A Second Defense of the Learned Hugo Grotius, Text

A Second Defense of the Learned Hugo Grotius · Text

A Second DEFENCE Of the Learned HƲGO GROTIƲS, OR A vindication of the Digreſsion concerning him, from ſome freſh EXCEPTIONS. By H. Hammond, D. D.

LONDON, Printed by J. Fleſher, for Richard Royſton at the Angel in Ivy lane, 1655.

p. 1A DEFENCE OF THE Learned HƲGO GROTIƲS.

1. WHat hath newly been ſuggeſted, in an Epiſtle Dedicatorie to the Oxford-heads, by way of Reply to my Digreſſion about the Learned Hugo Grotius, will receive punctual anſwer within the compaſſe of very few leaves. But for the Readers thrift and eaſe, I ſhall firſt ſet down the words, wherein the ſuggeſtion is delivered.

2. From thence, whence in the thoughts of ſome, I am moſt likely to ſuffer, as to my own Reſolves, I am moſt ſecure. It is in meddling with Grotius his Annotations, and calling into quaeſtion what hath been delivered by ſuch a Gyant in all kinds of literature. Since my ingagement in this buſineſs, and when I had well-nigh finiſhed the vindication of the Texts of Scripture commonly pleaded, for the Demonſtration of the Deity of Chriſt, from the exceptions put into their Teſtimonies, by the Racovian Catechiſme, I had the ſight of Dr. H's Apologie for him, in his vindication of his diſſertations about Epiſcopacy, from my occaſional Animadverſions, publiſhed in the Preface of my Book of the Perſeverance of the Saints. Of that whole Treatiſe I ſhall elſewhere give an account. My Defenſative as to my dealing with Grotius his Annotations, is ſuited to what the Doctor pleads in his behalfe, which occaſions this mention thereof.

This very Pious, Learned, Judicious man (he tells us) hath fallen under ſome harſh cenſures of late, eſpecially upon the account of Socinianiſme, and Popery. That is, not as though he p. 2would reconcile thoſe extremes, but being in Doctrinals a Socinian, he yet cloſed in many things with the Romane intereſt: as I no way doubt, but Thouſands of the ſame perſwaſions with the Socinians, as to the perſon and offices of Chriſt, do live in the outward Communion of that Church (as they call it) to this day; of which ſuppoſal I am not without conſiderable grounds, and eminent inſtances for its confirmation. This (I ſay) is their charge upon him. For his being a Socinian (he tells us) Three things are made uſe of to beget a jealouſie in the minds of men of his inclinations that way. 1. Some parcells of a Letter of his to Crellius. 2. Some Relations of what paſſed from him at his Death. 3. Some paſſages in his Annotations. It is this laſt alone wherein I am concerned. And what I have to ſpeake to them, I deſire may be meaſured and weighed by what I do promiſe. It is not that I do entertaine in my ſelf any hard thoughts, or that I would beget in others any evill ſurmiſes of the Eternal condition of that man, that I ſpeak what I do. What am I, that I ſhould judge another mans ſervant? He is fallen to his own Maſter. I am very ſlow to judge of mens Acceptation with God, by the Apprehenſion of their underſtandings. This onelyonly I know, that be men of what Religion ſoever, that is profeſſed in the world, if they are Drunkards, Proud, Boaſters, &c. Hypocrites, haters of good men, perſecutors and revilers of them, yea if they be not regenerate and born of God, united to the head Chriſt Jeſus, by the ſame ſpirit that is in him, they ſhall never ſee God.

But for the paſſages in his Annotations, the ſubſtance of the Doctors plea is, that the paſſages intimated are in his poſthuma, that he intended not to publiſh them, that they might be of things he obſerved, but thought farther to conſider: and an inſtance is given in that of Col. 1. 16. which he interprets, contrarie to what he urged it for, Joh. 1. 1, 2, 3. But granting what is affirmed as to matter of fact, about his Collections, (though the Preface to the laſt part of his Annotations will not allow it to be true) I muſt needs abide in my diſſatisfaction to theſe Annotations, and of my reſolves in theſe thoughts give the Doctor this account. Of the Socinian Religion there are two main Parts; the firſt is Photinianiſme, the latter Pelagianiſme. The firſt concerning the perſon, the other the Grace of Chriſt. Let us take p. 3an eminent inſtance out of either of theſe heads: Out of the firſt, Jam verò ſciendum eſt, multo quidem citius, quàm nunc d… mum temporis eam reſumi abſolvó que potuiſſe, & quominus id jampridem factum ſit, per eum non ſtetiſſe virum, cujus fideli curae opus integrum ab Authore ipſo primum creditū fuit & ſedulò commendatum. Praemon: ad Lect.their denying Chriſt to be God by Nature. Out of the latter, their denyall of his ſatisfaction.

