‹ by the name of REFORMED, not only from the 1 to 1.28 dage 27 Papists, but likewise from the Lutherans. The British answered, In our Churches the Lutherans are accounted the REFORMED, ED, since they first attempted to effect a Reformation in religion? We have it also in command from our King's most serene as possible in giving no offence to the Lutheran Churches," follows this clause,] Itaque addita est ista VOX NOSTRARUM, ‹ Therefore is that word (OURS] added, as Mr.Balcanqual's notes report it. But I can find to such words as

to employ as much Pectu

Majesty

29 9970

DOVOLIGE DILE President could dictate Canons , or insert them, when they never had been heard of till that hour, privately, d EDTOW wherein they were tendered for approbation, (as it appears by the former passages that he could,) he might take the liberty to expunge matters of greater weight and importance than was such a word as NOSTRARUM. And so, (as Mr. Hales did, upon occasion, by Mr. John Calvin,), 1 bid the Synod of Dort GOOD NIGHT, 2017 LAURENCE WOMACK, D. D.

Acta Syn. Nat. Dor. in folio 1620. But added in the Edition of those

Ju

ས་་་་་་

The circumstance mentioned at the close of Bishop Womack's pamphlet, respecting the omission of the word "OURS," is explained by what has been related, page 470, when, after several previous revisions and alterations, Heinsius and Hommius were invited by the States General further to revise. and improve the synodical documents. If the word oUR, inserted for the satisfaction of the British Divines, had been permitted to remain, the clause in which it occurs would have read thus: "This saving doctrine which has been with the most scrupulous fidelity expressed according to the word of God and the consent of OUR Reformed Churches," which would then have meant "the Churches of the United Provinces." But this paltry expression, did not accord with the enlarged ambition and the base motives of the Dutch Divines, who, by suppressing OUR, announced to the world, that the doctrine established at that Synod was "according to the consent of THE Reformed Churches" "And they left it to the information or the shrewdness of the reader, to interpret the meaning of "the Reformed Churches" after the Dutch and German fashion as "the Calvinistic Churches," or according to the more liberal signification given to the term by the British and other Divines as comprising all the Churches that are Reformed from Popery." Either of these significations would have suited the expression employed by the Synodical revisors; but it is evident, from other circumstances, that their design was to induce the reader to adopt the latter, for which they manifested a marked predilection. I. Instead of detailing any further particulars respecting the discussion which arose when the Remonstrants questioned the competency of the Synod,1 (page 428,) we will give a few extracts from the arguments of the Foreign Divines, in justification of the equitable constitution of that reverend tribunal.) Those arguments fil 14 Quarto pages of the ACTS of the Synod: Their objection, that the Contra-Remonstrants are schismatics, does not appear to› us true or at all probable. For, if they be accounted schismatics, the whole of this Church and the Republic are involved in the same crime: This Synod also consists of persons that are marked by no ecclesiastical censure, or that have ever been convicted of schism or condemned by any legitimate tribunal; Because the Remonstrants, by receding from, the doctrine generally received, s have themselves been the beginning and the cause of this separation; for that g is to be considered the truth which has from the commencement been deli-> vered and received, while that is reputed an error which is afterwards intro-i duced, till, after a lawful examination and judgment, the contrary be decided 19 Because it is professed by all foreign princes and republics that have deputed their divines to this assembly, that it is not a small council of schismatics, but a Synod of lawful pastors convoked together by the supreme authority of A the Dutch Republic and Church. With regard to the chief part of the Synod consisting of their adversaries,' divines are not accustomed to be like a white sheet of paper in the business of religion, neither ought they to be If there fore only those who preserve neutrality can become judges, they would always

