others : and hence arose this perplexing and difficult controversy respect
ing the church, which has not yet closed, and which is renewed with zeal
from time to time. (76)



were Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Norwich ; Dr. Tur
ner, of Ely ; Dr. Kenn, of Bath and Wells ;
Dr. Frampton, of Gloucester ; Dr. Thomas,
of Worcester ; Dr. Lake, of Chichester ; Dr.
Wriite, bishop of Peterborough." Mad.]

(73) ["These were Tillolson, Moore,
Patrick, Kidder, Fowler, and Cumberland,
names that will ever be pronounced with
veneration by such as are capable of esteem
ing solid, well-employed learning and genu
ine piety, and that will always shine among
the brightest ornaments of the church of
England." Mad.]

(74) [The language of Dr. Mosheim here,
would seem to imply, that the Non-Juring
bishops prodsced 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 Eng
land. But it was only a temporary disagree
ment, 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. Bolh parties professed the
came faith, adhered to the same discipline,
and used the same liturgy, except that the
Non- Jurors 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. TV.]

(75) The name of High Church, that is,
of those who have high notions of the church
and its power, properly belongs to the Non-
Jurors. But it is usual among the English
to give it a more extensive application ; and
to apply it to all those who extol immoderately
the authority of the church and declare it ex
empt from all human power, notwithstanding
they do not refuse to swear allegiance to the
king. And there are many such, even in
that church which generally goes under the
name of the Low Church. [The Non-Jurors
were also called Jacolntcs, from their adhe
rence to James II. and his son the pretender,
in opposition to the reigning sovereign and
the house of Hanover. The Scotish bishops,
after the year 1688, all adhered to the house
of Stuart, and were called Non-Jurors, be
cause they refused the oath of allegiance to
the reigning sovereign. Tr.~\

(76) [Henry Dodwell, senior, was appoint-



HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH. 427

$ 27. The Non-Jurors or High Church, who claimed for themselves the
appellation of the Orthodox and called the Low Church the Scliismatical,
differed from the rest of the Episcopal church in several particulars and
regulations, but especially in the following sentiments. I. That it is nev
er lawful for the people, under any provocation or pretext whatever, to re
sist their kings and sovereigns. The English call this the doctrine of
passive obedience ; the opposite of which, is the doctrine of active oledi.
ence, held by those who deem it lawful in certain cases, for the people to
oppose their rulers and kings. II. That the hereditary succession of kings
is of divine appointment ; and therefore, it can be set aside or annulled in
no case whatever. III. That the church is subject to the jurisdiction, not
of the civil magistrate, but of God only, particularly in matters of a reli
gious nature. IV. That, consequently, Sancroft and the other bishops who
were deposed under king William III. remained the true bishops as long
as they lived ; and that those substituted in their places, were the unjust
possessors of other men s property. V. That these unjust possessors of
other men s offices, were both bad citizens and bad members of the church,
or were both rebels and schismatics ; and therefore, that such as held
communion with them were chargeable with rebellion and schism. VI.
That schism, or splitting the church in pieces, is the most heinous sin ; the
punishment due to which, no one can escape, but by returning with sin
cerity, to the true church from which he has revolted. (77)

