However much Grotius was employed in the business of his embassy, he
still found time for study, which was one of the greatest pleasures of
his life. He has even been accused of applying too much to literature
for an Ambassador[445]; but his letters testify that he did not go to
study till he had finished what his duty to the crown of Sweden required
of him, and spent in it the time only which other Ministers give to
their pleasures, to conversations often useless, and visits sometimes
unnecessary.
Eight days after making his entry into Paris in quality of Ambassador,
he wrote to Salmasius, March 9, 1635[446], informing him of the happy
change in his affairs. He acquaints him, that when he shall be a little
used to business, he hopes to have leisure enough to continue the
cultivation of learning. "How desirous soever I may be of serving the
public in this respect, he says, I know not where I ought to begin. My
Commentaries on the Evangelists would be apt to expose me to hatred in
the present age, when every one maintains his opinions with obstinacy.
The History of the Low-Countries, tho' written with great simplicity,
will find malevolent readers. Shall I return again to trifles, such as
are not unworthy men of learning, and turn into Latin the Epigrams
collected by Planudas? One thing hinders me: I know you have made
several corrections in the Manuscripts, and I am unwilling to translate
from a faulty copy. Yet I cannot expect that you should interrupt your
studies, to send me the corrections you have made."
"My greatest relief from the languors of the Court, he writes to
Schmalz[447], is the conversation of men of learning, to whom I
chearfully give all the time that I can spare from business."
FOOTNOTES:
[445] Du Maurier, p. 418. & 423. Wiquefort Ambas. l. 1. p. 95.
[446] Ep. 368. p. 134.
[447] Ep. 373. p. 136.
II. Neither his serious studies, nor his public occupations, ever made
him relinquish the Muses: Amidst his embarrassments and anxiety in the
beginning of his embassy, he put his tragedy of Joseph to the
press[448], which had all the success that could be hoped for; and wrote
several Latin Epigrams. June 26, 1637[449], he sent some to his brother
that were just finished; observing to him that he would possibly one day
add to them a Greek translation in verse of the Latin verses in
Suetonius; and a Latin translation of Euripides's Iphigenia in Tauris.
He wrote to Gronovius, February 17, 1638[450], that he unbended himself
at times, after his weightier business, in the company of the Muses.
"However much I am busied, he writes to Freinshemius[451], I still
preserve my affection for the Muses, and look upon them as the most
agreeable of all Amusements."
FOOTNOTES:
[448] Ep. 378. p. 138 & 339, p. 851.
[449] Ep. 402 p. 869.
[450] Ep. 915. p. 402.
[451] Ep. 909. p. 435.
III. He made _Tacitus_ his particular study, and, writes to Vossius,
July 6, 1635[452], to inform himself, whether a new edition of that
celebrated Historian, was any where printing, because he had a mind to
communicate his notes to the Editors[453]. "They are neither," says he,
"political dissertations, nor a commentary; but corrections which may be
useful. I call them, to speak modestly, conjectures[454], tho' I am
persuaded most of them will appear to be well grounded." However, as
they filled but a few sheets[455], he did not think proper to print
them, at Paris; but sent them, in 1640, to his brother, who
communicating them to the Elzevirs, they were published the same year in
their edition of _Tacitus_[456], and have been several times reprinted.
FOOTNOTES:
[452] Ep. 430. p. 159.
[453] Ep. 573. p. 225.
[454] Ep. 402. p. 869.
[455] Ep. 444. p. 897.
[456] Fabricius, Biblioth.
IV. The learned Gronovius, intending to publish an edition of _Statius_,
requested Grotius to send him his remarks on that Poet: this he complied
with, in a letter of the 28th of October, 1636[457], containing the
several corrections he had made in the margin of this author, whom he
had often read with pleasure and application. The edition of _Statius_
was published: and Gronovius, without receiving Grotius's letter[458],
had made most of the remarks that were sent to him: Grotius, however,
suspected[459] Gronovius had perhaps been persuaded to pretend that he
did not receive his letter, that he might be under no obligation of
commending a man, whose name was odious to those in power.
FOOTNOTES:
[457] Ep. 673. p. 274.
[458] Ep. 808. p. 357.
[459] Ep. 406. p. 871.
V. Grotius also wrote notes on _Lucan_, which he offered to any
bookseller who would make use of them. He wrote to his brother[460], to
enquire when any new edition of that Poet should be printed, that he
might contribute to make it better by communicating his remarks. They
are to be found in some of the editions printed in Holland, and are
very highly commended by Vossius[461], who says the learned world is
much obliged to their author.
A letter from Grotius to his brother[462] informs us, that the latter
part of the notes of _Lucan_ were by William Grotius.
FOOTNOTES:
[460] Ep. 859. p. 377. & 402. p. 869.
[461] Præs. Vir. Epist. p. 377.
[462] Ep. 128. p. 792.
VI. A work, which he had much at heart, was the collection of Greek
Epigrams, known by the name of _Anthologia_: he was long about it, and
thought to publish it soon after his return to Paris in quality of
Ambassador. As he knew that Salmasius had made this collection his
particular study, he requests him, June 11, 1635[463], to communicate to
him the corrections he had made in the Greek text, either by the
assistance of manuscripts, or from his own conjectures. He gives a long
account of his design to Gerard Vossius, in a letter of the 20th of
December, 1635. "When I was here a private man, says he, in order to be
useful to the lovers of learning, after translating Stobæus and the
Maxims of the Comic and Tragic Poets, I also translated the Collection
of Greek Epigrams by Planudas; adding several Epigrams which are not in
Henry Stephens's edition: on coming here Ambassador, I thought I should
do well to finish what I had begun; and knowing that the great Salmasius
had collated these Epigrams with ancient manuscripts, I prevailed on him
to communicate to me his remarks; and I had the satisfaction to find my
conjectures confirmed by the authority of manuscripts. The whole is now
ready to be printed in the same form as _Stobæus_ and the Extracts from
the Greek Tragedies and Comedies. When I think of a Bookseller, Blaeu
first occurs to me: he loves me and all my friends: but one thing vexes
me; if I give him my manuscript, I shall not know when it will be
published: besides, I doubt whether he has any one that can correct the
Greek proofs, and make the Indexes which are necessary for rendering the
book useful to youth. If I could be assured of this, I would readily
give him the preference. I shall afterwards think of publishing more
considerable works." New reflections on Blaeu's dilatoriness set him
against him, especially as he was not satisfied with his Greek
types[464]: he therefore wrote to his brother, to consult with Vossius
what he ought to do. "I would not, he adds, have recourse to the
Elzevirs, not so much on account of this book, as of some others which I
am preparing for the press, and which will not be to their taste." It is
unlucky for the republic of letters, that Grotius was obstinately bent
on printing his _Anthologia_ in Holland; Morelle would gladly have
printed it at Paris[465]; Cramoisi would not have refused it. Grotius
writes to his brother, June 26th, 1637, "I am deliberating, whether to
make use of Cramoisi, the eminent Bookseller; but I have some reason to
question the abilities of his corrector." He once thought to send it to
England[466]; but he was diverted from this by reflecting, that
Franciscus Junius, who resided in that country, printed his works out of
the kingdom. The answers he received concerning the printing of the
_Anthologia_ not satisfying him, he wrote to his brother, April 20,
1639[467], "If my _Anthologia_ cannot be printed, or not printed
correctly, I would have it sent back to me; Cramoisi, the richest
Bookseller in this country, will undertake it." He was kept in hopes of
its appearing in Holland; but the printing of it was put off from time
to time: he wrote to several of his friends about it; however no
progress was made. Isaac Vossius, son of the famous Gerard, who
inherited his father's sentiments for Grotius, making an offer of his
service for his literary commissions, Grotius thanked him most
affectionately, in a letter of the 12th of November, 1644[468], in which
he says a great deal about his _Anthologia_. "I cannot sufficiently
thank you for the kind offer of your good services in relation to the
printing of my works. No body can be of more use to me than you: for who
has more friendship for me, or better understands those matters? I would
have the _Anthologia_ printed directly; and have desired my brother to
shew you my Prolegomena, and inform you in what manner I would have the
Indexes made. I shall repeat it, for fear that I have not sufficiently
explained myself in what I wrote to my brother. I would first have an
Index of the Poets, expressing exactly from what places the Epigrams are
taken. There must also be another Index of the persons who are the
subject of the Epigrams, and of those to whom they are addressed: there
should be a third, which may be called Chorographical, containing the
mountains, rivers, towns, baths, bridges, and other public works
mentioned in the Epigrams. There must be an Historical one for the great
actions which have happened in war or peace. To the two last Indexes I
would have the names of the authors added, who have mentioned such of
those actions as are least known; as Strabo, Pausanias, Procopius, and
others. After these Indexes there must be another, comprehending the
natural history, morality, and other particulars omitted in the
preceding ones. This work may be useful; but I would not, however,
charge any one with it, who could employ his time better. If, without
losing too much time, you could do it yourself, it would give me the
highest satisfaction, not only on my own account, but on the reader's,
to whom these Indexes would render the edition much more useful: for it
is proper to observe, that these Epigrams contain what is most important
in history, from the time of Plato to that of Justinian, and even
later."
This was the subject of the Preface, or Prolegomena, that was to be
prefixed to the work, and which, with his usual modesty, he says will
not be wholly useless[469].
The _Anthologia_ appears to have been put to press in Jan. 1645, under
the inspection of Isaac Vossius: for, on the 21st of that month, Grotius
writes thus to him. "I have seen a proof of the _Anthologia_, and like
the type very well. I would absolutely have it printed in quarto, like
_Stobæus_, and the Extracts from the Tragic and Comic Poets: but if it
will make too large a volume, it may be divided into two, and the Greek
and Latin printed to face one another."
Grotius left France a little after the date of this letter; and his
death, which soon followed, was no doubt the greatest obstacle to the
publication of the _Anthologia_, the printing of which Blaeu
discontinued. Grotius's copy falling into Le Clerc's hands, he gave
hopes that he would publish it with considerable additions. He has a
great deal about it in his _Bibliotheque Choisie_[470]. "Those who shall
read Grotius's version, says he, will equally admire the happy genius,
and the uncommon patience of that excellent man, who translated the
whole book in the same number of verses as in the original, which he
very often equals, and sometimes even surpasses. There will be an
excellent Preface by Grotius, treating of the _Anthologia_ and his
version of it."
Unhappily M. le Clerc did not fulfil the engagement he entered into with
the public. Father Berthier, a famous Jesuit, who, to solid piety joins
extensive learning, has lately given us, in the _Memoirs de Trevoux_, a
very curious article relating to Grotius's _Anthologia_. It is entitled,
_An Account of a Manuscript version of the Greek Anthologia by Grotius_.
