« הקודםהמשך »
though it is, perhaps, too uncharitably interpreted by the author already mentioned, would furnish, without doubt, just matter of censure, wore it founded in truth. I was both surprised and perplexed while I was translating it. I could not procure immediately proper information with respect to the fact, nor could I examine Mosheim's proofs of this strange assertion, because he alleged none. Destitute of materials, either to invalidate or confirm the fact, I made a slight mention, in a short note, of a correspondence which had been carried on between archbishop Wake and Dr. Du Pin, with the particulars of which I was not acquainted; and, in this my ignorance, only made a general observation, drawn from Dr. Wake's known zeal for the protestant religion, which was designed, not to confirm that assertion, but rather to insinuate my disbelief of it. It never could come into my head, that the interests of the protestant religion would have been safe in archbishop Wake's hands, had I given the smallest degree of credit to Dr. Mosheim's assertion, or even suspected that that eminent prelate was inclined to form a union between the “ Enthe pope's concurrence were insisted upon by some men of high rank, who seemed inclined to the union, and that these difficulties put an end to the conferences; that, however, two French divines, whom he supposes to be Du Pin and Girardin, were sent to England to propose pew terms.-It now happens unluckily for Mr. Kiorningius's reputation as a historian, that not one syllable of all this is true, as will appear sufficiently to the reader, who peruses with attention the account, and the pieces, which I here lay before the public. But one of the most egregious errors in the account given by Kiorningius, is at page 61 of his Dissertation, where he says, that archbishop Wake was so much elated with the prospect of success in the scheme of an accommodation, that he acquainted the divines of Geneva with it in 1719, and plainly intimated to them, that he thought it an casier thing than reconciling the protestants with each other. Let us now see where Kiorningius received this information. Why,, truly, it was from a letter of Dr. Wake to professor Turretin of Geneva, in which there is not one syllable relative to a scheme of union between the English and Gallican churches; and yet Kiorningius quotes a passage in this letter as the only authority he has for this affirmation. The case was thus : Dr. Wake, in the former part of his letter to Turretin, speaks of the sufferings of the Hungarian and Piedmontese churches, wbich he had successfully endeavoured to alleviate, by engaging George I. to intercede in their behalf; and then proceeds to express his desire of healing the differences that disturbed the union of the protestant churches abroad. Interim, says he, dum hæc, i. e. the endeavours to relieve the Hungarian and Piedmontese churches, feliciter peraguntur ignoscite, Fratres Dilectissimi, si majoris quidem laboris atque dificultatis, sed longe maximi nobis commodi inceptum vobis proponam; unionem nimirum, &c. Professor Turretin, in his work, entitled, Nubes Testium, printed only the latter part of Dr. Wake's letter, beginning with the words, Interim dum hæc feliciter, uli spero, peraguntur ; and Kiorningius, not having seen the preceding part of this letter, which relates to the Hungarian and Piedmontese churches, and with which these words are.connected, took it into his head that these words were relative to the scheme of union between the English and Gallican churches.-Nor did he only take this into his head by way of conjecture, but he affirms, very sturdily and positively that the words have this signification: Hæc verba, says he, tangunl pacis cum Gallis instaurandæ negotium, quod ex temporum rationibus manifestum est. To show him, however, that he is grossly mistaken, I have pablished, among the annexed pieces, No. xx. the whole Letter of archbishop Wake to Turretin.
glish and Gallican churches, founded on this condition, that each of the two communities should retain the greatest part of their respective and peculiar doctrines.”
If the author of the Confessional had given a little more attention to this, he could not have represented me, as confirming the fact alleged by Mosheim, much less as giving it, what he is pleased to call the sanction of my approbation. I did not confirm the fact; for I only said there was a correspondence on the subject, without speaking a syllable of the unpleasing condition that forms the charge against Dr. Wake. I shall not enter here into a debate about the grammatical import of my expressions; as I have something more interesting to present to the reader, who is curious of information about archbishop Wake's real conduct in relation to the correspondence already mentioned. I have been favoured with authentic copies of the letters which passed in this correspondence, which are now in the hands of Mr. Beauvoir of Canterbury, the worthy son of the clergyman who was chaplain to lord Stair in the year 1717, and also with others, from the valuable collection of manuscripts left by Dr. Wake to the library of Christ's Church College in Oxford. It is from these letters that I have drawn the following account, at the end of which copies of them are printed, to serve as proofs of the truth of this relation, which I publish with a disinterested regard to truth. This impartiality may be, in some measure, expected from my situation in life, which has placed me at a distance from the scenes of religious and ecclesiastical contention in England, and cut me off from those personal connexions, that nourish the prejudices of a party spirit, more than many are aware of; but it would be still more expected from my principles, were they knowy. From this narrative, confirmed by authentic papers,
it will appear with the utmost evidence;
1st. That archbishop Wake was not the first mover in this correspondence, nor the person that formed the project of union between the English and Gallican churches.
2dly. That he never made any concessions, nor offered to give up, for the sake of peace, any one point of the established doctrine and discipline of the church of England, in order to promote this union.
