Skip to the text
Ember
PT

Book XII

From the Year 1571 to 1579, and from 1603 till the Year 1615.

A brief Summary. — The Reformed Churches disturbed about the word Substance even in France. — It is maintained as grounded on the word of God in one Synod, and in another brought to nothing in favour of the Swiss, who were angry with the decision. — One Faith for France, and another for Switzerland. — Assembly of Frankfort, and a project of a new Confession of Faith for the whole second party of Protestants — What was to be suppressed there in favour of the Lutherans. — Detestation of the Real Presence established and suppressed at the same time. — Piscator's affair, and the doctrinal decision of four National Synods reduced to nothing. — Principles of the Calvinists, and demonstrations drawn from them in our behalf — Du Moulin's propositions received at the Synod of Ay. — Nothing solid or serious in the Reformation.

  1. — Many pretended Reformed Churches of France are for changing the article of the Supper, in their Confession of Faith.— i5Sl.

The union of Sendomir had not its effect, except in Poland. In Switzerland, the Zuinglians continued steadfast to reject equivocations. The French began already to join in their sentiments. Many maintained openly, that it was requisite to discard the word Substance, and change the thirty-sixth article of the Confession of Faith presented to Charles IX., wherein the Supper was explained. It was not particular men that made this dangerous proposal, but whole churches, even the chief churches, those of the Isle of France and Brie, that of Paris, that of Meaux, where the exercise of Calvinism commenced, and others neighbouring to them. These churches were for changing so considerable an article of their Confession of Faith, which they had published but ten years before as containing nothing but the pure Avord of God ; this must have

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 167 too much discredited the new party. The Synod of Rochelle, wherein Beza presided, resolved to condemn these reformers of the Reformation in 1571.

  1. — The. National Synod condemns them. — This Synod^s decision full of ^perplexities.

The case required a clear and distinct sentence. The contest being on foot, and the parties present, there needed no more than to decide in few words ; but brevity is the fruit of clear conceptions only. Behold, therefore, word for word what was concluded, and I ask only to be allowed to divide the decree into three parts, and to recite them severally.

They begin by rejecting what is evil, and their condemnations fall justly enough. To fix upon any thing will be the grand difficulty ; but let us read. " Concerning the thirty-sixth article of the Confession of Faith, the deputies of the Isle of France represented, that it would be requisite to explain this article, insomuch as it speaks of the participation of the substance of Jesus Christ. After a conference of some length, the Synod, approving the thirty-sixth article, rejects the opinion of those who refuse to receive the word Substance, by which word is not understood any confusion, commixtion, or conjunction whatever after a carnal manner, or otherwise natural, but a true conjunction, very intimate, and in a spiritual way, Avhereby Jesus Christ himself is so made ours, and we his, that there is no conjunction of body, whether natural or artificial, so close ; the which nevertheless does not tend to this end, that of his substance and person joined to our substances and persons, there should be compounded some third person and substance, but only to this, that his virtue and all in him requisite to our salvation, be by this means the more strictly given and communicated to us, dissenting from those who say, we join ourselves to all his merits and gifts, and with his holy Spirit only, without he himself being ours." Here is abundance of words, and nothing said. It is no commixtion, either carnal or natural : who knows not that ? It has nothing in common with the vulgar mixtures ; its end is divine ; the maimer of it is entirely celestial, and in this sense, spiritual ; who questions it P But has any man ever dreamt, that of the substance of Jesus Christ united to ours, a third person was made a third substance ? So much time ought not to be lost in rejecting such chimeras as never entered into any man's head.

  1. — Fain efforts of the Si/nod to find the substance of the Body and Blood in the Doctrine of the pretended reformed Churches.

Tt is something to reject those who pretend we partake in nothing but the merits of Jesus Christ, in his gifts, and in his spirit, without his giving himself to us: it Avas only requisite they should add, that he gives himself to us in the proper and natural substance of his flesh and blood, for this was the point in hand, and the thing to be explained. Catholics do this very clearly, for they say, Jesus Christ in pronouncing " This is my body, the same that was given for you : This is my blood, the same that was shed for you *," designs, not the figure of it, but the substance, which, in saying " Take," he renders wholly ours, there being nothing more ours than that which is given us in this manner. This speaks ; this is intelhgible. Instead of delivering themselves thus clearly and distinctly, we shall see our ministers lose themselves in rambling from the point, heap texts on texts without concluding anything. Let us return to where we left off; here is what presents itself: " Not consenting," proceed they, "with those who say, we join ovu'selves to his merits and his gifts and his spirit only, yea, rather marvelling with the Apostle (Ephes. v.) at this secret, supernatural and incomprehensible to our reason, we believe that we are made partakers of the body given for us and the blood shed for us ; that we be flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones, and receive him together with all his gifts with him by faith engendered in us by the incomprehensible influence and power of this holy spirit ; thus understanding that which is said, ' whoso eateth the flesh and drinketh the blood hath life everlasting.' Item, Christ is the vine and we the branches, and that he maketh us abide in him to the end we may bring forth fruit, and that we be members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones." They are certainly afraid of being understood, or rather do not understand themselves : thus clogging their meaning with so many useless words, so many intricate phrases, such a confused jumble of crowded texts. For after all, what they have to shew is, how much those are in the wrong who, refusing to acknowledge, in the Eucharist, any other communication than that of the merits and spirit of Jesus Christ, discard from this mystery " The proper substance of liis body and blood."" Now this is

••' i^Iat. xxvi. 20, 28. Luke xxii. 11), 20. 1 Cor. xi, 24.

