receive him; if not, his Majesty hath not cause to take exceptions against him." This was the course which the States of Holland really took ;* and the ultimate despicable management of Abbot, in procuring the condemnation of Vorstius at the are always liable to correction and examination, provided due order and moderation be observed. "13. It is likewise my wish and earnest endeavour, to see the subject of Predestination, with its concomitant articles, delivered in the churches and universities in a less rigid and absurd manner than some persons now teach it; and to have the whole of it drawn from the scriptures and referred to progress in practical piety. "14. It is another of my wishes, that when dissenting one from another on subjects which are not fundamental, we should tolerate each other with greater patience and lenity, manifesting in this way a stronger regard for the peace of the church, and causing both sects and schisms to be diminished. 15. And because all candidates for the sacred ministry ought, each according to his capacity and vocation, to direct his attention to this one object,-wisely to refer all things to edification, on this account I occasionally excite my pupils to the practice of this wisdom, lest an unseasonable zeal produce greater effects in the work of destruction than in that of edification. But the subtle and deceitful counsels which are contained in some parts of those letters, I never suggested to any person living." The last four of these apologetical remarks, in which may be traced an evident attempt to frame them for the latitude of Leyden, could not operate either as an apology or an excuse for the errors and indiscretions, that are detailed in the least objectionable form in the former eleven articles. After this explanation, and a few more like it, we can feel no surprise at the Curators of the University ultimately acceding to Archbishop Abbot's expedient, as communicated by Sir Ralph Winwood. See page 214. * Brandt says, "Vorstius asked and obtained a hearing of the States of Holland in March, 1612, when, in a full Assembly, he justified himself against de accusations of his adversaries to the satisfaction of most of the members: He likewise desired, that he might be permitted to avoid the storm which blew so violently upon him, and abstain for a while from the discharge of the office to which he was called, but upon which he had not then entered. The States deliberating upon his business, it was at last resolved, that it would be best for him immediately to deliver copies in Dutch and Latin of the Apology which he had then made, that so the States might notify the same to the king of Great Britain, and the most proper measures might be taken to give that Prince satisfaction, &c. It was likewise ordered, that Vorstius should draw up a clear and full answer, in one Treatise, to all the books and papers that had been published against any of his books, &c., that, in the mean time, till the States should otherwise direct, he should forbear the discharge of his Professorship, of which nevertheless he should enjoy the stipend; and that the Committee of the States, the Curators and Burgomasters of Leyden, should consult with him about a place in which he might dwell quietly and securely, provided it were neither at the Hague nor Leyden. -Pursuant to this resolution, it was thought fit, that he should settle by his own consent at Gouda, for the purposes already mentioned, and for certain reasons of state, but without prejudice to his past and present services, and that he should remain under the protection of the States of Holland. Grotius relates, that the States exhorted him to examine his words and writings between God and his own conscience, in ⚫ order to defend that which was justifiable; but to atone for what he could not defend ' by a sincere acknowledgment of his mistakes.' This was the more reasonable and necessary, because even some impartial persons, though convinced that he had been too vehemently opposed, were yet of opinion that in his book, Concerning God and the Divine Properties, he had sometimes treated of them in such a crude manner, that it looked as if he was about to infuse into the minds of men strange opinions, never heard of before in the church of God.”—Vorstius afterwards removed to Torgau, where he remained till the period when the Synod of Dort assembled. Synod of Dort, is matter of history and does not require to be repeated in this place. But the most curious part of this long story remains yet to be told: While King James was depicting Conrad Vorstius as a Socinian and an Atheist, he unwittingly suffered the other Conrad (Graser), who was a real Socinian, to escape with impunity. For the Socinian Annalists, who are not very nice in laying claim to eminent persons that never belonged to their fraternity, have seized upon Graser as their own man, and their claim has been allowed without a murmur: But, in setting up their claims to Vorstius, with a modesty that is unusual with them, a degree of hesitation is expressed about admitting him to rank among their party. Into what palpable errors does intemperate zeal hurry Of all the proofs produced by the Socinians, to shew that Vorstius was one of their fraternity, "nothing except his Confession of Faith," says Bayle, “written and signed on his death-bed, are of any importance." He adds, in another passage, "But what can be alleged against Sandius, who affirms, that, being for some time ⚫ in doubt whether he should rank Vorstius among such authors as are Unitarians, he no ' longer hesitated after he saw the Confession of Faith, which Vorstius signed on his 'death-bed; in which he evinces, with sufficient plainness, what was his opinion con⚫cerning God and the Lord Christ.'" The theological reader, however, will not think that the opinion of the dying Vorsstius is expressed with any adequate clearness, after he has perused his Confession in the following we 3, which were dictated when "his strength declined, and his speech began to fail him, o that he could hardly be heard:" "In the name