Christendom at the epoch of the Reformation, we may mention four which presented the most striking characteristics. First, the Papistical party, under whose banner were enlisted such different men as the ignorant Jetzel, the fanatical Eyck, and the almost evangelical Staupitz. Secondly, the Humanists, or the moderate party, numbering amongst its adherents such men as Erasmus, More, and the knightly Ulrich von Hutten. Thirdly, the Reformers, to whom such moderation appeared to be "time-serving," only worthy of cowards; and fourthly, the Libertines, or "Freethinkers," who (following the example of the Beghards, or fanatical "free spirits" of the 13th or 14th centuries,) were ready to propagate pantheistic heresies under the pretence of liberty, and raving of the "superhuman universe" revealed by the pseudoDionysius, were anxious to abolish all distinction between the creature and the Creator.

There can be no doubt that Romanists and Protestants vied with each other to repress the blasphemies of these "storm-birds of ill omen," who, in all periods of vehement spiritual or intellectual disturbance, "appear above the dark waves of human thought.' Mr. Mill, in his arguments against intolerance, has hastily asserted that those who first broke the "yoke of what called itself the Universal Church, were in general as little willing to permit difference of opinion as that Church itself." But in this severe stricture he has not taken into account the "respectus humanus,' and the cowardice which often "makes our frail human nature intolerant." The Reformers were in the "predicament of men who found themselves charged with heresy, and that damnable," and in their fear of being confounded with the deniers of their Lord, they were hurried into dangerous extremes. Knowing that the Romanists were on the watch to stigmatize them with heresy, they betrayed an almost morbid anxiety to prove themselves sound in point of doctrine.

It was probably this "excess of fear" (as the deep insight of Coleridge discerned) which led to the thanks offered to Calvin from all the Protestant churches, for his participation in the burning of Michael Servetus. It is remarkable that in the same century, the philosopher Bruno (who might also be ranked with the "Freethinkers," suffered martyrdom from a decree of the Church of Rome, for the same pantheistic tendency. At this advanced period of civilization, when those who dissent from the established creed are no longer stigmatized and oppressed by the promoters of rational liberty, we naturally shudder when we recal the cruel fate of these two unfortunate men, and remember that the genius of the one anticipated Harvey in his discovery of the circulation of the blood, whilst the other was one of the first promulgators of

the Copernican system. But it was long before the freedom of inquiry was permitted to exercise its full effect upon the condition of mankind.

Standing as we do upon the accumulated labours of past generations, let us be slow to conceive contempt for the mistakes of those who, with the heights of truth unscaled before them, were forced to cut their way step by step in the ice of error.

The testimony of history may convince us, that palpable and striking evils are apt to attend the sudden change of religious feeling in an entire people, even where the actual benefit resulting from that change may be permanent and undeniable. Bishop Latimer tells us, that London was "never so full of ill as in his times ;" whilst in the earliest stages of Christianity, the Apostle speaks of those who turned the grace of God into wantonness-" mockers, and murmurers against the truth."

With such lawlessness, (certain to result when the " grosser elements" of human nature are disturbed, and the barriers of custom suddenly removed,) the Reformers had to deal.

Among men actuated by the same spirit, and placed amidst the same difficulties, we may expect to find likenesses and differences— points of similarity and points of contrast.

Certain salient peculiarities of character, all the Reformers shared more or less in common. We may instance

1st. Their strong conviction of duty. 2ndly. Their intensity of purpose.

3rdly. Their truthfulness and plain speaking.

4thly. Their indifference to the world, and occasional melancholy.

1st. Their strong conviction of duty.

There is nothing more remarkable in the lives of these men than the fact, that each was animated by a constraining principle-by a power independent of his own will-which impelled him to take a prominent part in the struggle. The self-confident novices of modern times may learn a lesson of humility from the awful feeling of responsibility which caused these men to shrink from the public office of preaching. Often (like John Tauler in the Middle Ages) they would scarcely be able to speak in the agony of their souls. The rough and undisciplined Knox, when called to the office, manifested the deepest sorrow.* Yet they dared not be silent. Once illumined by the Gospel of Christ, they could not hide its

For an unprejudiced defence of Knox's character and conduct, see "The Men of the Scottish Reformation." Rev. J. S. Smith. Edinburgh: Macphail. The moderate admirers of the Reformer will be glad to see him justified, in this modest little work, from the vehement attacks of Miss Strickland.

light from others, but were forced to let it stream from every unshuttered window of their souls. In vain did Calvin try to draw back. "It was," he says, "as if God had seized me by His awful hand from heaven." In vain did Melancthon seek to hide himself among his books, and (animated by the gentleness of a Fénélon) endeavour to avoid offending men. Neutrality in such a case was impossible. Luther, terrified at the contests which were waging around him, and struggling with the old feelings of monkish obedience, recognized a higher power than his own which regulated events. "God," he writes, "hurries, drives, not to say leads, me. I am not master of myself, and am hurried into tumults." And good, moderate, well-meaning Latimer (the true personification of the conservatism and progressiveness of the English Reformation) fulminates from the pulpit the language of bold irony and biting sarcasm, which at another time he is ready to retract. In the singleness of his simple heart, he tried to reconcile "traditionary respect" with "Scriptural faithfulness." Yet circumstances have marked him out as the thunderer against flagrant abuses, and the boys in the street follow him with the cry-" Have at them, Master Latimer!"