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 169 what in no way appears in any of these numerous texts. These texts condude, only that we receive something flowing from Jesus Christ in order to enhven us, as members receive from the Head the spirit which animates them ; but do not at all conclude for our receiving the proper substance of his body and blood. None of these texts, except one only, namely, that of St. John vi., relate at all to the Eucharist; neither does that of St. John vi., if we believe the Calvinists, relate to it. And if this text, well understood, shews indeed in the Eucharist the proper substance of Jesus Christ's flesh and blood, yet it does not shew it in the manner it is here employed by the ministers, since the upshot of their discourse concludes at length in this, that "We receive Jesus Christ together with all his gifts with him by faith engendered in us." Now " Jesus Christ by faith engendered in us," is nothing less than Jesus Christ united to us in the proper and true substance of his flesh and blood ; the first of these being no more than moral wrought by pious affections of the mind ; and the second, being physical, is real and immediate of body to body, and of substance to substance : thus does this great synod expound nothing less than what it proposes to expound.

  1. — Error of the Synod ivhich seels the Mystery of the Euchu' rist without producing the Institution.

I observe in this decree, that the Calvinists having undertaken to explain the mystery of the Eucharist, and in this mystery the proper substance of Jesus Christ's body and blood, which it is grounded on, allege to us far different things from the words of the institution, " This is my body, This is my blood ;■" for they are very sensible, should they say, these words import the proper substance of the body and blood, that this would be making it clearly appear, that our Lord's design was to express the body and blood, not in figure, nor even in virtue, but in effect, in truth, and in substance. Thus this substance must have been not only by faith, in the minds and thoughts of the faithful, but in effect, and in truth, under the sacramental si)ecies, where Jesus Christ denotes it, and thereby, even in our bodies, into which we are ordered to receive it, to the end that we might, in every way, enjoy our Saviour and participate of our victim.

  1. — The Si/nod's reason for establishing the Substance. — They conclude the other Opinion to be contrary to God's tvord. Now, whereas the decree had not cited any one text that concluded for the proper substance, the thing in question, but rather had excluded it by shewing Jesus Christ united by faith only ; they come back at length to the substance by the following w'ords : '^ And in fact, as we derive our death from the first Adam, inasmuch as we partake of his substance ; so it is requisite we should partake truly of the second Adam, Christ Jesus, that we may derive our life from him. Wherefore all pastors, and in general, all the faithful shall be exhorted to give no way, in any kind, to opinions contrary to the above doctrine, which is grounded expressly on the word of God.'"

  2. — The Synod says more than it designed.

The holy Fathers made use of this comparison of Adam to shew that Jesus Christ ought to be in us otherwise than by faith and affection, or morally; for it is not by affection and thought only, that Adam and parents are in their children ; it is by the communication of the same blood, and the same substance; and therefore the union we have with our parents, and by their means with Adam, from Avhom we are all descended, is not only moral, but physical and substantial. The Fathers have thence concluded, that the new Adam ought to be in us after a manner equally physical and substantial, to the end that we might derive immortality from him, as from our first parent we derive mortality. Accordingly, it is what they have found, and much more abundantly, in the Eucharist than in ordinary generation, for that it is not a portion of the blood and substance, but the whole substance and the whole blood of our Lord Jesus Christ Avhich is therein communicated to us. To say now with the ministers, that this communication is wrought barely by faith, is not only to weaken the comparison, but also to annihilate the mystery, and deprive it of its substance ; and whereas it is more abundantly in Jesus Christ than in Adam, it is making it to be much less in him, or rather not at all.

  1. — A point of Doctrine was in Question among them.

Thus do our doctors confound themselves, and the more pains they take to speak their minds, the more do they obscure the subject. Nevertheless, through all these mists, you discern plainly, that among the defenders of the figurative sense there was in reality an opinion which admitted nothing in the Eucharist but the gifts and merits of Jesus Christ, or at most, nothing but his spirit, not the proper substance of his flesh and blood ; but that this opinion was expressly contrary to the word of Godj and not to have any admittance amongst the faithful.

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 171

  1. — The Swiss believe themselves condemned by this Decision.

It is no hard matter to guess who were the defenders of this opinion : it was the Swiss, the disciples of Zuinglius ; and such of the French as approving their sentiment would fain reform this article. And this was the reason that the Swiss were presently heard to complain, thinking they beheld their own condemnation in the Synod of Rochelle, and the fraternity broken ; since, notwithstanding the soft turn given to the decree, their doctrine was condemned in the main as contrary to the word of God, with express exhortation to allow it no shelter among the pastors or the faithful.

  1. — The Synod answers them by Bexa, that this Doctrine only regards France. — The Lidherans as well as Catholics detested as Defenders of a monstrous Opinion.

Under this {)ersuasion they Avrote to Beza, and the answer returned them was surprising. Beza was ordered to acquaint them, that the decree of the synod of Rochelle did not regard them, but only certain Frenchmen ; so that there was a confession of faith for France, and another for Switzerland, as if faith varied according to the climate, and it were not equally true, that in Christ Jesus there is neither Swiss nor Frenchman, as it is true, according to St, Paul, that there is neither Scythian nor Greek. To this Beza added, in order to claim the Swiss, that the churches of France detested the substantial and carnal presence, together with the monsters of transubstantiation and consubstantiation *. Here, then, by and by, we have the Lutherans as badly treated as the Catholics, and their doctrine accounted no less monstrous ; but this only in writing to the Swiss : we have seen how far they are able to soften matters when they write to the Lutherans, and how tender they are then of consubstantiation.

  1. — The Swiss, not satisfied with BezcCs Answer, still hold themselves for condemned.

The Swiss would not be gulled with these snbtilties of the synod of Rochelle, but were very sensible that they themselves were attacked under the name of these Frenchmen. BulHnger, minister of Zurich, who was ordered to answer Beza, made no (lifiiculty of telling him they were in fact the people condemned:! " You condemn," answered he, "those who reject1 the word ' proper substance ;' and Avho is ignorant that we are of this number?" What Beza had added, against the carnal and substantial presence, did not remove the difficulty ; Bullinger knew full well, that the Catholics no less than the Lutherans complained that a carnal presence was laid to their charge, which they did not dream of; and besides, he could not comprehend the meaning of receiving in substance what was not substantially present. Thus unable to conceive the refinements of Beza, or a substance united without being present, he answered him, " that they ought to speak plainly in matters of faith, lest they should reduce the simple to such straits as no longer to know what to believe ;" Avhence he concluded that it was necessary to mitigate the decree, and this was the only means he proposed for a reconcilement.