be

It fought out of that Church in which the dissension had grisen, and no be competent to settle its own disputes. Truth is the common treasure of the Church, and cannot on any account become the peculiar property of single persons: It is the public cause of God and the Church which is transacted in Synods, not the private cause of each individual. In external affairs the unjust sentence of a judge deprives another of property which he draws over to himself: But they who exercise a judiciary authority in the cause of faith, are neither able to rob other people of the truth, nor to appropriate it to themselves.-They urge against us the words of Ursinus and Paraus, who advised people not to approach to those Councils in which the same parties are both accusers and judges. But in vain do they object against us the observations of these men, who wrote against the petty Councils of the Papists and the Lutherans, which differ as much from this Synod as the heavens are distant from the earth. For (1) in those Councils, the decrees of men (for instance those of the POPE and of LUTHER,) are heard; in this, the decrees of God. (2) In them, prejudices are brought to the Council and are carried away; in this, we think there is no member who is not so well affected as eagerly to embrace whatever the Remonstrants may be able to prove from the word of God. (3) In them, manifest adversaries were seated; in this, partners of the same Church. (4) In them, every thing was servile; in this, all things are free, both as it respects the profession of faith and its defence: With regard to the schism, he is not to be blamed who makes the secession, but he who forces the other to make it. We thus approach to hear the cited brethren, and afterwards to consider whether they have produced or advised any thing that has not before claimed a due share of our consideration, and that may conduce to the illustration of Divine Truth and to the removal of the offences which oppress the Church of Christ; for we are prepared to yield to those who shall teach us any thing of greater truth and excellence.-An adverse party is either a private person, a multitude, or a public person; A private person cannot be at once both judge and party: but a multitude or a public person may: Thus according to the laws and statutes a magistrate is accustomed to sit as judge in his own cause.-Schism does not take away from the magistrate bis own rights, nor from the chief ministers of the Churches whose cause is patronized by the magistrate.-What Paræus said was concerning the Councils of the Papists and the Ubiquitarians [Lutherans], In this Synod the sam: persons will not sustain the double character of accuser and judge: For, let it be granted that the Contra-Remonstrants who haye been deputed to this Synod, are an adverse party; yet the sole judge of these controversies will be the word of God, to which all have bound themselves, before God by a solemn oath: If Doctor Paræus were present, they [the Remonstrants] would scarcely endure the sight of his countenance, and yet in his absence they venture to pluck his beard. We and our ancestors have had many transactions with the Ubiquitarians, Anabaptists, Libertines, the Jews and others; yet the ministers and elders of the Church were an adverse party to them." These and many similar arguments did the reverend foreigners produce, to persuade the hesitating Remonstrants to place themselves under the protection of such an impartial and equitable tribunal as that of the Dutch Synod.

II. Some account has been given (page 432,) of the dismission of the Remonstrants from all converse with the Synod, and their banishment. To complete the narrative, it will be necessary to state the manner in which they were occupied from Jan. 14th, to the 24th of May.-In the morning of the former day they had delivered their explanation of the First of their Five POINTS, and it was ordered to be copied out for the consideration of the different members. But that document, as well as the mere statement of the Five Points themselves, were not gratifying to the Calvinists. In his dimissory speech the President had complained, that "the Five Articles which they had presented, in the form of Theses, were not drawn up in the manner prescribed to them by the Synod; and that they were so exceedingly confused as to be rendered unserviceable." The Synod had particularly deprecated the Remonstrants' method of employing negatives, which impugned the doctrines of

Calvin and his followers; and many kind admonitions had they addressed to those refractory spirits, to alter their course, and to state only what they themselves believed, without interfering with the belief of other good people..... Some of their strong reasons why the Remonstrants should suffer Reprobation to slumber in quiet, (though this was one of the chief Points in dispute,), are recounted in the 446th page. It cannot, therefore, be any cause of wonder, that such contumacious being's were dismissed with a most violent speech from the President. On n the 21st of Jan. they presented, a Memorial to the Synod, in which they complained of many assertions in Bogerman's speech, and declared that they had not at the time made any reply, because they thought it best to follow the advice of the wise man, who said, Strive not with those who are în wrath.'—Many of the foreign Divines expressed great dissatisfaction against the manner which the Synod had adopted, of refuting the opinions of the Remonstrants in their absence and while they were still detained in town, -especially when they had offered to explain their sentiments upon the points in dispute, provided due liberty were granted to them. The following re-........ flections by Hales, shew the embarrassment which was felt on this subject: "The errors of public actions (if they be not very gross,) are with less inconvenience tolerated than amended. For the danger of alteration, of disgracing and disabling authority, makes that the fortune of such proceedings admits no regress, but being once howsoever well or ill done, they must for ever after be upheld. The most partial spectator of our Synodal Acts cannot but confess, that in the late dismission of the Remonstrants, with so much choler and heat, there was a great oversight committed,-and that whether we respect our common profession of Christianity, Quæ nil nisi justum suadet et lene, [which persuades to nothing except what is just and lenient,'] or the quality of this people apt to mutine by reason of long liberty, and not having learnt to be imperiously commanded,-in which argument the clergy above all men ought not to have read their first lesson. The Synod therefore, to whom it is not now in integro to look back, and rectify what is amiss without disparagement, must now go forward and leave events to God, and for the countenance of their action do the best they may.".