He tells us, that the original, in Grotius's own hand, is in the library
of the Jesuits College at Paris, where it was deposited in the year 1665
by Edmund le Mercier, Grotius's Secretary. This work, the learned Jesuit
observes, is valuable on three accounts. First, because the Latin verses
are excellent, and of the same measure with the Greek; so that if the
text be Elegiac verses, or pure Hexameters, or Iambics of six feet, or
Anacreontics, the version is always of the same species of poetry.
Secondly, he has every where confined himself to the number of verses in
the original, being never more laconic nor more prolix; which discovers
a very ready genius, and a singular patience. Thirdly, he corrects the
text from time to time by short notes placed in the margin.
Father Berthier gives afterwards Grotius's translation of several
Epigrams; which makes it earnestly to be wished, that the learned Jesuit
would publish the whole work: but the present prevailing taste for
trifles gives us ground to apprehend, that the booksellers of France
dare not undertake this work, which deserves so well to be transmitted
to posterity.
Besides the Epigrams that are to be found in all the editions, Grotius's
manuscript contains, first, those which were collected by Henry
Stephens, and are placed at the end of his edition of the _Anthologia_.
2dly, A very large number of inscriptions from Gruter. 3dly, A
collection made by Grotius himself from manuscripts.
A note at the beginning of this valuable manuscript informs us, that the
version of the seven books of the _Anthologia_ was begun by Grotius in
September, 1630, and finished before next September: which shews the
wonderful ease with which this great author wrote.
FOOTNOTES:
[463] Ep. 418. p. 153.
[464] Ep. 368. p. 859.
[465] Ep. 612. p. 244, 692. p. 285. & 402. p. 869.
[466] Ep. 964. p. 432.
[467] Ep. 505. p. 885.
[468] Ep. 1698. p. 733.
[469] Ep. 486. p. 896. & 369. p. 860.
[470] Fabric. Bibl. Gr. l. 3. c. 28. p. 707. tom. 2
VII. He was so sensible of his obligations to Sweden, that, as a public
testimony of his gratitude, he undertook to throw light on the History
of the Goths, in hopes of doing honour to the Swedes, who regarded them
as their ancestors. He wrote to Rome to[471] get what was wanting in
Heschelius's Greek edition of Procopius communicated to him, and
obtained it by the recommendation of Messieurs du Puis; as we learn from
a letter to the celebrated Nicholas Peyresc, dated April 8, 1636, in
which he adds, "I have translated the History of the Goths and Vandals
by Procopius, in honour of a nation who adopted me after being thrice
sold by my Country."
He communicated this project to Schmalz, July 24, 1636[472], "The time,
says he, which I am not obliged to spend in public business, I devote to
an enquiry into the antiquities of Sweden. Be so kind to send me, for
this work, a Swedish Dictionary, a New Testament in Swedish, and the
ancient inscriptions in that language, which are to be met with on
tombs, or in other places. I have seen a Latin translation of the
Swedish laws, which I should be glad to see again if possible. If you
can procure me all these, I shall think myself highly obliged by you;
and I hope you will not find me ungrateful."
He explains his project more at large in a long letter to Oxenstiern,
Aug. 28, 1636[473]. "Your Sublimity, he writes to him, shews me so much
favour, and you interest yourself so much in what concerns me, that I
think it my duty to give you an account, not only of my negotiations,
but of my leisure hours. As I intend to devote the time that is not
employed in the affairs with which I am charged, to the honour of a
kingdom which has loaded me with honours, I had begun to read all that
has been written on the great Gustavus in Latin, Italian, German, and
French: but soon perceiving that these writers did not know the
intentions of the ministry, were unacquainted with the places of which
they speak, and were ignorant of the art of war, I concluded that it was
impossible, with such materials, to complete a work that might deserve
the approbation of posterity. This has made me turn again to
antiquities. Of all the Ancients Procopius has best handled the History
of the Goths and Vandals: he was an able man, was Secretary to
Belisarius, had been on the spot, and speaks not only of what happened
in his own time, but also of the facts which happened before his time.
The Latin version is very faulty, imperfect, and inelegant: I have made
a new translation from the Greek Edition of Heschelius; with the
assistance of two manuscripts in the King's library, which enabled me to
make several corrections in the text; others I made by conjecture. I
intend to extract all that has relation to this subject from the Secret
History of Procopius, printed by Alemannus at Rome, and from Agathias.
Being informed, that the manuscript of the History of the Goths and
Vandals, in the Vatican library, was more complete than what Heschelius
followed, I have asked my friends at Rome to fill up the gaps in the
printed copies: which I hope they will do. That nothing may be omitted,
which has a relation to the antiquities of Scandinavia, I intend to add
what is contained in Strabo, Pliny, Tacitus, Ptolemæus, and those who
have written since, as Helmoldus, Eginhart, Adam of Bremen, and others.
I shall farther add the Gothics of Jornandes, the Epistle of Sidonius
Apollinaris on the manners of Theodoric King of the Wisigoths; the
Panegyric of Ennodius of Pavia in honour of Theodoric King of the
Ostrogoths and Italy; the Laws of the Ostrogoths, Westrogoths, and
Lombards, with the Book of Paulus Diaconus, who was himself a Lombard,
and makes his nation come from Scandinavia. We shall add, at the end,
the appellative names contained in the laws, with their original and
explication. I would beg of your Sublimity, that being now returned to
Sweden, you will give orders for communicating to me the old
inscriptions, the ancient laws, and, in fine, whatever is not printed
and may contribute to throw light on the antiquities of Sweden; that the
work which I am about may be the more perfect. I earnestly intreat your
Sublimity to be assured, that I will do all that depends on me, not only
to procure the advantage of Sweden, but also to contribute to her
glory."
Schmalz going to Rome about this time with Reigersberg, son to Grotius's
wife's brother[474], Grotius took that opportunity of renewing his
acquaintance with Holstenius, his ancient friend, who resided at Rome;
and to ask of him what was wanting in the printed editions of Procopius.
On receiving these valuable additions[475], he communicates the good
news to the High Chancellor, whom he entertains with a further account
of his work, in a letter dated June 25th, 1637[476]. "Your Sublimity, he
says, will pardon me, if, having little public business on my hands, I
give you an account how I employ my time. I send you a pretty long
Preface, in which I inscribe the new translation of Procopius, which
differs greatly from the old one, to your Sublimity, who have deserved
so well of Sweden, and to whom I am under so great obligations. The work
itself will include the authors who have written of the antiquities of
the Goths, Vandals, Wisigoths, and Lombards. Two reasons induced me to
make the Preface so long: the first, that I was obliged to answer
Cluverius, who, either from envy, or hired by the Danes, first sought to
darken our glory; but I have confuted him by such clear evidence, that I
think no person of sense will now attempt to repeat the same falsities.
The other was, that, the testimonies in favour of a nation being liable
to suspicion when built only on the assertions of the natives, I have
collected the authorities of foreigners, who have spoken honourably of
the Swedes and of the nations sprung from them."
Thus in appears that his design was to dedicate this work to the High
Chancellor[477], who heard with infinite pleasure of this new occupation
of Grotius. He liked the Preface much; spoke of it with the highest
esteem[478], and wrote to Grotius[479], thanking him in his own name and
in the name of the whole nation, and pressing him to publish the work.
However he was in no hurry[480], because he wanted to exhaust the
subject, and to make all proper enquiries for enabling him to treat it
thoroughly. He imagined he should find in Gallia Narbonensis, and the
neighbouring places, several things that might contribute to embellish
his work; and that the French, from envy to the Swedes, hindered his
friends from communicating them.
This work was finished before Grotius died; but it was not printed till
after his death: and whether it was that the intended Dedication to the
High Chancellor was never written, or was suppressed, it is not now to
be found. The title of the work is: _Historia Gothorum, Vandalorum, &
Longobardorum, ab Hugone Grotio partim versa, partim in ordinem digesta:
præmissa sunt ejusdem Prolegomena; ubi Regum Gothorum ordo e
Chronologia, cum elogiis; accedunt nomina appellativa & verba Gothica,
Vandalica, Longobardica, cum explicatione. Auctorum omnium ordinem
tabula centenorum indicat. Amstelodami, apud Ludovicum Elzevirium,
1655._
At the head of this work is a very learned Preface, in which the author
acquaints us, that he revised the Gothics and Vandalics of Procopius by
the Greek manuscripts; that he new-translated them because there were
many things omitted in the old translations, which were otherwise badly
done; and that, by the assistance of the Vatican manuscripts, he filled
up large gaps. There follows a geographical description of the ancient
country of the Goths, a character of the people, much in their favour; a
catalogue of their Kings; a chronological table of the time when they
lived; a list of the Lombard Kings, and another of the Kings of the
Vandals; the testimonies of the Ancients in favour of the people of
Sweden and the nations which derive their origin from the Swedes.
After the translation of all that Procopius has concerning the Goths and
Vandals there follows an Index, with this title: _Nomina appellativa &
verba Gothica, Vandalica, & Longobardica, quæ in hoc volumine
reperiuntur._ It appears from the author's researches, that almost all
the appellative names of the Lombards had, like those of the Greeks,
some signification. This collection concludes with the following pieces:
Jornandes _De Getarum sive Gothorum origine & rebus gestis_; the
_Chronicle_ of St. Isidorus, and Paulus Wanefridus _De Gestis
Longobardorum_. The Prolegomena acquaint us, that Grotius intended to
expound the ancient laws of the Goths and Vandals: but unhappily death
prevented his executing this design, for which no one was better
qualified.
FOOTNOTES:
[471] Ep. 572. p. 225.
[472] Ep. 622. p. 250.
[473] Ep. 641. p. 259.
[474] Ep, 645. p. 263.
[475] Ep. 676. p. 275.
[476] Ep. 780. p. 331.
[477] Ep. 825. p. 360.
[478] Ep. 408, p. 871.
[479] Ep. 410, p. 872.
[480] Ep. 1667, p. 727.
VIII. The nomination of Grotius, when very young, to be Historiographer
of the States, led him to enquire particularly into the troubles of the
Low Countries and their consequences with regard to the Seven Provinces.
He was employed about this in the year 1614, as appears by a letter,
written on the 8th of February, to the President de Thou. He informs
him[481], that love to his Country had engaged him in a work very like
his, but as much inferior as Holland is to France. "I own, indeed, the
work is above my abilities, but I shall not publish it till years and
judgment enable me to mend it." Communicating this work to Heinsius,
with whom he was then very intimate, that learned youth wanted words to
express his admiration. Balzac informs us of these particulars in a
letter to Chapelin, dated Sept. 20, 1640, in which he mentions a letter
from Heinsius concerning this History when Grotius was very young.
An author, more fond of his works than Grotius, would have made haste to
publish this, which appears to have been finished in 1636; for that year
he wrote to Martinus Opitius[482], "My Belgic annals are transcribing."