28. We now pass over to the Hollanders, the neighbours of the Eng
lish. The ministers of the Dutch churches thought themselves hkppy,
when the opposers of the Calvinistic doctrine of decrees or the Arminians,
were vanquished and put down : but it was not their fortune to enjoy
tranquillity very long. For after this victory, they unfortunately fell into
such contests among themselves, that during nearly the whole century,
Holland was the scene of very fierce animosity and strife. It is neither
easy nor important, to enumerate all these contentions. We shall there
fore omit the disputes between individual doctors, respecting certain points
both of doctrine and discipline ; such as the disputes between those men
of high reputation, Gisbert Voet and Samuel Maresius [Des Marets] ; the
disputes about false hair, interest for money, stage plays, and other minute
questions of morals, between Salmasius, Boxhorn, Voet, and several others ;
and the contests respecting the power of the magistrate in matters of re
ed Camden professor of History at Oxford Vindication of the deprived bishops, &c.
in 1688 ; and being deprived of the office in Dr. Hody replied, in The case of the Sees
1690, because he refused the oath of alle- vacant, &c. In 1695, Dodivell came forth
giance, he published a vindication of the again, in his Defence of the Vindication of
non-juring principles. Several other tracts the deprived bishops. Various others en-
were published by him and others on the gaged in this controversy. See Machine s
same side ; none of which were suffered to Note; Calamy s Additions to Baxters Hist,
go unanswered. In 169), Dr. Humphrey of his own life and times, ch. xvii., p. 465,
Hody published his Unreasonableness of Scp- &c., ch. xviii., p. 484, &c., 506, &c. Tr.]
oration, or a Treatise out of ecclesiastical (77) See Witt am Whyston s Memohs of
h -story, showing, that although a bishopu-as his own life and writings, vol. i., p. 30, &c.
unjustly deprived, neither he nor the church George Hick s Memoirs of the life of John
ever made a separation, if the successor was Kettlewcll, London, 1718, 8vo, who treats
not a heretic; translated out of an ancunt expressly and largely on these matters. Nou-
Grcck manuscript, (written at Constantino- veau Dictionnaire Histor. et Critique, article
p!e, and now among the Baroccian MSS.), Collier, torne ii., p. 112. Phil. Masson *
w the public library at Oxford. This was Histoire Critique de la Republic des Lettres,
answered by Dodwetl the next year, in his tome xiii., p. 298, &c., and elsewhere.



408 BOOK IV. CENT. XVII. SEC. II. PART II. CHAP. II.

ligion, carried on by William Appollonius, James Trigland, Nicholas Ve-
del, and others, and which destroyed friendship between Frederic Spanheim
and John van der Wayen. For these and similar disputes, show what
were the sentiments of certain eminent divines respecting particular doc-
trines and points of morality, rather than lay open the internal state of the
church. The knowledge of the latter, must be derived from those contro
versies alone, which disquieted either the whole church or at least a large
portion of it.

29. The principal controversies of this sort, were those respecting the
Cartesian philosophy, and the new opinions of Cocceius : for these have
not yet terminated, and they have produced two very powerful parties, the
Cocceians and the Voetians ; which once made a prodigious noise, though
now they are more silent. The Cocceian theology and the Cartesian phi
losophy have no natural connexion ; and therefore the controversies re
specting them were not related to each other. Yet it so happened that
the followers of these two very distinct systems of doctrine, formed very
nearly one and the same party, those who took Cocceius for their guide in
theology, adhering to Des Cartes as their master in philosophy ;(78) be
cause those who assailed the Cartesians, attacked also Cocceius and hia
followers, and opposed both with equal animosity. Hence the Cartesians
and Cocceians were under a kind of necessity to unite and combine thei;
forces, in order the better to defend their cause against such a host of adv
versaries. The Voetians derived their name from Gislert Voet, a very
famous divine of Utrecht, who set up the standard as it were, in this war,
and induced great numbers to attack both Des Cartes and Cocceius.

30. The Cartesian philosophy, which at its first appearance was view
ed by many even in Holland as preferable to the Peripatetic, was first as
sailed by Gislert Voet in 1639, at Utrecht, where he taught theology with
very great reputation, and who not obscurely condemned this philosophy as
blasphemous. Voet was a man of immense reading and multifarious
knowledge, but indifferently qualified to judge correctly on metaphysical
and abstract subjects. While Des Cartes resided at Utrecht, Voet censu.
red various of his opinions ; but especially the following positions, which
he feared were subversive of all religion ; namely, that one who intends to
be wise, must begin by calling every thing in question, even the existence
of God : that the essence of spirits and even of God himself, consists in
thought : that space, in reality, has no existence, but is a mere fiction of
the imagination ; and therefore, that matter is without bounds. Des Cartes
first replied himself to the charges brought against him ; and afterwards,
his disciples afforded him aid. On the other hand, Voet was joined, not
only by those Dutch theologians who were then in the highest reputation
for erudition and soundness in the faith, such as Andreio Rivet, Maresius
and Van Mastricht, but also by the greatest part of the clergy of inferior
note. (7 9) To this flame already raised too high, new fuel was added

(78) See Fred. Spanheirn s Epistola de iv., part ii., p. 222, &c. Irenceus PMale-
novissimis in Belgio dissidiis ; Opp., torn, ii., ihcs (Jac. Rhenferd), Kort en opregt Verhaal
p. 973, &c. van de eerste Oorsprongder Broedertwislen.

