« PreviousContinue »
ANCIENT AND MODERN,
THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
HISTORY OF THE MODERN CHURCHEN.
1. We have already seen the calamities and vexations the Lutheranchurch suffered from the persecuting n.
- - - - - Lutheran spirit of the Roman pontiffs, and the intemperate ... ". zeal of the house of Austria, which, on many oc- ;: casions, showed too great a propensity to second ot their ambitious and despotic measures; we shall " therefore, at present, confine our view to the losses it sustained from other quarters. The cause of Lutheranism suffered considerably by the desertion of Maurice, landgrave of Hesse, a prince of uncommon#. and learning, who notonlyembraced the doctrine and discipline ofthereformed church,"but also, in the year 1604, removedtke Lutheran professors from their places in the university of Marpurg, and the doctors of that communion from the churches they had in his dominions. Maurice, aftertaking this vigorous step, on account of the obstimacy with which the Lutheran clergy opposed his design, took particular care to have his subjects instructed in the doctrine of the Helvetic church, and introduced into the Hessian churches the form of public
• In the History of the Romish Church. See above.
ally use the denomination of reformed in a limited sense, to distinguish the church of England and the Calvinistical churches from those of the Lutheran persuasion.
worship that was observed at Geneva. This plan was not executed without some difficulty; but it acquired a complete degree of stability and consistence in the year 1619, when deputies were sent by this prince to the synod of Dort, in Holland, with express orders to consent, in the name of the Hessian churches, to all the acts that should be passed in that assembly. The doctors of the reformed church, who lived at this period, defended strenuously the measures followed by Maurice, and maintained, that in all these transactions he observed the strictest principles of equity, and discovered an uncommon spirit of moderation. Perhaps the doctors of modern days may view this matter in a different point of light. They will acknowledge, perhaps, without hesitation, that if this illustrious prince had been more influenced by the sentiments of the wisest of the reformed doctors, concerning the conduct we ought to observe toward those who differ from us in religious matters, and less by his own will and humour, he would have ordered many things otherwise than he actually did." II. The example of the landgrave of Hesse was followrenow.m. ed., in the year 1614, by John Sigismund, elector |...",".. of Brandenburg, who also renounced Lutheranism "o and embraced the communion of the reformed churches, though with certain restrictions, and without emo: any acts of mere authority to engage his subjects in the same measure. For it is observable, that this prince did not adopt all the peculiar doctrines of Calvinism. He introduced, indeed, into his dominions the form of public worship that was established at Geneva, and he embraced the sentiments of the reformed churches concerning the person of Christ, and the manner in which he is present in the eucharist, as they appeared to him much more conformable to reason and Scripture than the doctrine of the Lutherans relating to these points. But, on the other hand, he refused to admit the 8.alvinistical doctrine of divine grace, and absolute decrees; and, on this account, neither sent deputies to the synod of Dort, nor adopted the deci
• The reader will find a more ample account of this matter in the controversiul writings of the divines of Casse, and Derm-tadt, published at Cassel, Marpurg; and Giessen, in the years 1632, 1636, 1647; and of which Salig speaks largely in his Hist. .Aug. Confess. tom. i. lib. iv. cap. ii. p. 756. Those who understand the German language may also consult Garth's Historischer Bericht von dem Religions Wesen in Furstenthum Hessen, 1706, in 4to. Cyprian's Unterricht ron Kirchlicher Vereinigung der Protestanten, p. 263, and Appendir, p. 101. As also the Acts published in the Unschuldigen Nachrichten, A. 1749, p. 25.