Desiring to satisfy the foreigners, and at the same time to maintain the dignity of the Synodical decisions, the Lay Commissioners sent for the Remonstrants on the 23rd of Jan., and informed them, "that, though by the resolution of the States General they were excluded from all further negociations with the Synod, and the Synod was impowered to proceed in the

former hooks anation of their opinions as extracted from their

writings, yet that they [the Commissioners] in order. to remove all cause of complaint, had ventured of their own accord to allow them the liberty of drawing up in writing whatever they might wish to add in the way of explanation or vindication of their FIVE POINTS, and of delivering t such writings to the President of the Commissioners within a fortnight, who, would dispose of it in that manner which might be considered the most proper." The Remonstrants expressed their gratification at this unexpected proposal, which, while it imposed on them no necessity to answer any questions, gave them liberty to defend their opinions beyond the limits which, I their adversaries had wished to prescribe. They thanked the Commissioners for their offer, but represented that the time specified was too early. In answer to this, it was said, "On these matters there has already been writing enough: You must therefore be concise, for there is no necessity to repeat. what has been formerly adduced."-The Remonstrants said, "that, in an affair of such great importance, they ought to be permitted to make their q defence in the most proper manner; that much had been written against them, which they were obliged to answer; but that, since they could notgiet obtain a longer period, they would exert themselves to comply with the Commissioners' wishes, and though they believed they could not be prepared with all that had been proposed against the appointed day, yet they would then present to their Lordships a proof of their diligence.”

On the 7th of Feb., therefore, they presented to the Commissioners, by Poppius and other four, a manuscript consisting of 204 sheets. The Preface to

it was subscribed by all the cited persons, and in it they stated, "that after their dismissal, they would have been glad had they received permission toreturn home; but, since their lordships had forbidden them to move, they had submitted; that the papers now presented contained A Defence of their Doctrine on the First Point, with a Refutation of that of the Contra-Remon strants, An Exposition of the Ninth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans,” —An Explanation of the Second Point,' and ' An Iudex of the Evidences from..." which they had endeavoured to elicit the exact opinions of the Contra-Remon2/9 strants, and of those whom they considered orthodox, on the Second Point:na they requested to be allowed, other five or six weeks to complete their other papers; they thought, the Synod ought with great seriousness to consider this! their last defence before they proceeded to pass sentence; they complained, that, in their absence, the Synod had begun to refute their opinious as”extracted from the Hague Conference, aud that, according to the information which they received, had passed by some of their best arguments, had wrested them in a manner contrary to their obvious meaning, or had wished to appearignorant of their own arguments having been answered by the Remonstrants? such proceedings they considered dishonourable and unjust. Since, therefore, the Synod would not permit them to appear again in the assembly, they thought it just and necessary that they [the Synod] should return an answer to this their defence. They also requested to have copies of those speeches by which some of the members had attempted to confute their opinions, and which would either afford them some instruction, or enable them to return such answers as might be convincing to those members. They also requested, that the Commissioners would allow them to visit for a short time their families and Churches, &c." After having received this document, their Lordships desired the Remonstrants to withdraw; and when they had spent some time în' deliberation, the cited persons were called in and severely reprimanded: (1): Because they had presumed, in their Preface, to censure the proceedings of the Synod, which they were forbidden to do in future.(2) For not comply ing with the commands given to them, about bringing in the whole of their papers at the time appointed. (3) For speaking against the doctrines of the ContraRemonstrants. (4) For having made their defence so long and tedious. When many words had passed between the parties, the Commissioners declared. that, as a matter of grace, they would grant the Remonstrants one week longer to despatch the whole of their business.—Accordingly on the 15th of Feb., they presented their explanation of the Third, Fourth and Fifth Points; but when the Commissioners found, that the manuscript, which consisted of sixty sheets, did not include their defence of those articles, they said they might employ themselves in preparing that defence, and their Lordships would after-1 wards inform them when they expected it to be ready. The Remonstrants, therefore, applied themselves with diligence to the completion of their labour. Episcoplus composed all that was written on the First and Second Points, the defence of the Third and Fourth, and the explanation and defence of the Fifth. The Treatise on Reprobation was the work of Niellius. One of the Expositions on the Ninth of the Romans was by Borrius of Leyden, the other by Episcopius. Professor Barlæus wrote the Explanation of the Third and Fourth Points.