He writes to his brother the year following[483], "My Annals and my
History of the Low Countries are transcribed: but I think I must still
keep them a while." He consulted several of his friends on this subject,
and among others Gerard Vossius.
The sudden deaths of many of his acquaintance leading him to reflect on
the uncertainty of life, he wrote to his brother, May 21, 1639[484], "I
would have my works printed before my death, that I may be useful to
those that shall come after me; and would therefore have my Annals
correctly printed as soon as possible; but I would not have them printed
by those, who, from a party spirit, would tell what was in them before
they were published, and thereby prevent perhaps their ever appearing. I
therefore beg of you to find out some honest man to whom I may intrust
my copy."
In the mean time he was still revising them; and near two years after he
wrote to his brother, March 23, 1641[485], "Till I put the last hand to
my History, I would not have any one see it: you must therefore find a
handsome excuse to those who ask you for it. Read it, however, yourself,
and send me your remarks." Grotius had not the satisfaction to see his
History printed: it was not published till twelve years after his death,
by his two sons Cornelius and Peter, who dedicated it, in 1657, to the
States of Holland and West-Friesland.
This work is divided into two parts, Annals and History, in imitation of
Tacitus. The Annals begin with the year 1566, and contain five books:
there are eighteen of the History, which begins with the year 1588, that
is, when Prince Maurice had the greatest influence in the affairs of the
United Provinces, and concludes with the year 1609, when the twelve
years truce was made. Had his love to truth and honesty been less, he
had a fine opportunity of revenging himself on Prince Maurice. But he
every where does him justice[486], and even speaks of him as if he had
been always satisfied with his conduct to him.
M. Baillet thinks very advantageously and at the same time very justly
of this work. "That great man (says he, speaking of Grotius[487]) has
discovered in this work all the capacity, accuracy, judgment, solidity,
industry, perspicuity, honesty, and integrity, of a true historian. His
impartiality would almost make him pass for a foreigner, who had no
interest in what he relates: he appears a Dutchman, only by his thorough
knowledge of the causes, motives, ends, and other circumstances of the
subject he has undertaken to handle."
The only thing for which he can be censured, is the stiffness of the
style, by affecting to make it resemble that of Tacitus, which renders
it obscure and unnatural. We are assured, that the eminent
Advocate-general, Jerom Bignon, took notice of this fault to Grotius,
with whom he was very intimate; and that learned man, yielding to his
friend's advice, promised to do his work over again, and had even begun
it, but could not finish it; and his sons published it as it was at
first.
Peter Grotius tells us this History was his father's favourite work.
Grotius intended to dedicate it to the Queen of Sweden. Dec. 5, 1637, he
writes to the High Chancellor[488], "I have written a great part of the
History of the Low Countries: what I have done till the truce in 1609 is
ready to appear with some advantage. I purpose to dedicate it to our
Queen, unless your Sublimity determine otherwise. Of all the histories
of our time, it appears to me the most useful. It presents us with the
speedy rise of a republic, whose forces in its weak beginning were
scarce able to defend its small frontier; and which afterwards carried
its arms to the extremity of the globe: we no where find the art of
besieging or defending towns brought to such a height; in fine, we see
her Mistress of the Sea after her marine had been long neglected."
It should not be forgot, that the celebrated[489] Peyresc was of great
use to Grotius in compiling this work: he communicated to him several
important papers, and procured him the memoirs collected by Antonius
Querengius, who purposed to write the History of the famous Alexander
Farnese, Duke of Parma. Grotius's History was translated into French by
M. L'Heritier, father of Mademoiselle L'Heritier, famous for her
writings: but it deserves a new translator to turn it into better
French.
FOOTNOTES:
[481] Ep. 24. p. 8.
[482] Ep. 595. p. 236.
[483] Ep. 402. p. 869.
[484] Ep. 454. p. 883.
[485] Ep. 539. p. 916.
[486] Parhasiana, t. 1. p. 161.
[487] Preface de l'Hist. de Hollande.
[488] Ep. 873. p. 384.
[489] Vie par Gassendi, l. 3. p. 182.
IX. It was during his embassy that Grotius revised and enlarged his book
Of the Truth of the Christian religion. He had written a treatise on
this subject in Dutch whilst a prisoner; and turning it afterwards into
Latin, it had prodigious success. In the year 1637 it had been
translated into all languages[490], French, German, English, and even
Greek. The universal approbation this book met with, did not hinder
Grotius's enemies from doing all they could to depreciate it. They said
it contained the venom of Socinianism. Voetius, among others,
distinguished himself by his rage against it. "It is surprising, says
Grotius in a letter to his brother, October 22, 1637, that Voetius
should think he sees what the Doctors of the Sorbonne, who examined the
book, before it was printed, could not find in it. Doth Cardinal
Barbarinus, who recommended this work[491], and constantly carries it
with him, favour Socinianism? The Bishops of England have caused it to
be translated into their language; the Ministers of Charenton have
approved of it; a Lutheran has translated it; will he say these are all
favourers of Socinianism?"
After this letter was written, Grotius learnt[492] that his book had
been translated into Swedish. He justifies himself again in a long
letter written to Reigersberg December 19, 1637[493], "I have often
doubted which was best, to answer the censures of fools and knaves, or
resting in a good conscience to despise them. I have constantly done the
last; but your example makes me at present prefer the first: you have
defended me with so much friendship and steadiness, that if I should sit
still, I might justly be accused of indolence. My book of the Christian
Religion is read with applause by pious and learned men, not only in the
languages in which I composed it, but also in Swedish, French, German,
and English. Those who think it their interest that I should not pass
for a good Christian, seek every pretext to hurt me: they censure me for
making use of Castellio's version; but it is very certain that I had not
seen it when I wrote my book. I translated myself from the Hebrew and
Greek all the passages of Scripture I employed. They say I have
interpreted something in the fifth Chapter of St. Mathew in the same
manner as Socinus. These simple people know not that my explanation is
the same with what almost all the Greeks and Latins of greatest
abilities and piety have adopted. How many things are there in the same
Chapter of St. Matthew, which I have explained quite different from
Socinus?"
The great argument of those who wanted to hinder the success of his[494]
book was, that the author sufficiently shewed his inclination to
Socinianism by his silence concerning the Trinity. He opens his mind
about this matter to his brother, September 25, 1638, "The book of the
truth of the Christian Religion will live and flourish in spite of the
envy of my enemies. It was not proper for me to speak directly of the
Trinity; and such as have heretofore brought their arguments to prove it
from natural reason or the authority of Plato, have done more hurt than
service to Christianity." The men who since Grotius's time have acquired
the greatest reputation in France by writing for the truth of the
Christian Religion, such as Abbadie and Houteville, have followed his
example, and avoided the discussion of questions which suppose the
Divinity of the Scriptures.
Grotius had the satisfaction to find the Roman Catholics very well
pleased with this treatise: he writes to his brother[495], December 4,
1638, "My book of the Truth of the Christian Religion, which the
Voetians look upon as Socinian, is so far from being Socinian here, that
Roman-Catholic Monks are translating it into Persian, in order to make
use of it in converting the Mahometans. I have not attempted a direct
proof of the Trinity (he writes to Gerard Vossius[496]) for I always
remembered what I heard Junius your father-in-law say, who was a great
man, that Du Plessis, and those who, like him, in their disputes with
Atheists, Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans, endeavoured to establish the
Trinity by arguments drawn from the light of nature, and by passages
from Plato often misapplied, acted very imprudently, because they ought
first to have convinced them of the truth of the Scriptures, which alone
contain the doctrines which God has been pleased to reveal."
A new edition of the book on the truth of the Christian Religion, with
considerable additions, was published in 1639, which Grotius dedicated
to his illustrious friend Jerom Bignon; and this great Magistrate, in
returning him his thanks[497], gives the most favourable testimony to
the work. He says,[498] that tho' the subject had already been well
handled by several learned men, none of them had acquitted himself so
well, nor discovered so great knowledge of the learned languages, and so
much erudition, as Grotius. He admires the order and conciseness of the
work, and congratulates himself on living in Grotius's time, and sharing
in the friendship of so great a man. Some time after the publication of
this work, an Englishman[499] who had lived long in Turky, came to see
Grotius, and acquaint him that he had translated it into the Turkish
language, thinking no book more proper for instructing Christians who
live in Turky, and converting the Mahometans. He promised to use his
endeavours to get it printed in the Turkish language in England.
Besides the translations already mentioned, and which came to Grotius's
knowledge, there were others in Greek, in Chinese, in Flemish, in
Danish, in the language of Malacca, and five French translations. An
Arabic translation of it by the learned Pococke was printed at London
in 1660. We are assured[500] that there have been three translations of
it into Arabic, which gave occasion to Spon and Vehler to say that
Grotius copied an Arabic treatise, taking the very version of his book
for an ancient work: in fine, it had such a great run, that the history
of it makes the subject of a treatise[501].
This work of Grotius has been equally esteemed by dispassionate
Protestants and Roman Catholics. "Few pieces, says[502] Colomiers, have
succeeded better than the treatise _On the Truth of the Christian
Religion_. It is an excellent book, and ought to be the _Vade mecum_ of
every Christian. I have read it several times, and always with new
pleasure."
"Grotius's book, says the Abbé Houteville[503], is the first in which we
find these great characteristics, just reasoning, accuracy, and
strength; he is extremely concise, but even this brevity will please us
when we find it comprehends so many things without confounding them, or
lessening their evidence or force: it is no wonder the book should be
translated into so many languages."
FOOTNOTES:
[490] Ep. 411. p. 872.
[491] Ep. 181. p. 808. Ep. Coleri 37.
[492] Ep. 412. p. 873.
[493] Ep. 880. p. 387.
[494] Ep. 439. p. 880.
[495] Ep. 444. p. 881.
[496] Ep. 1096.
[497] Ep. 1232. p. 557.
[498] Ep. præs. vir. 451. p. 728.
[499] Ep. 534. p. 914.
[500] Fabric. Delect. Argum. c. 30. p. 551.
[501] Joannis Christophori Lockeri Dissertatio Epistolica, Historiam
libelli Grotiani _De Veritate Religionis Christianæ_ complectens, 1725,
in quarto; see also the Journal des Scavans de Pan. 1724.
[502] Colomiers, p. 586.
[503] Preface.
X. In the midst of his greatest occupations and most serious studies,
Grotius still found time to study Civil Law. Blaeu printed, in 1643, his
_Remarks on Justinian's Laws_. They are chiefly philological notes,
drawn from the Poets and Philosophers[504], serving to illustrate some
passages of the _Corpus Juris_[505]. "This book, the author modestly
tells us, is not of much use to those who frequent the bar: but it is
entertaining: and though I set no great value on it, I think it is
better to publish it, than suffer it to be lost. It will possibly give
pleasure to men of learning[506], and some such in this place are not
dissatisfied with it, because they love to see Grammar and History
united with Law[507]."