(79) Hadr. Baillet, la vie de Mr. Des Car- A.msterd., 1708, 8vo. The first attack upon
tes, tome ii., cap. v., p. 33, &c. Gam. tne philosophy of DCS Carles was made by
Daniel, Voyage du Monde de Mr. Des Car- Gisbert Voet. A.D. 1639, in his Disputatio
trs ; in his works, tome i., p. 84, &c. [Jac. de Atheismo. Smauel Maresius, at first de-
Bruckcr s Historia Crit. philosophise, torn fended the cause of De s Carles against Yoei:



HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH. 42s

when some of the theologians applied the precepts of DCS Cartes to the
illustration of theological subjects. Hence in the year 1656, the Dutch
Classes as they are called, or assemblies of the clergy in certain districts,
resolved that resistance ought to be made, and that this imperious philos
ophy ought not to be allowed to invade the territories of theology. By
this decision the States of Holland were excited, in the same year, sternly
*o forbid by a public law, the philosophers from expounding the books of
Des Cartes to the youth, or explaining the scriptures according to the die-
tates of philosophy. In a convention at Delft the next year, it was resolv
ed, that no person should be admitted to the sacred office, without first
solemnly promising not to propagate Cartesian principles, nor to deform
revealed theology with adventitious ornaments. Similar resolutions were
afterwards passed in various places, both in the United Provinces, and out
of them. (80) But as mankind are always eager after what is forbidden,
all these prohibitions could not prevent the Cartesian philosophy from final
ly obtaining firm footing in the schools and universities, and from being
applied sometimes preposterously, by great numbers, to the illustration of
divine truths. Hence the Dutch became divided into the two parties, above
named ; and the rest of the century was spent amid their perpetual con
tentions.

31. John Cocceius, (in German Koch), a native of Bremen, professor
of theology in the University of Leyden, and unquestionably a great man,
if he had only been able to regulate and to temper with reason and judg
ment, his erudition, his ingenuity, his reverence for the holy scriptures, and
his piety, which he possessed in an eminent degree ; introduced into the
ology not a little that was novel and unheard of before his times. In the
first place, as has been already remarked, he interpreted the whole sacred
volume in a manner very different from that of Calvin and all his followers.
For he maintained, that the entire history of the Old Testament, presents
a picture of the events that were to take place under the New Testament,
down to the end of the world ; nay more, that the things which Christ
and his apostles did and suffered in this world, were emblematic of future
events. He moreover taught, that the greatest part of the prophecies of
the Jewish prophets, foretell the fortunes of Christ and of the Christian
church, not by means of the persons and things mentioned, [not typically ],
but by the direct import of the words themselves. And lastly, many of
those passages in the Old Testament, which seem to contain nothing but
the praises of Jehovah, or moral precepts and doctrines, he with wonder
ful dexterity and ingenuity, converted into sacred enigmas and predictions

but afterwards he went over to the side of Heidan, Christopher Witlich, Francis Bur-

his adversaries. Even Cocceius was at first mann, John Braun, John Clauberg, D cter

opposed to DCS Cartes, though his friend Allinga, Ballh. Becker, Stephen Curccllaus,

Heidan persuaded him to treat the name of Herm. Alex. Roel,RuardAndala, and others.

De.s Cartes respectfully in his writings. SchL]

Peter ran Mastricht, John Hornbcck, An- (SO) Fred. Spanheim, de novissimis in
drew Essen, Melchior Leydcckcr, John Belgio dissidiis ; Opp., torn, ii., 959, &c.
Waycn, Gerhard Vries, James Remus, Those who wish it, may also consult the
James Trig-land, and Frederic Spanheim common historians of this century, Arnold,
manifestly great names contended against (Kirchen-und Ketzerhistorie, vol. ii., book
Des Cartes. For him, there were among xvii., ch. x., $ 1-6), Weissmann, (Historia
the philosophers, Henry Regius, James Go- Eccles. srec. xvii.. p. 905), Jager, Caroli,
Uus, Claudius Salmasivs, Hadr. Hcerebord, and also Watch s Einleitung in die Religions-
dec , aiwl among the theologians, Abraham streitigkeiten ausser unsrer Kirche, vol. iii.



