done their own cause no good. The reformers were growing more bold and numerous every day. The ancient hierarchy was shaken to its foundations; and it was become sufficiently manifest, that neither ecclesiastical menaces, nor ecclesiastical punish drawn of the ingenious, the learned, the mild and social, and (could we confine our consideration to some of his productions), the pious Erasmus, is exceedingly mortifying; but the justice of it is too evident: it cannot be rejected with-ments, could retard the progress of the new out a violation of truth, although neither can it be admitted without a sigh. Every Christian, especially if he unite with that paramount title the inferior, but honourable, one of scholar, feels disposed to make a struggle for the reputation of Erasmus; and the sentiment costs him something, which, in this instance, prefers the friendship of truth to every other friendship. But, without any farther delay, let us hear Dr. Milner speak. "Every student of the history of the reformation finds both instruction and amusement in observing the conduct of Erasmus. On his merit, as a restorer of learning, though it is scarcely possible to express ourselves too strongly, we need say no more. His well-earned honours, in that respect, are beyond the reach either of calumny or envy. It is the purity of his Christian principles, and the integrity and conscientiousness of his motives, which are called in question. His writings against monks and friars are allowed to have been of considerable service in abating the attachment of mankind to popery; yet a most excellent judge (Seckendorf) has not scrupled to affirm, that, through an excessive desire to be applauded for politeness, elegance, and moderation, no man had injured the cause of Luther so much as Erasmus. In fact, Erasmus himself boasts of his services in this respect to the Romish cause, and intimates how ill he had been requited. The real character of this great man may be better known by a judicious selection of a few extracts from his own writings, than the numerous and contradictory accounts of his enemies and his advocates. Several passages, conducive to this purpose, will, I trust, be found in different parts of this history. "The weak side of Erasmus was his disposition at all times to court the favour of persons of rank and distinction; and it was through their incessant importunities that he was at length prevailed on, though with much reluctance, to enter the lists against Luther. The papal advocates who had hitherto appeared in the controversy, had doctrines. The wisest and the most moderate of the Roman-catholics saw plainly that the church had lost much of its credit with the people in general, and that nothing could materially serve their cause, but what tended to regain the PUBLIC OPINION. For the purpose of compassing so important an end, they all, to a man, fixed their eyes on Erasmus. Not very anxious respecting his private sentiments in religion, they were fully convinced of his qualifications for the task they wished him to undertake. An extensive erudition, a perspicuous and elegant style, and especially a exquisite ▾ in of sarcastic humour, marked this celebrated scholar as the proper champion to engage Luther. Accordingly, neither pains nor ar tifice were spared to secure his services. Princes, and prelates, and cardinals, and even the pope himself, were most assiduous in touching those strings, the vibrations of which they judged most likely to gratify his pride, stimulate his ambition, and awaken his natural timidity. King Henry VIII. &c." pp. 845, 846. The subdivisions of the next chapter (the seventh), of which the title is "Continuation of the Controversy with Erasmus," contain further and very important information relative to that great man. These are "the Diatribe," a work of Erasmus, on the freedom of the will, written in 1524, and in opposi tion to Luther: the observations of Dr. Milner on this book discover much acuteness:-" Luther's Treatise de Servo Arbitrio," a reply to the former work :-" Scriptural Arguments used in the Controversy:" -"Luther's Arguments from St. Paul and St. John:"-"The Reply of Erasmus Hyperaspistes: "Scepticism of Erasmus:"- "Orthodoxy of Luther compared with the Scepticism of Erasmus: "Melancthon's Judgment of the Controversy between Luther and Erasmus:"-" Hostility of Erasmus: his Apologies:"-" Inconsistency and Levity of Erasmus." The -- " matter contained under these heads, especially some of the latter, is highly interesting, but, as far as Erasmus is concerned, very afflicting. Under the last is found the remarkable and well-known confession of weakness made by this eminent scholar to his friend Richard Pace: But if every syllable he (Luther) had written were unexceptionable, it was not my disposition to run the hazard of my life for the sake of truth. It is not every man who has sufficient courage to be a martyr; and I am afraid, that, in case of trial or persecution, I should follow Peter's example. I follow the