The next day (the 16th) the Remonstrants were informed, that they must have all their documents prepared within ten days, and that no longer time would be allowed. Accordingly on the 25th, they presented the Commissioners with their defence of the Second Point in eighty sheets of paper. Their Lordships, after having held a consultation with Bogerman, expressed their high displeasure at the extreme prolixity of all their documents, and at their not being delivered at the time prescribed. Much altercation ensued, when their Lordships declared, they would receive no more papers from them, and they were then dismissed. However, two days afterwards the Commissioners informed them, that they might finish their papers if they would engage to do so within a few days; but the Remonstrants required three or four weeks. This could not be granted, as the foreigners wished to depart before Easter:

but, they were to be prepared in the course of ten days!: On the 9th of March, 3 they again waited on the Commissioners, and stated, that the very severe frost had prevented them from having their papers finished against the appointed day, but that they would complete them in another weeek, which period, it seems, was granted to them.

It was at this interview that the President of the Commissioners said, he had received fresh orders not to suffer any of the cited Remonstrants, not even those who were ejected from their benefices at Utrecht and Horn, to move from Dort, This detention of the Remonstrants excited various speculatioits :12 Some unprejudiced people viewed it as a great injury, particularly when their presence was no longer necessary and when little attention was paid to their©-1 new writings. Others, who betrayed greater partiality, thought there were !* good reasons for detaining them at Dort, since it was improper to suffer them l to visit their churches, because they would then disclose all that they knew about the proceedings of the Synod, and prepossess the people too much! against the Contra-Remonstrant party, which might have excited fresh dist turbances, nur yd houwens A5

On the 18th of March, the Remonstrants delivered up their defence of the Fourth and Fifth Points, which completed all that they wished to produce. At the close of the last paper, they thus expressed themselves: : Lets that it storm come upon us which has most unjustly deprived so many flourishing churches of their faithful pastors, even during the sessions of the Synod and w whilst their cause was depending ;-that storm which has caused many thon→ fa sand souls to mourn and lament, and unceasingly to pour out their just combure plaints into the bosom of the Chief Shepherd. In the mean time we sincerelyde protest and declare, as in the presence of the Great Prince of pastors, before whose tribunal our adversaries and we must all appear to give an account of our actions, that it is purely from a humble fear of displeasing God, that webs reject those doctrines which we have opposed, because, being instructed by the Holy Scriptures, we firmly believe them to be repugnant to the honour of God, destructive to piety, and a scandal to the Christian Religion !", &c,n't al In a separate written address to the Commissioners, they say, among many other excellent things; We have not prepared these Defences and si Apologies, for the use of the Synod, with whom we bave no further transactions, but only in obedience to the commands of your Lordships. The Synod never dr shewed the least regard to what we have done, either in the explanation or inqy the defence of our doctrines; but, on the contrary, without receiving ourı papers, or at least without properly perusing them, they have lately done nothing but utter harangues against us, which may well be viewed as a pre condemnation of the whole body of our doctrines. To discover, the since!! rity of their hearts towards us and our, cause, and to render us still more odious, they have lately produced an extract out of our papers, and openly by out the President read it to the people, by which they have tried to insinuate ask though we denied the true humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ. When they... happen to find any thing which has been transiently advanced by us, either \ A to solve some argument of our adversaries or to corroborate one of our own 1 solutions, they eagerly seize it, if it be in any degree calculated to excite the slightest suspicion of our orthodoxy, however false it may be, and they eme ploy their men of learning in preparing a refutation of such arguments, and then make them the subject of an oration!"

no pouf He said When the Remonstrants had delivered these papers, the Commissioners over deliberated a long time whether they ought to receive them or not 3, and they w afterwards entered into a warm dispute with the cited persons about the timer. I consumed in the composition of such writings. The majority of their Lord ships, being commercial men, could not conceive that any extraordinary von mental exertion was required; and they betrayed their great ignorance, byud often telling the cited persons, that those documents had been prepared before's their appearance at the Synod, though they contained the refutation of sever› m ral arguments that had been employed against their doctrines in the Synod, ol and of which they had been incidentally informed, Balcanqual says, in referem i