as is said of the fabulous tree of Java, to breathe poison and death while it stands.

Human formularies, therefore, on men of genius are impertinent check-strings, causing them to stop, when they ought to proceed; to be cautious, where they should be resolute; timid, where they ought to be firm; slothful, where they should be industrious; and, even when they make discoveries, backward and procrastinating in communicating them to men, of very moderate abilities, and shallow, superficial arguments, they give a dangerous confidence, a popular boldness, an oracular power of appeal, an authoritative tone of decision; and men of weak capacities, and humble attainments, they keep in their state of infancy, and hold in leading-strings, all their days.

Such is the nature, such sad experience has proved it to be, of our Corpus Confessionums, our human Formularies of Faith in Protestant Communities. Men seem to have thought, that human opinions rise in value, for a succession of two or three centuries, as figures increase in value, ten times backwards towards the left hand. Whereas the contrary ratio is, in numerous cases, and for obvious reasons, found to be the true one.-With respect to our Divinity Schools, at Cambridge, we may take the rationale of them pretty correctly. The late learned Professor, Dr. Watson, published six volumes of Theological Tracts, prefixed to which will be found a List of Questions proposed in the Schools through a series of years in the Divinity Schools, viz. during the Professorships of Dr. Rutherforth, of himself, and, at a much earlier period, of Dr. Tuckney. It will, on all hands, I apprehend, be allowed, that while Bishop Watson was engaged in the duties of his office, he discharged them with as much liberality as discernment; and in the selection of his Tracts he has displayed the same liberality. This spirit may be seen in his distinguishing the Questions of Dr. Tuckney, (who was ejected in 1662 for nonconformity) above those of others, who had been Divi

nity Professors, in the intermediate time, between Dr. Tuckney and Dr. Rutherforth. It is no less visible, from his inserting, among his Tracts, some of Dr. Clarke's, and several written by Protestant Dissenters, Dr. Taylor, Dr. Priestley, and others: but would Bishop Watson, or, circumstanced as he was, could he, or, as some might ask, being bound by his own subscriptions to Queen Elizabeth's Statute, and King James's Letters, ought he, to have admitted questions vindicatory of Dr. Clarke's "Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity," of Dr. Taylor's " View of Original Sin," or of certain of Dr. Priestley's Polemical Writings? It is evident, I think, that the learned Professor, however liberal-minded, would not; it is evident, also, that the above-mentioned questions do also, in some sort, actually consider the Established Formulary as the Ruling Star of our Divinity-Schools; and, that where they do not point directly to it, the variations are but small.

It will be recollected by some, that this learned Professor, when officiating as Moderator in the Divinity-Schools, used sometimes to hold out in his hand a Greek Testament, intimating, at the same time, that to be the rule, which the disputants should regard in their arguments, and himself, in his decision; and this, as if he should say,-though he did not so express himself" in defiance of the S9 Articles." This was done with his accustomed dignity (for he was well-instructed in the Protestant Doctrine of the Right of Private Judgment, though he had not learned it from Elis zabeth's Statutes, or James's Letters), and not in the facetious, ironical spirit of Father Fulgentio. This preacher was once addressing a Popish assembly at Venice, on Pilate's question, "What is Truth?" When, holding out to them a New Testament, he informed them, that after much investigation, he had discovered it; and looked, as though intending to present it to them: then closing the book, and putting it into his pocket, he archly continued, "but the book is prohibited."Now, to present men with a book,

and to oblige them at the same time to receive a given interpretation of it (as was done towards Churches and Universi ties at the Reformation, and still is), to the extent of these 39 Articles-this is little different from locking up the sense of it; for it precludes the free use of it, and prevents an unbiassed examination of its contents. All the Vindications of Subscription, and grave Sermons, united, of Drs. Rutherforth, Powel, Halifax, and Hey, cannot furnish an answer to Father Fulgentio's honest irony.

