114

HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.

SECT. III.

doctrine was readily adopted by many, and || holydays that were celebrated in honour of the consequences that seemed naturally to flow from it in favour of episcopal ordination, happened in effect, and gave new fuel to the flame of controversy; for they who embraced the sentiments of Bancroft, considered all ministers of the Gospel, who had not received ́ordination from a bishop, as not properly invested with the sacred character, and also maintained that the clergy, in those countries where there were no bishops, were destitute of the gifts and qualifications that were necessary to the exercise of the pastoral office, and were to be deemed inferior to the Roman catholic priests.

the saints, the use of the sign of the cross, more especially in the sacrament of baptism, the nomination of godfathers and godmothers as sureties for the education of children, whose parents were still living, and the doctrine relating to the validity of lay baptism. They disliked the reading of the apocryphal books in the church; and, with respect to set forms of prayer, although they did not go so far as to insist upon their being entirely abolished, yet they pleaded for a right to all ministers, of modifying, correcting, and using them in such a manner, as might tend most to the advancement of true piety, and of addressing the Deity in such terms as were suggested by their inward feelings, instead of those which were dictated by others. In a word, they were of Ireland, as also to visit, reform, redress, order, correct, and amend, all errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, contempts, offences and enormities whatsoever; provided that they have no power to determine any thing to be heresy, but what has been adjudged to be so by the authority of the canonical scripture, or by the first four general councils, or any of them; or by any other great council, wherein the same was declared heresy by the express and plain words of canonical scripture, or such as shall hereafter be dewith the assent of the clergy in convocation." Upon the authority of this clause, the queen appointed a certain number of commissioners for ecclesiastical causes, who, in many instances, abused their power. The court they composed, was called the Court of High-Commission, because it claimed a more extensive jurisdiction, and higher powers, than the

XIX. All these things exasperated the puritans whose complaints, however, were not confined to the objects already mentioned. There were many circumstances that entered into their plan of reformation. They had a singular antipathy against cathedral churches, and demanded the abolition of the archdeacons, deans, canons, and other officials, that are supported by their lands and revenues. They disapproved the pompous manner of worship that is generally observed in these churches, and looked, particularly, upon instrumental music, as improperly employed in the service of God.clared to be heresy by the high court of parliament, The severity of their zeal was also very great; for they were of opinion, that not only open profligates, but even persons whose piety was dubious, deserved to be excluded from the communion of the church; and they endeavoured to justify the rigour of this decision, by observ-ordinary courts of the bishops. Its jurisdiction ing, that, as the church was the congregation of the faithful, nothing was more incumbent on its ministers and rulers, than to guard against its being defiled by the presence of persons destitute of true faith and piety. They found, moreover, much subject of affliction and complaint in the ceremonies that were imposed by the queen's order, and by the authority of her council. Among these were the festivals or

a presbyter and a bishop, according to them, being merely two names for the same office; but Dr. Bancroft, in a sermon preached at Paul's cross, (January 12, 1588,) maintained, that the bishops of England were a distinct order from priests, and had superiority over them jure divino.

The puritans justified themselves in relation to this point, in a letter addressed from their prison to queen Elizabeth, in 1592, by observing, that their seriments concerning the persons subject to excommunication, and also with regard to the ef fects and extent of that act of church discipline, were conformable to those of all the reformed churches, and to the doctrine and practice of the church of England in particular. They declared more especially, that, according to their sense of things, the censure of excommunication deprived only of spiritual privileges and comforts, without taking away either liberty, goods, lands, government private or public, or any other civil or earthly commodity of this life; and thus they distinguished themselves from those furious and fanatical anabaptists, who had committed such disorders in Germany, and some of whom were now making a noise in England.

