Apocalypse i. 20,” had made its appearance in 1611, and who " of a friend is not long since turned from us, and become our adversary;" the manner of whose writings is with "such an insolent conceit of himself, and with such contempt, indignation, and despite against us, as commonly is not seen in any but those who slide back from the truth which they had once tasted of... And in many passages he very sharply provoketh me in particular, besides other wrongs that he hath done me, well known."

His method led him to begin with his "Attestations," first from the latest writers; and next, he rehearses the practice of the nearest after the apostles; whence he turns to the admissions of "our very adversaries." That done, he shows what good consequences necessarily follow "this doctrine," and what inconveniences arise from rejecting it. He also answers objections, and notices" immodest and unchristian reproaches;" winding up the whole in "a brief advertisement," committing his work to " the upright-hearted and discreet Christian reader."

66

Alluding, in his first class, to Beza, Jacob charges Downam with misunderstanding a quotation concerning Marcellus, who, Jacob says, sought in churches perfectly established to bring all things in particular, and ordinarily, to the People's hearing, examining, judging, and voice-giving. But neither Beza nor we," he adds, "intend so. We acknowledge that the ordinary sway of all ecclesiastical authority ought to be in the true Bishop or Pastor of the church." He adduces Calvin, Viret, with Zuinglius, and Luther, "pillars of the Gospel," and descends to Bucer and Peter Martyr, Musculus, Bullinger, Gualter, Ursinus, Danæus, Tilenus, Junius, Piscator, Chemnicius, and lastly our countryman, Whitaker, who taught this concise and weighty maxim, "Quod omnes attingit, ab omnibus approbari debet.-What toucheth all, ought to be approved of all."

66 now

Afterward, he adduces the Confessions of Bohemia, Helvetia, Geneva, Savoy, and France; the Scottish, Belgic, Nassovian, that of the Palatinate, and of "other churches." Verily," he says, it appeareth, I hope, that we need not be ashamed either of these noble lights of religion, or of this doctrine which manifestly we have learned from such worthies." "b

Concerning "the best antiquity," Jacob says Eusebius records, "After James was dead, it is reported that the apostles and disciples out of all places, near about Jerusalem, came together into one, and took counsel together who might be judged worthy to succeed in James's place. Therefore all with one consent did think Simeon, the son of Cleopas, meet and able to have the government of the church there."c And again, he says, out of Egesippus, "After that James was slain, Simeon the son of Cleopas was made bishop; whom in the second place all the disciples appointed by voices to that government."d Various other instances are gathered from the Fathers and Councils, down to A. D. 682, when Jacob continues, "It is to no purpose here to inquire when or by whom this wrong first entered,-I mean, this withholding from the People of God their free consent in spiritual government."e

a P. 24. b P. 52. c Bk. iii. c. 10. d Bk. iv. c. 21. e P. 53, 67.

tice, whereby the People are excluded, and deprived of a great part of their Christian liberty and benefit thereby, is in other Books largely treated of, with Scriptures and reasons many.'

"a

His

Ainsworth now enters on a refutation, in forty pages, of “Certain Positions, held and maintained by some Godly Ministers of the Gospel, against those of the Separation, and namely, against Barrowe and Greenwood' the ground-work whereof, is thus laid, That the church of England is a true church of Christ, and such a one as from which whosoever wittingly, and continually separateth himself, cutteth himself off from Christ.' Rejecting the assumption, that their church is "a true church," with their proofs also, he remarks, "It is to be admired, that these Godly Ministers' can allege nothing for their church, but old popish stales.' "b But we pass on to borrow a remark or two from his " Answer to Mr. Crashaw's Four Questions, propounded in his Sermon preached at the Cross [Paul's], Feb. 14th, 1607, and printed 1608." And hence, we can only give part of the concluding section, premising that the Querist had taken occasion from Jer. li. 9, to inveigh against such as have separated "into a covenant and communion of their own devising." fourth query is, "If they will needs leave our church, whither will they go? To leave one thing for another no better, is seely; but, for a worse, is folly and madness." "I answer," says Ainsworth, "We have left Babylon for to come unto Sion. We forsook your confused assemblies, which consist of all sorts of people, and an unlawful mixture with the profane and wicked, that we might have communion with the people of the Lord, that willingly and gladly profess to believe the Gospel, and walk in it. Now, where you urge us to join to some other Church in other countries, first, you pass the bounds of your text, from whence you can gather no such doctrine; for the 'Jews,' forsaking Babel, joined not to any other nation or church than their own secondly, it is also contrary to your own practice, who, when you first left popery in king Edward's days and queen Elizabeth's, joined not yourselves to any foreign church, but one to another among yourselves.. thirdly, we could not join to any of those foreign churches, because we understood not their languages, nor they ours; and therefore unless we would have builded a new Babel, with strange tongues, we must join in communion among ourselves.

