were substituted in the room of scripture; and according as circumstances differed, or new opinions were broached, so were the creeds corrected, amended and enlarged, till they became full of subtleties, contradictions and nonsense."* And to all these implicit assent was required. Christians were thus by degrees not only stript of their liberties and rights of conscience, but reduced to the most deplorable state of slavery and spiritual darkness.

To restore the christian world to freedom, and to the light of God's word, was the great object of the reformation; and the avowed principles of the reformers, had they been faithfully pursued, would have led them to the accomplishment of this noble object. But as Robinson, the eminent puritan before referred to, deeply lamented, they had "come so lately out of such thick antichristian darkness, that they could not see all things." They could not attain to just and clear views of christian liberty, nor discern what would be the ultimate operation of the principles upon which they assailed the papal tyranny. Hence they were soon found acting in direct contradiction to their principles. Some of their friends and adherents could not bring themselves to renounce all attachment to the rites of their mother church; and to conciliate these, many of the Romish ceremonies were retained in some of the reformed churches, thus leaving occasion for animosities and divisions in their own party; while their enemies bitterly reproached them with the heresies and extravagancies springing up among their followers; and in the vain hope of removing such an opprobrium, and producing uniformity of faith in the leading doctrines of religion, creeds and confessions were devised, and enforced in the same persecuting spirit which they had so justly condemned and resisted. "Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, Knox, the founders of the reformed churches in their respective countries," says the impartial historian of Charles the Fifth, "as far as they had power and opportunity, inflicted the same punishments upon such as called in question any article in their creeds, which were denounced

* Introduction to Hist. of the Inquisition, p. 111.

against their own disciples by the church of Rome."* What a memorial of human weakness! In the very act

which gave to the reformers the name of protestants, and by which they resisted the edict requiring of them, among other things, to preach according to the sense and interpretation of scripture approved by the church, they boldly asserted their principles, declaring that they could not recede from the work of reformation, nor bind themselves from going further, "without denying the pure word of God, which they had espoused for their rule of faith and practice; and that since no doctrine could be more certain than that of God's word, and that no doctrine should be taught besides it, the obscure places of scripture could not be better explained and illustrated, than by such passages as were clear and plain." Yet these were the men to substitute their own interpretations for the decisions of God's pure word, and to enforce them as doctrines not to be questioned. How much of humility, and meekness, and modesty in our religious pretensions, may we not learn from this single fact !

But in their intolerance, if not in their inconsistency, these reformers erred with the age in which they lived. To this apology, so far as it goes, they are fully entitled. The same impartial historian observes, that "toleration, under its present form, was repugnant to the ideas which all the different sects. had adopted from mistaken conceptions concerning the nature of religion and the rights of truth, or which all of them had derived from the erroneous maxims established by the church of Rome." Individuals, indeed, were found even in those times, who had just views of human creeds and of the nature and extent of the reformation in religion which was needed. One of these, whose merits have been little known, furnishes so remarkable an instance in proof of this, as well as of the persecuting spirit which then prevailed, that he deserves particular notice. We allude to Erasmus Johannes, teacher of a latin school at Antwerp, whose enlightened views and unmerited fate are mentioned in the History of the Reformation in the Low Countries. He published a work, proving how early christianity began to be *Robertson's Hist. Charles V. v. 4, p. 186.

corrupted, and maintaining that in order to a true and lasting reformation it was necessary to conform to the apostolical churches in doctrine and discipline; and to that simplicity in expressing matters of religion, of which Christ and his apostles have left us an example. "What can we require more," said he, "of any body? And if we do, by what authority is it? Therefore, let every one make use of his christian liberty in this matter, and let him not hinder others. If any man thinks it necessary to use new terms in order to declare his notions and སྙ belief about divine matters, insomuch that the words of the prophets and apostles cannot serve him, it is most certain, that' not only the words are new, but also his doctrine and religion too; otherwise it would not be possible for him to fail of good and apposite expressions in holy writ."*