By this council our author means, the High-Commission court, of which it is proper to give some account, as its proceedings essentially belong to the ecclesiastical history of England. This court took its rise from a remarkable clause in the act of supremacy, by which the queen and her successors were empowered to choose persons "to exercise, under her, all manner of jurisdiction, privileges, and pre-eminences, touching any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the realms of England and

reached over the whole kingdom, and was much the same with that which had been lodged in the single person of lord Cromwell, vicar-general of Henry VIII These commissioners were empowered to make inquiry, not only by the legal methods of juries, and they could devise, that is, by rack, torture, inquisiwitnesses, but by all other ways and means which tion, and imprisonment. They were invested with a right to examine such persons as they suspected, by administering to them an oath, (not allowed in their commission, and therefore called ex officio,) by which they were required to answer all questions, and thereby might be obliged to accuse themselves or their most intimate friends. The fines they imposed were merely discretionary; the imprisonment to which they condemned was limited by no rule but their own pleasure; they imposed, when they thought proper, new articles of faith on the clergy, and praetised all the inquities and cruelties of a real inquisition. See Rapin's and Hume's History of England, and Neal's History of the Puritans.

Other rites and customs displeasing to the puritans, and omitted by our author, were, kneeling at the sacrament of the Lord's supper, bowing at the name of Jesus, giving the ring in marriage, the prohibition of marriage during certain times of the year, and the licensing of it for money, as also the confirmation of children by episcopal imposition of hands.

The words of the original are" nec sacris Christianis pueros recens natos ab aliis, quam sacerdotibus, initiari patiebantur." The Roman catholics, who look upon the external rite of baptism as absolutely necessary to salvation, consequently allow it to be performed by a layman, or a midwife, where a clergymnan is not at hand, or (if such a ridiculous thing may be mentioned) by a surgeon, where a still birth is apprehended. The church of England, though it teacheth in general, that none ought to baptize but men dedicated to the service of God, yet doth not deem null baptism performed by laics or women, because it makes a difference between what is essential to a sacrament, and what is requisite to the regu lar way of using it. The puritans, that they might neither prescribe, nor even connive at a practice that seemed to be founded on the absolute necessity of infant baptism, would allow that sacred rite to be performed by the clergy alone.

115

PART II.

HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.

opinion, that the government and discipline ||tained very different notions of this matter; of the church of England ought to have been they considered the Romish hierarchy as a sysmoddled after the ecclesiastical laws and insti- tem of political and spiritual tyranny, that tutions of Geneva, and that no indulgence had justly forfeited the title and privileges of was to be shown to those ceremonies or prac-a true church; they looked upon its pontiff as tices, which bore the smallest resemblance to Anti-Christ, and its discipline as vain, superthe discipline or worship of the church of stitious, idolatrous, and diametrically opposite Rome. to the injunctions of the Gospel; and, in consequence of these sentiments, they renounced its communion, and regarded all approaches to its discipline and worship as highly dangerous to the cause of true religion.

Fourthly, the commissioners considered, as the best and most perfect form of ecclesiastical government, that which took place during the first four or five centuries; they even preferred to that which had been instituted by the apostles, because, as they alleged, our Saviour and his apostles had accommodated the form, mentioned in Scripture, to the feeble and infant state of the church, and left it to the wisdom and discretion of future ages to modify it in such a manner as might be suitable to the triumphant progress of Christianity, the grandeur of a national establishment, and also to the ends of civil policy. The Puritans asserted, in opposition to this, that the rules of church government were clearly laid down in the Scriptures, the only standard of spiritual discipline; and that the apostles, in establishing the first Christian church on the aristocratic