130 BOOK IV. CENT. XVII. SEC. II PART II. CHAP. II.

of future events. To give support and plausibility to these opinions, he
first laid down this law of interpretation, that the language of the Bible
must signify all that it can signify : which rule, if adopted by a man of
more genius than judgment, may give birth to very strange interpretations.
la the next place, he distributed the entire history of the Christian church
into seven portions of time or periods, relying principally on the seven
trumpets and seals of the Apocalypse.

32. Theology itself, in the opinion of Cocceius, ought to be freed from
the trammels of philosophy, and to be expounded only in scriptural phra
seology. Hence, perceiving that the sacred writers denominate the meth
od of salvation which God has prescribed, a covenant of God with men, he
concluded that there could be no more suitable and pertinent analogy, ac
cording to which to adjust and arrange an entire system of theology. But
while intent solely on accommodating and applying the principles of human
covenants to divine subjects, he incautiously fell into some opinions which
it is not easy to approve. For instance, he asserted that the covenant
which God made with the Hebrew nation, through the medium of Moses,
did not differ in its nature, from the new covenant procured by Jesus
Christ. He supposed that God caused the ten commandments to be pro-
mulged by Moses, not as a law which was to be obeyed, but as one form
of the covenant of grace. But when the Hebrews had offended him by
various sins, and especially by the worship of the golden calf, God being
moved with just indignation, superadded to that moral law the yoke of the
ceremonial law, to serve as a punishment. This yoke was in itself very
burdensome, but it became much more painful in consequence of its im
port. For it continually admonished the Hebrews of their very imperfect,
doubtful, and anxious state, and was a kind of perpetual memento that
they merited the wrath of God, and that they could not anticipate a full
expiation and remission of their sins till the Messiah should come. Holy
men indeed, under the Old Testament, enjoyed eternal salvation after
death ; but while they lived, they were far from having that assurance of
salvation, which is so comforting to us under the New Testament. For
no sins were then actually forgiven, but only suffered to remain unpunish
ed ; because Christ had not yet offered up himself as a sacrifice to God,
and therefore could not be regarded, before the divine tribunal, as one who
has actually assumed our debt, but only as our surety. I omit other opin
ions of Cocceius. Those who assailed the Cartesian doctrines, attacked
also these opinions, in a fierce war which was kept up for many years,
with various success. The issue was the same as in the Cartesian contest.
No device and no force could prevent the disciples of Cocceius from oc
cupying many professorial chairs, and from propagating the opinions of
their master both orally and in writing, with wonderful celerity among
even the Germans and the Swiss. (81)

33. Nearly all the other controversies which disquieted the Dutch
churches in this century, arose from an excessive attachment to the Carte-
sian philosophy as connected with theology. This will appear from those
commotions greater than all others, produced by Roel and Becker. Cer.



(81) The same writers may be consulted Vol. Alberti, AfTrAow K( nnra, Cartesianis-

nere, as were referred to in 30, [note 79] ; mus et Cocceianismus, descripti et refutati,

for the Cartesian and Cocceian controversies Leips., 1678, 4to.
fere united in one. To these may bo added,



HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH. 431

tain Cartesian divines, at the head of whom was Herman Alexander Roel,
a theologian of Franeker, a man of singular acuteness and perspicuity,
were supposed in the year 1686, to attribute too much to reason in theolo.

f. Nearly the whole controversy was embraced in these two questions.
Whether the divine origin and authority of the sacred books, can be
demonstrated by reason alone ; or whether the internal testimony of the
Holy Spirit is necessary, in order to a firm belief on this subject ? II.
Whether the Holy Scriptures propose any thing to be believed by us,
which is contrary to correct and sound reason? The first was affirmed
and the second denied, not only by the above named Roel, but also by
John van der Wayen, Gisbert Wessel, Duker, Ruard alt Andala, and oth
ers : the contrary was maintained, by Ulrich Huber, a jurist of great repu
tation, Gerhard de Vries, and others. (82) A great part of Belgium being
now in a flame, the states of Friesland prudently interposed and enjoined
silence and peace on both the contending parties. Those who shall accu
rately investigate this cause, will I think perceive, that a great part of it
was a strife about words, and that the remainder of it might have been
easily settled if it had been stripped of its ambiguities.

