Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

EXTRACTS FROM NEW PUBLICATIONS.

Letter, written after the Battle of Waterloo, by the Queen of Westphalia to her Father, the King of Wirtemburg. (A Literal Translation.) [We extract the following Letter, exhibiting a rare example of conjugal fidelity and affection, from Sir Robert Wilson's recent publication, entitled-" A Sketch of the Military and Political Power of Russia, in the year 1817," 8vo. The gallant Author's name is voucher sufficient for the document. ED.]

"SIRE AND FATHER,

OUR Majesty requested me to

"YOUR descend this morning into your

apartment. For the first time in my life I declined the happiness of being in your presence: I knew the subject of the interview; and fearing that my mind might not be sufficiently collected, I have dared to take the liberty of developing the motives of my conduct, and making an appeal to your paternal affection.

“Your Majesty knows the whole truth. Yes, Sire, the Prince Jerome, your son-in-law, my husband and the father of my child, is with me! Yes, Sire! I have withdrawn an instant from the palace of my King, to succour the husband to whom my life is attached. My thoughts have accompanied him to the war-my care has preserved him in a long and painful journey, where his existence was often menaced. My arms have embraced him in his misfortune with more tenderness than even in the time of our prosperity!

"The Prince Jerome is not the husband of my own choice. I received him from your hand, when his house reigned over great kingdoms-when his head wore a crown. Soon the sentiments of my heart cherished and confirmed the bonds which your policy had commanded.

"Marriage and nature impose duties which are not subject to the vicissitudes of fortune: I know their extensive obligations, and I know also how to fulfil them: I was a queenI am still a wife and a mother! The change of policy among princes, in overthrowing the French empire, has also destroyed the throne, on which your goodness, and the Prince my husband, had seated me. We were obliged to submit to the force of circumstances! The august Maria Louisa

afforded me a great example of resig nation; but our situation is dissimilar. Public interest may command sacrifices of permanent duration, or which may cease when the interests of a new policy render other changes inevitable.

"Although chance has elevated us above the generality of mankind, we are much more to be pitied. A variable will controuls our destiny; but there its power ceases-it is impotent against the obligations Providence imposes on us.

The husband which God and you yourself gave me-the child whom I have borne in my bosom-comprise my existence. I have shared a throne with this husband, I will partake with him exile and misfortune: violence alone shall separate me from him. But, O my King! O my father! I know your heart, your justice, and the excellence of your principles: I know what these principles have been at all times on the subject of those domestic duties which should be respected by the Princes of your House.

"I do not ask your Majesty, from affection for me, to make any change in that system of conduct which has been adopted in conformity with the determinations of the most powerful Princes of Europe; but I throw myself at your feet to implore permission that my husband and myself may remain near your person: but, O my father! if that must not be, let us at least be restored to your favour before we remove to a foreign soil. It is only after having received some proof of your paternal love, that I can feel strength sufficient to appear before you. If we must go this very evening, let us depart with the assurance of your affection and protection in a happier time. Our misfortunes must have a period: policy will not always command in respect to us that which is humiliating, nor delight in the ruin and degradation of so many Princes, acknowledged in former treaties, and who have been allied to the most ancient and illustrious houses of Europe. Is not their blood mingled with ours? Pardon me, my father and my Sovereign! for having thus expressed myself; but condescend, by a single word, to let me know that it has not been received with dipleasure."

MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

Trinitarian Controversy at Exeter. (Concluded from p. 525.)

M

R. STOGDON, having been invited by a congregation to settle among them, wished to be ordained when the assembly should meet, in September 1717, before he entered on the pastoral charge. This being known to the orthodox party, so much intolerance was exhibited, that it was deemed desirable, for the sake of peace, to abandon the design; but Messrs. bailett, Withers, and Peirce, highly appreciating his talents and his character, gave him a written testimonial of their good opinion, a proceeding which excited the "hot displeasure of the "sound in faith," that they should venture to speak well of a man so deeply tainted with heresy. Beresy, however, continued to make rapid and "dangerous progress," and at a meeting summoned by the Orthodox, in January 1718, it was determined that a deputation should be seut to the ministers of Exeter, requesting them to preach "in defence of the eternity of Jesus Christ." When these ambassadors waited on Mr. Peirce, he told them that he believed in the eternity of Christ; but they answered, that he was required to acknowledge that Christ was self-existent and selforiginated. On which he asked, if they would have him add that he was unbegotten too? They replied, that he wanted to entrap them, and that they did not care to reason further.