XX. These sentiments, considered in themselves, seemed neither susceptible of a satisfactory defence, nor of a complete refutation. Their solidity or falsehood depended upon the principles from which they were derived; and no regular controversy could be carried on upon these matters, until the contending parties adopted some common and evident principles, by which they might corroborate their respec-it tive systems. It is only by an examination of these, that it can be known on which side the truth lies, and what degree of utility or importance can be attributed to a contest of this nature. The principles laid down by the queen's commissioners on the one hand, and the Puri- || tans on the other, were indeed very different. For, in the first place, the former maintained, that the right of reformation, that is, the privilege of removing the corruptions, and of correcting the errors that might have been introduced into the doctrine, discipline, or worship of the church, was lodged in the sovereign, or civil magistrate alone; while the latter denied, that the power of the magistrate extend-plan that was then observed in the Jewish ed so far, and maintained, that it was rather the business of the clergy to restore religion to its native dignity and lustre. This was the opinion of Calvin, as has been already ob- Lastly, the court reformers were of opinion, served. that things indifferent, which are neither comSecondly, the queen's commissioners main-manded nor forbidden by the authority of tained, that the rules of proceeding, in reform- Scripture, such as the external rites of public ing the doctrine or discipline of the church, worship, the kind of vestments that are to be were not to be derived from the sacred writ- used by the clergy, religious festivals, and the ings alone, but also from the writings and de-like, might be ordered, determined, and rendercisions of the fathers in the primitive ages. The Puritans, on the contrary, aflirmed, that the inspired word of God being the pure and only fountain of wisdom and truth, it was thence alone that the rules and directions were to be drawn, which were to guide the measures of those who undertook to purify the faith, or to rectify the discipline and worship, of the church; and that the ecclesiastical institutions of the early ages, as also the writ-ent, since this was a manifest encroachment ings of the ancient doctors, were absolutely destitute of all authority.

Thirdly, the commissioners ventured to assert, that the church of Rome was a true church, though corrupt, and erroneous in many points of doctrine and government; that the pontiff, though chargeable with temerity and arrogance in assuming to himself the title and Jurisdiction of head of the whole church, was, nevertheless, to be esteemed a true and lawful bishop; and, consequently, that the ministers ordained by him were qualified for performing the pastoral duties. This was a point which the English bishops thought it absolutely necessary to maintain, since they could not otherwise claim the honour of deriving their dignities, in an uninterrupted line of succession, from the apostles. But the Puritans enter

Sanhedrim, designed it as an unchangeable model, to be followed in all times, and in all places.

ed a matter of obligation by the authority of the civil magistrate; and that, in such a case, the violation of his commands would be no less criminal than an act of rebellion against the laws of the state. The Puritans alleged, in answer to this assertion, that it was an indecent prostitution of power to impose, as necessary and indispensable, those things which Christ had left in the class of matters indiffer

upon that liberty with which the divine Saviour had indulged us. To this they added, that such ceremonies as had been abused to idolatrous purposes, and had a manifest tendency to revive the impressions of superstition and popery in the minds of men, could by no means be considered as indifferent, but deserved to be rejected without hesitation as impious and profane. Such, in their estimation, were the

By this they meant, at least, that nothing should be imposed as necessary, but what was ex pressly contained in the Scriptures, or deduced from them by necessary consequence. They maintained still farther, that supposing it proved, that all things necessary to the good government of the church could not be deduced from those writings, yet the discretionary power of supplying this defect was not vested in the civil magistrate, but in the spiritual of ficers of the church.

116

HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.

SECT. III.

religious ceremonies of ancient times, whose || trine and discipline were submitted to the disabrogation was refused by the queen and her council.*