But these principles of reformation were too far in advance. of the age, and the author of them, who deserved a crown, was obliged to flee his country. Even now, perhaps, there are many who would be slow to receive them; but they may be safely promulgated. Persecution, in every form and degree, is reprobated and disclaimed by all the various sects in christendom. The principles upon which the protestant faith is established, and the rights of conscience and free inquiry maintained, have been so fully developed in their effects and influences, that as few could now be found to call them in question, as there once were to vindicate them. All denominations unite in professions of attachment to them; all agree that upon the free operation of these principles depend our hopes of farther advancement in christian truth, liberty and peace. What apology, then, could there be for us, if, in such times, we should copy the errors of the early reformers instead of following out their principles, and make subscription or assent to certain human explications of scripture an indispensable condition to the enjoyment of privileges, which all the disciples and followers of Christ are entitled to without it; and thus, as far as we have power and opportunity," domineer over the consciences of our

66

* Brandt's Hist. of the Reformation, v. 1, p. 399.

brethren? What might not be our condemnation, if we should go back to those very times of persecution, and almost antichristian darkness, for a system of such explications, drawn out in the heat of party contentions, "by men who comparatively understood little of the doctrinal parts of religion, and were quite unacquainted with the rights of conscience."* Would not this, in the language of Dr. Jortin, be indeed admitting that "an assembly of fallible men may determine concerning all points of faith and practice for themselves, and for their heirs; and entail bondage and darkness, worse than Egyptian, upon their posterity forever?"+ We could not justify ourselves in such a proceeding. It would, in our view, be not only resisting the progress and principles of the reformation, but returning, as far as we could, to that spirit of Romish tyranny and delusion, from which it was the object of the reformation to rescue the christian world.

As we earnestly desire to lead you to the same convictions of duty on this subject which we so strongly feel, as well as to the persuasion and acknowledgment that we are sincere in them; you will indulge us in pursuing the consideration of human tests in religion a little farther, and submitting to you the thoughts of some other authors of high reputation, who have taken views of the subject somewhat different from those already contemplated. Dr. Hartley, distinguished alike for his deep piety and learning, in his great work on "Man, his Frame, his Duty, and his Expectations," has spoken with much force upon the impropriety and futility of forming "any creeds, articles, or systems of faith, and requiring assent to them in words or writing." The whole of his remarks on this subject deserve your attention; a few of them only can be introduced here.

"How," observes he, " can a person be properly qualified to study the word of God, and to search out its meaning, who finds himself previously confined to interpret it in a particular manner? If the subject matter of the article be of great importance to be understood and believed, one may presume that it is plain, and

* Harris's Life of Ch. 1. p. 189. +Tracts, &c. v. 1. p. 419.

needs no article; if of small importance, why should it be made a test or insisted upon? If it be a difficult, abstruse point, no one upon earth has authority to make an article concerning it. We are all brethren; there is no father, no master, amongst us; we are helpers of, not lords over, each other's faith."

"Let us suppose the person required to assent or subscribe, to be a real earnest believer. It can scarce be supposed that such a person should assent to any set of articles, so as honestly to affirm, that he would choose to express his own sense of the scripture language in those words. To strain either the scriptures, or the articles, must be a very ungrateful task to an ingenuous man; and perhaps there may be so wide a difference in some instances, in his opinion, that no straining can bring them together.'

"If the scriptures cannot yet produce a true unity of opinion on account of our present ignorance and the weakness and wickedness of our natures, how should articles do this? Men can put as different senses upon articles, as upon texts, and so dispute without end.”

"As to the metaphysical subtilties which appear in some creeds, they can at best be only human interpretations of scripture words; and therefore can have no authority. All the real foundation which we have is in the words of scripture, and of the most ancient writers, considered as helps, not authorities. It is sufficient therefore, that a man take the scriptures for his guide, and apply himself to them with an honest heart, and humble and earnest prayer; which things have no connexion with forms and subscriptions."*

A learned divine of Germany, who wrote " Notes and Additions," which have been thought worthy to accompany the celebrated work of Hartley, enters more fully into this subject, and presents many interesting views of it, which we can now do little more than allude to. He shows that it is incumbent on the defenders of human articles of faith to prove that, without them, the scriptures alone would be insufficient to attain the great pur

* Page 514, 4to ed.