adversaries, and thrown into the Seine. Philosophy, it would seem, has her bigots, as well as religion; and the dispute, moreover, about quisquis, is highly indicative of the pulse of the times, and worthy of those who believed that nothing remained to be done in philosophy since the days of Aristotle.

When or where Arminius became acquainted with the philosophy of Ramus, does not appear. But a mind so ardent and inquiring as his, could not fail to read every thing which came in his way. That he found difficulty in the philosophy of Aristotle, will not be put to the score of heresy in these times; at least it will not, in this country. That he could find such difficulty, shews an inquiring, curious mind; perhaps some proneness to take pleasure in new things. Beza saw, as he thought, this characteristic of mind in him. He accordingly advertised one of Arminius' friends to warn him against it."It is a thing," said this wise and experienced instructor, "which Satan often makes use of in order to mislead distinguished men. Do not engage in vain subtleties. If certain thoughts which are new, suggest themselves to your mind, do not approve them at once, without having thoroughly investigated them, whatever pleasure they may at first afford you.Calvin gave me this advice; I have followed it, and always found it exceedingly good."

Nothing could be more opportune, or more judicious and sound, than this advice. Had Arminius taken it as he should have done, and reduced it to practice, he would have never been the head of a party which is called by his name; and he would have avoided many a scandal and sorrow, and much disturbance to the church of God.

It is to be deeply regretted, that all the ministers of religion have not put in practice such principles as Calvin and Beza have thus recommended. They do not stand in the way of any real improvement whatever, in the manner of representing or teaching religion; they only stand in the way of hasty and crude speculations being thrown out, before they are in any good measure examined or digested.

Grynaeus himself, pleased as he was with Arminius while at Basle, seems to have entertained views of his temperament like those of Beza. Philip Paraeus, in his life of David Paraeus, avers that Grynaeus Arminium graviter admonuisse, against his ardour and love of novelty.

I am indebted for these particulars to Bayle; for Bertius, the

partial friend of Arminius, has wholly omitted them in his account of him. I cannot refrain from adding Bayle's own reflections; not only for their distinguished acuteness, but for their usefulness. "The cautions of Beza," says he, "are fitted to furnish reflections profitable to many persons, and quite necessary for some readers. Remember the maxim of St. Paul, Knowledge puffeth up; but be on your guard against another talent, which puffs up more still. A man of boundless memory and reading applauds himself for his knowledge, and becomes proud. But one applauds himself still more, and is still more proud, when he thinks himself to have invented a new method of explaining or treating any subject. One is not so apt to consider himself the father of a science which he has learned from books, as he is to regard himself as the parent of some new explanation or doctrine which he has invented. It is for one's own inventions that a man cherishes the strongest partiality and affection; here he finds the most captivating charms; this is what dazzles him, and makes him lose sight of every thing else. It is a quicksand, of which the young, who are possessed of distinguished talents, cannot be too much admonished, nor too cautious to shun.”

These sentiments are not the less true nor the less important, because they come from a man who is known to have been somewhat sceptical on the subject of religion. They are worthy of all approbation and good heed on the part of every man, engaged in the solemn and highly responsible office of teaching the principles of the gospel.

Let us return to Arminius at Geneva. How long he remained here, during his second residence, is not well ascertained; but as he came here in 1583, and went into Italy in 1586-7, it seems probable that his stay was three or more years.

He was attracted to Italy, by the philosophic fame of James Zabarella at Padua. Thither he went, attended by a youug Hollander, his constant and friendly companion. After attending a course of lectures here, he travelled through Italy, visited Rome, then returned to Geneva for a short time, and soon after to Holland. While on his travels, he and his companion carried with them a Greek Testament and a Hebrew Psalter, which they did not fail daily to read, in their exercises of devotion. In 1587 Arminius returned to Holland; and, on repairing to Amsterdam, he found that reports had been circulated there greatly to his disadvantage, respecting his favourable views of No. II.

30

the Roman Catholic religion. Among other things, it was said that he had kissed the pope's feet; that he was intimate with Jesuits; that he was introduced to Cardinal Bellarmine; and that he had renounced the Protestant religion. "All this was false," says Bertius, "for he never saw the pope, except as one of the crowd who gazed on him as he passed by, nor does the beast admit any except kings and princes to the honour of kissing his feet; of the Jesuits he knew nothing; Bellarmine he never saw; and as to the Protestant religion, he has ever been ready to shed his blood in its defence." "Bertius is wrong," says Bayle, "in averring that the pope admits none to kiss his feet but kings and princes; private individuals are sometimes admitted to this honour!"

The probability is, that Arminius had been a little profuse of compliments and politeness to the Italians, while he travelled in their country; and it is also probable, that he had ventured to express his admiration of some things which he found in the consecrated land of classical study. This, in the view of some of his fellow Protestants, was "paying homage to the beast." They began spargere voces ambiguas, at first; these, like Virgil's Fama, soon magnified; every day's journey which they took, added new strength; and by the time they reached Amsterdam, they had assumed the definite shape which has been stated above. It is thus that a little more than ordinary civility towards one's opponents, can be transformed by party zeal, and withal a little of jealousy or envy, into downright heresy.