However, our reformers did so far comply with the wishes of the meeting as to express their belief publicly in the eternity of our Lord; but as they chose to respect the consciences of others, and dealt out no damnation on those who differed from them, they were accused of not daring to be "clear, open and strenuous in their opposition." Mr. Peirce, indeed, went further: he boldly proclaimed his right, and the right of all men, to think for themselves in the spirit of unfettered liberty:

[ocr errors]

This liberty let others tamely give up as they please; I do, and will insist upon it for myself, as a reasonable creature, a Christian, a Protestant, and a Dissenter. As I pretend not to impose on others, so nor will I be imposed

upon by others. No king, no parlia ment, no church, no council, no synod, no minister or body of ministers, shall be acknowledged by me to have any power or rightful authority over me. They may deprive me of my civil liberty, of my estate, or of my life, but this liberty, by the grace of God, they never shall deprive me of, to think and speak of the matters of God and of religion only in that manner in which I apprehend they are spoken of in the Holy Scriptures by God himself. Tell me not what Athanasius or Arius

what the Council of Nice or Rimini have said; but what Christ and Peter, and Paul, James and John, have said. I call no man master upon earth." And afterwards most earnestly, most pathetically, does he implore his hearers, "by the mercies of God, and the gentleness of Christ," to cultivate a spirit of candour and kindness and generous feeling, thus emphatically concluding, "This has been my course, and in the integrity of my heart I recommend it to you all. And now, whether you will hear, or whether you will forbear, Itake God,-and now also I take your own consciences, to record, that I have honestly and faithfully delivered my whole soul."

A temporary calm succeeded; but measures were taken by the Orthodox to make the period of the assembly in the following September, the moment for "purging the church" of the heresies which had been introduced. Unknown to the individuals most nearly concerned, advices were sent to London, and a meeting of ministers was called there to condemn the errors respecting the Trinity, which were making such progress in the West; and it was also determined that a subscription should be required from all the ministers at the Exeter assembly, to the first article of the Church of England. In the mean time (to keep up an appearance of liberality) Mr. Peirce and Mr. Withers were requested to meet Mr. Ball and Mr. Walrond, to "consult upon

*These two ministers, the first of Honiton, the second of Ottery, had afterwards, with five others, the honour of being fixed on to be the immediate instruments of the ejection of the Exeter ministers-a business for which their fiery intolerance well fitted

the subject."

The former instantly declared against the anti-christian pretensions of the assembly to dictate in matters of faith; but the latter, after assuring them that nothing was intended against those already in the ministry, it was proposed merely to guard against the introduction of "un sound preachers" as candidates, insisted on the necessity of removing the stain and stigma of heresy which attached to the West.

The day previous to the meeting of the assembly, a long discussion took place at a private house in Exeter (where many ministers were collected), in which Mr. Peirce insisted that the

them. I have a letter in Mr. Ball's handwriting, from which "the temper of his mind" may be judged. The following verbatim copy may elucidate the foregoing narration.

"Mr. Twogood,

"I hear your Mr. Stogdon is to be ordained at your brother's meeting-house. Doth your brother know what confession of faith is carried about Exon as his, which all the ministers are against? Has any one consulted any of the elder ministers about Bristol? I am not willing my name should be mentioned, because Mr. Stogdon takes me as his enemy, which God is my witness

I never was; but must I hold my peace, and see the church overrun with Arianism, to dethrone Christ, and bring in worship of a creature? These things should be considered, or where will faith be, and what a stink will non-conformity end in?

"Yours, J. BALL."

right of private judgment is the great principle of dissent, and also contended for the "supremacy of the Father." The liberal ministers proposed that the differences of opinion should be made the subject of friendly and free discussion; but to this the majority objected. To impose a creed is easier than to defend one. Mr. Withers (who had anticipated this debate) read a paper, arguing that the proposal of any test whatever is an encroachment on our common liberty, abhorrent to the spirit of dissent, and which (if allowed) must condemn the Puritans for refusing, and justify their adversaries in imposing the ex-officio oaths; that it would be the introduction of a system of encroachment and churchtyranny, which, though satisfied with one test to-day, would require another to-morrow. He then learnedly objected to the test itself. Though his address was candid, conciliatory and convincing, he was several times most rudely interrupted; and then (even in the intercourse of social communion) the friends of truth and free inquiry discovered the malignant spirit which was at work to bring about their

overthrow.

fest their " zeal for the glory of God") The assembly (impatient to mani. met half an hour earlier than usual; and after prayer, Mr. Ball moved, that they should declare against those who denied the divinity of our Saviour. *