"Thus have I answered your demands: and for your further satisfaction, if it may be, will yet give you a view of your own dealings with us, and the Babylonians' dealings with the Jews of old, as they are collected by yourself, in your sermon.-They of Babel objected, as you say, that their own religion' was general and universal over the world,' and the Jews' but in a corner; and yet again they say, Look into the world, at this day, and see if any nation of all that came from all the sons of Noah be of your religion: all that came of Ham are of ours; all that came of Japhet are of ours; and all that came of Shem, but only yourselves!' Yourself say unto us, in these like words,' Look over all Christendom, and you shall not find a church

that condemneth ours, or any that is not of our religion, &c.; the churches of the Low Countries are of our confession, &c.: whither, then, will you go but unto your corners and conventicles, &c. !'" In this way several of Crashaw's arguments are paralleled; and Ainsworth concludes, "Thus we see how you and your ministers imitate Babel, as if they had been set to school by Nebuchadnezzar to get the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans, Dan. i. 4; wherein, how well they have profited, let the reader judge."

We advance to the consideration of another work, more immediately relating to the internal affairs of the exiles. The title will sufficiently introduce the topics, and the hundred and twenty-one pages, quarto, in which they are comprised, exhibit another instance of the author's laborious occupation, and a further development of his learning and talents.

"A Defence of the Holy Scriptures, Worship, and Ministry used in the Christian Churches separated from Antichrist: against the Challenges, Cavils, and Contradiction of Mr. Smyth; in his Book intituled The Differences of the Churches of the Separation.'

Hereunto are annexed a few Observations upon some of Mr. Smyth's 'Censures;' in his Answer made to Mr. Bernard. By Henry Ainsworth, Teacher of the English Exiled Church in Amsterdam. printed at Amsterdam, by Giles Thorp, in the year 1609.” b

a P. 252, ad fin.

Im

b Ainsworth published “ An Epistle, sent unto Two Daughters of Warwick, from H. N.; the oldest Father of The Family of Love:' with a Refutation of the Errors that are therein, by H. A.-Psal. exliv. 11.-Imp. at Amst. by Giles Thorp. 1608." 4to. pp. 64.-Henry Nicholas revived or founded a sect, in Holland, in 1555. Their principles produced no small confusion there and in England. They maintained that the essence of religion consisted in the feelings of divine love. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Cent. XVI. sect. 3. Pt. 11. ch. 25. This treatise of Ainsworth's does not concern our present object, further than to remark upon it, that Smyth was, perhaps, tainted with the doctrines of the Familists. Yet the following information will be useful. From S. Rutherfurd's "Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist: opening the Secrets of Familism and Antinomianism, &c." 1648, 4to, we learn that Henry Nicholas, a mercer in Amsterdam, p. 346, and the Father of the Family of Love, came over to England, and wrote an Epistle to the two daughters of Lord Warwick, "dissuading them from regeneration by the Word of God read, or preached; and called that regeneration ceremonial, elementish, and false; and laboured to persuade the maids to a spiritual new birth,' by the Spirit and eternal Word; and did forbid suffering for the Truth, or confessing of Christ to the death, before men; and expounded the laying down of the life for Christ, of the mortifying the body of sin:' he had his errors from the Antitrinitarians, and denied Christ to be God." p. 55. This sect presented, in 1604, a Petition or Protestation to King James, printed at Cambridge in 1606, and answered by one of the University, p. 168. They supplicate and declare, that " Prostrate at your princely feet, as true, faithful, loyal, and obedient subjects to all your laws and ordinances, civil, politic, spiritual, and temporal, they, with humble hearts, do beseech your princely Majesty to understand that the people of The Family of Love or of God,' do utterly disclaim and detest all the said absurd and self-conceited opinions, and disobedient and erroneous sorts of the AnabaptistsBrowne, Penry, Puritans, and all other proud-minded sects and heresies whatsoever protesting, upon pain of our lives, that we are not consenting nor agreeing with any such brain-sick Preachers, nor their rebellious and disobedient sects whatsoever; but have been, and ever will be, truly obedient to your

·

John Smyth, A. M. had been resident, and, it is stated, beneficed at Gainsborough, but, with his followers, joined Johnson and Ainsworth at Amsterdam in 1606. This accession produced, in a short time, another dissension in the already agitated Church. Smyth imbibed with avidity doctrines held by the Dutch Remonstrants; and peculiar opinions on the validity of the administration of baptism, with his practice, procured for him the appellation of the Se-baptist. The latter of his two works mentioned in Ainsworth's title above, is " Parallels, Censures, Observations, appertaining to Three several Writings 1. A Letter to Mr. Ric. Bernard, by John Smyth; 2. A Book intituled, The Separatists' Schism, published by Mr. Bernard; 3. An Answer to the Separatists' Schism, by Mr. H. Ainsworth. Lond. 1609. 4to." He survived Ainsworth's attack upon his singularities but one year, dying in 1610; and in the following year was issued "A Declaration of the Faith of the English People remaining at Amsterdam, in Holland; being the Remainder of Mr. Smyth's Company with an Appendix, giving an Account of his Sickness and Death." This brief statement will prepare for the better apprehending what is about to be drawn from Ainsworth's present treatise.