For the firſt, I muſt needs tell the Apologiſt, that of all the Texts of the New Teſtament and Old, whereby the Deity of Chriſt is uſually confirmed, and where it is evidently teſtified unto, He hath not left any more then one (that I have obſerved) if one, ſpeaking any thing clearly to that purpoſe. I ſay, if one, for that he ſpeaks not home to the buſineſs in hand on Joh. 1. I ſhall elſewhere give an account: perhaps ſome one or two more may be interpreted according to the Analogie of that. I ſpeake not of his Annotations on the Epiſtles, but on the whole Bible throughout, wherein his expoſitions given, do for the moſt part fall in with thoſe of the Socinians, and oftentimes conſiſt in the very words of Socinus and Smalcius, and alwaies do the ſame things with them, as to any notice of the Deity of Chriſt in them. So that I marvell the Learned Doctor ſhould fix upon one particular inſtance, as though that one place alone were corrupted by him, when there is not one (or but one) that is not wreſted, perverted, and corrupted to the ſame purpoſe. For the full conviction of the truth hereof, I refer the Reader to the inſuing conſiderations of his interpretations of the places themſelves. The condition of theſe famous Annotations, as to the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, is the ſame; not one Text of the whole Scripture, wherein Teſtimonie is given to that ſacred truth, which is not wreſted to another ſenſe, or at leaſt the Doctrine in it, concealed, and obſcured by them. I do not ſpeak this with the leaſt intention to caſt upon him the reproach of a Socinian: I judge not his Perſon: his Books are publiſhed to be conſidered and judged. Eraſmus I know made way for him in moſt of his Expoſitions about the Deity of Chriſt but what repute he hath thereby obtained among all that honor the Eternal Godhead of the ſon of God, let Bellarmine on the one hand, and Beza on the other, evince. And as I will by no means maintain or urge againſt Grotius any of the miſcarriages in Religion, which the Anſwerer of my Animadverſions undertakes to vindicate him from; Nor do I deſire to fight with the Duſt and Aſhes of men; yet what I have ſaid, is, if not neceſſary to return to the Apologiſt, yet of tendency, I hope, to the ſatisfaction of others, who may inquire after the p. 4reaſon of my calling the Annotations of the learned man to an Account in this Diſcourſe, ſhall any one take liberty to pluck down the Pillars of our Faith, and weaken the grounds of our aſſurance, concerning the perſon and grace of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and ſhall we not have the boldneſs to call him to an account for ſo ſacrilegious an attempt? with thoſe then, who love the Lord Chriſt in ſincerity, I expect no blame or reproach for what I have indevoured in this kinde; yea that my good will ſhall find acceptance with them, eſpecially if it ſhall occaſion any of greater leiſure and abilities farther, and profeſſedly to remark more of the Corruptions of thoſe Annotations, I have good ground of expectation. The truth is, notwithſtanding their pompous ſhew and appearance (few of his Quotations, which was the **Grotius in lib. 5. de veritat. Relig. in notis R. Sel. Aben Ezra & Onkelos adducit, ſed alienis oculis hic vidit, aut alienâ fide retulit (fortè authoribus illis aut non intellectis, aut propter occupationes non inſpectis) aut animoſitati & authoritati ſuae in citandis authoribus, & referendis dictis aut factis, ut ipſi hoc uſui veniebat, nimium in ſcriptis Theologicis indulſerit. Vet: diſput: de Advent: Meſs.manner of the man, being at all to his purpoſe) It will be found no difficult matter to diſcuſſe his Aſſertions, and Diſſipate his Conjectures.

For his being a Papiſt, I have not much to ſay; let his Epiſtles (publiſhed by his Friends) written to Dionyſius Petavius Reverende Domine, ſaepe tibi moleſtus eſſe cogor, ſumpſi hanc ultiman operam, mea antehac dicta & famam quoque à miniſtris all…tratam tuendi, in eo Scripto ſiquid eſt, aut Catholicis ſentent…is diſcongruens, aut caeteroqui à veritate alienum, de co abs te viro Eruditiſſimo &c. cujus judicium plurimi facio moneri percupio. Epiſt: Grot; ad Dionys: Petav: Epiſt: 204.the Jeſuite, be peruſed, and you will ſee the character which of himſelf he gives: As alſo what in ſundry writings he aſcribes to the Pope.