What we cannot sufficiently admire in a man of so great learning, and so
much business as Grotius, is, that he should make the Holy Scriptures
his favourite study in every period of his life. They were his
consolation in prison; he always devoted a part of the day to them: and
they were his principal study during a great part of his embassy. His
_Commentary on the Evangelists_ was finished in 1637; but before he
printed it[508], he wanted to see the _Aristarchus Sacer_ which Heinsius
was going to put to press. This was a Commentary on the New Testament,
which Grotius imagined to be much in the manner of his, and which piqued
his curiosity the more as Heinsius was Grotius's rival in literature,
and his secret enemy. Heinsius's credit with the Elzevirs, who were his
booksellers[509], was one of the reasons which hindered Grotius from
employing them. "We must not think of the Elzevirs, he writes in
confidence to Vossius[510], on account of that man who has so much
credit with them, and bears us ill-will. I should be glad to know
whereabouts are his notes on the sacred books, and when they will be
published, for I postpone till then the revisal of mine." There was at
that time in Holland a Jew very famous for his learning, Manassah
Ben-Israel. Grotius consulted him sometimes, and always with profit. In
a letter to him without date he tells him, "The answer you have given to
my difficulties about some places of the law of Moses and the historical
books of Scripture, has yielded me great pleasure; and I do not think
any one would have given an answer more solid. I have read many
Interpreters; but I see that you know them better than I, and that you
have read many more, and are master of them. I return you therefore my
sincere thanks; and encouraged by this favour shall take the liberty to
apply to you when I have any difficulty, being ever ready to return you
the like, when it lies in my power. Your books, which I have mentioned
to several persons here, are read with pleasure and profit: I would
therefore beg and conjure you to employ the leisure you may have in
explaining the obscurities of the Law, which will be a signal service to
all men of learning."
This was not a compliment void of truth, but his real sentiment of this
learned Jew: he speaks in the same manner in a private letter to Gerard
Vossius[511]. "I have written again, he says, to Manassah, and beg of
you to deliver to him my letter. I esteem very highly not only his
erudition, but also his judgment. He treads successfully in the steps of
Abenezra, Maimonides, and Abrabanel. I have made his works known here,
and they are much read and valued."
Grotius foresaw that his Commentary on the New Testament would occasion
him some disputes. "I am at a loss, says he, to Vossius, what to do with
my Notes on the New Testament. I shall easily find a bookseller here;
but I am afraid of meeting with some difficulties from the Divines, who
will have nothing of this kind published without their approbation: and
for my own part, I cannot submit in every thing to either of the two
parties, nor can I be silent when I have something that may be of use to
deliver. I shall see how to remedy this inconveniency. I have no hopes,
says he to his brother[512], that the Divines of the Sorbonne will give
their approbation to my Notes, especially since they censured
Milletiere. It remains to be considered whether I shall print them in my
own house without approbation, of which there have been examples."
Heinsius's work, which was expected with so much impatience, had no
success[513]. Salmasius (his declared enemy indeed) said publicly, he
was ready to shew, that, abstracting what he had borrowed, there would
not remain one remark of importance: and it was held in no higher esteem
by others of the first rank in learning[514]. Cardinal Richelieu, being
informed that Grotius leaned more to the sentiments of the Roman
Catholics, than to those of the Ministers of Charenton, gave orders[515]
that his work should be printed without being obliged to pass the
censors. He kept measures however with Heinsius; and desired his brother
William Grotius to tell him[516], that he had always said there were
several things in his Notes which pleased him much; and that he had made
the same remarks in some places that Heinsius had done, by mere chance.
As Grotius had a very great esteem for the learned Father Petau, he
communicated to him his works. On sending him his Notes on the Old
Testament, he desired him to hint what alterations he thought necessary.
When his Commentary on the Evangelists was printed at Amsterdam[517], he
sent a copy to Father Petau, desiring him to read it, if he had time,
and acquaint him what ought to be omitted, added, or changed, that the
second edition might appear with more advantage. "The booksellers of
Amsterdam offer to print what I have written on the Old Testament: but I
chose rather to have it printed here, that I may see the last proofs. I
shall expect your remarks, or those of the persons to whom you have
communicated what I have written on the first part of the Old Testament.
I would have come for them myself had I not been confined by sore eyes.
I have a high sense of your goodness, he writes again to Petau[518], in
taking the trouble to revise my Annotations on the Old Testament, in
giving them to those who have time to examine them more strictly, and in
contributing by your recommendation to the success of the work. As I
have now an opportunity of putting them to press, I must beg of you to
return them as soon as may be with your remarks. When the rest is
transcribed, relying on your goodness I shall take the liberty to
interrupt your occupations, however important and useful, by sending
it."
The Dutch Booksellers[519] had prefixed to Grotius's Commentary on the
New Testament his head, with a high elogium annexed to it; which vexed
him much. He wrote very seriously to his brother that it was the more
improper, as this effect of vanity was prefixed to a book designed to
inspire humility; that he had tore out the picture in his own copies,
and desired that he would endeavour to get the same done to all the
rest, because it concerned his reputation; and he chose rather to
suppress his Preface, than publish it with this picture. A short
advertisement before his Notes on the New Testament acquaints us that he
began them when a prisoner, that he finished them when a private man,
and printed them when Ambassador. Though this work was far advanced
before he was employed by the Court of Sweden, it is evident from his
letters that he made many additions and amendments to it during his
embassy.
He met with new difficulties after Cardinal Richelieu's death from the
Chancellor Seguier, who never loved him. "The Chancellor of France, he
writes to his brother, August 27, 1644[520], will not grant a privilege
for printing my Commentary on the Old Testament, though very able
Doctors have assured him that it contains nothing contrary to the
doctrine of the Roman Catholics; but he refuses to give any even for
good books, if the authors are not of his communion."
Cramoisi however printed it, but he was afraid of being a loser by the
great expence of a handsome edition in folio if he did not obtain a
privilege, because the Dutch, who could print it much cheaper, would
bring it into France, and undersell him.
The refusal of a privilege[521] did not hinder another Paris bookseller
from undertaking an edition of the Notes on the New Testament, which
Grotius calls his favourite work[522].
M. Simon, whose opinion is not always agreeable to the strictest
justice, judges very favourably, however, of Grotius: "His Notes, says
he, are esteemed by every body; and stand in no need of a particular
recommendation from us. We shall only observe that he abounds too much
in quotations from the Poets, and many profane authors; in which he
seems rather to affect appearing a man of learning and erudition, than a
man of judgment and a critic. Had he avoided this fault, his Notes would
have been much shorter, and not less excellent. They are chiefly
valuable for his frequent collation of the ancient Greek translation of
the bible with the Hebrew text, and his freedom from prejudice in favour
of the Masoretic version: though he generally chuses the best
explanation of the text, he sometimes multiplies the various readings
without necessity. After all (adds the author of the Critical history)
though I blame Grotius for quoting too frequently the profane authors,
these quotations contain some very good things, serving to explain the
difficulties in Scripture. I could only have wished, that, agreeable to
the rules of criticism, he had not adduced the testimonies of profane
authors, and especially the Poets, except in places that required those
elucidations."
M. Le Clerc, after examining this judgment, speaks thus of Grotius[523]:
"If you desire to know what is chiefly valuable in Grotius's Notes on
the Old Testament, and not to be found elsewhere, it is first his
explanation of an infinite number of passages of Scripture by the
assistance of Pagan antiquity. Secondly, an admirable knowledge of the
different manners of speaking used in Scripture, which he so happily
compares with one another, that no interpreter ancient or modern has
thrown so much light on them; and in fine, an extraordinary penetration
in discovering the true sense of the prophecies."
M. Fabricius[524] tells us, that one thing which highly recommends
Grotius's Commentary on the New Testament is the design, which he
happily executed, of proving the truth of the Christian Religion by the
Scripture itself.
Before we conclude this article we must take notice that it has been
pretended by some learned men, who otherwise do him justice, that
Grotius is frequently mistaken in his quotations from the Rabbis,
because he took them at second-hand. Esdras Edzardi, well skilled in
these matters, made a small collection of his mistakes, which he shewed
to Morhof[525].
FOOTNOTES:
[504] Ep. 1520. p. 689.
[505] Ep. 639. p. 948.
[506] Ep. 640. p. 949.
[507] Ep. 648. p. 952.
[508] Ep. 859. p. 377. & 964. p. 432.
[509] Ep. 1056. p. 476.
[510] Ep. 1056. p. 476.
[511] Ep. 1256. p. 570. & 1315. p. 596.
[512] Ep. 503. p. 884.
[513] Ep. 507. p. 884.
[514] Ep. 465. p. 886.
[515] Ep. 476. p. 890.
[516] Ep. 481. p. 891.
[517] Ep. 1531. p. 693.
[518] Ep. 1534. p. 694.
[519] Ep. 570. p. 928.
[520] Ep. 720. p. 970.
[521] Ep. 740. p. 976.
[522] Ep. 1253. p. 553.
[523] Sentimens des Theolog. p. 388.
[524] Delect. Argum. c. 2. p. 40.
[525] Polihistor. t. 3. l. 5. p. 54. Vind. Grot. 463.
XII. This deep study of the Holy Scriptures led Grotius to examine a
question which made much noise at that time. Some Protestant Synods had
ventured to decide that the Pope was Antichrist; and this extravagance,
gravely delivered by the Ministers, was regarded by the zealous
Schismatics as a fundamental truth. Grotius undertook to overturn such
an absurd opinion, that stirred up an irreconcileable enmity between the
Roman Catholics and the Protestants, and of consequence was a very great
obstacle to their reunion, which was the sole object of his desires. He
entered therefore upon the consideration of the passages of Scripture
relating to Antichrist, and employed his Sundays in it[526].
It was this work that raised him up most enemies. We see by the letters
he wrote to his brother that his best friends were afraid lest they
should be suspected of having some hand in the publication of the books
in which he treated of Antichrist. "If you are afraid of incurring
ill-will, he writes to his brother[527], you may easily find people that
are far from a factious spirit who will take care of the impression.
Nothing has incensed Princes against those who separated from the Church
of Rome more than the injurious names with which the Protestants load
their adversaries; and nothing is a greater hindrance to that reunion
which we are all obliged to labour after in consequence of Christ's
precept and the profession we make of our faith in the Creed. Perhaps
the Turk, who threatens Italy, will force us to it. In order to arrive
at it we must first remove whatever obstructs a mutual quiet hearing. I
hope I shall find assistance in this pious design. I shall not cease to
labour in it, and shall rejoice to die employed in so good a work."
