tius all the information which he was desirous to obtain. In one of Vossius's letters to Grotius, in giving a very favourable opinion of Thomson's Diatriba, he says: "Yet it is no concern of our hero Bertius to know this our judgment, unless you shall otherwise determine: For, even his friends tell me, that he is one who has this in common with the great parent of Roman Eloquence, that it is with great difficulty he can be silent about those things which imperiously require silence." The Remonstrants were occasionally great sufferers by this indiscretion on the part of Bertius, as the reader will perceive by the following extract of Uitenbogaert's letter to Vorstius, under the date of January 29, 1613:

"I do not know what cause Bertius has to complain of us. He was lately called to our meeting with some other brethren, and we treated openly about all things while he was present. Some discourse arose between him and Episcopius, respecting his disputation with Sybrands Lubbertus on the article of Justification; in which Episcopius thought he had observed some things which could by no means be reconciled with the Heidelberg Catechism,* though Bertius seemed desirous to cover himself with this shield. Being hardly pressed, Bertius replied, that he wished to publish an open disavowal of the Catechism.I immediately followed and asked him, if he thought such a 'course was lawful for him, by the oath which according to the 'public laws of the college he had given to their Lordships the 'Curators on his entrance into office ?-Others of the brethren added, Sybrands will sing a triumph, when he has extorted this 'from his adversary.'-But Bertius proceeded much further, and uttered some things about Justification, which neither I nor the other brethren could approve, and which we considered ought on no account to be passed over in silence, lest our silence should some time afterwards be interpreted into a token of approbation. -Borrius, therefore, Episcopius, and myself, each admonished him apart, and told him plainly, that we could not approve of 'such assertions till we were better informed.' We added, that they appeared to us of such importance, that, if they were ' related to those who censured us, they might prove exceedingly ' detrimental to the common cause.'-For it was our fear, and that not a vain one, lest Festus should by chance hear such things occasionally from him (since he is accustomed to hold

6

The whole of this discussion is in confirmation of the care with which the immediate followers of Arminius wished to conform to the established formularies of consent, till they might obtain some relief in the decisions of an impartial National Synod. See page 643.

familiar discourse with him, as he did formerly with their fatherin-law,) and lest Festus should, according to his usual custom, take occasion from them to traduce the cause of the Remonstrants in general. We therefore earnestly besought him, to abstain from such practices and to act with greater prudence.*~ I observed, that this conversation was not very agreeable to him; yet I can see no reason why it should be so exceedingly displeasing. We undoubtedly had certain and very just reasons for acting towards him in this manner.-I afterwards understood, that he had complained of the interlocutors at the Hague Conference; and I now see, that he has likewise given utterance to some complaints to you; but that he has no cause for such conduct, you already perceive. I know with what views and intentions this Society of Remonstrants was formed: It was determined, that we should abide within the limits which were then laid down by the consent of all, at least until there was a revision of the formularies.] If therefore any persons, relying on the inventions of their own brains, choose to wander beyond those boundaries, and to raise unnecessary disputations, let them do this at their own peril, and keep their affairs to themselves if they please; but let them not employ the common cause of the Remonstrants as a pretext for their private actions, without even consulting the persons with whom they are associated, and let them not under such pretexts betray that cause."

Soon after the death of Arminius, Bertius published his first and most celebrated treatise entitled HYMENEUS DESERTOR: Sive de Sanctorum Apostasia Problemata duo. "The Deserter Hymenæus, or two Problems+ concerning the Apostacy of the

Another proof of his meddling humour and imprudent conduct is contained in the following extract from one of Uitenbogaert's letters to Vorstius in 1613:-" The pamphlet of Grotius [The Piety of the States of Holland] is just published both in Dutch and Latin: and, what will much surprise you, the work was read in manuscript some weeks ago by the King and the English Bishops. This was a most astonishing fact to Grotius, because he was ignorant by whose aid such a premature disclosure could have been effected. Bertius was at length detected as the guilty indi. vidual, from whose imprudence and too eager curiosity alone the whole affair had proceeded. It is however, a happy circumstance, that his Majesty was not displeased with it; had the result been different, I am much afraid the work must have been strangled in its cradle. If there ever was a pamphlet published which was calculated to irritate our zealots, according to my judgment it is this. Yet I hope it will be profitable to some persons, and will recal the precipitate judgments of many, although it is not in every part favourable to the designs of certain people who are not evil."

The two Problems resolved in the book of Bertius, are,—FIRST, That one who is justified may fall from his justification:-SECONDLY, That the justification from which such a man fell, was, nevertheless, a true justification.

