it, establish the point. They are denominated, among other diftinctions," mad enthusiasts;" "corrupt gofpellers;" "men who thought that if they magnified Christ, and depended upon his merits, they might difregard morality;"" those who thought themselves more evangelical than others;" and who "bufily stickled in the maintenance of Calvin's doctrine"." The " 12th Article," the Bishop of Lincoln fays, "was added in 1562, in oppofition to the opinions of certain fects called Antinomians, Solifidians, and Gofpellers, who denied the neceffity of good worksi.” "Our Church," Dr. Hey proceeds, "did not. . . properly intend to lay down any doctrine of predeftination; but only to declare against abuses actually prevailing i;” or, as Mr. Daubeny explains the matter, only to "give a feries of texts relative to a certain myfterious fubject, chiefly for the purpofe of guarding against the abuse of them." In this case, 'therefore, the authors of our forms of doctrine would neceffarily use the very utmoft caution in the expreffion of their fentiments. They would, as far as the language of their times, and the fubjects in hand rendered it poffible, express just what they intended to be received, and no more. They could not express themselves too ftrongly against the old errors, but they encouraged the new ones. They were placed between Scylla and Charybdis, and could not steer at too great a distance from the one, without equal danger of fplitting upon the other. And thus have thefe Gentlemen, by their own statement, fet their bending objection straight, and proved, notwithstanding its general prevalence and apparent plaufibility, that it has no foundation whatever.

There are perfons however, who, notwithstanding all this, believe it a fact, that as far as doctrine was concerned, thefe very extravagancies, not less than the corruptions of

(h) Ibid.; Hiftory of Refor. Vol. ii. p. 27 ; &c. Vol. ii. p. 265, (j) Nor. Lect. Vol. iii. P. 502.

(r) Appendix, &c. p. 219.

(i) Elements,

Rome, confifted in a depreciation of the doctrines of grace. So far, it is, on the other hand, maintained, were the Sectaries which then prevailed inEngland from proceeding to the extreme which abuses thofe doctrines, that a leading feature by which, in common, they were diftinguished, was, their rejection of such tenets; their rejection, or extenuation, of the "doctrines of Original fin, and Predestination, and Election, and adherence to thofe of Free will and buman Merit." Nor is this opinion unfupported by unexceptionable evidence. No teftimony of an individual on fuch points, perhaps, deferves greater attention than that of Mr. Strype. No man feems to have inveftigated thefe matters with more diligence, and few have obtained greater credit for integrity. There is a Teftimonial prefixed to the fecond vol. of his Annals," which is referred to by Bishop Watson*, "of his ability for writing an ecclefiaftical hiftory of the church of England at, and after, the firft Reformation, and a recommendation of his work figned by above twenty Bishops." And yet, if we may credit Mr. Strype, they were not abusers of Calvinifm, but perfons of the very oppofite principles,

who firit made a feparation from the Reformed Church of England in 1550;" who excited the anxiety, and exercifed the Pens; of the principal Reformers in Queen Mary's -time; and in short, who conftituted the principal Sects that obtained, and were noticed, in 1552, 1562, and 1571, the periods when the articles were especially under confidération; when they were framed, revised, and finally eftablished. The principles, Mr. S. mentions, among those which especially diftinguished these Sects, are, that they "held the opinions of the Anabaptists and Pelagians, and violently opposed the doctrine of Predeftination;" that they held freewill, man's righteoufnefs, and juftification by works; doctrines which the Proteftants in the times of

(k) Tracts Index. thefe years.

(1) See Eccles. Mem. and Annals under

King Edward, for the most part, difowned;" that they "denied the Divinity of Chrift and of the Holy Ghost, the doctrine of Original fin, Predeftination and free Election, &c. which the Proteftants here generally held "."

The fame thing is indeed obvious from another confideration. The Sectaries against whom the Articles are said to have been principally intended are, the Anabaptists, and the Puritans". Now that the errors of the Anabaptists were on the Pelegian fide of the question, there can be no doubt. And, when the Articles were first framed, and, in substance, made what they now are, the Puritans did not exist. Nay, there is very strong evidence, that at the time when these doctrinal standards affumed their precife prefent form, no difference had commenced between the Episcopal Churchmen, and thofe afterwards called Puritans, in matters of doctrine; but, that the leaders of our Reformed Church were unanimous in decrying the above Anticalvinistic fentiments as heretical 9.