  1. — They were at last forced to chancje the Decree, and reduce the Substance to nothing at all. — 1572.

Tney were forced to stoop to these terms, and the year following, in the synod of Nismes, substance was brought to so small a matter, that they might as well have quite suppressed it. Whereas at the synod of Rochelle, the debate was about putting a stop to an opinion contrary to that which was grounded expressly on the word of God, they endeavour now to insinuate that the c[uestion was only about a word. They raze out of the decree of Rochelle these words which contained its main force and purpose ; viz. " The synod rejects the opinion of those who refuse to receive the word substance." They declare they will do no prejudice to strangers ; and such is their complaisance for them, that these great words, " the proper substance of Jesus Christ's body and blood,"" so much affected by Calvin, so strenuously maintained by his disciples, so carefully retained at the synod of Rochelle, and at last brought to nothing by our reformed, no longer appear in their confession of faith, but as a monument of the impression of the reality and substance, which the words of Jesus Christ had naturally made in the minds of their forefathers, and even of Calvin himself.

  1. — Reflection on this weakening of the first Doctrine.

And yet if they will but reflect on these relaxations of their first doctrine, they may observe therein in what manner the spirit of seduction has deluded them. Their fathers would not easily have deprived themselves of the substance of Jesus Christ's body and blood. Accustomed in the Church to this

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 173 sweet presence of the body and blood of their Saviour, the pledge of an immense love, they would not willingly have been brought down to shadows and figures, nor to a simple virtue flowing from his body and blood. Calvin had promised them something more. They had suffered themselves to be attracted by a notion of reality and substance continually inculcated in his books, in his sermons, in his commentaries, in his confessions of faith, in his catechisms: a false notion, 1 confess, they being there in words only, and not in fact ; but yet they were charmed with the fine idea, and believing they lost nothing of what was possessed by them ia the church, they did not fear to leave it. Now that Zuinglius has gained the ascendant by the consent of their synods, and Calvin's big words stand evidently void of force and destitute of all sense, why do not they retin-n from their error, and seek, in the church, that real possession with which they had been flattered ?

  1. — 21ie different Confessions of Faith a mark of the clisiniion of the Party.

The Swiss Zuinglians were appeased by the explanation of the synod of Nismes : but the ground of division still subsisted. So many confessions of faith were a too convincing token of it to be dissembled. Meanv.hile the French, the Swiss, the English, and the Poles, had their se[)arate ones, which all of them kept to, without borrowing from their neighbours, and their union seemed nearer allied to policy than true concord.

  1. — 21ie Assemhhj of Frankfort, where endeavours are used to bring the defenders of the fi (jurat ive sense to agree in one common Confession. — 1572.

They had often sought remedies for this incouvenience, but in vain. In 1577, an asseml)ly was held at Frankfort, where the ambassadors of Queen Elizabeth assembled with the deputies of France, of Poland, of Hungary, and of the low countries2. The Count Palatine, John Casimir, who the year before had brought into France so great a succour to our reformed, procured this assembly. The whole party that defended the figurative sense, whereof this prince was one, was there assembled, exce[)t the Swiss and Bohemians. But those last had sent their declaration, submitting themselves thereby to what should be resolved : and as for the Swiss, the Palatine caused it to be declared by his ambassador that he held himself assured of them3. The intent of this convention, as appears by the palatine-deputy's harangue at his opening of it, was to draw up, by the unanimous consent of all the other deputies, one common confession of faith for these churches ; and the reason that induced the Palatine to make this proposal was, because the Lutherans of Germany, after making the famous book of Concord so often mentioned, were to hold an assembly at Magdeburg, there to pronounce with one accord the approbation of this book, and at the same time the condemnation of all those who should refuse to subscribe it ; so as, being declared Heretics, they might be excluded from toleration granted by the empire in matters of religion. By this means, all the defenders of the figurative sense were to be banished, and the monster of ubiquity, maintained in this book, to be established. It was the interest of these churches, which were to be condemned, to appear at that time numerous, powerful, and united. They were cried down as having each one their particular confession of faith, and the Lutherans, united under the common name of the Confession of Augsburg, easily resolved on the proscription of a party, which its disunion made contemptible.

  1. — A design of comprehending the Lutherans in this common Confession of Faith.

This their great grievance was coloured over nevertheless, in the best way possible, with specious words ; and the Palatine deputy declared that all these Confessions of Faith, conformable in doctrine, differed in method only, and the way of speaking. But he well knew the contrary, nor were the differences but too real for these Churches. Be that as it will, it was their interest, in order to put a stop to the proceedings of the Lutherans, to shew them their union by a confession of faith as well received among them all, as was that of Augsburg among the Lutherans. But they had yet a more general design : for in making this new confession of faith common to the defenders of the figurative sense, their intent was to pitch on such expressions as the Lutherans, defenders of the literal sense, might agree too, and so by this means make one body of the whole party called Reformed. The deputies had no better means than this of preventing the condemnation threat-

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. '176 ened them from the Lutheran party. AVherefore, the decree they made concerning this common Confession of Faith had this turn given it *. " That it ought to be made, and made clear, full, and solid, with a clear and brief refutation of all the heresies of these times ; yet, with such a temper of style, as rather to attract than alienate those that adhere purely to the Confession of Augsburg, as much as truth could allow."

  1. — Qualities of this new Confession of Faith. — Deputies named to draiv it up.

To make this Confession of Faith clear, to make it full, to make it solid, with a clear and brief confutation of all the heresies of those times, was a grand undertaking ; fine words, but the thing exceeding difficult, not to say impossible, amongst people of such different persuasions : above all, not to exasperate any further the Lutherans, those zealous defenders of the literal sense, it was necessary to pass lightly over the Real Presence, and the other articles so often mentioned. Divines were named, who had a thorough knowledge of the Church's grievances, to wit, of the divisions in the Reformation, and of her Confessions of Faith which kept them asunder. Rodulph Gaultier, and Theodore Beza, ministers, one of Zurich and the other of Geneva, were to put the finishing stroke to the work which was afterwards to be dispatched to all the Churches in order to be read, examined, corrected, and augmented as judged proper.