cussion of the whole congregation, and whatever was supported by a majority of votes XXI. This contest between the commission- passed into a law. It was the congregation ers of the court, and those religionists who de- also that elected some of the brethren to the sired a more complete reformation than had office of pastors, to perform the duty of public yet taken place, would have been much more instruction, and the several branches of divine dangerous in its consequences, had the party, worship; reserving, however, the power of distinguished by the general denomination of dismissing these ministers, and reducing them Puritans, been united in their sentiments, to the condition of private members, whenever views, and measures. But the case was quite such a change should appear to be conducive otherwise; for this large body, composed of to the spiritual advantage of the community. persons of different ranks, characters, opin- For these pastors were not esteemed superior, ions, and intentions, and unanimous in noth- either in sanctity or rank, to the rest of their ing but their antipathy to the forms of doc- brethren, nor distinguished from them by any trine and discipline that were established by other circumstance than the liberty of preachlaw, was suddenly divided into a variety of ing and praying, which they derived from the sects; of which some spread abroad the delu- free will and consent of the congregation. sions of enthusiasm, which had turned their It is, besides, to be observed, that their right own brains; while others displayed their folly of preaching was by no means of an exclusive in inventing new and whimsical plans of nature, or peculiar to them alone, since any church government. Of all these sects the member that thought proper to exhort or inmost famous was that which was formed, struct the brethren, was abundantly indulged about the year 1581, by Robert Brown, an in- in the liberty of prophesying to the whole assinuating man, but very unsettled and incon- sembly. Accordingly, when the ordinary sistent in his views and notions of things. teacher or pastor had finished his discourse, all This innovator did not greatly differ, in point the other brethren were permitted to commuof doctrine, either from the church of Eng- nicate in public their sentiments and illustraland, or from the rest of the Puritans; but he tions upon any useful or edifying subject, on had formed singular notions concerning the which they supposed they could throw new nature of the church, and the rules of ecclesi- light. In a word, Brown endeavoured to moastical government. He was for dividing the del the form of the church after the infant whole body of the faithful into separate socie- community that was founded by the apostles, ties or congregations, not larger than those without once considering the important changes which were formed by the apostles in the in- which had taken place since that time, both fancy of Christianity; and maintained, that in the religious and civil state of the world, such a number of persons, as could be contain- the influence that these changes must necessaed in an ordinary place of worship, ought to rily have upon all ecclesiastical establishments, be considered as a church, and enjoy all the or the particular circumstances of the Chrisrights and privileges that are competent to an tian church, in consequence of its former corecclesiastical community. These small socie- ruptions and its late reformation. And, if his ties he pronounced independent, jure divino, notions were crude and chimerical, the zeal, and entirely exempt from the jurisdiction of with which he and his associates maintained the bishops, in whose hands the court placed and propagated them, was intemperate and exthe reins of spiritual government; and also travagant in the highest degree; for he affirmfrom that of synods, which the Puritans in ge-ed, that all communion was to be broken off neral regarded as the supreme visible sources with those religious societies which were foundof ecclesiastical authority. He also maintain-ed upon a different plan from his, and treated ed, that the power of governing each congregation, and providing for its welfare, resided in the people; and that each member had an equal share in this direction, and an equal right to regulate affairs for the good of the whole society. Hence all points both of doc

* Dr. Mosheim, in these five articles, has followed the account of this controversy given by Mr. Neal. This writer adds a sixth article, not of debate, but of union. "Both parties (says he) agreed too well in asserting the necessity of an uniformity of public worship, and of calling in the sword of the magistrate for the support and defence of their several principles, which they made an ill use of in their turns, as they could grasp the power into their hands. The standard of uniformity, according to the bishops, was the queen's supremacy, and the laws of the land; according to the puritans, the decrees of provincial and national synods, allowed and enforced by the civil magistrate: but neither party were for admitting that liberty of conscience, and freedom of profession, which is every man's right, as far as is consistent with the peace of the government under which he lives." It is farther to be observed, that, according to this system, one church was not entitled to exercise jurisdiction over another; but each might give the other counse! or admonition, if its members

more especially the church of England as a spurious church, whose ministers were unlawfully ordained, whose discipline was popish and antichristian, and whose sacraments and institutions were destitute of all efficacy and virtue. The sect of this hot-headed innovator, not being able to endure the severe treatment which their opposition to the established forms of religious government and worship had drawn upon them, from an administration that was not distinguished by its mildness and indulgence, retired into the Netherlands, and founded churches at Middleburg, Amsterdam, and Leyden; but their establishments were neither solid nor durable.* Their founder returned into walked in a disorderly manner, or abandoned the capital truths of religion; and, if the offending church did not receive the admonition, the others were allowed to disown it publicy as a church of Christ. On the other hand, the powers of the church-officers were confined within the narrow limits of their own society. The pastor of the church might not administer the sacrament of baptism, or the Lord's supper, to any but those of his own communion.