decisions of the pope and the emperor when they are right, which is acting like a religious man; and when they are wrong I submit, which is taking the safe side *, pp. 942, 943. " We must observe here, that there is some dissimilarity in the cases, as well as characters, of Erasmus and Peter; and we fear that the pliable scholar flattered himself with the supposed resemblance, even when performing the part of a humble confessor. The apostle had an ardent zeal for the cause of his Saviour; and he doubtless felt himself ready, as he professed, to lay down his life for his sake. He was confident likewise, however reprehensible that confidence were, that he should not fail in the hour of trial. His modern imitator, with certainly less ardour in the same cause, foresees his weakness and fall, should he be equally tried: but he reposes on the view, and deliberately, and that on the example of the chief of the apostles in his regard, justifies a future transgression. The reflection of Dr. Milner on this subject is just and important. "Here, at once, from his own mouth, is the solution of all the enigmatical conduct of Erasmus.-Many sincere and excellent Christians have, I believe, been as timid and irresolute as he was, but their timidity and irresolution was their pain and their burden. They prayed for grace to help in time of need; they never made light of their infirmities or besetting sins; but, on the contrary, viewed them as the enemies to their spiritual improvement, and struggled to obtain victory over them, constantly fighting like faithful soldiers of Christ, and diligently avoiding the snares of temptation." p. 943. The following remark of our author, after having related some incidents, discovering the progress of the reformation, is highly important in itself, and well-applied, "I am persuaded no Christian reader will be fatigued with perusing such extracts as these, or think them ill placed in a history of the church of Christ. They introduce us into the very secret corners of the hearts of the Saxon divines, and prove, beyond contradiction, what was the real spirit of the reformation at this blessed season. Infidel or sceptical historians can easily invent motives and causes which discredit religion; it is more gratifying to the hostile tempers of such men, and also gives then abundantly less trouble, to indulge their imaginations in forming perverse and groundless conjectures, than to exercise a cool and dispassionate judgment in a laborious search after truth; there is, however, a pleasure in attaining a satisfactory conviction on a great and inte resting subject, which is the inestimable re ward of an honest and patient search after truth, and which is utterly unknown to the prejudiced writers of the stamp here alluded to, however brilliant may be their talents, however elegant their compositions." pp. 971, 972. The observations which our historian makes on a certain letter of Erasmus well deserve to be transcribed. "Thus does Erasmus, with the most consummate address, point out and praise a sort of middle path in religion, and at the same time, with a delicate adulation, insinu ate, that his friend Henckell, to whom hẹ was then writing, was among the few per E sons who were actually treading that path. The events, which followed, justify the historinn in observing, that such systems of refinement and mediocrity are, in effect, per fect chimeras; that the cross of Christ must be undergone by those who mean to glorify God, to preserve a good conscience, to rebuke, by their lives and conversations, the evil practices of the world, and to promote the salvation of mankind. Erasmus, during many years, was employed in this nugatory scheme; and while he courted the favour of the great, and secured himself from the danger of persecution, he promoted not one of those peculiar truths of Christian doctrine, on account of which the good reformers suffered grievously from the tyranny of pow erful princes and prelates." pp. 1060, 1061. The proof contained in pp. 1095 -1102, of the tolerating principles of Luther, with respect to penal inflictions for the sake of religion, together with the observations upon it, will be read with some surprise, and more admiration. No circumstance in the life of Luther places his character in a more unfavourable light than the Sacramentarian controversy, particularly as it was conducted between him and the Swiss divines, men of equal zeal for the reformation, of more discernment respecting the subject in dispute, and of a temper, both in the conduct of the controversy, and in the state of irreconcileable doctrinal hostility in which it left them, far more pacific, and therefore more Christian. The faults of Luther in this affair are freely admitted, and censured, by Dr. Milner. For the purpose of healing these dissensions, a conference was proposed by the Landgrave of Hesse, and held at Marpurg, in the year 1529. It ended, says our author, rather according to what might have been expected, than according to the