3. The firſt thing that I am here to clear, is the meaning of plain words. I ſaid that Grotius was ſometimes calumniated, as a Socinian, ſometimes as a Papiſt, and as if he had learnt to reconcile contradictories, or the moſt diſtant extremes, ſometimes as both of them together. And here I am told that the harſh cenſures under which he hath fallen, are not as though he would p. 5reconcile thoſe extremes—And ſure I never ſaid, or intimated they were, but that the Socinian and Popiſh doctrines were ſo contradictorie one to the other (the one affirming, the other expreſſely denying the Eternal Divinity and ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and many the like) that it was impoſſible for the ſame man to be both Socinian and Papiſt, without being a greater artificer then yet ever was in the world, one that had learnt to reconcile contradictories &c. i. e. (if I muſt farther conſtrue plain words) to believe together things moſt incompetible, and impoſſible to be believed together by the ſame perſon, the affirmations and the negations of the ſame Enunciations, that Chriſt was, and was not Eternal God, made, and made not ſatisfaction for our ſins; For this work of wonder, above what either nature or divine power can extend to, is neceſſarily required to the verifying of that part of the calumnie.

4. The 2^d is, his ſtating the jealouſie, as far as it is own'd by him, viz. that H. Grotius being in Doctrinals a Socinian, he yet cloſed in many things with the Romane intereſt; where the Diſtinction being made between Doctrinals and intereſt, it is viſible, 1. That this doth not ſo much as pretend that he was a Papiſt, for it is the doctrines onelyonly (ſuch is that of the Popes Supremacie, &c.) which can give any man that denomination, and for cloſing in many things with the Romane intereſts, the Anabaptiſts and other ſuch Sectaries, the moſt diſtant from Poperie, may and oft are as guilty of that, as any. 2. There is no colour for this ſuggeſtion, as far as Grotius's writings give us to judge (and farther then thoſe I have no perſpective to examine his heart) For the fomenters of the diviſions in Chriſtendome, being the only perſons whom he profeſt to oppoſe, the irreconciliabiles, and qui aeterna cupiunt eſſe diſſidia, tis conſequent, that the Pacificatorie intereſt was the onelyonly one eſpouſed by him, and purſued moſt affectionately; and I could never yet diſcerne by any pregnant indication, that this is the Romane Intereſt.

5. The 3^d is, his manner of proving his thus ſtated ſuggeſtion. 1. By his bare affirmation, without the leaſt tender of proof for the truth of it; 2. by his confident undoubted aſſurance, that thouſands of the ſame perſwaſions with the Socinians, as to p. 6the perſon and offices of Chriſt, do to this day live in the outward communion of the Church of Rome. Whereas, 1. This could have no force to infer the concluſion, as it concerned Grotius, who never lived a day, or died in the communion of the Church of Rome, nor is by his moſt unkind adverſaries affirmed to have done ſo, but is known to have profeſt his willingneſs to communicate with the church of England; and 1 tis not imaginable how any one Doctrinal Socinian, ſhould after his having eſpouſed thoſe Doctrines, if his practices be conſonant to his perſwaſions, live in outward Communion with the Church of Rome, if by living in the outward Communion, be meant either joying in the offices, or receiving the Sacrament with them, when (beſide many other obſtacles in the way, the Athanaſian Creed, and the like) the very **Sedendo vel ſtando poteſt celebrari. Geniculari eſt Idololatricum. Socin: deuſ: & fin: coen: Dom: p. 115:receiving the Euchariſt kneeling, is by Socinus defined to be Idololatrical, and moſt ſtrictly required by the Papiſts from every Communicant.

Fourthly, when he hath premiſed his profeſſion that he would not beget in others any evill ſurmiſes of the eternal condition of that man (who is (bleſſed be God) out of the reach of ſuch darts) with a [what am I, that I ſhould judge another mans ſervant?] and yet addes in the next words [He is fallen to his own maſter,] I cannot but think theſe words ſo far contrary to his profeſſion, as may be apt to beget evil ſurmiſes in others. The foregoing words are evidently taken from Rom. 14. 4. and judging there, and here, is uſed in the ſenſe of condemning, which is, at the beſt, ſurmiſing of the eternal condition, and [falling to his own Maſter] is in like manner taken from the ſame verſe, and ſo marks by the Italick letter, and [falling] there evidently ſignifying that Lot, to which the precedent [judging] determines it, and to which the ſubſequent [ſtanding] is oppoſite, what can this regularly infer, but that he which is fallen to his maſter, is fallen under condemnation? But if by [fallen] he meant no more then death, as I yet hope, and deſire the reader in charity to believe he did, I heartily wiſh, he would hereafter be more carefull in uſing of Scripture ſtyle in a ſenſe ſo diſtant from the known importance of it in Scripture, without any character to diſcriminate it; and withall, that when he ſpeaks of ſo nice a point, as is the eternal ſalvation of one that is dead, he will not deliver p. 7his mind in ſuch general Aphoriſmes, as thoſe (which the jealouſie or mallce of any man may interpret, to the inferring the moſt ſanguinarie concluſion) that the men of what religion ſoever, if they are Drunkards, Proud, &c. ſhall never ſee God. For though I have all reaſons to believe that this Learned man was regenerate and born of God, and united to the head Jeſus Chriſt by the ſame Spirit that is in him, and withall, neither lived, nor dyed, in any one or more of thoſe waſting guilts (I hrartily wiſh all men living were as guiltleſſe as he) yet who knows what ſurmiſes may be infuſed into thoſe, that are willing to believe ill or have no grounds of knowledge to pronounce any thing that is good, of him, when they find ſuch Aphoriſmes as theſe (comprehending ſo many ſorts of ſinners, which ſhall never ſee God) made uſe of to conclude a diſcourſe, which purpoſely treated of that perſon, and cannot diſcern with what proprietie, they could be directed to that place, if they did not relate to him.