*The British churches at Amsterdam and

PART II.

HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.

117

England, and, having renounced his principles || France, were supposed to have a greater proof separation, took orders in the established pensity to mutiny and sedition.* church, and obtained a benefice.* The Puri- | XXIII. The light of the Reformation was tan exiles, whom he thus abandoned, disagreed first transmitted from Saxony into Poland by among themselves, and split into parties; and the disciples of Luther. Some time after this their affairs declined from day to day. This happy period, the Bohemian Brethren, whom engaged the wiser part of them to mitigate the the Romish clergy had expelled from their severity of their founder's plan, and to soften country, as also several Helvetic doctors, prothe rigour of his uncharitable decisions; and pagated their sentiments among the Polanders. hence arose the community of the Independents, Some congregations were also founded in that or Congregational Brethren; a sect which still republic by the Anabaptists, Anti-Trinitarians, subsists, and of which an account shall be gi- and other sectaries. Hence it was, that three ven in the history of the following century. distinct communities, each of which adopted XXII. In the Belgic provinces, the friends the main principles of the Reformation, were of the Reformation seemed for a long time un- to be found in Poland,-the Bohemian Bre certain, whether they should embrace the com-thren, the Lutherans, and Swiss. These communion of the Swiss or that of the Lutheran munities, in order to defend themselves with church. Each of these had zealous friends the greater vigour against their common eneand powerful patrons. The matter was, ne- mies, formed among themselves a kind of convertheless, decided in 1571, and the religious federacy, in a synod held at Sendomir in 1570, system of Calvin was publicly adopted; for the on certain conditions, which were comprehendBelgic confession of faith, which then appeared in the Confession of Faith that derives its ed, was drawn up in the spirit, and almost in the terms, of that which was received in the reformed churches of France, and differed considerably, in several respects, from the confession of Augsburg, but more especially in the article relating to Christ's presence in the eucharist. This will not appear surprising to those who consider the vicinity of the French to the Low-Countries, the number of French protestants constantly passing or sojourning there, the extraordinary reputation of Calvin and of the college of Geneva, and the indefat-expectations of those who have employed their igable zeal of his disciples in extending the limits of their church, and propagating throughout Europe their system of doctrine, discipline, and government. Be that as it may, from this period, the Dutch, who had before been denominated Lutherans, assumed universally the title of Reformed, in which also they imitated the French, by whom this title had been first invented and adopted. It is true, that, as long as they were subject to the Spanish yoke, the fear of exposing themselves to the displeasure of their sovereign induced them to avoid the title of Reformed, and to call themselves Associates of the Brethren of the Confession of Augsburg; for the Lutherans were esteemed, by the Spanish court, much better subjects than the disciples of Calvin, who, on account of the tumults which had lately prevailed in

title from the city now mentioned. But, as this association seemed rather adapted to accelerate the conclusion of peace, than to promote the cause of truth, the points in debate between the Lutherans and the Reformed being expressed in this reconciling confession in vague and ambiguous terms, it was soon after this warmly opposed by many of the former, and was entirely annulled in the following century. Many attempts have, indeed, been made to revive it; but they have not answered the

dexterity and zeal in this matter. In Prussia the Reformed gained ground after the death of Luther and Melancthon, and founded the flourishing churches which still subsist in that country.§

XXIV. The Bohemian, or (as they are otherwise called) Moravian Brethren, who descended from the better sort of Hussites, and were distinguished by several religious institutions of a singular nature, which were well adapted to guard their community against the reigning vices and corruptions of the times, had no sooner heard of Luther's design of reforming the church, than they sent deputies, in 1522, to recommend themselves to his friendship and good offices. In succeeding times, they continued to discover the same zealous attachment to the Lutheran churches in Saxony, and also to those which were founded in other countries. These offers could not be well accepted without a previous examination of their religious sentiments and