King James declared, in his famous manifesto, (see p. 455,) that Bertius lied

Saints." Without any consideration, he transmitted a copy of his book, as a present, to that violent Calvinist, Archbishop Abbot, who accounted it an insult: And as such it was resented by king James, (see p. 455,) who asserted in his famous Declaration, "that the title alone of the book, rendered the author worthy of the fire." His true friend, Isaac Casaubon, wrote to Bertius in October, 1611, and said, "If you had asked my advice, you would never have sent your book to that Prelate. He is an eminent man and very pious; but, in the opinion of most men, his sentiments are different from those which you maintain."

Scarcely had he recovered from the effects of this act of indiscretion, when in 1615, he published his Diatribe concerning Justifying Faith, and an Apology against Piscator, in which he advanced some doctrines that savoured much of Semi-Pela

roundly in affirming this to be the doctrine of the Church of England. But Bishop. Overal, who had long been Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, and who will always be acknowledged as a more competent theological authority, has justly observed: "Certainly that notion of the Perseverance of all those who have once believed and are regenerated, about which there is such cavilling, was never approved by any of the Fathers, but rejected by all antiquity; and more than sufficiently confuted by the continual experience of all ages; and it has only been started in these last times, being introduced into the Church by the jealousies arisen between Zwinglius and his followers, and Luther."

Bertius wrote an Apologetical Letter to the Archbishop in Feb., 1612, and another to his Majesty, and requested Casaubon to present them. The Archbishop received his own; but, after reading that which was addressed to the King, he detained it for some weeks and then commanded Casaubon to return it to Bertius, Casaubon had afterwards an opportunity of speaking to his Majesty about Bertius, to whom he wrote in March, "I perceive that not only this very wise king, but also the principal men of the kingdom who are distinguished for their learning and piety, have such an opinion of you, as induces them to regret that your cause has not been separated from that of Vorstius. For they all affirm, that Vorstius has written and still maintains those assertions respecting the Nature of God which cannot be maintained without the greatest impiety. Your writings do not shew that you hold similar sentiments to his, and this excellent King and all good men wish that it may prove to be different from them."

After this interview with King James, Casaubon informed Bertius that if he would write a letter full of moderation, &c., he would present it, and use his utmost exertions to secure his Majesty's esteem. Bertius accordingly wrote an ample epistle to Casaubon in April, the substance of which was related to his Majesty, and Casaubon communicated the result in the following words: " I lament from my heart, that Vorstius cannot be recalled to a right mind and to sound doctrine: I return thanks to God Almighty, that, in questions of this description, you profess yourself to be opposed to that pest! When I had made his most serene Majesty acquainted with this fact, he derived no small degree of pleasure from the information. But I wish, you had employed some other expressions than those which occur in the title of the book that you have lately published; you would, in that case, have found the king more equitable, and many other of the best men, who are offended with the very novelty of your title. But, if I am not deceived, that doctrine could have been proposed in a manner far less invidious."

gianism, if not of Pelagianism. The contents of his book would have been of a character far more heretical, had not a great part of it been submitted by him, in manuscript, to Grotius, through whose interference and that of Uitenbogaert many objectionable passages were omitted.* These circumstances