The reflections of Bayle on this subject are so just and striking, that I cannot forbear to transcribe them. "Among the popular diseases of the human mind, I know not whether any are more worthy of blame, or more productive of evil consequences, than the habit of giving a loose rein to suspicion. It is a very slippery road; and one very soon finds himself at a great distance from the point where he set out. He passes easily from one suspicion to another. He begins with possibility, but does not stop there. He passes on to probability; then to an almost certainty. In a short time, what was possible or probable, becomes matter of incontestable certainty; and this certainty is spread over a whole town. Large cities are most of all exposed to this evil."

It may be true that large cities are more prolific in such offspring; because the means of multiplying them are so much more facile and convenient. But human nature is every where

substantially the same; and one of the most conspicuous evidences of its degraded and sinful condition, is, its proneness to suspicion and detraction, and the gratification which it experiences in indulging or fostering this spirit.

Arminius found his Mecaenases, at Amsterdam, cold and suspicious when he first returned. He succeeded, however, in satisfying them entirely that he had been slandered. He soon received an invitation to a place as minister in one of the churches at Amsterdam, over which he was installed in 1588, being then 28 years of age. On his return from Italy, he had passed through Geneva, where Beza gave him a letter to his patrons, in which he speaks of him as "animo ad faciendum officium optime comparatus, si Domino Deo placeret, ipsius uti ad opus suum in ecclesiâ suâ ministerio."

Arminius soon became exceedingly popular as a preacher at Amsterdam. His slender, but sweet and sonorous voice, his manner, his ardour, his distinguished talents and finished education, all combined to give him extensive popularity and influence. The rumours which had been set afloat concerning his inclination to become a Catholic, gradually died away, and all classes of men united in extolling his talents as a preacher and a pastor.

This season of popularity and peace, however, was soon in a measure interrupted, by an occurrence unforeseen, and altogether without design, on the part of Arminius. There lived, at Amsterdam, a man of distinguished talents and learning, by the name of Theodore Koornhert, who was strongly opposed to the doctrine of predestination as held at Geneva and in Holland, and who had written and spoken much against it. Two of the ministers at Delft, Arnold Cornelius and Renier Dunteklok had undertaken, by conference and by writing, to oppose Koornhert. In order to do this, however, as they thought to the best advantage, they had relinquished the views of Calvin and Beza in respect to the decretum absolutum, viz. the doctrine that the decree of election and reprobation preceded all respect to the fall of man, and to his obedience or disobedience. This is what has since been called Supralapsarianism. On the other hand, the ministers at Delft maintained, not only that God in his decree regarded man as created, but also that he had respect to his lapsed condition. This is what has since been called Sublapsarianism. It was the work which the Delft ministers published at this time, entitled Answer to some Arguments of Calvin

and Beza on the subject of Predestination, which first gave rise to these denominations in the church of Christ.

Whether the ministers of Delft did not misunderstand the views of Calvin and Beza, it may be of some importance here briefly to shew. Calvin says: "Predestination we call the eternal decree of God, by which he hath determined, in himself, what he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar destiny; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or other of these ends, we say, he is predestinated either to life or to death." Institutt. Lib. III. c. 21. § 5.*—“ In conformity with the clear doctrine of Scripture, we assert, that by an eternal and immutable counsel, God hath once for all determined, both whom he would once for all admit to salvation, and whom again he would condemn to destruction." Ib. § 7.† -" Now with respect to the reprobate . . . . Esau, while yet unpolluted with any crime, is accounted an object of hatred. If we turn our attention to works, we insult the apostle, as though he saw not what is clear to us. Now that he saw none [i. e. no works], is evident, because he expressly asserts the one [Jacob] to have been elected, and the other [Esau] rejected, while they had not yet distinguished any good or evil, to prove the foundation of divine predestination not to be in works. . . . The reprobate are raised up for this purpose, that the glory of God may be displayed by their means. When God is said to harden, or shew mercy to whom he pleases, men are taught by this declaration, to seek no cause beside his will." Lib. III. c. 22. § 11.

* Praedestinationem vocamus aeternum Dei decretum, quo apud se constitutum habuit, quid de unoquoque homine fieri vellet. Non enim pari conditione creantur omnes; sed aliis vita aeterna, aliis damnatio aeterna praeordinatur. Itaque prout in alterutrum finem quisque conditus est, ita vel ad vitam vel ad mortem praedestinatum dicimus.

+ Quod ergo Scriptura clare ostendit, dicimus, aeterno et immutabili consilio Deum semel constituisse, quos olim semel assumere vellet in salutem, quos rursum exitio devovere.

Nunc de reprobis.... Esau, nullo adhuc scelere inquinatus, odio habetur. Si ad opera convertimus oculos, injuriam irrogamus apostolo, quasi id ipsum quod nobis perspicuum est non viderit. Porro non vidisse convincitur, quando hoc nominatim