they thought differently from these reformed churches, in no other heads of doctrine except these five articles.* But since the Illustrious the States, two years before, [Dec. 3, 1611.] had by name expressed six heads of doctrine, concerning which they forbad to be taught, otherwise than it had been hitherto delivered to the Belgic churches: namely, concerning the perfect satisfaction of our Lord Jesus Christ for our sins, the justification of man before God, saving faith, original sin, the assurance (or certitude) of salvation, and concerning the perfection of man in this life; they in the first place demanded, that they would declare concerning these articles, that they embraced the opinion expressed in the Confession and Catechism of these churches, which they the other pastors had comprised from the same in certain written theses; and that they rejected the contrary opinion proposed in certain antitheses, from the writings of Arminius, Bertius, Vorstius, Venator, and others. The Remonstrants replied (regesserunt) to this, that they could not see in what manner these controversies could be quieted (sopiri) by a national Synod; and truly in the present state of things, that they neither approved nor demanded its convocation: that this cause could not be helped by synodal decisions; nor did they think that Holland, in the concern of religion, would ever submit itself to the decisions of the other provinces. As to the declaration which was demanded, they would communicate with the other Remonstrants concerning the same: and when, on each side, they had comprised briefly in writing their own opinion, they departed, the business being left unfinished. Afterwards the Illustrious the States called Utenbogardus and Festus to them, that they might know from them what had been done

"The demands of the Arminians were moderate; they required no more than a bare toleration of their religious sentiments; and some of the first men in the republic, such as Olden Barneveldt, Grotius, Hoogerberts, and several others, looked upon this demand as just and reasonable." Mosheim, vol. v. p. 442. "This toleration was offered to them in the conference holden at the Hague in 1611, provided they would renounce the errors of Socinianism." Note by Maclaine.

The event was what might previously have been expected; indeed nothing else could come of such a conference, between parties whose sentiments were so entirely discordant, (2. Cor. vi. 16-18.) The toleration demanded by the Remonstrants was in direct opposition to the existing laws, grounded on private or partial authority at best; like King James' claim of the dispensing power over acts of parliament in matters of religion, and indeed it amounted to a private repeal of those laws. The others were willing to consent to a legal and limited toleration. It is also evident, that their firm decision and opposition was not mainly about predestination and reprobation.

in this conference at Delph, and what hopes shone forth of concord being entered on. Festus sincerely, and without disguise (nudeque) related what had been done, and declared, that hope of peace shone forth, only provided the Remonstrants would openly declare their opinion on the articles delivered to them. Utenbogardus, by courtly craftiness, had procured that he should be heard alone, Festus being absent; that he might the more freely propose the things which he thought would serve his own purpose. And when he had odiously traduced the proceedings of the rest of the pastors, as the persons who, by the demand of a declaration, (which yet before the conference he himself had promised,) endeavored to bring a new inquisition into the churches, and one by no means to be endured, obtained, that the same persons should be forbidden any more to demand this declaration from the Remonstrants: and moreover, that it should at the same time be enjoined on them, to explain more at large in writing, their counsel on the best way of peace, and concerning the conditions, by which they thought that a toleration should be circumscribed. When this had been done by them, and it had also been shewn, that the proposed theses concerning which a declaration had been demanded, were extant, in so many words, in the Confession and Catechism of the Belgic churches; and the antithesis themselves had been delivered in public writings, by many persons, with whom the Remonstrants had much communication, in these regions:* when this their writing had been publicly read, they (the Remonstrants) by their advocate, effected that it should be severely forbidden, to be communicated to any of the human race, either in printing, or as written by the hand of any one. And because they saw, that the deputies of the churches, or of the Synods, to whom the common cause of these concerns used to be committed, greatly withstood them, (as the nature of their office demanded,) they caused also, that, as before all the annual Synods had been hindered, so that it should likewise be forbidden to the same persons, henceforth to use the name, or perform the office, of a deputy of the churches or of a Synod. That, by this means, all care respecting the

* Mosheim and many (indeed most) other writers on the subject represent the Contra-Remonstrants, as aiming to impose the creed of Geneva, or of Calvin, on the Remonstrants in Belgium. Let the impar tial reader judge whether this was the real case. There might be, and indeed was some coincidence between this and the Confession and Catechism of the Belgic churches, but the latter exclusively are mentioned in the whole contest.

safety and peace of the churches being taken away, they (the Remonstrants) might so much the more freely make progress among them.*

By this method of acting, the Remonstrants rendered themselves more and more suspected by the churches ;. while all the more prudent men judged that, unless they dissented in these articles (the six stated above, page 55,) from the doctrine of the churches, they would have had no reason, why they should covertly flee from this declaration; especially when they might have (thus) promoted (consuli posset) the peace of the churches and their own credit. But that they might the more easily obtain that toleration by public authority which they always pressed; by the benefit of which they indeed hoped to be able by little and little, to introduce their own doctrine in the churches, they employed this artifice; they sent over into England, by Hugo Grotius, a certain writing, in which the true state of the controversy was dissembled, a copy of a letter being also annexed; and they requested that he would petition from the most Serene James, King of Great Britain, seeing this cause could not be settled by any other method than by a toleration, that his most Serene royal Majesty would deign to give letters according to the form of the annexed copy, to the Illustrious the High Mightinesses the States General; which he, (Grotius) having seized on an opportunity, surreptitiously obtained and transmitted them to the Illustrious the States General.†