The Preface intimates that Smyth, "not long since, professed himself to be a member with us.' "a His challenges for disputation were so exceedingly importunate, that it became necessary to notice them. Ainsworth says accordingly, "I have taken in hand to set forth our just defence, and to show the fraud and malignity of this boaster. .. And this which I have undertaken is rather for others who may be troubled with his writings, than for his own sake, who yieldeth small hope of good, seeing he proceedeth so fast in evil, and out of a proud heart' hath stirred up strife. Prov. xxxviii. 25. .. In three sundry books he hath showed himself of three several religions... I had much rather have followed more comfortable meditations, in the peaceable practice of the truth, than thus to contend with those that seek

Highness and your laws, to the effusion of our blood, and expenses of our goods and lands in your Majesty's service; highly applauding Almighty God, who hath so graciously and peaceably appointed unto us such a virtuous, wise, religious, and noble King, and so careful and impartial a justiciary to govern over us." p. 343. If," they tell his Majesty, "we do vary or swerve from the Established Religion in this land, either in service, ceremonies, sermons, or sacraments; or have publicly spoken or inveighed either by word or writing against our late Sovereign Princess' government, in cases spiritual and temporal, then let us be rejected for sectaries, and never receive the benefits of subjects." p. 346. Their suit is, "That all of us, your faithful loving subjects, which are now in prison in any part of this your realm,.. may be relieved, &c. .. for we are a people but few in numbers, and yet most of us very poor in worldly wealth." p. 351. They complain most bitterly of the Puritans. Rutherfurd states, that "divers of the Court of Queen Elizabeth and of King James, and some Nobles, were Familists," p. 349: and, in another place, he writes, "Because there were divers courteous and noble Familists, the Prelates, that respected ever the persons of men, would not publicly accuse them by name." p. 353. By their principles, he tells us, Familists "may profess or deny any religion, as the market goes!" p. 345.

a See back, p. 172. b In his

the Beast."

Principles, &c. ;" "Differences, &c. ;" and "The Character of

I have refused to conform to the church order in England, I could therefore do no less but give out, yea, unto posterity, the true and most important Reasons of my dissenting herein."a

Dispensing with Jacob, for awhile, we turn our attention, notwithstanding its dissimilarity of subject, to Ainsworth's work intituled "An Arrow against Idolatry; Taken out of the Quiver of the Lord of Hosts." This is a refined and exquisite piece of irony, directed against the Church of Rome.b

Its execution and general merit are of the very first order; proving that the author could adapt his talents to every species of literary labour, and that his intellectual stores were inexhaustible. It is remarkable that the date of the first edition of this work is not known. His latest editor could not trace it earlier than 1624, but we have ascertained that it existed previously to 1612, that being the date of Clyfton's "Advertisement," noticed, hereafter, in its place, where this production of Ainsworth's pen is, more than once or twice, referred to, in the text and in the margin, though without its date being added.

The subject is comprised in six chapters. "Of the nature and beginning of Idolatry: How fast the sin of Idolatry cleaves to all flesh: Of Jeroboam's Idolatry, that infected Israel; and of the pretences he might make for his sin: A conviction of Jeroboam's impiety: Of the Idolatry of these times, far exceeding Jeroboam's: A conclusion, dehortatory from this sin." The author's object and success are very happily described in these words ;—" In the prosecution of this design, he traces the superstition and idolatry of the Church of Rome to their source, in the notions and inclinations natural to all men; and applies his dissuasives to every kind and degree of the same iniquity. The whole discovers great abilities in the writer; but the parallel which he has drawn between the antichristian idolatry and that of Jeroboam, is peculiarly ingenious, and equally solid; and the pleas which he supposes him to have used in its defence, together with his replies to them, manifest no common degree of invention and judgment. When it is considered that Ainsworth wrote at a period in which the art of composition was almost unknown, the force and eloquence of this performance show him to have possessed very singular talents. He appears, indeed, to have excelled most of his contemporaries as much in good writing, as in the understanding of the truth." This, from a writer holding the sentiments which Dr. Stuart advocated, is no mean praise!

The passage most applicable to our particular purpose, constitutes the latter part of the fifth chapter. "As for Jeroboam, he dares not show his face before this Beast his successor; for his inventions, com

a P. 318, 319.

"The learning and spirit with which this argument is prosecuted are admirable; and excepting Lord Bacon's paper on The Pacification of the Church,' there is not, perhaps, another controversial treatise belonging to the age of James the First, that discovers the same measure of acuteness. It has a section containing the substance of Middleton's celebrated 'Letter' on papal idolatry." Vaughan's Memorials of the Stuart Dynasty. 1831. 8vo. vol. 1. ch. xx. p. 319. c Edit. 1788. 12mo. pp. 82. d Life of Ainsw. p. lvi. • Ibid. p. lvii.