Middleburg are incorporated into the national Dutch church, and their pastors are members of the Dutch synod, which is sufficient to show that there are at this time no traces of Brownism or Independency in these churches. The church at Leyden, where Ro* Dr. Mosheim advances this on the authority binson had fixed the standard of independency, of a passage in Brandt's History of the Reformation, about the year 1595, was dispersed; and it is very re- which is a most curious and valuable work, notwithmarkable, that some members of this church, trans- standing the author's partiality to the cause of Arplanting themselves into America, laid the founda-minianism, of which he was one of the most respection of the colony of New-England.

*

- Brown, in his new preferment, forgot not only the rigour of his principles, but also the gravity of his former morals; for he led a very idle and dissolute life. See Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. i. † Neal, vol. i. chap. vi.-Hoornbeckii Summa Controvers. lib. x. p. 738.-Fuller's Ecclesiastical History of Britain, book x.

Loscher, par. iii. lib. v. cap. iv.

Kocheri Biblioth. Theolog. Symbolicæ, p. 216. See Brandt's His. of the Netherlands (written Dutch,) vol. i. book v.

table patrons.

† Loscher, par. iii. lib. v. cap. iii.-Salig, tom. ii. lib. vi. cap. iii. iv. v.-Regenvolscii Hist. Eccles. Slavonicar. lib. i. cap. xvi.-Solignac, Hist. de Pologne, tom. v.-Kautz, Præcipua Relig. Evangel. in Polonia Fata, published at Hamburg, in 1738.

1 See Dan. Ernest Jablonsky's Historia Consensus Sendomiriensis, published at Berlin, in 1731; as also the Epistola Apologetica of the same author, in defence of the work now mentioned, against the obinjections of an anonymous author.

§ Loscher, par. iii. lib. vi. cap. i.

But, some time after, Matthias Devay, and other doctors, began to introduce, in a secret manner, among these nations, the doctrine of the Swiss churches in relation to the eucharist, as also their principles of ecclesiastical government. This doctrine and these principles were propagated in a more open and public manner about the year 1550, by Szegedin and other Calvinist teachers, whose ministry was attended with remarkable success. This change was followed by the same dissensions that had broken out in other countries on similar occasions; and these dissensions grew into an open schism among the friends of the Reformation in these provinces, which the lapse of time has rather confirmed than diminished.*

principles: and, indeed, this examination turn- || of Luther, and the ministry of his disciples. ed to their advantage; for neither Luther nor his disciples found any thing, either in their doctrine or discipline, that was, in any great measure, liable to censure; and though he could not approve every part of their Confession of Faith, which they submitted to his judgment, yet he looked upon it as an object of toleration and indulgence. Nevertheless, the death of Luther, and the expulsion of these Brethren from their country in 1547, gave a new turn to their religious connexions; and great numbers of them, more especially of those who retired into Poland, embraced the religious sentiments and discipline of the Reformed. The attachment of the Bohemians to the Lutherans seemed, indeed, to be revived by the Convention of Sendomir; but, as the articles of Union, drawn up in that assembly, soon lost all their force and authority, all the Bohemians gradually entered into the communion of the Swiss church. This union was at first formed on the express condition, that the two churches should continue to be governed by their respective laws and institutions, and should have separate places of public worship; but, in the following century, all remains of dissension were removed in the synods holden at Ostrog in 1620 and 1627, and the two congregations were formed into one, under the title of The Church of the United Brethren. In this coalition the reconciled parties showed to each other reciprocal marks of toleration and indulgence; for the external form of the church was regulated by the discipline of the Bohemian Brethren, and the articles of faith were taken from the creed of the Calvinists.