of God the Lord who made heaven and earth, that only holy and Almighty Being, that King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone hath immortality, and dwells in light inaccessible, which no man hath seen nor can see, beside whom I own no other God, that is the most high Creator of heaven and earth. I moreover acknowledge his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ for such a Creator and Saviour whom we ought to adore and worship with the highest and most perfect reverence, as Him to whom all power in heaven and earth is given, and under whose feet God his heavenly Father hath put all things, without excluding any thing save Him only who hath subjected all things to him; insomuch, that there is nothing in the whole world that is not bound to adore him with the highest divine honour that can be conceived, and finally, that we are all bound to rely upon him for salvation, forasmuch as he has reconciled God his Heavenly Father to us, not only by his doctrine and preaching, his miracles and wonders, and the example of his holy life, but also by his holy death and passion, as with a holy sacrifice, having thus made an everlasting atonement for us. "If now any person should go about to abuse my little authority, I hereby positively declare, as I have formerly done, that I make a difference between the Lord Jesus the Son of God, our only and eternal Saviour, and Him who is the only True and Almighty God; agreeably to the words and meaning of the Holy Ghost, so frequently expressed in the New Testament." When Herboldus Tombergius had written thus far, "the sick man had scarcely as much strength left as to sign CONRAD VORSTIUS with his dying hand, in characters hardly legible." It is difficult to determine from these words what were the real sentiments of Vorstius. He seems to attribute exclusive Divinity to the Father: For, while he denominates Jesus Christ "the only-begotten Son," he does not specify the sense in which its votaries, and how difficult is it for them to correct a false statement ! This eminent individual, who under proper management might have made an excellent Professor and have redeemed his character for orthodoxy,* remained without employment from the year he uses that scriptural expression, but appears to make not only a distinction between the Father and the Son in regard to personality, (as is done by the orthodox,) but likewise such a difference" between them as indicates that they are essentially two beings. At the same time, he avows his conviction, that Jesus Christ is the "Creator" and the "Saviour;" that by his " death and passion” he has made an "atonement" for men; that he is invested with absolute and universal dominion; and that, under the character of CREATOR and SAVIOUR, the highest worship is to be ascribed to Him by all intelligent creatures. With these principles, it is impossible that he should have been a Socinian in the proper sense of that term; And yet, had he held the Divine and Eternal Sonship of Christ in the orthodox sense, as implying an equality of essence with the Father, the probability is, that he would have declared it. The only conclusion therefore to which we can fairly come on this subject, appears to be, that Vorstius was a strict Arian, who believed that the Son of God was first created by the Father, and then delegated to create the universe,—a sort of inferior deity, who was, nevertheless, entitled to religious homage. This was formerly the creed of many learned and speculative men: But it is connected with so much absurdity and contradiction, as to occasion it at present to be generally abandoned. In modern times, those who deny the orthodox doctrine concerning the Holy Trinity, usually take refuge in Unitarianism, as it is called; which, in point of fact, is not properly a modification of Christianity, but a system of refined Deism. One thing, however, must be confessed, that these expressions of Vorstius contain much of that studied ambiguity which he had employed for many years preceding, and which is another instance of "the ruling habit strong in death." But as the dying man had not breath to complete this brief Confession, even in the imperfect mode of dictation, and as it is not improbable that he intended to render it less dubious on the one side or the other, it must be viewed with pity and interpreted with charity. * The following very judicious, discriminating and charitable remarks of Uitenbogaert, addressed to his young friend John NARSIUS, in 1612, are in complete accordance with my own opinion, and finely elucidate the estimation in which Vorstius was held, after all his errors, by those who had the best opportunities of becoming acquainted with his character: "This is my judgment of the man: It is possible that his extensive and indiscriminate perusal of Socinian books has engendered in his mind some doubts concerning certain doctrinal points of superior importance. But he is not so attached to those opinions, as not to be easily divested of them, and thus the man may be retained within the bounds of Catholic agreement. But the object at which his enemies aim, is, not hat he may be retained within the church, but that he may be ejected, and consigned to destruction. Such is that burning and fiery zeal of ours, which breathes out nothing but faggots, and fires, and burning alive! For the sake of retaining him, what would not the Papists do, suffer, conceal, and bear, if they had such an individual among them who was wavering in the matter of religion? This [christian course,] however, seems to form no part of our occupation: But, as if we possessed an abundance of such men as he is, (though there is at the same time the greatest dearth of them,) we prefer suffering the loss of many virtues by our hatred of one fault, to the concealment of one fault by our love of many virtues." This is highly characteristic of the benevolence of Uitenbogaert's mind, such as I have described it at the commencement of this Appendix, p. 194. Yet the successive unpleasant disclosures of the Professor's imprudent proceedings induced Uitenbogaert to acquiesce in his being silenced, in the manner described, (p. 214,) till he could be reclaimed from his errors by mild treatment, and a friendly exposure of his errors. 