7. Fiftly when he ſaith, that the Praeface to the laſt part of Grotius's Annotations will not allow that to be true, which I ſaid of his Poſthuma, viz. that they had not been formed by him, or fitted for the publick, &c. I anſwer, that that Preface of the Publiſher, if it be ſuppoſed to have ſet down the whole truth, hath yet nothing contrarie to what I ſaid. It ſaith the Opus integrum was by the Author committed and earneſtly commended to the faithfull care of foreign. But what was the Opus integrum? not that laſt part or volume of Annotations thus completed, and ſo made Integrum intire by his own hand (though for as much as concerned the Apocalypſe I think it had received from his own pencil, by occaſion of the conteſts he met with about his tract De Antichriſto, the very lineaments and colors, wherein it appears) but Opus integrum, the whole volume, or volumes which contained all his foreign adverſaria on the New Teſtament, which it ſeems were thus committed to a friends hands, or elſe they had never come to ours. And this is perfectly conſonant to what I ſaid, and (I ſuppoſe) exemplyfied, and evidenced concerning thoſe Annotations.

8. Sixtly when he ſaith, that H. Grotius hath not left any more then one text of the New and Old Teſtament whereby the p. 8Deity of Chriſt is uſually confirmed and where it is evidently teſtified to] I refer him briefely to one place in his Annotations on S. John's Goſpel, which alone will be able to diſcover, what weight there is in this affirmation. There having by way of Preface obſerved, that S. John did more expreſſely, then any other of the Evangeliſts and more early in the very firſt words of his writing, ſet down the divine nature of Chriſt, ipſo initio Dei nomen ei aſſignandum—exiſtimans, in the very beginning of his Goſpel aſſigning him the name of God, accordingly, in his explication of the firſt verſe, he makes the [foreign In the beginning was] an expreſſion of Chriſt's eternity, applying to it the place in the Proverbs concerning wiſedome c. 8. 22, 23, 24, 25, 26. 27. The Lord poſſeſſed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old, I was ſet up from everlaſting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was, when there was no depths I was brought forth, when there were no fountains abounding with water, before the mountains were ſetled, before the hills was I brought forth, while as yet he had not made the earth nor the field, nor the higheſt part of the duſt of the world, when he prepared the heavens, I was there—(and in his notes on the Old Teſtament, Prov. 8. 27. he expreſſely refers to this, Joh. 1. 1. and by ſo doing manifeſtly defines that eternal wiſdome to be Chriſt) and on this occaſion he brings the moſt expreſſe affirmations of the antients Juſtine and Athenagoras, the former affirming Chriſt's praeexiſtence before the word foreign, and p. 851. foreign, he was God before the worlds; the latter his eternity, and that from the beginning God being an eternal mind foreign. Then out of the old Teſtament from the Chaldee Paraphraſt he brings ſeveral places where God is interpreted by God and his word, making and founding the heavens and earth, Iſa. 45. 12. and 48. 13. and according and conſenting thereto, 2 Pet. 3. 5. which again are ſo many more evidences ſet down by him, of Chriſts eternal deity, and then on v. 3. to teſtifie that all things were created by this eternal word, he appeals to the place, which before I produced from him, Col. 1. 16. by him were all things created—

9. This I hope without farther ſearch, may ſuffice to prove, that he hath left more then one text of the Old and New Teſtament ſpeaking p. 9home and clearly to this purpoſe; For what can be more clear and home, then this, that Chriſt was God before the world was (whereas Socinians make the beginning Joh. 1. 1. to be the beginning of the Goſpel) and that by him the whole world was created.