Reigersberg, Blaeu, Vossius himself, however much devoted to Grotius,
beheld with concern[528] the printing of this book, because they did not
doubt but it would increase the number of his enemies. Grotius informs
his brother of the uneasiness which Vossius gave him on this
subject[529]: "Among those who wish this work destroyed, says he, I am
astonished and grieved to see Vossius. Whence could he have this idea?
I imagine somebody has told him, that it would injure the fortune of his
children if he approved of such books; and that, on the contrary, he
would find favour by hurting me. We must, therefore, have recourse to
Corcellius or Corvinus." He elsewhere complains of the too great
timidity of this old friend[530], who at bottom approved of Grotius's
sentiments, but durst not own them publicly because he was not so
independent as Grotius.
The treatise on Antichrist made much noise among all the declared
enemies of the Romish Church[531]. Michael Gettichius wrote to Ruarus,
that he had only glanced over Grotius's book on Antichrist; but as far
as he could judge by the first reading, that learned man, who was
possessed of such an excellent genius, and such singular erudition, had
no other intention than to engage the Learned in a further enquiry
concerning Antichrist; and to determine them to attack with greater
strength the Romish Antichrist; or, if he wrote seriously, he wanted to
cut out a path for going over, without dishonour, to the Papists. Ruarus
answers this letter, Dec. 16, 1642, from Dantzic. "I have always, he
says, looked on Grotius as a very honest, and at the same time a very
learned man. I am persuaded that love of peace engaged him in this work.
I don't deny but he has gone too far; the love of antiquity perhaps
seduced him: no Remonstrant, that I know of, has as yet answered him;
but he has been confuted by some learned Calvinists, particularly
Desmarets, Minister of Boisleduc, who has written against him with much
bitterness."
Grotius's work was printed in 1640, with this title: _Commentatio ad
loca quædam Novi Testamenti, quæ de Antichristo agunt aut agere
putantur, expendenda, eruditis._
It contains an explanation of the second chapter of the second epistle
of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, in which he undertakes to prove, that
the Man of Sin, there mentioned, is the Emperor Caius Caligula, who
wanted to place his statue in the temple of Jerusalem, as may be seen in
Philo; and was desirous to be thought a God, as Philo and Josephus
relate. He afterwards explains the eighteenth verse of the second
chapter of the first epistle of St. John. _You know that Antichrist is
come, and that there are many Antichrists._ He thinks the Antichrist
already come was Barchochebas, and that the other Antichrists are Simon
the Magician and Dosithæus.
The beast, in the thirteenth chapter of the Revelation, is, according to
him, Rome pagan; the power, which is given to it for forty-two months,
signifies Domitian's persecution, which lasted three years and a half.
The beast that ascended out of the bottomless pit, mentioned chap. xi.
ver. 7. is magic, and Apollonius Thyanæus: in fine, he finds the famous
number 666, mentioned in the last verse of the thirteenth chapter of the
Apocalypse, in Trajan's name, who was called Ulpius, of which the
numeral letters form the number 666.
The Reformed were strangely scandalized at this work. Samuel Desmarets
answered it with great bitterness, which drew another piece from Grotius
in defence of the former, with this title: _Appendix ad interpretationem
locorum Novi Testamenti, quæ de Antichristo agunt, aut agere putantur,
in qua via sternitur ad Christianorum concordiam_. Desmarets is never
mentioned in it but under the name of Borboritus. It has been observed,
that Grotius was guilty of a slight inaccuracy in this treatise: he says
the Emperor Barbarossa's enemies ascribed to him the pretended book _De
tribus Impostoribus_: he confounds the grandson with the grandfather,
for it was Frederic II. against whom this calumny was advanced, as
appears from the letters of Peter Desvignes, his Secretary and
Chancellor, and as Grotius himself remarks in his observations on
Campanella's philosophy.
He printed at the same time his treatise _Of Faith and Works_ against
Desmarets, and against the error of the inadmissibility of grace, under
the title of _Explicatio trium illustrissimorum locorum Novi Testamenti,
Capitis I. Pauli ad Ephesios posterioris, Capitis II. Jacobi Commatis
XIV. & sequentium, Capitis III. Epistolæ I. Johannis, in quibus agitur
de fide & operibus_. This work shews, that faith is not sufficient for
Justification; and that if those who have faith live in sin, they are
hated by God.
_Via ad pacem ecclesiasticam_ was printed in 1642: it contains the
_Consultation_ of Cassander presented to the Emperors Ferdinand I. and
Maximilian II. accompanied with remarks by Grotius. He expected that
these works, which were compiled solely with a view to promote union
among Christians, would procure him many enemies; and he adopted, on
this occasion, what was said in 1557 by an author who laboured in the
same design, That for persons to endeavour to make mankind live in
peace, was commendable; that they might indeed expect a recompence from
the blessed Peace-maker, but they had great reason to apprehend the same
fate with those, who, attempting to part two combatants, receive blows
from both. "Perhaps, by writing to reconcile such as entertain very
opposite sentiments, I shall offend both parties: but if it should so
happen, I shall comfort myself with the example of him who said, If I
please men I am not the servant of Christ."
Grotius, content with gratifying his pacific desires, expected his
reward from posterity; which he clearly intimates in some verses written
by him on this subject
Accipe sed placidis, quæ si non optima, certe,
Expressit nobis non mala pacis amor.
Et tibi dic, nostro labor hic si displicet ævo,
A gratâ pretium posteritate feret.
Rivetus, the Clergyman, treated Grotius with as much indignity, as if he
had attempted to destroy the foundations or Christianity. Grotius
answered him in a tract, entitled: _Animadversiones in animadversiones
Andreæ Riveti_.
This work was followed by two others on the same subject: _Votum pro
pace ecclesiasticâ, contra examen Andreæ Riveti_, and _Rivetiani
Apologetici Discussio_: this last did not appear till after the author's
death.
He wrote, in 1638, a small piece, entitled: _De Canæ administratione ubi
Pastores non sunt, item an semper communicandum per symbola_. The design
of this pernicious work is to shew, that Laymen, in the absence of
Priests, and in cases of necessity, may do their office.
Rigaut had already maintained this error, and been smartly attacked by
M. De l'Aubepine, Bishop of Orleans: all the defenders of the hierarchy
were scandalized at it, and Father Petau, among the Roman Catholics, and
Dodwell, among the English Clergy, have refuted it.
In the tract, _An semper communicandum per symbola_, the Arminians
endeavour to maintain, that we are not obliged to communicate with such
as require subscriptions to which we cannot assent without acting
against our consciences. Grotius's design was to shew, that the
Arminians might dispense with communicating with the
Contra-Remonstrants, if these insisted on retractions.
Another theological work of Grotius (of whose publication we cannot fix
the time) is entitled: _Dissertatio historica ac politica de dogmatis &
ritibus & gubernatione Ecclesiæ Christianæ, de dogmatis quæ reipublicæ
noxia sunt, aut dicuntur._ In this piece he treats of the end of the
priesthood, and the duties of the Priests: he places what relates to the
distinction and unity of the three Persons, the two Natures, and their
properties, among the points of which we may be ignorant without ceasing
to be good Christians. It is probable this piece was written before
those concerning Antichrist, the author appearing in it less favourably
disposed towards the Roman Catholics and the Pope.
It is apparent that Grotius had not sufficiently examined this subject,
since he speaks of it in a manner so heterodox. He would not have held a
language so opposite to Christianity, at, or after the time of his
dispute with Rivetus.
FOOTNOTES:
[526] Ep. 416. p. 874.
[527] Ep. 477. p. 890.
[528] Ep. 480. p. 891. & 482. p. 891.
[529] Ep. 485. p. 892.
[530] Ep. 445. p. 895. 507. p. 901. 511. p. 902. & 514. p. 904.
[531] Ep 61. p. 276. & 89. p. 415.
XIII. Grotius, even whilst engaged in the dispute against the zealous
Protestant Ministers, undertook to clear up the origin of the Americans;
which enquiry involved him in a controversy that gave him much
uneasiness. John de Laët of Antwerp, who had much studied these matters,
printed Grotius's work, with Notes, under this title: _Joannis de Laët
Antverpiani Notæ ad dissertationem Hugonis Grotii de Origine gentium
Americanarum, & Observationes aliquot ad meliorem indaginem difficillimæ
illius questionis. Amstelodami apud Ludovicum Elzevirium, anno
1643_[532].
Grotius first confutes those, who think that the people of America came
from Great Tartary, because they had no horses before the Spanish
conquest, and that it is impossible the Scythians, who abounded in
horses, should bring none with them; besides the Tartars were never
seamen. His opinion is, that North-America was peopled by persons from
Norway, from whence they passed into Iceland, afterwards into Greenland,
from thence to Friseland, then to Estotiland, a part of the American
continent, to which the fishers of Friseland had penetrated two
centuries before the Spaniards discovered the New World. He pretends,
that the names of those countries end with the same syllables as those
of the Norwegians; that the Mexicans and their neighbours assured the
Spaniards they came from the North; and that the country which the
Norwegians inhabited, after quitting Estotiland, has retained almost
the name of Norway; that there is yet a town in it called Norembega; in
fine, that there are many words in the American language, which have a
relation to the German and Norwegian; and that the Americans still
preserve the customs of the country from whence they are originally
sprung. As to the people of Jucatan, and the neighbourhood, Grotius
makes them come from Ethiopia by the way of the Ocean. He grounds this
opinion on the practice of circumcision among these nations of America,
which was also used by the Ethiopians. He pretends that the Peruvians
are descended from the Chinese, because the wrecks of Chinese vessels
have been found, he says, on the coasts of the Pacific Ocean, and they
worship the sun: besides, the Peruvians, he adds, write from the top to
the bottom of the page like the Chinese.
Laët easily shewed that Grotius's conjectures were ill founded, and that
he had even advanced several facts which were not strictly true: he
denied the existence of the city of Norembega, and maintained that
Jucatan is too distant from Africa for the Ethiopians to penetrate into
America, it being at least two months sail from Ethiopia to Jucatan. He
refutes the pretended traces of Christianity, which Grotius said were
found in that part of America before the discovery of the Spaniards,
supporting his confutation on the authority of Spanish writers; in fine,
he denies that any Chinese wrecks have been found on the coasts of the
Pacific Ocean, and censures, as a very great inaccuracy in Grotius, what
he advances concerning the Peruvian manner of writing.
After doing justice to the excellent judgment and profound erudition of
Grotius, he ventures to assert, that he found nothing in his
Dissertation that could satisfy a man moderately acquainted with the
History of America; and approves of what was observed by Joseph Acosta,
that it was easier to confute what was written on the origin of the
Americans, than to know what to hold; because there were no monuments
among them, nor any books of Europeans to throw light on this matter:
and hence concludes, that it is rashness to promise truth on such an
obscure subject.
