Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, Vol. 2Hallam, Henry
History
Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, Vol. 2
Hallam, Henry
Literature, Modern -- History and criticism
is not in good odour with any but the Arminian divines, nor do
they, we see, wholly agree with him.
[96] Ruarus nearly agreed with Grotius as to the atonement; at
least the latter thought so. De satisfactione ita mihi respondit,
ut nihil admodum controversiæ relinqueretur. Grot. Epist. 2da
series, p. 881. See also Ruari Epistolæ, p. 148, 282. He paid
also more respect to the second century than some of his
brethren, p. 100, 439, and even struggles to agree with the
Ante-Nicene fathers, though he cannot come up to them, p. 275,
296. But in answer to some of his correspondents who magnified
primitive authority, he well replies: Deinde quæro quis illos
fixit veritati terminos? quis duo illa prima sæcula ab omni
errore absolvit? Annon ecclesiastica historia satis testatur,
nonnullas opiniones portentosas jam tum inter eos qui nomen
Christi dederant, invaluisse? Quin ut verum fatear, res ipsa
docet nonnullos posterioris sevi acutius in enodandis Scripturis
versatos; et ut de nostra ætate dicam, valde me pœniteret Calvini
vestri ac Bezæ si nihilo solidius sacras literas
interpretarentur, quam video illos ipsos, quos tu mihi obducis,
fecisse, p. 183. He lamented the fatal swerving from
protestantism into which reverence for antiquity was leading his
friend Grotius: fortassis et antiquitatis veneratio, quæ gravibus
quibusdam Pontificiorum erroribus præluxit, ultra lineam eum
perduxit, p. 277 (1642); and in answer to Mersenne, who seems to
have had some hopes of his conversion, and recommended to him the
controversy of Grotius with Rivet, he plainly replies that the
former had extenuated some things in the church of Rome which
ought to be altered, p. 258. This he frequently laments in the
course of his letters, but treats him with gentleness in
comparison with some of the sterner Socinians. It is remarkable
that even he and Crellius seem to have excluded the members of
the church of Rome, except the “vulgus ineruditum et Cassandri
gregales,” from salvation; and this while almost all churches
were anathematizing themselves in the same way. Ruar. Epist., p.
9 and p. 167.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account