Fresh out break of the Quinquarticular disputes in England. that we never weaken the promises of the Gospel universally propounded in the Church'.' It would have been well for our own country, as for others, if the controversialists had hearkened to this sober counsel, and instead of pursuing their speculations on the nature of the Divine decrees, had turned to that aspect of religion immediately bearing upon man. But in spite of the earnest efforts of a small conciliatory band, the return of the deputies from Dort was the signal for a still deeper agitation of the topics there disputed. Already do we see the sky blacken,' was the language of Bishop Hall2, (himself one of the few mediators); we hear the winds whistle hollow afar off, and feel all the presages of a tempest, which the late example of our neighbours bids us fear.' A growing school of the English theologians had warmly espoused the tenets of Arminius, and gave vent to their unmeasured condemnation of the synod in which his system was proscribed; the rest were even louder in their praises of the Calvinistic party, and though happily restrained from the deeds of bloodshed which had accompanied the suppression of the Dutch Remonstrants, it is impossible to exaggerate the ferocity of the zeal which they now breathed in every quarter. The pulpits of the rural district, as well as of the town, were propagating the perturbation of which the Universities were the center. Everywhere, some or other of the Five Points' was the text of the fiery preacher, and if he chanced to hold the Calvinistic theory, which was very frequently the case, he stirred up the strongest passions of his audience by associating the system of Arminius with the hated Babylonish harlot3; while the press, vying with the pulpit, was 1 Suffragium Collegiale Synodo Dordrecht. 103, 104, Lond. 1626. 2 Dedication of the 'Via Media.' 3 The House of Commons, who made their religious discontent a plea for political agitations, were manifesting the same spirit. The following specimen occurs in their remonstrance against the Duke of inundating the country with a host of publications, which for the coarseness of their tone and the rancour of their spirit are unrivalled even among the sickening annals of the Quinquarticular disputations. James I. to The zeal and vehemence, or, we might almost Attempt of add, the frenzy, with which these questions were now repress them. handled, appear to have at length satisfied the King that his sanction of the recent synod had been the means of calling up a power which, if not speedily allayed, might embody itself in some political agitation, and shake him from his throne. His next step, therefore, was an effort to restrain the contending parties, and with the versatility which may be traced in all his public conduct, he wrote a letter to archbishop Abbot (August 4, 1622), deploring the abuses and extravagances of the pulpit, and charging him to circulate a number of Directions concerning Preachers' among all the clergy of his province. One of these, which was obviously intended as a curb on the rampant disputations, was couched in the following terms: "That no preacher of what title soever, under the degree of a bishop, or dean at least, do from henceforth presume to preach in any popular auditory the deep points of predestination, election, reprobation, or the universality, efficacy, resistibility or irresistibility of God's grace; but leave those themes to be handled by learned men, and that moderately and modestly, by way of use and application, rather than by way of positive doctrine, as being fitter for the schools and universities than for simple auditories'.' Buckingham: 'And as our fear concerning change of subversion of religion is grounded upon the daily increase of papists....so are the hearts of your good subjects no less perplexed, when with sorrow they behold a daily growth and spreading of the faction of the Arminians, that being, as your majesty well knows, but a cunning way to bring in popery, and the pro- Similar attempt of Charles I. But notwithstanding the vigilance of the ecclesiastical authorities, who were now as weary as King James of the fruitless' agitation, and grieved at the spread of 'indecent railing,' the royal order, in many districts of the island, was continually forgotten, or ignored. When Charles I. succeeded to the throne in 1625, he found the Church of England labouring under the evils which had grown up in the previous reign, spent by unedifying contests, and torn by the factions which were fostered every day by the virulence of party-spirit. He therefore betook himself in earnest to the remedies which had been suggested by his father, and with the help of Laud and some other Proclamation bishops, drew up the memorable Proclamation of 1626. He began by deploring the prevalence of dissensions, and the sharp and indiscreet handling of some of either party,' on the ground that they had 'given much offence to the sober and well-grounded readers, and raised some hopes in the Roman Catholics that by degrees the professors of our religion may be drawn, first to schism, and afterwards to plain popery.' He then signified his disapprobation of all those who, from motives of a different kind, adventured to innovate on the existing usage of the realm, avowing his determination to visit the clergy, whoever they might be, with a severe penalty, if they should raise, publish, or maintain opinions not clearly warranted by the doctrine and discipline of the Church3. of 1626: imperfectly obeyed. In the Universities and market-towns where this of Corpus Christi College, Ox- 1 Almost the only fruit of it above doctrines, Wilkins, 466. 2 Their object might be in some measure to deliver Montague from his numberless assailants, among the rest from the House of Commons, who had established a Committee of Religion and undertaken the censorship of the theological press. See Le Bas, Life of Laud, 87, 88. 3 Rushworth, I. 412. edict was immediately put in circulation, it seems to After reminding the people that he was the su- 1 Many of the divines at that period foresaw the inevitable tendency of the Genevan teaching. In a letter to the Duke of Buckingham in 1625 from three of the bishops, it is affirmed 'that they cannot conceive what use there can be of civil government in the commonwealth, or of preaching and external ministry in the Church, if such fatal opinions, as some which are opposite and contrary to those delivered by Mr Mountague shall be publickly taught and maintained.' And a yet stronger affirmation of this truth may be seen in a Letter of Dr Brooks, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, Dec. 15, 1630. Heylin's Hist. Quinqu-Art. Part II. ch. vI. 2 Prynne, in his Canterburie's 129. of the Articles claration pre of repressing unnecessary disputations, he proceeds, with the advice of his bishops, to declare that the Its general Articles of Religion contain true doctrine, and to con nature. firm them by his royal approbation. He then states, in the two following clauses, that differences on the external polity of the Church should be settled by the clergy assembled in Convocation', and that from the decisions of this body he will not endure any varying or departing in the least degree. On approaching the dissensions which had been ill raised' among the clergy, he expressed his satisfaction that all of them had cordially subscribed the Articles established, and that even in 'those curious points in which the present differences lie,' the disputants were on both sides. not unwilling to carry their appeals to that common standard. In respect, therefore, of the questions rising out of the Quinquarticular controversy, he ended by the following order: We will that all further curious search be laid aside, and these disputes shut up in God's promises, as they be generally set forth to us in the holy Scriptures, and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them. And that no man hereafter shall either print or preach to draw the Article aside any way, but shall submit to it in the plain and full meaning thereof: and shall not put his own sense or comment to be the meaning of the Article, but shall take it in the literal and grammatical sense?.' 1 This clause aroused the special indignation of the puritan, Sir John Elliot: 'And now to the particular in the declaration, we see what is said of popery and Arminianism; our faith and religion is in danger by it, for like an inundation it doth break in at once upon us. It it said, If there be any difference of opinion concerning the seasonable interpretation of the Thirty-nine Articles, the bishops and clergy in the convocation have power to dispute it, and to order which way they please, and for aught I know, popery and Arminianism may be introduced by them, and then it must be received by all.' Rushworth, I. 649. 2 Wilkins, Iv. 475. On Dec. 30, 1629, the king published instructions for causing the contents of the Declaration to be put in execution and punctually |