Laët's answer vexed Grotius: he replied to it in a second Dissertation,
entitled, _Adversus obtrectatorem, opaca quem bonum facit barba_.
Printed at Paris by Cramoisi, in 1643. Laët answered in a piece, printed
in 1644, by Lewis Elzevir, in which he inserts Grotius's second
Dissertation. There is nothing new in these two last books: and it were
to be wished that they had been written with less bitterness. It has
been[533] observed, that Grotius's system is not new; and that it had
been already advanced by Myl, whom Grotius does not once quote.
FOOTNOTES:
[532] This work was printed at Paris the same year.
[533] Hornius, de Orig. Gent. Amer. l. 1. c. 2. p. 17.
XIV. It now remains to give some account of the other works of Grotius,
which hitherto we have not had occasion to mention. In 1629, he printed
at William Blaeu's the History of the Siege of Grolla: _Grollæ obsidio
cum annexis anni 1627_. This piece would have been brought into his
History[534] if he could have continued it. He speaks of it with great
modesty[535] in his letters to his brother. "I don't expect, he says,
much honour from such a small tract."
He published, in 1631, _An Introduction to the Laws of Holland_, in
Dutch. Simon Groenovegius de Madin, a Lawyer, wrote Notes on this work,
which Grotius thought well done and very useful; and sent the author a
letter of thanks[536].
He left several manuscripts prepared for the press, which were published
after his death.
Lewis Elzevir printed, in 1652, a small collection in twelves with this
title: _Hugonis Grotii quædam hactenùs inedita, aliaque ex Belgicè
editis Latinè versa, argumenti Theologici, Juridici, Politici._ It
contains, among other Dissertations, _Remarks on the Philosophy_ or
rather _on the Politics of Campanella_; and a tract entitled: _Hugonis
Grotii Responsio ad quædam ab utroque judicum consessu objecta, ubi
multa disputantur de Jure Summarum Potestatum in Hollandiâ,
Westfrisi[^æ], & Magistratuum in oppidis_. The disputes of the Province
of Holland with the States-General probably gave occasion to this
treatise. Grotius intended to publish the Golden verses of
Pythagoras[537], with a translation by himself: but what he could not do
in his life-time was done in England after his death, in the year
1654[538].
Of all the tragic Poets, his favourite was certainly Euripides. We have
already seen that he translated the _Phoenissæ_ in 1630. He afterwards
revised and corrected it, as appears by a letter to his brother,
September 3, 1639[539]. His translation of the _Iphigenia in Tauris_ is
mentioned in several letters[540]. He likewise turned into Latin the
_Supplicantes_ of Euripides, of which he speaks to his brother[541]. The
learned Father Berthier[542] has lately informed us, that this
translation still exists in the library of the Jesuits college at Paris.
"One of the most precious pieces, and which alone would have been
sufficient to give value to this manuscript, is the entire translation
of Euripides's piece, entitled _Supplicantes_, added at the end of the
volume by way of desert: the whole is in excellent Iambic verses: we
would cite some part, if we had not already trespassed too far on the
complaisance of the reader."
In 1629, Grotius wrote to his brother[543], that he had finished a
piece, proving that the war between different Princes ought not to
injure the free trade of the powers not engaged in it. This is all we
know of the treatise, which is now lost: we are equally ignorant of a
work, entitled, _The Portrait of Zeno_, which he mentions in several
letters[544], and seems very desirous of having it printed. He left
several manuscripts in his closet, which, after his death, were
purchased by the Queen of Sweden from his wife: among these[545] were,
_Notes on some of the most difficult Laws_; _A Comparison of the
Republics of Athens and Rome with that of Holland_; _Notes on the Hymns
of Orpheus_, and an _Illustration of the Books of Moses by the Writings
of the Pagans_. The author of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_[546] speaks of a
manuscript of Æschylus with Notes by Grotius. Many of his books were
filled with marginal notes. He tells us[547], that he had collected,
with great care, the remains of the apostolical Fathers, and that he had
thoughts of translating that part of Josephus's history, which relates
to the law, and of adding notes to it. But probably the execution of
this project was hindered by his other studies, and the information he
received, that Samuel Petit, who was well skilled in the learned
languages, had the same design.
FOOTNOTES:
[534] Ep. 191. p. 811.
[535] Ep. 194. p. 814. & 196, p. 113.
[536] Ep. 1627. p. 719.
[537] Ep. 683. p. 961.
[538] Fab. Bib. Græc. tom. 1. p. 471. & 472.
[539] Ep. 506. p. 885.
[540] Ep. 402; p. 869. & 595. p. 236.
[541] Ep. 683. p. 961.
[542] Art. 91. August, 1751. p. 1807.
[543] Ep. 207. p. 817.
[544] Ep. 465. & 466. p. 886. Ep. 469. p. 887.
[545] Observat. Hallenses, 24. t. 7. p. 350. Bib. Remons. p. 80.
Fabricius Bib. Græca, t. 1. l. 1. c. 19, p. 117.
[546] Vindiciæ, p. 841.
[547] Ep. 391. p. 866. & 768. p. 330.
XV. His Letters may be regarded as Treatises; the collection we have of
them is a treasure not only of public but of literary history, and
contains many dissertations on the most important subjects. The
XXXIst, to Gerard Vossius, and XXXIIId, to John Utengobard, treat
of Predestination and Grace, according to the Arminian system. We have
already spoken of the LIVth, addressed to Du Maurier, the French
Ambassador in Holland, and containing a method of study for grown
persons. The LXIId, to the Baron de Langerac, the Dutch Ambassador in
France, is a formal treatise on a piece of Du Moulin concerning the
government of the ancient Church; the means of reconciling Grace with
Free-will; and the authority of Sovereigns in matters ecclesiastical.
He treats in the XCIst, to Vossius, of the effects of Christ's death.
The CCLXIVth, to the celebrated Nicholas Peyresc, Counsellor of the
Parliament of Aix, is rather a book than a letter, being a collection of
all that the Ancients have said of Nicholas Damascenus, which leaves us
at a loss with regard to nothing that could be known concerning that
celebrated writer.
The CCCXXIXth, to John Descordes, Canon of Limoges, treats of the
power of Bishops over the Monks, and several other points of the ancient
Church discipline. He proves, in the CCCLVIIth, to Jerom Bignon,
Advocate-General, that the letter ascribed to Pope Clement, which was
published in 1633, is really his. His letters to his brother treat of
the Law of Nature and several points of Civil Law: and a letter,
addressed to John Isaac Pontanus, contains his remarks on what Cluverius
has said of the antiquities of Germany.
The most interesting literary occurrences of his time are to be found in
his letters, always accompanied, with instructing reflections: in fine,
his negotiations, and the great events of the last ten years of the
reign of Lewis XIII, are very particularly, and, for the most part, very
truly related in them.
We must not conceal that Du Maurier, the son, whose anecdotes are full
of blunders, advances[548] that, when Grotius desired to be recalled,
the High Chancellor readily took him at his word, because, says he,
Grotius sent him only the news that every body knew. Father Bougeant
repeats this passage with great complacency; but he would have done much
better to have read Grotius's letters with attention, than to censure
them without reason. By their assistance he might have rectified several
dates in his work, which, otherwise, deserves the public esteem.
Another author, whose history is written with indiscretion and
partiality, but who was nevertheless well acquainted with the events of
the age of Lewis XIII, sets a high value on Grotius's letters[549]: I
mean Le Vassor, whose judgment deserves the more regard as he had little
turn for panegyric. He refutes those who advanced that Grotius employed
his fine Latin to send Oxenstiern the lies of the day; and maintains
that such as say this, have either never read Grotius's letters, or are
unacquainted with the history of Lewis XIII. He does not deny, that,
among the many pieces of news contained in them, there are some without
foundation; but he excuses him, because a Minister is obliged to write
what is generally reported. He adds, "Those, who shall read Grotius's
letters with a little discerning, will find in them the most secret
affairs of the times of his embassy touched upon in few words, with
great delicacy and moderation." Grotius himself acquaints us, that he
used great circumspection in writing news to the High Chancellor[550].
"I must beg, says he, of your Sublimity, to pardon the shortness of my
letter: I chuse rather to say little, than write what is false; and
would fain send you nothing that is uncertain: but this is attended with
much difficulty amidst so great obscurity.--Living among people, he says
in another letter[551], who are very close, and receiving news which are
often mixed with falshood, I am sorry to be obliged to give you my
conjectures in the room of certainty; but there is nothing to apprehend
from such an equitable Judge, who has regard to the good intention."
This made him easy; and what ought to give us a high idea of his
Letters, is, that they greatly pleased the High Chancellor[552]; and
Muller, the Swedish Ambassador, set a high value on them[553].
The author of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_ assures us[554], after Morhof, that
Grotius's Letters are not all printed; and he adds, that he knew a
cabinet in which were preserved upwards of two hundred and sixty,
written to Queen Christina and the High Chancellor. Bunau, a Privy
Counselor at Dresden, is said to have had many of them. Puffendorf saw
several in cypher, to which he had a key. Among those, which are printed
in the collection of Grotius's letters, there are some in cypher,
relating to the general affairs and secret intrigues of the Court of
France. M. de Boze has a copy of these letters in his curious cabinet,
with an explanation of the cypher, given him by a Swedish gentleman,
which he communicates to those who desire it, with a politeness that it
were to be wished were common to all men of learning.
FOOTNOTES:
[548] Memoires, p. 423.
[549] Le Vassor, t. 8. 2 partie, l. 40. p. 277.
[550] Ep. 537. p. 210.
[551] Ep. 550. p. 214.
[552] Ep. 55. p. 492.
[553] Ep. 1094. p. 492.
[554] P. 846.
XVI. One of the most interesting parts of Grotius's life is the
knowledge of his sentiments in religion, and the ardent zeal with which
he undertook to reunite Christians in one belief. Brought up in the
principles of Protestantism, he had in the former part of his life a
great aversion to Popery. A letter to Antony Walæus, Nov. 10, 1611[555],
in which he opens all his mind, acquaints us, that however much he might
be attached to the prevailing religion in the State wherein he lived, he
was persuaded that the Roman Catholics held all the fundamental truths;
but they superadded, he thought, several other articles, which he
treated as new opinions. The zeal of the Jesuits for the Roman Catholic
religion, and their attachment to the Pope, had rendered them extremely
odious to all the enemies of the Romish church. Grotius viewed them in
the same light, agreeably to the sentiments which had been instilled
into him in his infancy, as we find in a letter written, April 1,
1617[556], to his brother then in France; but when he came to riper
years, he did them justice, highly valuing their society, and receiving
many of them into his confidence, particularly the learned Dionysius
Petavius.