10. In a word, If one text acknowledged to aſſert Chriſts eternal divinity, will not ſuffice to conclude him no Socinian in that point, who was not ſo Atheiſtical, as to doubt of the truth and authority of that one place, and ſo cannot be doubted to believe, what from one place (if there had been no more) he did believe; 2 If ſix verſes in the Proverbs, two in Iſaiah, one in S. Peter, one in S. Paul, added to many in the beginning of S. John, will not yet amount to above one text; or laſtly, If that one may be doubted of alſo, which is by him interpreted to affirme Chriſt eternally ſubſiſtent with God, before the creation of the world, and that the whole world was created by him, I ſhall deſpaire of ever being a ſucceſſefull Advocate for any man.

11. And then how, ſtill, he that affirmed poſitively that he hath not left more then one, and preſently addes his doubting of this one [not more then one, if one] and after [not one, or but one,] can firſt inlarge the catalogue, that [perhaps ſome one or two more may be interpreted according to the analogie of that one] and then preſently contract it again, that [his Expoſitions alwaies do the ſame things with Socinus and Smalcius] who it is certain do not permit that one to be underſtood of Chriſts eternal divinity, and yet at length profeſſe, that he ſpeaks not with the leaſt intention to caſt on him the reproach of a Socinian, or to urge againſt him any of thoſe miſcarriages in Religion, which the Anſwerer of his Animadverſions undertakes to vindicate him from (and Socinianiſme was, one of them) acknowledging that Eraſmus made way for him in moſt of his Expoſitions about the Deity of Chriſt, (which is to make him an Eraſmian, rather then a Socinian) and after that ſtill adhere, that his attempt is ſacrilegious, even to pluck down the pillars of our Faith—concerning the perſon and grace of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, how, I ſay, he can reconcile, all theſe contrary appearances, I have not the skill, and therefore ſhall not have the curioſity to divine, or conjecture.

12. Seventhly when he marvels the Doctor ſhould fix upon one p. 10particular inſtance, as though that one place onelyonly were corrupted by him] I anſwer that he miſinterprets my words, and miſrepreſents my deſigne and aime in producing that particular inſtance; It was not to give example what place of Scriptures thoſe notes had corrupted, or miſinterpreted, but to evidence that thoſe Annotations, under his name, agreed not with his ſenſe, of which as this was one eminent and pertinent inſtance, interpreting this place, Col. 1. 16. after his death, to the Socinians mind, which in his lifetime he had interpreted expreſſely againſt it, and as one inſtance thus explicite, is as concluding to this matter, as many more could be, ſo elſewhere I have added many inſtances more to the ſame purpoſe, which I ſhall not here collect unſeaſonably.

13. What places in the Old Teſtament, wherein the Deity of Chriſt is evidently teſtified to, are corrupted, wreſted or perverted by this learned man, H. Gr. I profeſſe not to divine, nor ſhall, it ſeems, come to the full conviction of the truth thereof without reading over this, whole (which is a great) volume where their confutation lyes ſcattered, and is not, as I diſcern, put together in any part of the work, ſave onelyonly in the title page, and to this larger travaile my proſpect doth not invite me, having already by what I have recited from Grotius's notes on Joh. 1. compared with this Authors ſuggeſtions, a competent foreign, what I am to expect from any farther inquiry.

In lieu hereof, I ſhall onelyonly adde theſe two ſuppletory conſiderations. 1. That the word of God, being all, and every part of it equally of undoubted truth, that doctrine, which is founded expreſſely on five places of divine writ, muſt by all Chriſtians be acknowledged to be as irrefragably confirmed, as a hundred expreſſe places would be conceived to confirme it. 2. That this charge of diſarming the Church of her defences againſt the adverſaries of the faith, by diverting thoſe places of Scripture, which have formerly been uſed to aſſert the great myſteries of Salvation, to other and inferior ends, though it be a very popular one, and that which is moſt apt to divolve an odium on him, which ſhall be repreſented guilty of it, and may therefore probably be choſen, as the field of declamation againſt Grotius, by any that can gladly expatiate on that ſubject, yet will it upon inquiry be p. 11found in ſome degree, if not equally, chargeable on the learnedſt and moſt valued of the Reformers, particularly upon Mr. Calvin himſelf, who hath been as bitterly and unjuſtly accuſed, and reviled, on this account, (witneſs the book entitled Calvino-Turciſmus) as ever Eraſmus was by Bellarmine or Beza, or as probably Grotius can be.