  1. — Letter written to the Lutherans by the assembly of Frankfort.

To prepare a work of so great a nicety, and hinder the condemnation which the Lutherans were hatching, it was concluded to write, in the name of the whole assembly, a letter capable of mollifying them. AVherefore they were acquainted f , that this assembly was called together from sundry parts of the Christian world, to oppose the Pope''s attempts, after informations received that he was uniting the most potent princes of Christendom against them, namely, the Emperor, the King of France, and the King of Spain ; but what had most afflicted them was, that certain princes of Germany, who say they invoke the same God with us, as if the Catholics had another, and detest with us the tyranny of the Roman Antichrist, were preparing to condemn the doctrine of their Churches; and so,4 amidst the misfortunes that distressed them, they saw themselves attacked by those, in whose virtue and wisdom they had reposed their chief trust.

  1. — The Assembly minces the difficulty of the Eucharist.

Then they represented to those of the Confession of Augsburg, that the Pope, whilst he ruined the rest of the Churches, Avould not spare them. For how, proceed they, should he hate those less who first gave him the mortal stab, namely, the Lutherans, whom, by this means, they place at the head of the whole party ? They propose a free council in order to unite amongst themselves, and oppose the common enemy. Lastly, after complaining they were going to be condemned without a hearing, they say, the controversy that divides them most from those of the Confession of Augsburg, viz. that of the Supper and Real Presence, has not so much difficulty as is imagined, and it is an injury done them to accuse them of rejecting the Confession of Augsburg. But they add, it stood in need of explanation in some places, and even that Luther and Melancthon had made some corrections in it; by which they evidently mean those different editions, Avherein were made the above-seen changes in the lifetime of Luther and Melancthon.

  1. — The consent of the Synod of Salnte-Foy to the new Confession of Faith. — 1578.

The year following, the Calvinists of France held their national Synod at Sainte-Foy, where they gave power to change the Confession of Faith, which they had so solemnly presented to our Kings, and which they boasted to maintain to the last drop of their blood. The decree of this Synod is Avorth our notice : it imports, " that after seeing the instructions of the assembly held at Frankfort by the means of Duke John Casimir, they enter into the design of uniting in one holy band of pure doctrine all the reformed Churches of Christendom, whereof certain Protestant Divines were for condemning the soundest and the greatest part : and approve the project of making and drawing up a formulary of a Confession of Faith common to all the Churches, as also the invitation expressly made to the Churches of this kingdom, to send to the place appointed men well approved and authorized with ample procuration, in order to treat, agree, decide on all the points of doctrine and other things relating to the union, repose, and preservation of the Church, and God's pure service." For the execution of this project, they name four deputies to draw up this common

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 177

Confession of Faith, but -with much more ample powers than had been demanded for them in the assembly of Frankfort *. For, whereas this assembly, unable to believe the Churches could agree in one Confession of Faith without seeing it, had ordered, that after its being seen by certain ministers and polished for their examination and correction, this Synod, condescending beyond all that could be imagined, not only expressly charges these four deputies to be present at the place and time appointed, with ample procurations as well from the ministers, as in particular from the Viscount of Turenne ; but also adds thereto, " that in case even there were no means of examining this Confession of Faith throughout all the provinces, it was left to their prudence and sound judgment to agree and conclude all the points that shall come under deliberation, whether in regard of doctrine, or any other thing concerning the welfare, union, and repose of all the Churches."

  1. — Faith trusted in the hands of four Ministers, and of the Viscount of Turenne.

Here have you then manifestly, by the authority of a whole national Synod, the faith of our pretended churches of France left to the disposal of four ministers and of the Viscount of Turenne, with power to determine therein as they pleased, and those who will not allow, that we may refer to the judgment of the whole Church the least points of faith, refer the whole of theirs to that of their deputies.

  1. — Why Mr. de Turenne ivas put in this dejiutation concerning Doctrine.

One may wonder perchance to see Mr. de Turenne named amongst these doctors : but you must understand that this welfare, union, and repose of all the churches, for the sake of which this deputation was made, meant much more than appeared at first sight. Forasmuch as the Duke John Casimir, and Henry de la Tour, Viscount of Turenne, joint deputies with these ministers, had thoughts of settling this repose by other means than by arguments and Confessions of Faith j which, however, necessarily made part of the negotiation, experience having shewn that these new reformed Churches could not be united in a league as they ought, without first agreeing in point of doctrine. All France was flaming with

VOL. II. N5 civil wars ; and the Viscount de Turenne, then but young, yet full of wit and valour, Avhom the disaster of the times had drawn into the party but two or three years before, had immediately raised to himself in it so great an authority (net so much by his illustrious blood which aUied him to the greatest families of the kingdom, as his great capacity and courage), that he was already lord-lieutenant to the King of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. A man of such genius entered easily into the design of reuniting all the Protestants: but God did not suffer him to accomplish it. The Lutherans were found intractable, and the Confessions of Faith, notwithstanding the resolution unanimously taken of changing them all, subsisted as containing the pure word of God, which it is neither lawful to add to, nor take from.

22.- — Letter, wherein the Cahinists own Luther and Melancthon for their Fathers.

We see that, in the year following, namely 1579, a union was still hoped for, since the Calvinists of the Low Countries wrote conjointly to the Lutherans, authors of the Book of Concord, to Kemnitius, Chythrseus, James Andrew, and therestof the violent defenders of Ubiquity, whom they failed not to call, not only their brethren, but their own flesh (so intimate was their union, notwithstanding their so considerable divisions,) inviting them " to take moderate counsels, to enter into methods of union, in order whereto the Synod of France (that of Sainte-Foy) had named deputies, and this," say they, '6 after the example of our holy fathers, Luther, Zuinglius, Capito, Bucer, Melancthon, Bullinger, Calvin," whose unanimity Avas such as you have seen. These, then, are the common fathers of the Sacramentarians and Lutherans ; these are the men in whose harmony and moderate counsels the Calvinists glory ! J

  1. — The project of a Common Confession continued to our days, and always to no purpose.