On one occasion, when Mr. Ball preached from Mr. Peirce's pulpit, he had the good Richard Baxter's words will bardly manners to indulge in animadversions which be misplaced here:-" Had not the devil could not but be applied to Mr. P. He turned orthodox, he had not made so introduced a Trinitarian doxology, which many true Christians heretics, as Epiphahad been discarded, and publicly returned nius and Austin have enrolled in the black thanks to God for the liberty of so glori- list. Had not the enemy of truth and fying him. After the list was published peace got into the chair, and made so of the seven ministers who recommended pathetic an oration as to inflame the minds and procured the ejectment of Mr. Peirce of the lovers of truth to be over zealous and Mr. Hallett, he said he would have his for it and to do too much, we might have name put in capitals in the list, and that had truth and peace to this day. Yea, had he been silent, he should not have died still if he see any man of experience and in peace. Mr. Walrond too, was so proud moderation stand up to reduce men to the of the distinction, that he says, " he would ancient simplicity, he presently seems the have the enemies of Christ's Godhead know most zealous for Christ, and tells the that he counts it his truest glory, and desires unexperienced leaders of the flocks, that that his name may stand on the list for ever." it is in favour of some heresy that such a There indeed it will stand, another monn- man speaks; he is plotting a carnal synment of human folly, another proof that cretism, and attempting the reconcilement there are "who GLORY in their shame." of Christ with Belial; he is tainted with Popery, or Socinianism, or Arminianism, or Calvinism, or whatsoever may make him odious to those he speaks to. O, what the devil hath got by overdoing!"

After his exploits at Exeter, Mr. Walrond succeeded in inducing the congregation at Budleigh to discharge their minister, Mr. Beadon (a most exemplary and high-minded man), on a charge of heresy,

[blocks in formation]

Thirty-two Directions for Peace, XXVII.

The proposal was seconded by a clamorous concurrence of voices. When (after some time) silence was restored, several respectable ministers expressed their wishes that the expediency of so singular a proceeding should be calmly discussed; but no! it had been before determined that the stamp of heresy, of infamy, should be affixed to the obnoxious advocates of civil and religious liberty, and, in consequence, a noisome tumult drowned the reasonable suggestion. Moderation, candour and charity were here successless advocates.

Mr. John Walrond then asked permission to read letters he had received from Mr. William Long and Mr. Benjamin Robiuson, of London, on the subject of the spreading errors; upon which Mr. Peirce proposed that the representations which had caused the now produced letters, should first be laid before the assembly. This reasonable suggestion obtained no attention; though, after-inquiries made it obvious that the statements sent to London were most unfair and exaggerated, not a detail of facts, but a string of eulogiums on the candour, forbearance and tenderness of the orthodox party, and of equally wellmerited accusations against the heterodox. A number of silly stories were introduced respecting the "new notions," and the whole combined was admirably calculated to alarm the timid, and to inflame the intolerant. The London letters were read, and it was immediately determined that all present should declare their faith. It was asked, "if the words of Scripture could be accepted as sufficiently orthodox ?" "No! no!" was the immediate decision, they are not express enough for such an occasion as this. Mr. Joseph Hallett (the senior minister) then read his declaration, and

*The conduct of these London divines was scarcely less illiberal than that of their western co-adjutors. When Mr. Walrond's letter reached town, and had been read at a meeting of ministers, it was proposed, that before any proceedings were grounded on his statements, further inquiry should be made, and Mr. Peirce, in particular, be written to but this proposition was immediately negatived, they "would not question Mr. W.'s veracity and they hurried off their anathema without delay.

concluded by saying, that oue of the great plagues of the church had been the composing, and then imposing creeds upon others in language of our Own. He wished men would have more manners and more humility than to accuse the word of God of imperfection and obscurity, and more wisdom than to endeavour to mend it by their uncharitableness.*

Various were the declarations made. Mr. Peirce openly avowed his belief in the inferiority of the Son. † Some refused to make any confessions of faith whatever; and one said, “I deny any authority that any man or body of men, or this assembly hath to demand my opinion." However, the scribe recorded, as the general sense "That there is but of the assembly, one living and true God, and that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are the true God." During the discussions, the wildest extravagancies of ultraorthodoxy were defended, and one of the high party, when the absurdity of his creed was urged upon him, said, "I leave God to reconcile his own contradictions."