14. 8^thly. For the doctrine of the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and the interpretation of thoſe Scriptures, that belong to it, I cannot imagine any ſurer meaſure can be taken of Grotius's ſenſe, then by that perſpicuous and judicious treatiſe which he hath written purpoſely on that ſubject, againſt Socinus himſelf, and which I believe will be found a ſurer Antidote againſt that poyſon, among conſidering men, then hath been mixed by any other the moſt skilful hand, ſince that controverſie hath been agitated in this laſt age, more eſpecially the places of Scripture are by him there vindicated * Edit. Lugdun. p. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, &c.from the perverſions of Socinus, and a great cumulus of texts brought forth to teſtifie to the doctrine of Satisfaction, which I ſhall not recite, that I may leave on the Reader an ingagement to ſurvey the book, and commit the judgement to his own eyes.

15. OnelyOnly becauſe I have heard the ſignal place Iſa. 53. taken notice of by ſome, as that wherein his Annotations are moſt ſuſpected, I ſhall there faſten a while. From 1 Pet. 2. 24. having inferred that Chriſt ſo bare our ſins, that he freed us from the puniſhment of them, and ſo that we are healed by his ſtripes, he at length urges as parallel to this, Iſa. 53. 11. my righteous ſervant * p. 12.ſhall juſtify many, and ſhall bear their iniquities, foreign iniquity ſaith he, ſignifying the puniſhment of iniquity 2 Kin. 7. 9. and foreign to bear, the bearing of puniſhment, and thence concluding, Deſertè ergo hic dicitur Chriſtus laturus poenas eorum qui juſtificantur, It is therefore here diſtinctly ſaid, that Chriſt ſhall bear the puniſhments of thoſe who are juſtified, and according to this ſpecimen he gives the myſtical ſenſe of that whole chapter (and refutes the Socinian arts of evading it) and at laſt from v. 12. concludes the puniſhments which Chriſt indured for our ſins to be the foundation and merit of his dividing the ſpoile, and interceding, decere enim ut is qui peccata multorum tulerit, jus habeat pro iis intercedendi, for it was fit that he that bare the ſins of many, ſhould have the right of interceding for them; and' much p. 12more to the ſame purpoſe, defining poſitively againſt all the adverſaries foreign, that Peccata ferre patiendo, at que ita ut inde liberentur alii, aliud indicare non poteſt quàm poenae alienae ſuſceptionem, to bear ſins by ſuffering, and ſo that others may be freed by that means, cannot ſignifie any thing elſe, but the undergoings of other mens puniſhment, annexing Iſa. 53. 6. The Lord hath laid on him, the iniquity of us all—and refuting all the evaſions, that wete there interpoſed by Socinus.

16. And when to this, and the *From p. 12. to p. 18. many pages more which are there ſubjoyned for the vindicating that one chapter, and the ſeveral expreſſe teſtimonies therein, I ſhall adde two things more for preventing all poſſible miſtake or jelouſie of his after-change in this matter, I ſhall have no motive farther to inlarge this conſideration.

17. Firſt, the Annotations of that Learned man on the Old Teſtamen, publiſhed a little before his death, are very brief, and eſpecially reſpect the firſt and literal interpretation; As in the Prophets, where there is one immediate completion of each Prophecy among the Jewes of or neer that time, wherein it was written, another more remote and ultimate concerning Chriſt, or the times of the Goſpel (this might be exemplified in ſeveral inſtances, applyed by the New Teſtament to Chriſt, having had before a literal completion [Out of Aegypt have I called my ſonne] and many the like) there generally his care is, to ſet down moſt diſtinctly the firſt, or literal ſenſe, as that is terminated in the immediate completion (and this, I ſuppoſe, becauſe it was moſt neglected by other interpreters, who were more copious in rendring the myſtical notation) And accordingly on Iſa. 53. conceiving the Jewes uſage of the Prophet Jeremie, and Gods regard to him, to be literally predicted there, he interprets every verſe of that chapter to that ſenſe (which was not ſo eaſily diſcoverable, or vulgarly taken notice of) omitting to inlarge on that other, more ſublime completion in Chriſt, which the New Teſtament had ſo clearely expreſt, all Commentators enlarged on, and himſelf in the tract de Satisfact. ſo evidently ſet down, and vindicated, that all that was needfull to be added, was eaſily ſaid by him by way of introduction to that whole chapter, in theſe few words, Hae notae in Jeremiam quidem congruunt p. 13priùs, ſed potiùs, ſublimiúſque, ſaepe & magis foreign in Chriſtum. Theſe characters agree indeed firſt to Jeremie, but to Chriſt more principally and eminently, and oftentimes more according to the very letter or diction.