All these endeavours towards a union proved abortive, and the defenders of the figurative sense were so far from being able to agree with the Lutherans, defenders of the hteral sense, in one common Confession of Faith, that they could not even agree among themselves *. The proposal was frequently renewed, and even near to our days in 1614, at the Synod of

« Act. Auth. Blon. p. 72.

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, KTC. 179

Tonins, which, in 1615, was backed by the expedients })roposed by the famous Peter du Moulin. But though for this he received the thanks of the Synod of the Isle of France, held the same year at the borough of Ay, in Champagne ; and notwithstanding the known credit he had, not only in France, among his own brethren, but also in England and over the Avhole party, all proved to no purpose. The churches, which defend the figurative sense, confessed the mighty evil of their disunion, but withal confessed it was beyond remedy; and this common Confession of Faith, so earnestly desired and endeavoured at, is become a Platonic idea.

  1. — Vain shifts of the Ministers,

This history would require that I should relate the answers returned by the ministers, with regard to this decree of Sainte-Foy, after it became public, and was urged against them by the Catholics. But all of them, by the above account of the fact, fall of themselves. Some said, a mutual toleration was the only thing in question ; but it is plain enough, a common Confession of Faith was not necessaiy for that end, since the effect of this toleration is, not to make one common faith, but to bear mutually with one another's faith. Others, in excuse for the great power of deciding on doctrine lodged in the Jiands of four deputies, answered, this was because it was known " near the matter ''^" what they could agree in ; this " near the matter" is admirable. Doubtless men are not over nice in questions of faith when satisfied with knowing " near the matter" what they are to say ; and little also do they know what to stick to, when, for want of such knowledge, they give their deputies so unlimited a power of concluding whatsoever they shall think fitting. The minister Claude f answered, that they knew precisely what they were to say ; and should the deputies have gone beyond it, they would have justly been disowned as men that had gone beyond their commission. But this answer, allowing it so, does not satisfy the chief difficulty, consisting in this, that to please the Lutherans, they must have given up to them all tiiat tended to exclude, as well the Real Presence as the other points contested with them ; that is to say, they must evidently have changed, in such considerable articles, a Confession of Faith expressly affirmed by them to be contained in the word of God.

2b.— Difference betwixt what was designed to be done in favour of the Lutherans at Frankfort and Sainte-Foy, and what was done at Charenton.

Care ought to be taken not to confound what was to be done then with what was done since, when the Lutherans were received into communion at the Synod of Charenton, in 1631. This last action shews only, that the Calvinists can bear with the Lutheran doctrine, as a doctrine not at all prejudicial to ihe fundamentals of faith. But it is certainly quite a different thing to tolerate, in the Lutheran's Confession of Faith, what you believe erroneous in it, and to suppress in your own what you believe to be a truth revealed of God, and expressly declared by his word. This is what they had resolved to do in the assembly of Frankfort and at the Synod of Sainte-Foy ; this is what they would have executed, had it pleased the Lutherans ; insomuch that it was only the fault of the defenders of the Real Presence that all which clashed with it was not erased out of the Sacramentarian Confessions of Faith. But the reason of this was, once change, and no end of changing ; a Confession of Faith which changes the doctrine of ages past, shews thereby that itself may be changed likewise ; nor must we wonder the Synod of Sainte-Foy thought they had power to correct in 1578 what the Synod of Paris had established in 1559.

  1. — Spirit of instability in Calvinism.

All these means of agreement now mentioned, so far from diminishing the disunion of our Reformed, did but increase it. Here were men ignorant as yet what to stick to, whose first step, at setting out, was by a breach upon the whole Christian world. Here was a religion built on the sand, which had no stability even in her Confessions of Faith, although made with such nice care, and pubhshed with such pomp. Even the professors of it could not persuade themselves that they had not a right to innovate in so changeable a religion, and it was this produced the novelties of John Fischer, known under the name of Piscator, and those of Arminius.

  1. — Piscator's dispute.

Piscator's affair will teach us many important matters, and I am the more desirous to relate it at full length, the less it is know by the generality of our reformed.

Xri,] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 181

Piscator taught divinity in the academy of Herborne, a town in the earldom of Nassau, towards the end of the sixteenth century. Examining the doctrine of Imputed Justice, he says that the justice of Jesns Christ, which is imputed to us, is not that which he practised during the course of his hfe, but that which he underwent in bearing voluntarily the punishment of our sin on the cross ; as much as to say, the death of our Lord being a sacrifice of an infinite value, whereby he paid and satisfied for us, it was also by this act alone that the Son of God was properly Saviour, Avithout any necessity of joining to it any other acts, this being of itself sufficient ; so that, if we are to be justified by imputation, it is by that of this act, in virtue whereof precisely we are acquitted in the sight of God, and whereby " the hand-writing of the sentence passed against us was defaced," as St. Paul speaks, " by the blood which pacifieth both heaven and earth *.

  1. — This doctrine detested by the National Synod of Gap. — First decision.

This doctrine was detested by our Calvinists in the Synod of Gap, anno 1603|, as contrary to the eighteenth, twentieth, and twenty-second articles of the Confession of Faith, and it was resolved by them, '7 that a letter should be addressed to Mr. Piscator, and likevvise to the university in which he taught."

It is certain these three articles decided nothing as to what concerned Piscator, and for this reason we find no more mention made of the twentieth and twenty-second articles. And as to the eighteenth, in which it was pretended the decision might be found, it said no more than that " we are justified by the obedience of Jesus Christ, which is allowed us," without specifying what obedience ; so that Piscator found it no hard matter to defend himself in regard to the Confession of Faith. But since they will have it that he innovated in respect to the Confession of the pretended reformed of this kingdom, which had been subscribed by those of the Low Countries, I agree to it.