3. Having thus considered, in a general way, the influence of our Statutes, Royal Letters, &c. on Criticism, and Theological Literature, let us,-to put the matter in the most striking point of view-add a few words on the Nature and Extent of our Subscriptions, together with the testimonies of several learned men, members of our University, against them.

An extract from Queen Elizabeth's Statute has been already given, and an allusion also made to King James's three darling Articles, as he used to call them. As, over and above an obligation to obey University and CollegeStatutes, the members of our University are also bound to receive the above Articles, as the rule of their faith and practice, it may not be improper to give them here at full length. They read, as follows:

"I. That the King's Majesty under God is the only supreme Governor of the Realms; and all other his Highness's dominions and countries, as well in spiritual as ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal, and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within his Majesty's said realms, dominions, and countries.

"II. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of Ordering of Bishops, containeth nothing in it contrary to the Word of God; and that it may lawfully be used; and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed, in

public prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, and no other.

"III. That he alloweth the Book of Articles, agreed upon by the Archbishops, and Bishops of both provinces, and the whole Clergy in Convocation holden at London in 1562, and that he acknowledgeth all and every of the Articles therein contained (being in number 39, besides the Ratification) to be agreeable to the word of God.

"We, whose names are underwritten, do willingly, and ex animo, subscribe to the 3 Articles above-mentioned, and to all things therein contained *."

One or two brief remarks should be made here.

By a Grace, then, which passed the Senate Jan. 2, 1613, it was ordered (juxta tenorem literarum a serenissimo Rege Jacobo missarum) that no one should have a Grace passed, for the Degrees of Bachelor in Theology, or Doctor in any Faculty, till he had subscribed James's three Articles. But James afterwards so narrowed this Grace, as, it should seem, to supersede it, and to place in its room his own Royal Order of Dec. 12, 1616, which, among other things, runs thus-" that his Majesty signified his pleasure, that he would have all that take any Degree in Schools to subscribe to the three Articles," quoted above.

It seems, as though James, wished to have it understood, that he behaved towards the University with great liberality and condescension in this business; and the Bishop of Winchester, with King James's Order, sent the following strange Letter to Dr. Hill, Master of Catharine Hall, who was the Vice-Chancellor that year.

"Good Mr. Vice-Chancellor,

"I have sent you his Majesty's hand to his own direction: I think you have no precedent, that ever a King first with his own mouth, then with his own hand, gave such

* Excerpta e Stat. Acad. Cantab. p. 25.

DISSERTATION.

directions; and, therefore, you shall do very well to keep the writing curiously, and their directions religiously, and to give his Majesty a good account of 'em carefully; which I pray God you may: and so, with my love to yourself and the rest of the heads, I commit you to God.

"From the Court, the 12th Dec. 1616,"

Such, then, is the theory, according to King James's three darling Articles, of Subscription; and both of the theory and practice an account is given in another part of this work: The it is unnecessary to treat of them further here. truth is, the few pages now remaining to the end of this Dissertation have been lying blank for a considerable time, during which, what was intended to be stated here, has been treated of in another place. The testimonies of learned Academics against the system are also there given. The few following pages, therefore, shall be filled up with other

matters.

After so much, elsewhere advanced, concerning spurious charters, a desire was felt to pursue the same course relative to them, as will be found to be adopted towards some other subjects, which concern our Universities: this was, to introduce the testimonies of learned men on these points, so that some opinions, which have been advanced, might appear to flow in the natural order of facts, and to rest not on private, prejudiced, and doubtful allegations, but on public, unsuspected testimonies, on well-established, substantial authorities; for, I am aware, it may startle some people, not accustomed to this sort of inquiry, to read, that charters and other public instruments, which could confer the most powerful privileges, give the most extravagant exemptions, and convey the most extensive possessions, were many of them gross forgeries. Certain, however, it is, that the forging of charters was so common a practice, from the sixth to the eleventh century, and even later, that it may almost be said to have been a profession.