FOOTNOTES:
[555] Ep. 14 p. 4.
[556] Ep. 15. p. 759.
XVII. Even when farthest removed from the Roman Catholic Church, he paid
the greatest regard to the decisions of the ancient councils, to the
discipline of the primitive Church, and the authority of the Fathers. He
writes, June 6, 1611, to John Utengobard[557], that he highly respected
the ancient councils which condemned Manicheism and Pelagianism. He
declared to Vossius, July 17, 1616[558], that none held the doctrine
condemned by the ancient Church in greater detestation. "Besides the
hatred, says he to Antony Walæus, which I profess to the tenets that
were unknown to pious antiquity, nothing more engages me to condemn, and
overturn, as far as I can, this sort of opinions, than their being an
obstacle to peace."
In the explanation of Holy Scripture he would have the sentiments of the
ancient Church adhered to. This point he treated at a conference with
the Prince of Condé, in the beginning of 1639[559]; in which he shewed,
that to be a Christian, and have a right to the surname of Catholic, one
must receive the Sacred Scriptures, and explain them not according to
the interpretation of private persons, which had often given occasion to
seditions, schisms, and even wars, but according to the sentiments of
the ancient Churches, chiefly to be found in the Creeds, and in the acts
of General Councils.
He was so persuaded of the truth of these principles, that in an
advertisement, prefixed to his _Commentary on the New Testament_, he
declares that if he had written any thing inconsistent with the
interpretation of Holy Scripture by the ancient Church, which he hoped
he had not, he would chuse to have it neglected, and was most ready to
alter it.
FOOTNOTES:
[557] Ep. 28. p. 9.
[558] Ep. 77. p. 54.
[559] Ep. 1108. p. 498. See also Ep. 622. p. 943.
XVIII. This profound veneration for antiquity contributed greatly to
render him more favourable to the Roman Catholics. At a time when it was
looked upon by the Protestants as a kind of Apostacy, to speak with
decency and temper of the sovereign Pontiffs, he ventured to commend
Pope Urbin VIII in some verses made in honour of the blessed Virgin. He
speaks thus of him in a Letter to his brother of the 21st of February,
1625[560]. "I send my father the Poem on the Mother of God. I would not
however have it published, not only because the honour, distinct from
superstition, given to the saints offends several of our people; but
also because Pope Urbin is commended in it. He is an excellent Poet, as
appears from his elegant Pindaric odes. God grant he may be able to
unite Christians, who are too much divided, in one faith."
The Reformers were held by him in no great esteem. In 1633 he wrote to
Gerard Vossius[561], "I think nothing can be truer than your judicious
remark, that the best way to prevent good men from approving of so many
different sects would be to shew them, without animosity or passion,
from the sole motive of love to truth, that those who avail themselves
so much of antiquity have it not always on their side, and that such as
promised to restore the Church to its primitive state have not at all
times succeeded." He no doubt meant the pretended Reformed.
"The Protestants, says he to his brother[562], go too far when they
accuse the Roman Catholics of error; they attack at the same time the
whole Greek and Latin Churches, those of Syria, Arabia, and Egypt, and
thereby very imprudently furnish arms to their adversaries. I see, he
writes to Vossius[563], that those who have erected new Churches among
us, have followed their own ideas, but have not always advanced the
affairs of Religion."
Salmasius was as zealous for the pretended reformed religion, as he was
become indifferent to Grotius. However they visited one another, but it
was with much coldness. "Salmasius (he writes to his brother[564],
February 10, 1641) came to see me: he is ready to defend the most
outrageous opinions; among others, that St. Peter never set foot in
Italy. It is surprising what a party spirit will do."
Grotius looked upon almost all the Reformed as factious men[565]. He had
no esteem for Calvin; speaking of Cassander, he says he was a very
excellent, and at the same time a very able man, and therefore most
worthy of Calvin's hatred: he advised James Laurentius to read, instead
of Calvin's _Institutions_, Vincent de Lerins. "I hear[566], says he to
him, that you are less seditious than most of your order (that is, the
Protestant Clergy) and that you only suffer yourself to be drawn away by
others: wherefore I will give you one good counsel: read the Scriptures
in the original, the confessions of faith of the ancient Christians,
instead of the Belgic Confession, the Catechisms of Cyril in the room of
Ursinus's Catechism, and the acts of the General Councils, and not those
of the Synod of Dort: you will then easily perceive that Grotius is not
become a Papist, but Laurentius turned a Calvinist." Laurentius wrote
against him: but Grotius took his revenge[567] by silence. He did not
approve of the separation of the Protestants; he thought these new
Churches, these new Rites had not at all contributed to the promoting of
piety. "It is just, said he[568], to reform our manners: but would it
not have been better for us, after reforming ourselves, to have prayed
to God for the reformation of others; and for the Princes and Bishops,
who desired a reformation to have endeavoured to procure it by general
councils, without breaking the unity." A Minister called D'Or, turning
Roman Catholic[569], Grotius discovered little concern at it, and speaks
of it with great calmness in a letter to his brother. "What D'Or has
just done, says he, the learned Pithou did before him: Casaubon was
resolved to do the same had he remained longer in France, as he assured
several persons, and among others Descordes. I would fain, continued he,
have the abuses that have crept into the church remedied, and will
always say so; but is it just, or are there any examples, that it should
be done by schism? This ought to be the more weighed, as we easily
perceive that those who have formed new parties had not always the
Spirit of God; that they have propagated new abuses, and that this
licence to separate themselves has given rise to different parties which
will never be united." He speaks in another place of Casaubon's
sentiments[570], and pretends that this learned man thought the Roman
Catholics of France better informed than those of other countries, and
came nearer to truth than the Ministers of Charenton.
He explained himself very frequently and very sharply against the schism
of the Protestants. "Viretus, and the rest, says he[571], ought not to
have erected new churches: yet they have done it before they were
excommunicated: even an unjust excommunication would not have entitled
them to erect altar against altar." He recites several passages from the
Fathers on this subject, by which he pretends to confute the first
reformers[572]. He came so near the Roman Catholics in the end, that in
a letter to his brother he has these words: "It cannot be denied that
there are several Roman Catholic pastors here who teach true religion,
without any mixture of superstition: it were to be wished that all did
the same." In his later works he speaks of Calvin with the highest
indignation[573]: "I know, he says, with what injustice and bitterness
this Calvin treated Cassander, Baudoin, and Castellio, who were much
better men than himself."
In refuting the apology of Rivetus he speaks with all the zeal of a
Roman Catholic Disputant, and proves that the Calvinists are
Schismatics, and had no mission; that they neither had miracles for
them, nor any particular command from God: that the Ministers are
factious spirits, who seek only to disturb the State: that their
religion is new, and has not antiquity on its side. In his youth he had
commended Beza in some anapest verses; extolling him as one of the most
zealous defenders of the truth: he afterwards retracted this elogium,
and wished it buried in eternal oblivion.
In fine, the Jesuits, who were the objects of his aversion before he
knew them, became his friends. He was reproached with this; and mentions
the accusation in a letter to his brother[574]. "I am not, says he, the
common defender of Jesuits; but the King looks on them as good subjects
and employs them on several occasions." He publicly took their part in
some of his works. He maintains in his pieces against Rivetus[575] that
the Society had produced very able men of an irreproachable life, and
that there were more such among them than among others. "I know many of
them, he says, who are very desirous to see the abuses abolished, and
the church restored to its primitive unity. The King entrusts them with
his most valuable concerns." Father Petau, among others, possessed his
confidence, as we have already observed, and shall see again.
FOOTNOTES:
[560] Ep. 85. p. 780.
[561] Ep. 935. p. 120.
[562] Ep. 487. p. 864.
[563] Ep. 1004. p. 641.
[564] Ep. 593. p. 913.
[565] Ep. 534. p. 914. 537. p. 916. & 1520, p. 689.
[566] Ep. 1570. p. 709.
[567] Ep. 1078. p. 711.
[568] Ep. 607. p. 938.
[569] Ep. 610. p. 939.
[570] Ep. 613. p. 940.
[571] Ep. 674. p. 959.
[572] Ep. 677. p. 959.
[573] Animad. in animad. Riveti, p. 640.
[574] Ep. 628. p. 915.
[575] Animad in anim. Riveti, ad Art. 6. p. 658. Discussio Rivet.
Apolog. p. 694. & p. 681.
XIX. His great knowledge of antiquity and that singular veneration which
he always paid to the primitive church made him even in his youth look
upon the abolition of episcopacy, and of a visible head of the church,
as something very monstrous. He went much farther in the sequel; shewing
that[576] Melancton himself wanted the Pope to be left in the Church,
and that King James of England and several able Protestants acknowledged
the utility of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome: adding, "If several
Protestants had made the same reflection, we should have had a church
more reformed."
He thinks that this Monarchy (these are his own terms[577]) is of use in
the church for maintaining its unity. In fine, in a piece against
Rivetus[578], he proves the primacy of the Pope from a passage of St.
Cyprian, and adds, "You see that the primacy is hereby established; and
this name in every society implies some jurisdiction. The Bishop of
Rome, says he[579], is Prince of the Christian Aristocrasy, as it has
been called before our time by the Bishop of Fossombrone. This primacy
is under Jesus Christ, and may be exercised without tyranny, and without
destroying the rights which the Bishops have over the churches committed
to them." He entertained favourable sentiments of the Episcopal
authority even before his embassy; and thought it necessary to preserve
the unity of the Church[580]. "It is a question only in name[581](says
he to his brother some years after) to ask whether Episcopacy be of
divine right: it is sufficient that Jesus Christ has set the example in
the college of Apostles; that the Apostles have followed it, and that
this establishment has been approved by the universal consent of the
Church, excepting some innovators of the present age."
He handles this point in the eleventh Chapter of the treatise _Of the
power of Sovereigns in matters of Religion_[582]; he says it is
fanaticism to advance that a Bishop has nothing above a simple Priest.
"Episcopacy, says he[583], that is to say the preheminence of a Pastor,
is not contrary to the Divine right. It is incumbent on him who thinks
otherwise, that is, who accuses the whole ancient Church of folly and
impiety, to prove his opinion. That Episcopacy[584] was received by the
whole Church appears from the general councils, which have always had
great authority with all devout men; witness the national and provincial
councils, where we find certain marks of the Episcopal precedency;
witness all the Fathers without exception. Episcopacy began with the
Apostles[585]: to be convinced of this we need only have recourse to the
catalogues of Bishops in Irenæus, Eusebius, Socrates, Theodoret, and
others, who all make them begin with the Apostles. It would be very
great obstinacy or disrespect to reject authors of so great weight, who
unanimously agree in an historical fact. The history of all ages informs
us of the advantages which the Church has derived from Episcopacy[586]."
