here proposed, avoiding all thorny disputations, as he calls them, is substantially that which Luther maintained. Only adhere to what is thus taught concerning human impotency and imperfection, and what becomes of the sort of merit for which Eccius, Faber, and all that class of men contended--The sentences, to which Erasmus objects, were not Luther's, but were calum-gether the Papists in these Protesta niously imputed to him.' So far the learned historical commentator on Lutheranism." pp. 160, 161. Then, eight years further on (1541), the concessions of the papal advocates on the doctrine of justification were surprising, and actually laid the foundation for an agreement, if that had been sincerely sought. changeableness of character. The 1 to which any public bodies are brou formal retractation. Truth is invincib cation and the Bible must, and will, sap, by the grace of God, the very fou of papal ignorance and superstition, an the bosom of their own communiti bulls issued of late against the Bible will recoil upon the framers of the members of the popish communion must, individually, drop off and join th testant brethren, as light is diffused. thing, we are sometimes inclined t which conspires, with many others, to The gradual improvement of the general tone of morals kept pace with the silent victories of truth; and the Romish doctors were compelled, by the movements of men's minds and the spirit of inquiry, to enter far more into the questions of Christianity, to attend more to essential truths, and to discharge the functions of the Christian ministry with somewhat more of piety and diligence. The light penetrated in every direction. In fact, we should never have heard of such men as Jansenius and his followers in France, or of Borromeo in Italy, or of the affecting and powerful writings produced by the Roman Catholic ecclesiastics on the great foundations of our common Christianity, or of the partial revivals of religion in different spots of the popedom, or of the salvation of souls, if Luther had not first dispelled the darkness by the wide spread illumination of his flaming torch. nions, is not so much the love of trut science, as that high political party spir so unhappily mixes with their religio that unnatural bond of union be loose man left, in the present state of Europ unimpeded effects of truth and knowle the pope will soon totter on his ill-s throne, and the nations and individu adhering to his absurd and antiquate will be only those who, deluded by th of unrighteousness, are reserved for tion at the coming of the Lord. The accordingly, which threatens us a Pr people is, we are disposed to think, not from the arguments or craft which Pop employ, as from our own apathy and ence to religion generally; from infide deism insinuating themselves under t of a loose and undefined Christianity the forgetfulness of the main charact controlling discoveries of the Gospel provoking the God of mercy and truth grateful returns to him for all his go and by a contemptuous disregard of hi and Spirit. Our danger arises from tl cent levity with which the differences the Protestant and Popish creeds are times treated by our public men, a These incidental effects were no doubt par- even in our senate. With an abstinen tial and inadequate. The vast mass of the political heats, we would combine th popish body remained in the same, or nearly wakeful jealousy of the portentous fo the same, depth of superstition and idolatry; perstition, and tyranny of the anti-C and the ostensible church, the leading hier-church. We would have men doubly e unutterable evil of idolatry; the guilt of weakens the necessity of good works: it takes uman inventions for pardon; the danger of for granted, contrary to all experience, that ninspired commandments; the certain demo- Popery insists more than Protestantism on the alization which is created by indulgences, sa- importance of human actions: it insinuates, or isfactions, and the merits of saints; and the rather asserts, in face of the real fact, that otal denial of all effective Christianity, which Protestants do not teach the necessity of good Hows from a heap of unmeaning ceremonies, works, as a part of their religious creed, but adapted to fascinate the senses,-from a blind consider themselves to be governed by an inacquiescence in human authority,-from igno- exorable fate, and therefore to be irresponsible rance the most profound, joined with dogma- for their actions. If such deplorable misstatetism the most presumptuous,-from the exclu- ments should be often made in a Protestant sion of the Bible and the extinction of free in- legislature, and should pass current amongst quiry. What the torpor and ignorance of the nobles and rulers of our country, the worst Protestant statesmen, combined with the in-effects may be expected to follow. But we credible zeal of Papists, may effect, we know have been insensibly drawn into too great not. But the main preventive we conceive to length on this topic. Our design was to point be not political heats and animosities, but an the attention of our readers to the real characaroused conviction of the spiritual enormities ter of the Roman Catholic Church, as delineatof the one system, and of the holy life-giving ed in the volume before us, and the surprising doctrines of the other; Popery presenting, on effect which the Reformation has produced, all sides, a direct contrast to the doctrines and and is producing, directly and incidentally, precepts of the Gospel-Protestantism founded upon it. on the word of God, and that only. Having gone through the first general division of our remarks, which was to furnish such specimens of Mr. Scott's work as might convey a just impression of the period of the history under review, we shall now proceed to show the manner in which the duties of an ec All the declarations made at different times in or out of parliament by public men, that we are not greatly accountable for our opinions -that we have no better reason to assign for our adherence to the Protestant church than that we were born in a Protestant country-clesiastical historian have been performed by that questions about transubstantiation are of no more importance than the idle disputes agitated by the schoolmen-are of the worst tendency, and directly go to dig up the foundations of Christianity itself. In this view, the very erroneous impression which a celebrated statesman lately gave of the Protestant faith deserves an instant's no- The doctrine of the merit of works,' we have lately heard it pronounced, and that by the author. With the main qualities required in an historian of the Church of Christ, Mr. Scott appears to us from this publication to be well endowed. He has brought to his difficult task a mind stored with evangelical knowledge, a calm and well-regulated judgment, a delight in his subject, a facility in writing, and some skill in disentangling perplexing questions. The work is composed very much in the spirit of his predecessors the two Milners: we have the same general views of Christian doctrine; a similar soundness of judgment, a similar anxiety to distinguish real vital piety, whereever it may lie hid, from its mere accidents and adjuncts, and the same direct aim to exhibit and to honour the grand fundamental doctrines of the Gospel of Christ. We observe no leaning towards the obliquities of party; but, on the contrary, an impartial, even-handed simplicity, reposing in well-ascertained truth, leaving secondary matters where facts place them, dealing out commendation and censure as cach case seems to require, and rendering history the mild and dignified judge of human conduct. Mr. Scott occasionally throws out, in passing, a sententious and pointed observation, to expose a sophism, to silence cavils, or to display to his reader truth as respects some controverted topic. We give two or three specimens. On reporting the objection of the Archbishop of Saltzburgh to the Reformation, as being proposed by a poor monk, instead of being suggested by princes and dignitaries, Mr. Scott asks: "When, almost, was it ever heard, that extensive and thorough reformation proceeded |