Now in proportion as this account of the matter is received, the former one must be rejected, and of courfe all reafonings upon it. But then, our fyftem will be equally supported upon another principle. In this cafe, as will appear more fully hereafter, the prevailing fentiments of our Reformers were those now ufually termed Calvinistic, and they are expreffed with great moderation. Our opponents may admit whether of thefe accounts they please, they are equally unfriendly to their extenuating system. If, according to the former, and now common reprefentation, it was a principal object with the authors of our forms to guard against Calvinism, then certainly they would verge no nearer it than

(m) See Ibid. (n) Above, p. 19. (0) See the 8th. of King Edward's Arts. in the Collection, &c. to Hift. of Reformation, p. 210; and Hift. itself, Vol. ii. p. 110. (p) See Strype's Life of Parker, (q) See ibid.; Neal's Hift. of the Puritans, p. 137, 162, 268; Rogers Preface to his Expof, of the Articles, &c. (r) Sect. 2nd. of this Chap.

p. 154.

what they deemed effential truth; if, according to the latter account, they were themselves, in the above sense, Calvinists, this confideration will prohibit the smallest extenuation of the plain meaning of their words. And every one of the statements which have been made, their conceffions towards the ancient fyftem, their rejection of Calvinifm, or their unanimity upon it, militates alfo directly against the frequent infinuation, that expreffions were adopted beyond what was intended, in order to accommodate, and to comprehend the Calvinifts.

3. Another method by which we may approach the precife doctrines intended to be established in the written confeffions of our Church, is, The examination of the OTHER WRITINGS AND DECLARATIONS of her Reformers, on the fame fubjects; especially those which were of great publicity, or had the fanction of authority.

These writings are at once commentaries upon the establifhed Creed, and in themselves direct evidences what doctrines were uniformly taught by the framers and imposers of it. It would indeed greatly exceed the limits of our plan to exhibit here this evidence in its proper force. We will however venture to affert, that, from the Acceffion of Edward when the articles of our faith firft came under regular difcuffion, to the period when they affumed their present form, and were finally impofed under Elizabeth, there is no other production either of any collective Body of the chief Agents in the business, or even of any principal individual among them, that in the fmalleft degree reftricts the most full and doctrinal interpretation of these articles upon the points in question. Nor did thefe venerable men ever, at any future period, difcover by their writings any relaxation of the fentiments here exprefsed. In expatiating upon them more at

(s) See Croft's Bampt. Lect. p. 109; Strictures on Paley p. 58, Antijac. Rev. for January 1800, p. 47.

large, they oftentimes pursued these doctrines still further, and went beyond what is neceffarily implied in the established compendium; but it was left for Divines of another Century to explain them away.

We begin with the acceffion of King Edward, because then only, it is, and muft be, confeffed, the legal and regular reformation of our Church commenced. Before that period, as Bishop Burnet expreffes the matter," it was rather conceived than brought forth." Bishop Pretyman, accordingly, calls Edward the "first Proteftant King of England"." The great hero of this work, Cranmer, had before laboured under perpetual and invincible restrictions from the auftere and capricious Henry: and, as might naturally be expected, his own mind, and the minds of his affociates, only opened upon the erroneous fyftem gradu̟ally; and by the fame gradation advanced toward the perfection of truth. The productions of Henry the Eighth's time are not therefore the proper illustrations of our articles. As well might we attempt to illuftrate the perfections of a man by the half-formed Embryo; as well might we recur to the dawn of the morning to illumine the meridian brightnefs. Thefe publications were indeed excellent in comparifon of what preceded them, and in fome particulars their doctrines are found; but they notoriously, and confeffedly, retain many of the peculiarities of the Romish faith. "In the articles of religion published by Henry the 8th in 1536," Bishop Pretyman fays, "fome of the Popish doctrines are difclaimed, but others are retained"." And, the

Neceffary Doctrine," &c. "printed in 1543," Dr. Hey admits, has many doctrines of the church of Rome in it." It would therefore be equally warrantable to prove from fuch writings, that these Popish doctrines are the fpecific doctrines of our church, as any others on which they differ from what was afterwards agreed upon. Yet with

(t) Pref. to 1ft Vol. of Hift. of Reform. (v) Elements, Vol. ii. p. 34. (w) Ibid. (x) Nor. Lect. Vol. ii. p. 207.