18. The 2^d thing that I have to adde for the clearing of his conſtancie, or no change in theſe doctrines, will be ſuch, as I think will leave no place of Jealouſie, his own expreſſe words proteſting his opinion, when he was accuſed of changing it. This he hath publikely done in his Diſſcuſſion (written a little before, and not publiſhed till after his death) p. 17. by ſetting down the occaſion and author of that defamation, and for the removing of it, referring the reader to what he had in many places of his Annotations on the Goſpels written coucerning the eternity of the Word, the blood of Chriſt given for our redemption &c. And this I have before my eyes at this time, more clearly teſtified under his own hand in a letter of his written to a friend of his of this nation, who then held a correſpondence with him, in theſe words, Poteris autem, vir optime, omnibus, qui nos norunt, affirmare, me de iis quae contra Socini admiratores defendi, non modo nihil diſcedere, ſed & illorum aliquos meâ operâ adductos ad meliorem ſententiam. Quo magis gratias tibi habeo de edito noſtro libro de Satisfactione Chriſti, In quo argumento illos à proprietate verborum tam multorum in ſacris literis, & à manifeſtiſſime antiquitatis conſenſu, poſitionibus quibuſdam inanibus abſtractos non dubito. Giving him authority to aſſure all that know him, not onelyonly that he hath no whit departed from what he had maintained againſt the Socinians, but alſo that ſome of them had by his indevour been reduced from the Socinian errors, charging them with the vanity of their poſitions, and departure both from the Propriety of many words in the Scriptures, and from the moſt manifeſt conſent of antiquity, and expreſſing himſelf very well pleaſed that his Book de ſatisfactione was reprinted at Oxford. And all this long after the publication of Crellius's Book againſt him, which is the thing ſuppoſed to have wrought the change in him. Upon theſe plain words I ſhall adde no Deſcants, but leave them that have intertained contrarie ſurmiſes, to conſider them:

19. 9^thly. For the character given of this Perſon, with whoſe duſt p. 14and aſhes he yet deſires not to fight, viz. that few of his quotations are at all to his purpoſe; and the grounds of that character, the words of Voetius diſputing againſt him, and affirming that it was cuſtomary with him to indulge too much to his own authority in citing authors or relating ſpeeches or facts] I ſhall ſay but this, 1. That theſe two things are different, to miſcite, which was the thing Voetius ſpake of, and not to cite to the purpoſe; A falſe citation is one thing, an impertinent or unſeaſonable citation, or ſuch as is not at all to his purpoſe, is another, and ſo this citation from Voetius is guilty of the infirmity it accuſeth, is not to his purpoſe that cited it. 2^dly. That adverſaries teſtifications of the faults of thoſe, whom they find it uſefull to aſperſe, are not valid teſtimonies, nor competent to affixe (or juſtifie) ill characters on any, and that Voetius was ſuch, is known to many, and, I doubt not, to him that cited him. 3^dly. That whoſoever ſhall be willing to profit by that mans writings, will find that as he writes with great conſent, ſo is he obſervable to bring the moſt pertinent teſtimonies of any man, and ſeldome to omit any, which the moſt diligent obſerver ſhall take notice of. And if in ſo large a field he be found ſometimes to have miſtaken, or miſcited a teſtimonie, there are ſo many innocent wayes to ſuch kind of errors, that untill it appear that his were not ſuch, they cannot with reaſon affixe an ill character on him; and 4^thly. That if this character were true, it yet infers not the point in hand, that he was either Socinian or Papiſt, thoſe two Sects having not the incloſure, or Monopoly from all other ſects, of writing or quoting what is not to their preſent purpoſe.

20. Laſtly, for the little which he hath to ſay to prove him a Papiſt, and 1. For his Epiſtles written to Dionyſius Petavius a Jeſuite, and in them the words ſet in the margine, I anſwer, 1. That it being willingly acknowledged that he wrote five very ſhort Epiſtles to Dionyſius Petavius, which are put together in the two laſt leaves of his Epiſtles ad Gallos, there is this obvious account to be given of it, which will no way reflect ill upon him.

21. Petavius was both a very learned, and a very moderate Papiſt, fit to be joyned with Jac. Sirmundus, a Jeſuite alſo, yet both theſe of ſuch abilities and affections to the good of learning, of p. 15ſuch diligence in the ſearch and ſtudy of antiquity, and withall of ſo much temper above what is generally expected from that Society in other kingdomes, that it can be no prejudice to him who ſo earneſtly deſired, and laboured to advance the peace of the univerſal Church, to have a particular reſpect unto, and acquaintance with one of theſe, and as his living ſo long in Paris, where Petavius was an eminent perſon, makes it no miracle, that he ſhould be thus acquainted with him, ſo his Pacificatory deſign could not but render it profitable and deſirable, he muſt have been an unskilfull manager, if intending to reconcile diſtant intereſts, he did not acquaint himſelf with the utmoſt of both their pretenſions; And what means was more commodious to that end, then this, of receiving advertiſements from Petavius.