The following is an extract from the letter of Grotius under the date of Aug. 3, 1614 :-" Reverend Sir, after I had written to you yesterday, a letter arrived from Bertius with some pages of the work in which he controverts by most solid arguments the horrid dogma of Piscator, and with such perspicuity, that, it appears probable to me, he will be able to prove what he wishes to Piscator himself. He desired to have my judgment: I replied in a friendly and candid manner, that all the points which he opposes in Piscator are highly approved by me; but that, in the mean time, there are certain things which appear to me unsafe, and undoubtedly unseasonable. The latter, however, are exceedingly few, and not in the least necessary to his purpose. He has inserted in that pamphlet a Diatribe on the history of Pelagius, in which, his enemies, or the enemies of the cause which he defends, will exclaim, that he defends or at least excuses Pelagius. He says, that Pelagius proved his sentiments to the Palestine Synod: But, it is evident, he deluded that Synod; for to avoid being himself condemned, he condemned the very things which he soon afterwards disseminated with so much the greater eagerness, &c. Bertius also blames many things in the African Synods. But for what reason? What was there done in them, that could be opposed to him? For there is not in them a single word about the absolute decree ; still less about an irresistible force; and far less still about the inamissibility of justifying grace, nay, there are in them several arguments in opposition to those things. These Synods seem to me to have distinguished with sufficient plainness between the dogmas peculiar to St. Augustine which they entirely omitted, and those ancient and catholic doctrines which they defended against Pelagius and Celestius.- Bertius complains, that those who were studious of peace obtained a bad name, and he specifies Cassianus and Faustinus, who are authors of no reputation, and whose sentiments, in the very words of these authors, were condemned by the Fathers of the Council of Orange. And for what end do we excuse those men, when our own sentiments remain unshaken after we have rejected theirs? What pleasure can there be in pronouncing invectives against the African Synods, that do no harm to us? What benefit do we hope from such a course?-I solemnly believe, that these things are not written to obscure the glory which is due to grace; but other persons will believe that they have this tendency. As soon as this book reaches Great Britain, depend upon it, it will be condemned. Then all those who indulge in evil wishes against the States of Holland, will exclaim, 'This is that magnificent commendation of GRACE, by which term they ' understand NATURE! They invent excuses for Pelagius, and praise the Semi'Pelagians who were condemned by the Council of Orange! This is the object which they have in contemplation, and to which that Edict [for a toleration] has a ' manifest reference !'—I seem to hear the Archbishop and Winwood talking in this strain. But among ourselves, all refractory persons will say, 'A commencement has been made, by the Regent of the Theological College, of transgressing the boundaries of the Decree:' And they will find no difficulty in infusing this persuasion into some people. How eagerly will this intelligence be circulated in Amsterdam, and in Friezland!-Will he not be able to keep at a distance sufficiently great from the rocks of the Absolute Decree, even when he does not ascribe that to Nature which he detracts from Grace? Yet, I believe, Bertius writes thus, from a sort of benignant pity towards men who were formerly condemned, rather than from any other cause. For he confesses in another passage, that every good action is prevented [preceded] by Grace. But neither the ostentatious display of our benignant feelings, nor of our erudition, ought to be of such consequence to us, as on their account to deprive ourselves of the ability to assist others, and to burden our country and the Church with

shew, that the Remonstrants had no control over his productions, but were much injured by them, since his sentiments were generally interpreted as those of the body to which he professed to belong. In the same year, he found it convenient to retire from his situation in the Theological College, of which Brandt gives the following account:

"A little time before, Peter Bertius, Regent of the Theological College of the States at Leyden, resigned that office on account of the trouble which it gave him,-particularly in these times, when the exhibitioners and other scholars were so divided into parties, and when some of them, who belonged to the party of the Contra-remonstrants, were privately exercised by Festus Hommius, a minister of Leyden, in disputations and in the composition of sermons, though they had, in Polyander, a Professor of the same sentiments. Some are of opinion, that Bertius had rendered himself so obnoxious, by several imprudent and crude expressions in his work On the Apostacy of the Saints, that he could do no more good in the University; and that he had likewise been privately warned by the Higher Powers to quit his place. After that, he was again made Professor of Philosophy; and, in his stead, the Curators called to the Regency of the Theological College, Gerard John Vossius, master of the Latin School at Dort, and a person of great learning, discretion, and other virtues."

While the Remonstrants were engaged in the lawful defence of all that was dear to them as men and Christians, they found in Bertius a deserter, who servilely conformed to the persons unnecessary difficulties. I am surprised that the excellent man did not recollect what bad success he had, solely in the inscription of his late book.

"I have written these things with freedom, for the sake both of Bertius and of the public. I foresee many evils that will ensue, unless these things be altered. The book is not yet finished; it is comprised in a few sheets. What is this, when placed in comparison with the public tranquillity? I request you, reverend Sir, who understand these matters so well, and who are acquainted with our situation and the times in which we live,-I request you, if your sentiments co-incide with mine, to add your authority with my advice: But if your thoughts and mine on this point do not agree, I desire you to receive with complacency my solicitude, that the peace which has been obtained after so many inconveniences, and which is at present in the utmost peril, should no more be dispersed by new offences. I call God to witness, that in this matter I have had regard solely to the honour of Bertius, the tranquillity of the Republic and of the Church, and the removal of envy from the good cause."

Uitenbogaert complied with the wishes of Grotius, and Bertius expunged many of the objectionable passages from his book: Yet a sufficient number was suffered to remain, to prove that the author went beyond Arminius and his followers on some points of doctrine.-These extracts, and those which occur in App. P., serve to shew the uncommon pains that were taken, by such prudent men as Uitenbogaert and Grotius, to keep such aspiring minds as Vorstius and Bertius within the bounds of moderation and orthodoxy.