3dly. That any desires of union with the church of Rome, expressed in the archbishop's letters, proceeded from the
hopes, well founded, or illusory, is not my business to examine here, that he at first entertained of a considerable reformation in that church, and from an expectation that its most absurd doctrines would fall to the ground, if they could once be deprived of their great support, the papal authority; the destruction of which authority was the very basis of this correspondence.
It will further appear, that Dr. Wake considered union in external worship, as one of the best methods of healing the uncharitable dissensions that are often occasioned by a variety of sentiments, in point of doctrine, in which a perfect uniformity is not to be expected. This is undoubtedly a wise principle, when it is not carried too far; and whether or no it was carried too far by this eminent prelate, the candid reader is left to judge, from the following relation.
In the month of November, 1717, archbishop Wake wrote a letter to Mr. Beauvoir, chaplain to the earl of Stair, then ambassador at Paris, in which his Grace acknowledges the receipt of several obliging letters from Mr. Beauvoir. This is manifestly the first letter which the prelate wrote to that gentleman, and the whole contents of it are matters of a literary nature. In answer to this letter, Mr. Beauvoir, in one dated the 11th of December, 1717, 0. S.
f The perusal of this letter, which the reader will find among the pieces here subjoined, No. 1. is sufficient to remove the suspicions of the author of the Confessional, who seems inclined to believe, that archbishop Wake was the first mover in the project of uniting the English and Gallican churches. This author having mentioned Mr. Beauvoir's letter, in which Du Pin's desire of this union is communicated to the archbisbop, asks the following question ; Can any man be certain that Beauvoir mentioned this merely out of his own head, and without some previous occasion given, in the archbishop's letter to him, for such a conversation with the Sorbonne doctors ?* I answer to this question, that every one who reads the archbishop's letter of the 28th of November, to which this letter of Mr. Beauvoir's is an answer, may be very certain that Dr. Wake's letter did not give Mr. Beauvoir the least occasion for such a conversation, but relates entirely to the Benedictine edition of St. Chrysostom, Martene's Thesaurus Anecdotorum, and Moreri's Dictionary. But, says our author, there is an &c. in this copy of Mr. Beauvoir's letter, very suspiciously placed, as if to cover something improper to be disclosed.t But really is any thing was covered here, it was covered from the archbishop as well as from the public, since the very same &c. that we see in the printed copy of Mr. Beauvoir's letter, stands in the original. Besides, I would be glad to know what there is in the placing of this &c. that can give rise to suspicion? The passage of Beauvoir's letter runs thus; They, the Sorbonne doctors, talked as if the whole kingdom was to appeal to the future General Council, &c. They wished for a union with the church of England, as the most effectual means to unite all the Western churches. It is palpably evident, that the &c. here has not the least relation to the union in question, and gives no sort of reason to suspect any thing but the spirit of discontentment, which the insolent proceedings of the court of Rome had excited among the French divines.
* See the 2d edition of the Confessional, Pref. p. Ixxviii. Note W. f The other reflections that the author has there made upon the correspondence between archbishop Wake and the doctors of the Sorbonne, are examined in the following note.
gives the archbishop the information he desired, about the method of subscribing to a new edition of St. Chrysostom, which was, at that time, in the press at Paris, and then mentions his having dined with Du Pin, and three other doctors of the Sorbonne, who talked as if the whole kingdom of France was to appeal, in the affair of the Bull Unigenitus, to a future general council, and who “ wished for an union with the church of England, as the most effectual means to unite all the western churches." Mr. Beauvoir adds, that Dr. Du Pin had desired him to give his duty to the archbishop. Here we see the first hint, the
first overture that was made relative to a project of union between the English and Gallican churches; and this hint comes originally from the doctors of the Sorbonne, and is not at all occasioned by any thing contained in preceding letters from archbishop Wake to Mr. Beauvoir, since the one only letter, which Mr. Beauvoir had hitherto received from that eminent prelate, was entirely taken up in inquiries about some new editions of books that were then publishing at Paris.
Upon this the archbishop wrote a letter to Mr. Beauvoir, in which he makes honourable mention of Du Pin as an author of merit; and expresses his desire of serving him, with that benevolent politeness which reigns in our learned prelate's letters, and seems to have been a striking line in his amiable character." Dr. Du Pin improved this
g See the Letters subjoined, No. II.