1611 to the year 1621. After the conclusion of the Synod of Dort, which had fulminated its anathemas against him, "he betook himself this summer," [1622] says Brandt, "to the newly built town of Frederickstadt in Holstein. He was quite tried of the irksomeness of a skulking life. At first [after 1619] he kept himself concealed for some time in the province of Utrecht, at the house called the Chapel, or thereabouts; and, at another time, within the city of Utrecht, in the house of Dr. Peter Van Dam, in continual fear of being discovered and apprehended. It was reported, that there was a design of sending him over to England, in order to deliver him into the hands of an unmerciful judge, and to have him burned in a pitchbarrel. He was often hunted after, even by Count Ernest himself, while he commanded the garrison at Utrecht; the houses which were suspected of harbouring him being beset by soldiers with loaded pieces. Many nights was he forced to pass without sleep, to avoid a surprise; and often, at very unseasonable hours, was he obliged to seek a new shelter.-He had made a previous application, about the close of the year 1621, to the Duke of Holstein, through the Heer De Haan, for leave to come and settle in his dominions, on condition that he and other Remonstrants might enjoy the exercise of their religion. At the same time he sent a short apology for himself, with regard to the heresy of which he was accused by the Contra-remonstrants, and declared that he was of the opinion of the Remonstrants as published in their Confession; and that the things which his enemies were accustomed to lay to his charge, beyond what was contained in that Confession, were either mere calumnies, or, as far as true, were matters of Philosophy and not of Divinity, which by no means related to Christian Faith or the practice of piety, as he had frequently shewn and was ready to do so more at large. The Duke, having seen his Apology, caused it to be examined by his chief chamberlain, Ægidius de Lange, and by his Superintendant and Chaplain, as well as by other divines; and they all approved of his Apology. The Duke therefore requested De Haan to write to Vorstius, that his arrival in Holstein would not only be agreeable to the Duke; but that he would take him into his service as soon as he came, and would graciously grant him protection and maintenance.* As soon as "Beside this, Vorstius received another invitation from the Count of Steinfurt, William Henry, who expressed such kindness for him, as to send a gentleman in a calash, with John Andrew Konerding, the minister of Gronau, to convey him to Steinfurt, where he designed to employ him again in the Church, (notwithstanding the sentence passed upon him by the Synod of Dort,) as he had done by Konerding him he arrived in Holstein, he was received by the Duke and his Council with great marks of favour, and was created chaplain to the Duke. He was also led to hope, that his salary would be soon augmented; and since there was not then any suitable conveniences for his residence at the new town of Frederickstadt, the Duke ordered that he should lodge with the Heer De Haan in the castle of Tonningen. He flattered himself, that he should there enjoy a little rest, after having been so long in an unsettled state. But, being exhausted and weakened by the many troubles which he had endured, he was seized, in September, with a sickness which became his last, and within a few days reduced him to a corpse. The same day on which he was induced to rejoice at the unexpected arrival of his wife, he was compelled to confine himself to his bed through the increase of his bodily infirmities, which he had till then dissembled. He lay ill about ten days. His faithful friend, Dr. Peter Van Dam, who had followed him from Utrecht, did for him whatever his art could effect or his love could suggest. But it was all in vain. The distemper prevailed; and the patient, at the same time, instructed his physician and the rest of his friends how a christian ought to meet death: He entirely laid aside all worldly cares, and spent the rest of his time in prayer and pious ejaculations. On the 29th of Sept. (old style) he commended his soul to God and Christ his Saviour, and gave up the ghost, gently expiring. Thus died Vorstius, being 53 years, 11 months, and 10 days old. His body was conveyed from Tonningen to Frederickstadt on the fourth day after his decease, attended by his friends in seven coaches, and was interred in a vault under the very place where the church was afterwards erected. The minister Grevius preached his funeral sermon in the Low Dutch language, and described all his good qualities in a very moving manner: The rector Mark Gaulter afterwards composed an encomium on his self, whom he had preferred, though he had been turned out of the Divinity College at Leyden for his adherence to the doctrines of the Remonstrants. But Vorstius inclined to Holstein in preference, particularly as his wife had an aversion to Steinfurt, where she had a sister so extremely partial and violent on account of the controverted points, as to render it impossible to live with her. He therefore civilly excused him. self to the Count, and set out privately, first to Amsterdam, where the famous poet Van der Vondel harboured him several days, and then conducted him to Horn, whence he went by sea to Tonningen, on the 4th of June, 1622.”—BRANDT. This is a good specimen of the trammels in which all the minor German princes were held by the decrees of the Synod of Dort. This Count had refused a previous application from some friends of Vorstius's through fear: But in the interim, Frederick the Elector Palatine lost the battle of Prague, and the kingdom of Bohemia, the Protestants of Europe were delivered from the tyrannical chains which Calvinism endeavoured to rivet on them, and the Count then ventured to invite Vorstius. |