  1. — Second Condemnation of Piscator^ s Doctrine at the Synod of Rochelle.

Piscator was written to by order of the synod, as resolved, and his answer, modest, but firm in his sentiment, was read at the Synod of Rochelle, in 1607. After reading it, this decree was made: " As to the letter of Dr. John Piscator, Professor in the Academy of Herborne, in answer to that of the Synod of Gap, rendering account of his doctrine which teaches justification to be by the sole obedience of Christ in his death and passion, imputed as justice to the faithful, and not by the obedience of his Hfe ; the assembly ?ioi5 approving i\Q division of causes so conjoint, hath declared, that the whole obedience of Christ in his life and death is imputed to us for the entire remission of our sins^ as being no other than one and the same obedience."

  1. — Important observation, that the Doctrine of the Calvinists against Piscator resolves the difficulties they urge against us in regard of the sacrifice of the Eucharist.

In consideration of these last words, I would willingly ask our Reformed, why, in order to merit for us the forgiveness of our sins, they require, not only the obedience of the death, but also that of the whole life of our Redeemer ? Is it that the merit of Jesus Christ dying is not infinite, and not more than sufficient, for our salvation ? This they will not say ; they must, therefore, say, that what is required as necessary after an infinite merit, does neither destroy its infiniteness nor sufficiency ; but at the same time it follows, that to consider Jesus Christ, as continuing his intercession by his presence not in heaven only, but also on our Altars in the sacrifice of the Eucharist, is destroying nothing of the infiniteness of the propitiation made on the cross ; it is only, as speaks the Synod of Rochelle, not dividing things conjoined, and accounting all Jesus Christ did in his life, all he did in his death, and all he now does whether in heaven, where he presents himself for us to the Father, or on our Altars, where he is present in another way, as the continuation of one and the same intercession, and of one and the same obedience which he began in his life, consummated in his death, and never ceases to renew both in heaven and in the mysteries, thereby to apply them to us effectually and perpetually.

  1. — Third decision. — Formulary and Subscription ordained against Piscator in the Synod ofPrivas. — 1612.

The doctrine of Piscator had its partisans. Nothing was found against him in the eighteenth, twentieth, and twentysecond articles of the Confession of Faith. And, indeed, they abandoned the two last to fix on the eighteenth, which was no more to the purpose, as we have seen, than the others ; and to drive the matter home against Piscator and his doctrine, they went so far, in the national Synod of Privas, as to oblige all

Xir.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 183 the pastors to subscribe expressly against Piscator in these terms : " I underwritten N. in regard to the contents in the eighteenth article of the Confession of Faith of the Reformed Churches, regarding our j ustification, do declare and protest, that I understand it accordimj to the sense received in our church, approved hij the national synods, and conformable to God's word ; which is, that our Lord Jesus Christ was sabject to the moral and ceremonial law, not only for our good, but in our stead ; and that all the obedience he rendered to the law is imputed to us, and that our justification does consist, not only in the remission of sins, but in the imputation of active justice ; and subjecting myself to the loord of God, I believe ' that the Son of man came not be ministered unto, but to minister,' and that he did minister to the purpose he came for : promisinrj never to depart from the doctrine received in our churches, and to subject myself to the ordinances of the national synods on this head"

  1. — The Scripture ill-quoted, and its whole Doctrine illunderstood.

What it avails imputed justice, that "Jesus Christ came to minister, and not to be ministered unto ;" and to what purpose this text is brought abruptly and without connexion into the midst of this decree, let him guess that can. Neither do I see what use the imputation of the ceremonial law is to us, which never was made for us ; nor for what reason '^ Jesus Christ must have been subject to it, not only for our good, but in our stead." I well comprehend how ,Tesus Christ, having dispersed the shadows and figures of the law, has left us free from the servitude of the ceremonial laws, which were but shadows and figures ; but that it was necessary for such intent that he himself should have been subject to them in our stead, the consequence would be pernicious, since it might be equally concluded he had also set us free from the moral law, by his fulfilling it. All this shews the little exactness of our Reformed, who were more intent on shewing erudition in a profusion of big empty words, than on speaking with accuracy in their decrees.

  1. — Fourth decision against Piscator in the Synod of Tonins. — 1614.

I am at a loss to know what could be the reason that Piscator's affair was had so very much to heart by our French Reformed, or why the Synod of Privas descended to the utmost precautions, by enjoining the above subscription. This, however, ought to have been decisive : a formulary of faith, ordered to be subscribed by all the pastors, should have explained the matter fully and distinctly. Nevertheless, after this subscription and all the precedent decrees, it was still necessary to make a new declaration at the Synod of Tonins in 1G14. Four great decrees one after another, and in such different terms, concerning a particular article, and on so limited a subject, is very extraordinary ; but in the new Reformation something is always found to be added or curtailed, and never is their faith explained so sincerely, nor with so full a sufficiency, as to make them adhere precisely to the first decisions.

  1. — The impiety of imputed justice as it is proposed by these

Synods.

To conclude this affair, I shall make a short reflection on the nature of the doctrine, and some reflections on the procedure.

As to the doctrine, I very well understand how the death of Jesus Christ, and the payment he made to the divine justice of the punishment we owed it, is imputed to us, as you impute to a debtor the payment made by the surety for his acquittance. But that the perfect justice fulfilled by our Lord in his life and death, and the absolute obedience he rendered to the law, should be imputed to us, or as they speak, allowed, in the same sense, that the payment of the surety is imputed to the debtor; is the same as to say, that he discharges us by his justice from the obligation of being good and virtuous, as by his punishment he discharges us from the obligation of undergoing that which our sins had merited.

  1. — Plainness and simplicity of the Catholic Doctrine opposed to the obscurities of the contrary.

I understand, then, and very clearly, in another kind of manner, what it avails us to have a Saviour whose sanctity is infinite. For thereby I behold him alone worthy to obtain for us all the graces requisite to make us just. But that we should formally be made just, because Jesus Christ was just ; and that his justice should be allowed us, as if he had fulfilled the law to our discharge, neither does the Scripture say it, nor can any man of good sense comprehend it.