Christian wishes of the good Landgrave. We are bound, he adds, to mark with the most entire disapprobation, that unchristian stubbornness of temper which manifested itself in Luther at the conclusion of the conferences. The sacramentarians begged hard to be acknowledged as brethren. Considerable concessions were made. And the Landgrave exerted himself to produce a cordial friendship. But the spirit of Luther proved perfectly untractable and intolerant. Nothing than that each side should shew more could be gained from him, Christian charity to the other, as far as they could conscientiously; &c. pp. 1119, 1120. The Helvetic reformers were much irritated by the conduct of Luther. Bullinger, one of the most eminent of the number, some years afterwards (1534) writes to Myconius:-"Domini Lutheri impudentia nuper libellis quibusdam de primatu, missa, et in Erasmum scriptis vehementer doleo. Video enim hunc hominem ecclesiæ Dei plus incommodaturum quam profuit unquam. Interim vero hunc omnibus in Europa doctis in evangelio præferre non cessat Bucerus, miror quo consilio? Ecolampadium virum sanctissimum illum, prædecessorem tuum in istis furiosis rixis palam prædicat Satana strangulatum periisse. Vide quid Monachus iste audeat? Eraset convitiorum atque calumniarum mum prorsus Arrianis annumerat, plaustra in senem illum, et de ecclesia et litteris optime meritum effundit." On the same subject, Myconius, in his reply, says: "De Erasmo et Luthero idem sentio quod tu de altero. Profuerunt initio, nunc nemo nocet perniciosius. Alter superbus et insolens est, alter avarus et ambitiosus. imo emendet utrosque. Equidem Deus opto faveat, jurare ausim, Lutherum persuasum, Spiritum Sanctum non esse nisi apud se et suos." It is pleasing, however, to remark the great variation of style with which the former of these divines speaks of Luther, immediately upon the intelligence of his death, when that event had given him, in his own view, greater liberty of renewing his literary intercourse with the principal friend of the deceased reformer, Melancthon, to whom he writes: "D. Lutherum virum doctum, et de ecclesia optime meritum, gaudeo migrasse ad Dominum, non propter causam, quam cum illo habuimus litigandam: Dominus novit : sed quod malis liberatus maximis fu- Maclaine's name is mispelt Macturisque ereptus calamitatibus, cur- lane. We must confess likewise, sum suum feliciter absolvit, et nunc that we have seemed to feel that a cum Domino nostro, cui servivit læ- greater attention might have been tatur in gloria. Interim non medio- paid to chronology and dates. Dr. criter doleo, illo nos viro destitutos, Milner is aware of the importance cujus ope et consilio in communi re of accuracy in this respect, as apligionis causa poteramus juvari. pears from an observation, p. 844 : Tametsi enim pro carnis humanæ but authors cannot place themselves ingenio sua habuerit vitia, insigne in the exact position and circumtamen constantiæ donum consecu- stances of readers. tus, fortis et tenax fuit in retinenda sinceritate doctrinæ contra papistas, quibus nihil concedi voluit per compositiones et colloquia. Vidit haud dubie," &c.* After what we have written, we trust we shall not be accused of any hostile intention, or of a spirit peculiarly hypercritical, if we state the few circumstances in this history which we could have wished absent. The expression "seeking souls," which, if we mistake not, occurs more than once, might, we think, have been exchanged for one equally significant, and less calculated to excite unnecessary prejudice. The being pitched against another in a contest, being an overmatch, and being gravelled, appeared to us terms beneath the dignity of such a history as the present. We are not quite reconciled to the use of capitals by way of imparting emphasis to a word or sentence: and we were almost shocked at the appearance of a occasionally adorning the margin for somewhat of the same purpose. Throughout all the latter part of the history, See Faeslin. Cent. prim. Epist. ab Eceles. Helvet. Reforin. &c. Num. xxxvii. xxxviii. and Ixi. Num. iii. is a letter of Erasmus, not published in the Amsterdam edition of his Works, to Zuingle, dated 1523, where he says, "Omnia recusavi, que mihi hoc nomine offerebantur, ut adversus illam (Lutherum) scriberem;" and yet in 1521 he bad, as he professes in his etter to Warham, begun to read Luther's Works for the purpose of answering them. Perhaps the design had been relinquished. Or he might mean, as the following words seem to import, that he had not yet actually commenced hostilities: which was the fact, We are here reminded, that Luther wrote a letter to Erasmus, in the year 1524, which is referred to p. 855, and quoted at length in the Appendix, pp. 25, &c. This is the same letter, which in the last edition of Erasmus's Works is numbered 726. Dr. Milner, p. 927, represents the letter of Erasmus to Luther, numbered 806, as the answer to that of Luther just alluded to: but it must be another, and a later one, not contained in the