XXV. The descendants of the Waldenses, who lived shut up in the valleys of Piedmont, were naturally led, by their situation in the neighbourhood of the French, and of the republic of Geneva, to embrace the doctrines and rites of the reformed church. So far down, however, as the year 1630, they retained a considerable part of their ancient discipline and tenets; but the plague that broke out in that year having destroyed the greatest part of this unhappy people, and among the rest a considerable number of their pastors and clergy, they addressed themselves to the French churches for spiritual succour; and the new doctors, who were sent in consequence of that invitation, made several changes in the discipline and doctrine of the Waldenses, and rendered them conformable, in every respect, with those of the protestant churches in France.§

The Hungarians and Transylvanians were engaged to renounce the errors and superstitions of the church of Rome by the writings

*See a German work of Carpzovius, entitled, Nachricht von den Bohmischen Brudern, p. 46; as also Jo. Chr. Kocheri Biblioth. p. 76.

† Beside Comenius, Camerarius, and Lasitius, who have written professedly the history of the Bohemian Brethren, see Loscher, par. iii. lib. v. cap. vi.-Salig, tom. ii. lib. vi. cap. iii.-Regenvolsc. lib. i. cap. xiii.

xiv. xv.

Regenvolscii Hist. lib. i. cap. xiv. p. 120.

Leger, Histoire Generale des Eglises Vaudoises, livr. i. chap. xxxiii. p. 205, 206.-Abr. Sculeti Annales Renovati Evangelii, p. 294.-Dan. Gerdes, Hist. Renovati Evangelii, tom. ii. p. 401.

XXVI. After the solemn publication of the famous Form of Concord, many German churches, of the Lutheran communion, dissolv ed their original bonds, and embraced the doctrine and discipline of Calvin. Among these we may place the churches of Nassau, Hanau, and Isenburg, with several others of less note. In 1595, the princes of Anhalt, influenced by the counsels of Wolfgang Amling, renounced also the profession of Lutheranism, and introduced into their dominions the religious tenets and rites of Geneva; this revolution, however, produced a long and warm controversy between the Lutherans and the inhabitants of the principality. The doctrines of the Calvinist or reformed church, particularly those which relate to the eucharist, were also introduced into Denmark, toward the conclusion of this cen tury; for, in this kingdom, the disciples and votaries of Melancthon, who had always discovered a strong propensity to a union between the protestant churches, were extremely numerous, and they had at their head Nicholas Hemmingius, a man eminent for his piety and learning. But the views of this divine, and the schemes of his party, being discovered much sooner than they expected, by the vigilant defenders of the Lutheran cause, their plans were disconcerted, and the progress of Calvinism was successfully opposed by the Lutheran ministers, seconded by the countenance and authority of the sovereign.§

*Pauli Debrezeni Historia Eccles. Reform. in Hungar. et Transylvan. lib. ii. p. 64, 72, 98.-Unschuld. Nachricht, An. 1738, p. 1076.-Georg. Haneri Historia Eccles. Transylv

† See for an account of this matter, the German work of Bechman, which is entitled Historie des Hauses Anhalt, vol. ii. p. 133, and that of Kraft,

which bears the title of Ausfuhrliche Historie von dem. Exorcismo, p. 428, 497. Though the princes professed Calvinism, and introduced Calvinist ministers into all the churches, where they had the right of patronage, yet the people were left free in their choice; and the noblemen and their vassals, who were attached to Lutheranism, had secured to them the unrestrained exercise of their religion. By vir tue of a convention made in 1679, the Lutherans were permitted to erect new churches. The Zerbst line, and the greatest part of its subjects, profess Lutheranism; but the three other lines, with their respective people, are Calvinists.

↑ Erici Pontoppidani Annal. Ecclesiæ Danice Diplomatici, t. iii. p. 57.

That is, (for our author consistently with truth can mean no more) the designs, that were formed to render Calvinism the national and esta blished religion, proved abortive. It is certain, however that Calvinism made a very considerable pro