The friends of free inquiry exerted themselves as far as they were able in behalf of truth and charity. Mr. Matthew Huddy preached a sermon t to the assembly, earnestly contending for the right of private judgment, recommending the use of reason in matters of religion, and condemning the spirit of intolerance which had been exerted so banefully and so exten

*This language is borrowed from the Preface to Part II. of Baxter's Saint's Rest ; and I may be excused, I hope, in introducing a passage from the same authorPreface to Church History:-" If you know not what to call me, I will tell you. I am a Christian, a mere Christian, of no other religion; and the church that I am of is the Christian church. But you must know of what sect or party I am? I am against all sects and dividing parties.

"I, and such as I, call ourselves mere Christians, or Catholic Christians against all sects and sectarian names, and haters both of true heresy and schism, and proud, nnrighteous hereticating and anathematizing."

It was a subject of after-regret to Mr. P. that he had not manfully resisted the usurping pretensions of the assembly to question him concerning his faith. September 9, 1718.

sively. Though this admirable sermon was clamorously railed against, Mr. Isaac Gilling resumed the subject two days after, in a discourse, “On the mischief of rash and uncharitable judging," in which he makes a noble stand against those inquisitors who would dictate creeds and tyrannize

over consciences.

About two months after the assembly, the trust of the Exeter congregations applied to their ministers, requiring their professions of faith in the words of the first article of the Church of England, the Sixth Answer of the Assembly's Catechism, or the test agreed upon at the September assembly. Mr. Peirce refused to comply. They urged that he had already subscribed (as required by law) when he began to preach, but he candidly told them, he had not lived twenty years longer without some enlightenment of mind, and if now he were called on to subscribe, he would on no account comply. They next urged him quietly to lay down his ministry, but this, of course, he refused; telling them, however, that if they chose to dismiss him he should not resist their proceedings.

That the trustees might appear to proceed with some sort of decorum, they called in seven neighbouring ministers to advise with them. These

were

John Ball, of Honiton, Samuel Hall, of Tiverton, John Moore, of ditto, William Horsham, of Topsham, John Walrond, of Ottery, Josiah Eveleigh,‡ of Crediton, and Joseph Mauston, of Lympston, who were among the most intemperate of the Trinitariau party. They met

When Fox, the martyrologist, was requested to subscribe, he pulled out a Greek Testament from his pocket, deciaring that he would subscribe to that and to nothing else.

Mr. Moore afterwards objected to the method adopted for the ejectment of Mr. Peirce and Mr. Hallett

Mr. Eveleigh pretends (in his Sober Reply, p. 21) to have felt a wonderful interest in behalf of Mr. Peirce, and says he would have cut off his own right hand to have preserved his usefulness: yet his writings and his conduct breathe a spirit of bigotry and slander, which ill become the pert self-complacency which so constantly intrudes.

in the early part of the following year, though no intimation was given to Mr. Peirce and his colleagues of their having been sent for. These (as was expected or foreknown) jointly agreed, that if a minister adopted Anti-Trinitarian principles, his congregation would be justified in discharging him. A circular to this effect was sent over the county. It was known that at the great meeting of ministers about to be held at Salters' Hall, § the subject of the Exeter controversy was to be discussed; but so impatient were they to manifest their zeal against their "false brethren," that they would not wait for the result. The ministers were therefore called before this tribunal, and questioned and cross-questioned as to their belief. Mr. Peirce was asked, if he would allow "Christ and the Father to be one God." He replied that "if they would refer him to one text which said so, he would own it, but that he would subscribe to no test not expressed in Scripture language; that if they came and authoritatively required him to say that two and three make fire, he would refuse to do so; that the days of blind submission were past, for God had roused a noble spirit iu men (when least expected), and that he would not basely sacrifice the liberty they were so bravely defending." Mr. Hallett made a similar declaration. Mr. Withers offered Bishop Pearson's explanation of the Trinity, which was not accepted. Mr. Lavington roundly gave his assent to the formulary required. The result was, that the Trustees (though not unanimously) shut out the three ministers from their chapels. Whatever might be the opinion of the majority of the members, the trustees insisted on their right to the sole management of ecclesiastical affairs, and thus their anti-christian proceedings were consummated.

§ Here too, a similar spirit was manifested; for though it was not possible to get a resolution passed (as was attempted) obliging all ministers to express their belief in the Trinity in a form of words to be prescribed, yet the majority did agree that a congregation may require a minister to prove to them the soundness of his orthodoxy. A great number of ministers protested against this decision.

Mr. Withers afterwards assented to the first article of the Church of England, and

« ZurückWeiter »