2ndly. Their intensity of purpose.

It may be admitted that the vehement resolution which distinguished these men, was occasionally associated with much that the fastidiousness of modern society might stigmatize as narrow or prejudiced. Men who are animated by one intense and leading idea, are apt to connect everything else with it. They adopt a set of opinions which they have proved in their sequestered experience, and outward circumstances have no power to subdue "any angular influence" which they may have contracted. Having been led by their mental conflicts to that wilderness where the "whirlwinds of earthly cares are laid to rest, and the billows of worldly desire have ceased to swell," they forget to judge of others by their past irresolution, rather than by their present certainty. Thus it happens that impatient intolerance, and dogmatism of thought, are often among the inferior qualities which balance great emotions-such faults being occasionally the exaggeration of manly virtues. The intensity and earnestness of the Reformers, were the most suitable weapons with which the barrenness and indifference of their times could be assailed. Wherever they looked around them, they perceived little left of the old religion but the smooth varnish of outward uniformity. Bitter must it

have been to have viewed the marred and defiled beauty of the Catholic Church in the mirror of her devoted past; to have reflected how the dead stagnation and cold formalism of the once

saintly Sardis seemed to be bound up in human nature; and to have perceived how godliness had degenerated into the spurious profession of an hereditary creed! If the schemes of the Reformers had been strangled by difficulties in their birth-if, like half-workmen, they had been content to daub the building with untempered mortar-or, if the suggestion of counter-arguments had caused them to sink down to rest, instead of marching on their way-where would have been the Reformation with all its glorious results?

3rdly. Their truthfulness and plain-speaking.

There is no "betrayal of trust" like the withholding of truth from mankind. To be true men, (as Whately has remarked,) it is not enough to believe what we maintain, but we must maintain what we believe. Truth may seem to bring danger to its maintainers, but, when proved, all things must be braved for it. Not to undeceive is to deceive. We are bound never to countenance any erroneous opinion, however beneficial may seem to be its results. It was on the recognition of this cardinal principle that the conduct of the Reformers was based. The susceptibility for understanding truth, depends as much on the heart as on the head. The minds of men (previous to the Reformation) had long been prejudiced by the tendency to look to the expedient, whilst the necessity of renouncing private judgment had perverted the power of evidence. But Luther, with his clear conscience and unbiassed reason, soon perceived that the errors of superstition were based upon fundamental falsehoods which were pleasing to fallen humanity; that (for instance) the tendency to interpose saints and angels between men and the All-perfect, was caused by a natural shrinking of erring mortality from approaching the presence of Divinity; that the system of indulgences was engendered by a love of Materialism, and a determination to overlook the spiritual nature of Christianity.* In like manner, the subtle genius of Calvin (or what Woolmar called the "courbure" of his intellect) discerned quickly the hidden causes of these abuses, and stripped off their monstrous disguises; till Erasmus exclaimed at the commencement of his career, " Video magnam pestem oriri in Ecclesia contra Ecclesiam."

Nor was it wonderful that, in their abhorrence of falsehood and shams, these men should have spoken out in strong and indignant words. The language of Calvin was clear, cutting, and terse. Gifted with a remarkable memory, and a prodigious facility for labour, his earliest writings called forth the admiration of the

Dr. Tulloch.

learned, while his later ones were distinguished by an excess of logic. Everybody," he remarked naively of himself, "is aware that I know how to press an argument, and with what precision and brevity I write." Apparently the habit of abuse, which sometimes disfigured the polemics of Calvin, resulted not so much from intemperance or weakness, as from excessive confidence in his own opinions. In his controversial writings, the memory of the dead is no more revered than the fame of the living. He menaces all possible contradictions of the truth, and is indignant with hypothetical persons. "Now if a man," he says, "were to dispute whether Plato, Aristotle, or Cicero, ever existed, would you not think him worthy of being punished or chastised with rods ?" The occasional choler of Luther resulted from another cause. Impetuous natures seldom comprehend the full meaning of selfcontrol, and, by the earnestness of his character, he was sometimes hurried into the passionate language of indignant reproof. In vehement expostulation, not without its grandeur, he exclaims: "Hearest thou, O Pope-not all-holy, but all-sinful-who gave thee power to lift thyself above God? O Lord Christ! hasten Thy last day, and destroy the devil's nest at Rome!" But the sublime verges close to the ridiculous, when we hear the sage Erasmus called that "venomous serpent," or that "amphibolous being." Yet anger, in its truest and holiest form, is one of the Divine perfections. Not to be angry at sin, is to connive at it. Thus John Knox, who in his stern mission bore more than one resemblance to the uncompromising truth of the Baptist's character, would justify his own boldness, saying he had learned "to call wickedness by its own terms-a fig a fig, and a spade a spade."

We need not be ashamed to acknowledge, that the Reformers were strangers to that false refinement of modern society-that supple, "easy-turning" language of the world, which was denounced by the Apostle as much as "foolishness of speech." Nor need

we deny, that while laborious anger was the settled indignation of reason, Luther was liable by constitution to those more passionate agitations which Jeremy Taylor designates as "great but transient angers."

66

Scripture," as Dean Trench remarks, "has nothing in common with the stories of absolute condemnation of anger. It inculcates a moderation, not an absolute suppression of the passions: each were given to man that he should do a work with them. Nor can there be a surer and sadder token of an utterly prostrate moral condition than the not being able to be angry with sin."

* Eph. v. 4.