By this means accounting as nothing our interior justice, and that which we practise through grace, they make us all in the main equally just, by reason that the justice of Jesus Christ, supposed by them the only one that renders us just, is infinite.

They likewise wrest from the elect of God that crown of

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 185 justice, which the just Ju«lge reserves for each one in particular, since they suppose ail have the same justice which is infinite ; or it" at lengtli they confess, this infinite justice is allowed us in different degrees, accordingly as we approach to it more or less hy that particular justice we are vested with bygrace, it is by extraordinary expressions, saying the same thing with the Catholics.

  1. — Reflection on the procedure — "Scripture quoted therein only for form-sake.

This is, in a few words, what I had to say on the doctrine itself. I shall be still more brief as to the procedure : it has nothing but what is weak in it, nothing grave nor serious. The act of most importance is the formulary of subscription enjoined at the Synod of Privas, but, from the very beginning, they do not so much as think of convicting Piscator from the Scriptures. The point to be proved was, " That the obedience of Jesus Christ, whereby he fulfilled the whole law in his life and death, is allowed us in order to make us just," Mhich is called in the formulary of Privas, as before in that of Gap, the imputation of the active justice.

Now, all that could be found in four synods to prove this doctrine and the imputation of the active justice, by the Scripture, is, that " the Son of Man did not come to be ministered unto, but to minister," a text so little adapted to imputed justice, that there is no discovering even to what purpose it was cited.

But so it is with these new reformers, provided they name but the word of God with emphasis, and then fling out a text or two, however wide from the purpose, they think to have answered the profession they make of believing nought but Scripture in express terms. The people are dazzled with these big promises, and are not even sensible what a sway the authority of their ministers has over them, though when all is done it is by that their assent is determined.

  1. — How the Confession of Faith is quoted.

As from the word of God nothing was proved against Piscator, so likewise their Confession of Faith was opposed in vain against him.

For Ave have seen them at Privas immediately forego the twentieth and twenty-second articles, which were produced at Gaj). The eighteenth is only insisted on, and as it spoke nothing but what was general and indeterminate, theybe hotught themselves of thus remedying it in the Formulary : "I declare and protest that I understand the eighteenth article of our Confession of Faith according to the sense received in our churches, approved in our synods, and conformable to the word of God."

The word of God would have sufficed alone ; but as that was in dispute, to finish it there was a necessity of coming back to the authority of things judged, and abiding by the article of the Confession of Faith, understanding it, not according to its precise terms, but according to the sense received in churches, and approved in the National Synods, which finally regulates the dispute by tradition, and shews us that the most assured means of understanding what is written, is to see in what manner it always had been understood.

This is what passed, as to the affair of Piscator, in four national synods. The last of them was that of Tonins, held in 1614, where, after the subscription commanded by the Synod of Privas, all seemed determined in the most serious manner imaginable; yet after all there was nothing in it, for the year following, to go no further, that is, in 1615, Du Moulin, the most renowned of all their ministers, openly made a jest of it, with the approbation of a whole synod. The history of the thing is this ': —

  1. — They laugh at all these Decrees. — Nothing serious in the Reformation. — Du Moulin' s remonstrance approved in the Synod of Ay. — 1615.

The party of the Reformation opposed to Lutheranism had always been disturbed that they could never contrive among themselves a common Confession, to unite all their members, as the Confession of Augsburg united all the Lutherans. So many different Confessions of Faith shewed a principle of division which weakened the party. They came back, therefore, once more to the project of a re-union. Du Moulin proposed the means in a writing sent to the Synod of the Isle of France, The whole drift of it was to dissemble the dogmata, which they could not agree in ; and Du Moulin writes in express terms, that among the things it was requisite to dissemble in this new Confession of Faith, they ought to place Piscator's question regarding Justification * : a doctrine so much detested by four national synods, becomes indifferent all on a sudden in the opinion of this minister, and the Synod of the Isle of France,

*_Act, Auth. Blond. Piece, vi. p. 72,

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 18t with the same hand with which it had but just subscribed Piscator's condemnation, nay, the pen, as 1 may say, still wet with the ink it had made this subscription with, thanks Mr. Du Mouhn by express letters for this proposal8 : such instability is there in the new Reformation, and so easily does she sacrifice the greatest matters to this common Confession which she never could attain,

  1. — Du Moulin' s ivords — Dissimulation^ character of Heresy ^ owned in the Reformation.

The words of Du Moulin are too remarkable not to be related. " There," says hef, viz., in this assembly to be held for this hew Confession of Faith, " I am for no disputes about religion, for minds once heated will never be brought to yield, and each one at his return cries out victory ; but I would have laid on the table the Confession of the churches of France, of England, of Scotland, of the Low Countries, of the Palatinate, of the Swiss, &c. That out of these Confessions we might strive to form one common one, wherein we should dissemble many things, without the knowledge of which one might be saved, as is Piscator's question regarding Justification, and many subtile opinions proposed by Arminius about Free-will, Predestination, and Perseverance of the Saints."

He adds, " as Satan had corrupted the church of Rome by her having too much, namely, by avarice and ambition, so he strives to corrupt the churches of the new reformation by knowing too much, to wit, by curiosity," which, in reality, is the temptation all heretics sink under, and the snare they are taken in ; and concludes that, in the way of agreement, " they shall have gone the greatest part of the journey, if they can but prevail on themselves to be ignorant of many things, be contented with necessaries to salvation, and be easy in regard or others."

  1. — Reflection on these words of Du Moulin approved in the Synod of Ay.

How to agree in this matter was the question, for if by such things, the knowledge of which is necessary to salvation, he understands those which every private man is obliged to know, under penalty of damnation, this common Confession of Faith is already made in the Creed of the Apostles, and in that of Nice. The union made on this foundation would reach much beyond the newly-reformed churches, nor could they hinder our being comprehended in it ; but, " if by the knowledge of things necessary to salvation" he understands the full explanation of all the expressly revealed truths of God, who has revealed none the knowledge of which does not tend to secure the salvation of his faithful, there " to dissemble" what the synods have declared " expressly revealed of God," with " detestation" of the contrary errors, is laughing at the church, is holding her decrees for imposture even after signing them, is betraying both religion and conscience.