22. The words of Grotius himſelf, when he was by Rivet accuſed for commending Jeſuites, are here worth reciting, Jeſuitas * Diſcuſſ. p. 61.non omnes laudavit Grotius, ſed quorum & mores & eruditio laudem merentuſ, Eos verò qui in Galliâ ſunt, pro talibus habet, quales eos Reges Galliae volunt exiſtimari, i e. pro bonis civibus, & quid magis neceſſarium eſt pacem Eccleſiaſticam reſtituere cupienti, quàm eruditorum audire conſilia, eorum maximè quibus & praeſens Eccleſiae ſtatus & antiquior hiſtoria percognita ſunt. He commends onelyonly thoſe Jeſuites whoſe manners and learning deſerve praiſe, the French Jeſuites, whom he takes to be ſuch as the Kings of France account of them, i. e. good Subjects to their Prince—And what can be more neceſſary to one that deſires to reſtore the peace of the Church, then to hear the adviſes of thoſe eſpecially who have the perfecteſt knowledge of the preſent ſtate of the Church, and of antient hiſtorie. And to the ſame purpoſe again, p. 91. affirming that he had great reaſons to believe that ſome of that Society, Petavius no doubt, were ſeriouſly willing as well as able to contribute very much toward the peace of the Church.

23. 2^dly, For the words here cited from his Epiſtle, that if there were any thing in that anſwer to Rivet, which agreed not with Catholike doctrine, or were otherwiſe diſtant from truth, or (which he addes in that place, but is here left out) minus idoneum ad pacem, leſs fit for Peace, he deſired to be admoniſhed p. 16by Petavius.] The reſult is no more then what all his controverſie with Rivet profeſſes, that he was one, that deſired the returne of all Catholike truth and peace into the Chriſtian world (and he muſt renounce his part in Chriſt's Legacie [peace I leave with you] that is not in this particular affected like him) And then what wonder he ſhould deſire to be admoniſhed by a ſober learned man of the Romiſh Communion, if he wrote any thing which was not ordinable to that end?

24. The ſame deſigne, and way of purſuing it, will be yet more viſible in the 200^th Epiſtle, where he hath theſe words to the ſame Petavius, Liceat mihi tuâ ope addere, demere, corrigere quae opus erit ad verum pacémque promovendam, Give me leave by your helpe to adde, to take away, to mend what is needfull toward truth and the advancing of peace, viz. ſuch an advancement of peace, as was perfectly conſiſtent with truth.

25. The 2^d and laſt ſuggeſtion in this matter is taken from what Grotius hath ſaid in ſundry writings concerning the Pope] to which I have already ſpoken ſomewhat in the anſwer to the animadverſions, as ſar as concerned that paſſage in his Diſcuſſio, which I diſcerned to be moſt accuſed of inclination to the Popes intereſt. As for the Papal power, whatſoever paſſage can be brought from him, muſt ſure be interpreted by analogie with thoſe rules, which he premiſeth in his Diſcuſſio, requiring that it may be confined and limited ſec. Canones, according to the antient Canonical rights allowed the Pope by the Councels, and ſo as the authority of Scripture, the rights of the Catholike Church, of Councels, of Patriarchs of the Eaſt, of Primates, and Metropolitanes, and other Biſhops be preſerved intire, as alſo all the juſt rights of all Chriſtian Princes in their own Dominions. See Diſcuſſ. Riv. Apol. p. 18, 19, 20. And againſt this, or on this head, here being no one place produced, to ſupport this indefinite charge, I cannot reply by Divination, and ſo have thus briefely diſcharged my preſent undertaking.

26. What is briefely toucht on with reflexion on my ſelf in the end of that Dedication, of the ſoftneſs and gentleneſs of the leaves of my Anſwer to his Animadverſions, of the illneſs of p. 17my cauſe, wherein I am ingaged againſt him, and the illneſs of my Principles in managing a good cauſe, in the Treatiſe of Schiſme and ſome others (which he hath not pleaſed to name) I am no way qualified to judge of, till his ſeverer ſheets inſtruct me, by diſcovering the infirmities of my cauſe, and till by his managery of a diſpute with a Romaniſt, he ſhall approve his Principles to be ſuch as will hold out againſt all gainſayers. At the preſent having no more to adde, I willingly take leave of him.

The End.

ERRATA.

End of the text · Henry Hammond, A Second Defense of the Learned Hugo Grotius (1655)