On this occasion, the Remonstrants exulted after a wonderful manner, and, hoping that they might now become possessed of their wish, they labored by their advocate, that a certain

*These decrees were made by the States of Holland alone, or nearly; and they directly tended to disannul the code of laws of the federated provinces, promulgated by the States General of these provinces, and thus to dissolve their political, as well as religious union. Now what motives could the Remonstrants or their patrons have, in such circumstances, for so carefully concealing the statements and avowed sentiments of the other pastors? Impartial love of the truth could not possibly suggest such precautions and injunctions. They cannot but call to our recollection, the conduct of the Jewish priests and rulers respecting the apostles of Christ: "But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak to no man in this name." Acts iv. 16, 17.

It should be noted, that this narrative was published several years before the death of James; who therefore, it must be presumed, was willing to have it thought that these letters were surreptitiously obtained by Grotius; and indeed he seems to have been inveigled into a measure, by no means consistent with the part which he afterwards sustained in the controversy.

formular of a toleration, (the same indeed which is contained in the fourth and fifth articles of the second chapter of the ecclesiastical government of Utrecht,) should be confirmed by the authority of the Illustrious the States, and commanded to the churches. Though the minds of many, in the convention of the States were inclined to this, yet the more prudent strenuously opposed it; thinking it to be unjust, to command (authoritatively) on the churches, a toleration, as to articles of faith, which had never been duly examined in a lawful ecclesiastical convention, and which drew with them a manifest change in doctrine; neither could the peace of the churches be obtained by this, when it was to be feared, if it were permitted, that opinions so discordant, should be proposed from the same pulpit to the same congregations, that the churches should be more and more disturbed, as experience had hitherto taught.* Yet the Remonstrants went on to press this their toleration by every means, and to commend it privately and publicly in their writings and sermons; especially by this argument, that the articles concerning which the controversy was maintained, they said, were of so small importance, that they did not relate to the ground of the fundamental points of salvation; but in articles of this kind, toleration might and ought to be established.

July 25, 1614.] And thus they at length effected, that a decree concerning this toleration, some of the principal and powerful cities of Holland and West Friezland being unwilling and striving against it, should be published in print, confirmed with certain testimonies of scripture and of the fathers (among whom they had also brought forward Faustus Regiensiensis,

* Let it be recollected, that all the parties were professedly, and many of them, in judgment and conscience, strict presbyterians as to church government. The toleration here described, is entirely different from any thing known in Britain, or indeed at present thought of. The general sentiment even of those who claim not only the fullest toleration, but something beyond toleration, as their indisputable right, is, at least, "Separate places of worship for those of discordant opinions." The ground of the toleration here stated likewise, is widely different from that which is at present insisted on; namely, that in matters of conscience towards God, no human authority has a right to interfere, provided nothing be avowed or done, which threatens or disturbs the peace of the community; and that human authority can make only hypocrites, not willing and conscientious conformists. This is simple, intelligible, and evidently reasonable; but to tolerate exclusively opinions, which do not relate to the fundamentals of salvation, or militate against them, must make way for intricate and endless disputes and difficulties, about what are and what are not the fundamentals of salvation; what is tolerated, and what is not tolerated.

the leader of the Semi-Pelagians.) Against which things, when James Triglandius, a pastor of the church at Amsterdam, had answered in a public writing, Utenbogardus also prolixly attempted a defence of this decree. In this he, by unworthy methods, traduced and reviled, as well the doctrine of the reformed churches, as especially the lights of the same, Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, and others. To this writing, Triglandius opposed an accurate answer, in defence of the honor, both of the doctrine and the doctors of the reformed churches. And when they (the Remonstrants) saw, that the authority of this writing, to which they had given the name of a decree of the States, was not so great, as that by it they could attain to what they aimed at, they indicated that the same things must be attempted in another way; and for that purpose, a certain other formular of toleration having been devised in deceitful phrases, they, by the hands of certain persons, who secretly favored their party and opinions, but were not considered as Remonstrants, solicited from the pastors, subscription to this formular, every where throughout Holland, both privately and in their convention.

But when even in this way the business did not go on according to the purpose of their own mind; they judged, that those persons must be compelled (cogendos) by the authority of the superiors, whom they were not able to persuade to this, and that at length sometime it must be broken through, and this business evidently accomplished. To this end they likewise obtained, that in the name of the Illustrious the States, the decree concerning mutual toleration, which had been published in the former year, should be sent to each of the classes, and at the same time it should be enjoined on the pastors to obey the same without any contradiction. And that they might the more easily prefer those who were attached to their party, to the ministries of the churches, others having been excluded; they effected moreover that another (decree) should be joined to it, by which it was permitted, that in the vocation of pastors and elders, it should be allowable to use that order, which in the year 1591 had been framed, but not approved; from the prescribed rule, of which the election was appointed to be by four of the magistracy, and four others to be deputed from the presbytery. When these decrees had been transmitted to the classes, the most of them sent away their deputies to the Illustrious the States, that they might publicly explain their difficulties or grievances, which they had as to those things that were contained in the