collection of Erasmus's letters. The substance and spirit of the letter will hardly comport with such an one as that of Luther. Erasmus plainly supposes himself to have been called by Luther an atheist, an epicurean, &c.; and the terms in which the date is expressed put the matter beyond a doubt:- Basilea II. Aprilis, quo tuæ reddita sunt literæ, Anno 1526. The importance of this portion of Dr. Milner's history is impressed upon the intelligent and considerate reader, if he be a Christian, by many considerations. The attention of general readers has of late, more than usual, been called to the reformation and to the character of the agents concerned in that astonishing revolution. Unfortunately for truth and piety, the subject has been pretty much confined to the hands, either of decided infidels, or of cold and merely speculative Christians. The consequence has been, and misrepresentation of the suban almost entire misapprehension ject with the writers; and with the readers, as far as they have trusted their guides, a proportionable degree of delusion. It is a delusion, likewise, be it observed, of a very pernicious tendency, as discrediting, and, so far, impeding the progress of religion in the souls of men. The Christian world, therefore, is under great obligation to an author, who, like the present, on the one hand possesses the real Christianity to enter into the true character of the reformers, and the merits of their cause; and, on the other, is endowed with the learning, judgment, and perseverance necessary to collect and arrange the voluminous materials which are extant on the subject; and thus restore the characters of those to whom protestants owe their present invaluable religious advantages, to the honourable estimation in which they ought to be held, and recover for them the influence which their heroic and triumphant faith is calculated to have, both in the revival and establishment of the same faith, upon posterity. It is no small recommendation of the present work, that it has brought together, and presented to the mere English reader, the most valuable portions of those numerous protestant collections, which, notwithstanding their worth, are exceedingly difficult of access in England, and, as long as Europe continues in its present agitated state, will remain so. The principal impression, we apprehend, which will abide on the mind of the reader of this work will be, the new and different light in which the characters of the two heroes of their age, Luther and Erasmus, are placed. Luther, however, is properly speaking, and justly, the hero of this volume. Yet great as Dr. Milner's admiration of this reformer evidently is, he has conducted his narration, we think, with exemplary candour. The faults of Luther, perhaps all his faults, are allowed, and chastised with the due degree of censure. At times, as we proceeded, we did indeed think, that the author was disposed to favour. But on due consideration we willingly surrender the suspicion. The writer of a piece of biography, or of a history in which some particular character predominates, has formed his opinion of the individual from a careful study, and repeated inspection, of his life, as a whole; and he comes to the consideration of the successive parts of that life, when he records them, with information and a judgment necessarily, in some degree, different from those of the reader, who, as he advances in the story, is acquainted but slightly, if at all, with the whole portion which is future, and which could not fail, if known, to cast some shade or colour upon what precedes. A second reading puts him pretty nearly in the attitude and condition of the author. Dr. Milner has certainly been very successful in vindicating some parts of the character of Luther, which have been thought not calculated to bear much light, even by his friends. He has demonstrably shewn, that the reformer, however zealous, and at times paradoxical, understood how to guard and qualify the doctrines most liable to abuse, as well as those who make this their principal study. There are likewise instances of submission, conciliation, and candour in the conduct of the Saxon reformer, which, as being of a class different from his characteristic virtues, discover more decisively the operation and power of divine grace in the formation of his character. The account of Erasmus is distinguished by corrections of a different kind. The influence of worldly affections, excited by worldly temptations, in producing an indecision and duplicity of views and conduct, and, when those were no longer tenable, an evident hostility to truth itself, is sadly exemplified in the facts which the diligence and penetration of the present historian have presented to the reader. The instruction conveyed by this least grateful part of the history is very striking and important; and it is, in a particular and solemn manner, directed to those, whose talents and influence expose them to flattery; and who are therefore likely to be |