h This handsome mention of Dr. Du Pin, made by the archbishop), gives new subject of suspicion to the author of the Confessional. He had learned the fact from the article Wake, in the Biographia Britannica ; but, says be, we are left to guess what this handsome mention was ; had the biographer given us this letter, together with that of Noveinber 27, they might, PROBABLY, (it would have been more accurate to have said POSSIBLY) have discovered what the biographer did not want we should know, namely, the share Dr. Wake had in FORMING the project oj an union between the two churches.* This is guessing with a witness; and it is hard to imagine how the boldest calculator of probabilities could conclude from Dr. Wake's handsome mention of Dr. Du Pin, that the former bad a share, of any kind, in forming the project of union now under consideration. But the ingenious guesser bappens to be quite mistaken in his conjecture; and I hope to convince him of this, by satisfying his desire. He desires the letter of the 27th, or rather the 28th of November; I have referred to it in the preceding note, and he may read it at the end of this account. He desires the letter in which handsome mention is made of Du Pin; and I can assure him, that in that letter there is not a single syllable relative to an union. The passage that regards Dr. Du Piu is as follows; I am much obliged to you, says Dr. Wake, in his letter to Mr. Beauvoir, dated January 2, 1717-18, for making my name known to Dr. Du Pin. He is a gentleman by whose labours I have profiled these many years. And I do really admire how it is possible for one man to publish so much, and yet so correctly, as he has generally done. I desire my respects to him; and that if there be any thing here whereby I may be serviceable to him, he will freely command Such was the archbishop's handsome mention of Du Pin; and it evidently * Corfessional, 211 cdit. Pref. p. fxviii.
favourable occasion of writing to the archbishop a letter of thanks, dated January 31, (February 11,) 1717-18; shows that, till then, there never had been any communication between them. Yet tliese are all the proofs which the author of the Confessional gives of the probability that the archbishop was the first mover in this affair.
But his Grace accepted the party, a formal treaty commences, and is carried on in a. correspondence of sone length, &c, says the author of the Confessional. And I would candidly ask that author upon what principles of Christianity, reason, or charity, Dr. Wake could have refused to hear the proposals, terms, and sentiments, of the Sorbonne doctors, who discovered an inclination to unite with his church? The author of the Confessional says elsewhere, that it was, at the best officious and presumptuous in Dr. Wake to enter into a negotiation of this nature without cuthority from the church or the government. But the truth is, that he entered into no negotiation or treaty on this head; he considered the letters that were written on both sides as a personal correspondence between individuals, which could not commence a negotiation, until they had received the proper powers from their respective sovereigns. And I do think the archbishop was greatly in the right to enter into this correspondence, as it seemed very likely, in the then circumstances of the Gallican church, to serve the protestant interest, and the cause of reformation. If, indeed, in the course of this correspondence, Dr. Wake had discovered any thing like what Mosheim imputes to him, even a disposition toward an union, founded upon the condition that each of the two churches should retain the greatest part of their respective anıl peculiar doctrines, I should think bis conduct liable to censure. But no such thing appears in the archbishop's letters, which I have subjoined to this account, that the candid examiner may receive full satisfaction in this affair. Mosheim's mistake is palpable, and the author of the Confessional seems certainly to have been too hasty in adopting it. He alleges, that the archbishop might have maintained the justice and orthodoxy of every individual article of the church of England, and yet give up some of them for the sake of peace. But the archbishop expressly declares in his letters, that he would give up none of them, and that though he was a friend to peace, he was still a greater friend to truth. The anthor's reflection, that without some concessions on the part of the archbishop, the treaty could not have gone a step farther, may be questioned in theory ; for treaties are often carried on for a. long time, without concessions on both sides, or perhaps on either; and the archbishop might hope, that Du Pin, who had yielded several things, would still yield more; but this reflection is overturned by the plain fact. Besides, I repeat what I have already insinuated, that this correspondence does not deserve the name of a treaty. I. Proposals were made only on Du Pin's side ; and these proposals were positively rejected by the archbishop, in his letters to Mr. Beauvoir. Nor did he propose any thing in return to either of the Sorbonne doctors, but that they should entirely renounce the authority of the pope, boping, though perhaps too fancifully, that when this was done, the two churches might come to an agreement about other matters, as far as was necessary. But the author of the Confessional supposes that the archbishop must have made some concessions; because the letters on both sides were sent to Rome, and received there as so many trophies gained from the eneinies of the church. This supposition, however, is somewhat hasty. Could nothing but concessions from the archbishop make the court of Rome consider them in that light? Would they not think it a great triumph, that they had obliged Du Pin's party to give up the letters as a token of their submission, and defeated the archbishop's design of engaging the Gallican church to assert its liberty, by throwing off the papal yoke? If Dr. Wake made concessions, where are they? And if these were the trophies, why did not the partisans of Rome publish authentic copies of them to the world ? Did the author of the Confessional ever hear of a victorious general, who carefully hid under ground the standards he had taken from the enemy? This, indeed, is a new method of dealing with trophies. Our author, however, does not, as yet, quit his hold, he alleges that the French divines could not have acknowledged the catholic benevolence of the archbishop, if he made no concessions to them. This reasoning would be plausible, if charity toward those that err, consisted in embracing their errors; but this is a definition of charity, that, I fancy, the ingenious author will give up, upon second thoughts. Dr. Wake's catholic benevolence consisted in his esteem for the merit and learning of his correspondents, in his compassion for their servitude and their errors, in his desire of the reformation and liberty of their church, and his propensity to live in friendship * Id. ib. p. lxxxv.
† Id. ib. p. Ixxix. See below, mole[y] and the letters subidinal, No. XI.