  1. — Du Moldings inconstancy.

Now, when you shall perceive that this same Du Moulin, who makes so slight a matter, not of Piscator's propositions only, but also of the much more important ones of Arminius, was afterwards one of the most unmerciful censors of them, you will acknowledge, in his procedure, the perpetual inconstancy of the new Reformation, always suiting her dogmata to the occasion.

  1. — Great points to he sujypressed ; amongst others that ivhich is contrary to the Real Presence.

To conclude the account of this project of re-union then concerted, when this common Confession of the party opposed to the Lutherans should be finished, another was to be made also, but more wide and general, in which the Lutherans might be comprehended9. Du Moulin here sets forth all the ways of expressing themselves, so as " not to condemn the Real Presence, nor Ubiquity, nor the necessity of Baptism," nor the rest of the Lutheran tenets ; and what he cannot save by equivocations or indeterminate expressions, he wraps up in silence, in the best way he can : he hopes to abolish by this means the appellation of Lutherans, of Calvinists, of Sacramentarians, and, by force of equivocating, to make no other name remain for Protestants than the common one of the Christian Church Reformed. The whole Synod of the Isle of France applauded this fine plan ; and this union, thus completed, it would be time, proceeds this minister, to solicit the reconciliation of the Church of Rome — but he doubts as to their succeeding. And with good reason, for we have not one instance of her ever approving equivocations in matters of religion, or consenting to the suppression of articles she once believed revealed by God.

XII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 189

  1. — Importance of the disputes among the defenders of the fiijurative sense.

But I do not allp^v to Du ]\louliii and the rest of the same party, that the diti'erences in their Confessions of Faith are only in the method and expressions, or else in polity and ceremonies ; or, if in matters of faith, in such only as had not yet passed into law or public ordinance : for we have seen, and shall see the contrary througii the whole sequel of this history. And can they say, for example, that the doctrine of Episcopacy wherein the Church of England is so firm, and carries it to such a pitch as to receive no Calvinian ministers without reordaining them, is a matter only of expression, or, at most, of mere polity and ceremony ? Is it nothing to look on a Church as utterly destitute of pastors lawfully ordained Pit is true the Calvinists are even with them, as we are assured by one of their famous ministers in these words: " If any of ours should teach the distinction of bishops and priests, and that there is no true ministry without bishops, we could not suffer him in our Communion, that is to say, at least in our ministry10." The English Protestants therefore are excluded from it. Is this a difference of small importance ? This same minister does not speak so of it, he being agreed that, on account of these differences, which he will have but small, of government and discipline, they treat one another as persons excommunicated |. If we descend to particulars in these Confessions of Faith, how many points shall we find in some which are not in others ? And in reality, were the difference in words only, their obstinacy would be too great not to agree after so frequently attempting it : if in ceremonies only, their weakness would be too great in insisting on them ; but the truth is, they are all sensible how little they agree in the main; and if they boast of being well united, this only serves to conlirm, that the union of the new Reformation is rather political than ecclesiastic.

Nothing now remains but to entreat our brethren to consider the great steps they have seen taken, not by private men, but by their whole Churches, touching matters decided by tnem with all the authority, said they, of the word of God : yet all these decrees came to nothing. It is a way of speaking in the Jleforniation always to name the word of God : they believe a thing never the more for that, nor fear the least to suppress

190 THB HISTORY OF [bOOK

Avhat they had advanced under the sanction of so great an authority ; but we must not wonder at it. There is nothing in rehgion more authentic than Confessions of Faith ; nothing ought to have been better warranted by the word of God than what the Calvinists had inserted in them against the Real Presence and the other dogmata of the Lutherans. It was not only Calvin that accounted, as detestable, the invention of the Corporeal Presence ; De corporali j)T(Ssentid detesfabile commentum11 : the whole Reformation of France had just said, in body, by the mouth of Beza, that she detested this monster, as well the Lutheran Consubstantiation as the Papistical Transubstantiation. But there is nothing sincere, nor serious, in these detestations of the Real Presence, since they were ready to retrench all that had been said against it, and this, not only by decree of a national Synod, but by a joint determination of the whole party solemnly assembled at Frankfort. The doctrine of the figurative sense, not to speak here of other points, after so many battles and such a number of pretended martyrs, would have been buried in eternal silence, had it but pleased the Lutherans. England, France, Germany, Switzerland, the Low Countries, in a word, all the Calvinists any where to be found, consented to this suppression. Hoav therefore can men remain so wedded to a tenet, which they see so little revelation for, that it is already cast forth from the profession of Christianity by the concurrent wishes of the whole party.

XIII.] THE VARIATIONS, ETC. 191

Footnotes

  1. Colos. iii. 11. Hosp. 1671. f. 344. t Hosp. Ibid. ↩

  2. Act. auth. Blou. p. HO. ↩

  3. Act. auth. Blon. p. 60. ↩

  4. Act. autli. Blou. p. 62. t IWd, p. 63. ↩

  5. Hist, de Pas. de Franc. Act. auth. Blou. p. 0"3. Syn. de Sainte-Foy. Ibid, pp. 5, U. ↩

  6. Anon. I'i. Rep. p. 3C5. f Mr. Claude, dan la Nog. Conf. rep. a I'Expos. p. 149, ↩

  7. Col. ii. 14. t Syn. de Gap. cli. de la Conf. de Foy. ↩

  8. Act. Auth. Bloud. Piece, vi, p. 72. f Ibid. u. i. ↩

  9. Act. Aiitli. Blond, pp. 12, 13, ↩

  10. Jur. Syst. p. 214. t Id. avis, aux Prot. u. 3, at the bcgiiining of liis Prej. Logit. ↩

  11. 2 Def. cont. Westp. opusc. 83. S. n. 9. ↩

Chapter 14 of 18