34. A little after this first controversy had been in some measure
hushed, this same Roel in the year 1689, fell under no slight suspicion
that he was plotting against sound theology, in consequence of some other
singular opinions of his. He was viewed with suspicion, not only by his
colleagues, particularly by Campeius Vitringa, but also by very many of
the Dutch divines. (83) For he denied that the Scriptural representations
of the generation of the Son of God, are to be understood literally or as
denoting a kind of natural generation ; and maintained that the death of
holy men and the evils they suffer in .this life, equally with the calamities
and death of the wicked, are the penal effects of the first sin ; and he ad
vanced some things respecting the divine decrees, original sin, the divine
influence in regard to the sinful acts of men, the satisfaction made by
Christ, and other subjects, which either in reality, or at least in form and
phraseology, differed much from the received opinions. (84) The magis
trates of Friesland published decrees, which prevented these disputes from
spreading in that province : but the rest of the Dutch, and especially those
of the province of Holland, could not be restrained from condemning Roel
and his disciples, both privately and in their public conventions, as corrupt-
ers of divine truth. (85) Nor did this resentment die with the excellent

(82) John Ic Clerc, Biblioth. Universelle tained, that, the title Son of God referred
et Histor., tome vi., p. 368. only to the human nature of Christ, and to

(83) Concerning this extraordinary man, the supernatural formation or conception of
see the Bibliotheca Bremensis Theologico- it, as also to his mediatorial office ; and con-
Philol., torn, ii., pt. vi., p. 707. Caspar sequently, that it afforded no proof of his
jBurmann sTrajectumeruditum, p. 306, &c. divinity. Yet in his later wrings, he ac-
[UnpartheyischeKirchenhistorie, Jena,1735, mitted that Christ was also called the Son c-1
4to, vol. ii., p. 620, &c. TV.] God, on account of his eternal generation by

(84) These errors may be best learned the Father ; yet without excluding tie before
from a paper of the Faculty of Theology at mentioned ground. In order to prove that
Lryden, in which they confirm the sentence the death of believers is a punishment, he
pronounced on them by the Dutch synods, maintained, that in justification only some of
entitled : Judicium ecclesiasticum, quo opin- the punishments of sin are remitted, and that
iones quaedam 01. H. A. Roellii synodicc the complete removal of them does not take
damnatae sunt, laudatum a Professoribus place till after the resurrection. Schl.]
Theologire in Academia Lugduno-Batava ; (85) [It must not be inferred, from this
Leyden, 1713, 4to, 20 sheets. iRoel main- statement of Dr. MosJieim, that professol



432 BOOK IV. CENT. XVII. SEC. II. PART II. CHAP. II.



man who was the object of it ; but even to our times, the Roelians, though
they most solemnly protest their innocence, are thought by many to be
infected with concealed heresies.

35. Balthazar Seeker, a minister of the Gospel at Amsterdam, from
the Cartesian definition of a spirit, the truth of which he held to be unques-
tionable, took occasion to deny absolutely all that the Scriptures teach ua
respecting the works, snares, and power of the prince of darkness and
his satellites, and also all the vulgar reports respecting ghosts, spectres,
and withcraft. There is extant a prolix and copious work of his, entitled
The World Bewitched, first published in 1691 ; in which he perverts and
explains away, with no little ingenuity indeed, but with no less audacity,
whatever the sacred volume relates of persons possessed by evil spirits,
and of the power of demons ; and maintains, that the miserable being whom
the sacred writers call Satan and the Devil, together with his ministers,
lies bound with everlasting chains in hell ; so that he cannot thence go
forth to terrify mortals, and to plot against the righteous. Des Cartes pla
ced the essence of spirit in thinking : but none of those acts which are as
cribed to evil spirits, can be effected by mere thought. (86) Therefore lest
the reputation of Des Cartes should be impaired, the narrations and decis
ions of the divine books must be accommodated to his opinion. This er
ror not only disquieted all the United Provinces, but likewise induced not
a few Lutheran divines to gird on their armour. (87) Its author, although



Roel was excommunicated, deprived of his
office, or even declared a heretic. Some of
his opinions were condemned ; but not the
man. After serving as a chaplain to several
noblemen, he was made professor, first of
philosophy and then of theology, at Franeker