However he did not yet venture to say[587] that Episcopacy was of Divine
establishment: he contented himself with maintaining that it was of
Apostolical institution. This was sufficient to offend a party among
whom there were some who carried their fury and ignorance so far, as to
maintain that Episcopacy was an invention of Satan: an expression which
scandalized Grotius even in his youth, as appears by a letter written
in 1614 to Daniel Heinsius[588]. He became more bold afterwards; and was
not afraid to maintain in the face of the pretended reformation[589],
that Episcopacy was established by Christ, and that it were to be wished
it were restored wherever it had been abolished.
It was in consequence of this respect for the Episcopal College, and its
head, that he exposed himself to the indignation of the whole Protestant
party, and the bitter invectives of the Ministers, by maintaining that
nothing was more absurd than what they had written against the pretended
Romish Antichrist.
One of his principal reasons for writing on this subject was a
persuasion not only of the truth of his sentiments, as he writes to his
brother[590], but that it was his duty to remove every obstacle that
obstructed the reunion, "of which I have greater hopes than ever, he
says, December 3, 1639. If it is not granted us to enjoy that great
blessing (he adds) it is our duty to throw water on the flames, and not
oil; and to plant trees that will bear fruit perhaps in another age." He
was so pleased with himself for breaking the ice in this matter, that he
tells his brother[591] in a private letter, he is persuaded God inspired
him with the thought: that he returns him his most humble thanks for it,
and that he thought himself in consequence obliged to labour in it with
all his might, not only to support the truth, but also because he judged
nothing was more capable to appease mens minds and prepare the way to
the reunion. "I hope, he says to Vossius[592], to find at least among
posterity equitable readers who will thank God for the light which he
has been pleased to communicate to me for the understanding several
obscure passages of Holy Scripture. I owe all that I have written on
Antichrist[593] that is good, not to my own researches, says he to his
brother, but to my prayers, and to the goodness of God, who has been
pleased to enlighten me, though I did not deserve it." He flattered
himself that his works on this subject had undeceived several
Protestants[594], and that Rivetus, his grand adversary, was looked upon
even by his collegues as a Divine of little judgment and a moderate
share of erudition.
FOOTNOTES:
[576] Comment. ad. loca de Antichristo.
[577] Via ad Pacem, Art. 7. p. 17.
[578] Ad. Art. 7. p. 641.
[579] P. 642. & p. 695. Discussio Apolog. Rivet. & p. 696.
[580] Ep. 318. p. 115.
[581] Ep. 534. p. 914. see Ep. 739. p. 975.
[582] No 2.
[583] No 3.
[584] No 4.
[585] No 5.
[586] No 9.
[587] No 10.
[588] Burman's Collection, t. 2. Ep. 211. p. 434.
[589] Via ad Pacem, Art. xiv. p. 621.
[590] Ep. 474. p. 889.
[591] Ep. 490. p. 895.
[592] Ep. 1441. p. 653.
[593] Ep. 499. p. 898.
[594] Ep. 501. p. 899.
XX. He had been at first much prejudiced against the opinion of the
Romish Church concerning the real presence. We may judge of it by the
letter which he wrote June 7, 1622, to Episcopius[595]. "I think, says
he to him, that you would do well to confute those who with Cassander
believe that one may disapprove the errors of the Romish Church, and yet
not be obliged to separate from her communion. Two points especially
appear to me to deserve discussion: the first is, whether an action
lawful in itself, as the adoration during the time of the supper,
ceaseth to be so on account of the error of the Ministers of the Church,
who would have this adoration referred to the visible signs."
In process of time he departed from the manner of speaking at least of
the Ministers. He acknowledged[596] that in the Eucharistical bread some
change is made, which the ancient Latin Church called Transfiguration,
and the modern Transubstantiation: when Jesus Christ, being
sacramentally present, favours us with his substance, as the Council of
Trent speaks, the appearances of bread and wine remain, and in their
place succeed the body and blood of Christ.
It is certain that he did not approve of the sentiments of the
Calvinists concerning the Eucharist: he reproached them with their
contradictions[597]. "The Disciples of Calvin, says he, speak very
differently on this subject in their Confessions and in their disputes:
you will hear them say in their confessions, that they really,
substantially, and essentially partake of Christ's body and his blood;
in their disputes they maintain that Christ is received only spiritually
by faith. The ancients go much farther, admitting a real incorporation
of Jesus Christ with us, and the reality of Christ's natural body, as
St. Hilarius speaks."
Thus Grotius was persuaded the term _transubstantiation_, adopted by the
Council of Trent, was capable of a good interpretation[598]: but it is
not clear however, that, though he admitted the expressions used by the
Catholic Church, he was of her opinion. After approving the term
transubstantiation, he adds[599], "And because what is spiritual among
the Jews is called real, the terms really, substantially, and
essentially, are used in the Protestant Confessions, and by their
Doctors." It is plain from what he subjoins, that he sought rather to
unite different sentiments by means of equivocal expressions, than by an
exact Creed, which might be susceptible of only one sense. "We must not
condemn, says he, those who assure us that the Eucharist is but the sign
of the body of Jesus Christ, since St. Augustine, with several other
Fathers, speak in this manner; and the sacrament is defined to be the
visible sign of an invisible grace."
He made a draught of a kind of Formulary, in which the Catholics and
Protestants were to join: it was this. "We believe that in the use of
the supper we truly, really, and substantially, that is to say, in its
proper substance, receive the true body and the true blood of Jesus
Christ in a spiritual and ineffable manner." Grotius informs us that
this formulary was approved of by the Roman Catholic Doctors and by
Protestants: which is not surprising of the Catholics, since the
expressions he employs, when taken in their natural sense, comprehend
the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church: it is more surprising of the
Protestants; but it must be observed that Calvin himself said[600], that
under the Eucharistical signs we receive truly the body and blood of
Jesus Christ; that Christ's flesh is distributed in this sacrament; that
it enters into us; that we are partakers not only of Christ's spirit,
but also of his flesh; that we have its proper substance, and are made
partakers of it; that whole Christ is united to us, and therefore is
united to us in body and spirit, that we must not question our receiving
his proper body, and that if there is any man upon earth who sincerely
acknowledges this truth, it is he.
These expressions of Calvin were certainly favourable to the opinion of
the Roman Catholics: he found himself obliged to make use of such terms,
because they had been so long authorised, that he was afraid of
appearing desirous to change the ancient doctrine; but the sense he gave
them took away their force. The Protestants whom Grotius consulted,
agreeable to the opinion of their Master, thought the expression,
substantial presence, might be reconciled with their confession of
faith; which, denying the real presence, teaches that Christ is united
to us only in a figure in the sacrament, and in spirit by faith.
Though Grotius believed that one receives substantially Jesus Christ in
the use of the supper, there is no proof of his admitting the real
presence in the sense of the Council of Trent: for, besides that his
Formulary scarce makes stronger mention of it than Calvin, he seems not
to condemn those who admitted only the sign of Christ's body: an
indulgence which will never be approved of by a Roman Catholic.
FOOTNOTES:
[595] Ep. 181. p. 67.
[596] Via ad pacem art. x. p. 619. & 642.
[597] Votum pro pace, p. 687.
[598] Animad. in Animad. art. x. p. 642.
[599] Via, p. 619.
[600] Variations, l. 9. p. 37.
XXI. He justifies the decision of the Council of Trent concerning the
number of the sacraments in his works against Rivetus. "The word
sacrament, though sometimes taken in a more general signification, may
nevertheless, says he[601], be understood in a more limited one of these
seven external signs, which are designed for the good of our souls, and
more distinctly mentioned in Scripture; Baptism in St. Matthew xxviii.
19. Confirmation, Acts viii. 17. Penance, Matthew xvi. 19. the
Eucharist, Matthew xxvi. 26. Ordination, 1 Tim. iv. 22. Extreme Unction,
Mark vi. 13. James v. 14. and Marriage; Ephes. v. 32."
FOOTNOTES:
[601] Rivet. Apol. discussio, p. 698.
XXII. In the examination of the other articles, which divide the Roman
Catholics from the Protestants, Grotius continued to lean towards the
Romish Church. In 1638 he acknowledges in a letter to Corvinus[602],
that pious and able men, who were well disposed towards the Protestants,
owned they were mistaken in the decision of the principal controversies
between the Protestants and the Romish Church.
After the year 1640 he took no offence at the use of images in churches,
and prayers for the dead. He writes to his brother this year[603], "The
Lutherans have images, and there are some in several places of England.
Montaigue and others have proved that it is not idolatry to have
recourse to the prayers of the Apostles and Martyrs."
He explains himself afterwards much more strongly in favour of the
Romish Church. He was persuaded[604] that the Cherubims of Moses clearly
shewed that images were not forbid. "The honour due to Martyrs, says he,
in his _Via ad pacem_[605], is much greater than what we owe to living
Saints, because the Apocalypse tells us, that the Martyrs reign with
Jesus Christ: there is therefore no harm in publicly testifying our
esteem for them, and celebrating their memories on days set apart for
that purpose, and in the places where they suffered martyrdom. The
Protestants acknowledge that they pray for the Church: they are in the
wrong therefore to look on those as Idolaters; who, agreeable to the
opinion of several ancients, think the knowledge of our wants and our
prayers may be communicated to the Martyrs by a revelation from God, or
by the ministry of Angels. Such, he says in another place[606], as think
it idolatry to address, the Martyrs, that they may pray for us, accuse
St. Chrysostom, and the other holy Doctors of the Greek and Latin
Church, of a horrible crime. For my part, I dare not do this; neither
would I blame those who abstain from praying to the Saints. I have also
said that true Relics of true Martyrs deserve to be respected."
In fine, in his _Votum pro pace_[607], he proves by a long series of
passages from the Fathers, that the invocation of saints was used by the
ancient Church, and therefore cannot be treated as idolatry; that there
is no law in the Gospel against the use of Images in Churches, that it
cannot be said they are forbid by the law of nature, and that in the
times of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine the relics of Martyrs were
honoured in the Church. He defends in several places Praying for the
Dead, which was practised in all the Churches of the East, as well as of
the West[608]: he proves that the ancient Church prayed for the Dead,
and that St. Augustine[609] regarded the opposers of this practice as
heretics. He maintains[610] that every ancient liturgy has prayers for
the Dead, and that as Tertullian relates, they were used in all the
Churches in his time. He asserts[611], that the Jews knew and admitted
of a Purgatory. One of the articles which made most noise in the
beginning of the grand Schism in the sixteenth Century was that of
justification, Grotius declares[612], that the more he examined the
Scriptures, the greater agreement he discovered between them and the
tradition of the Roman Church concerning justification. He was persuaded
that it had the same idea of the Catholic Church mentioned in the Creed,
as the ancients entertained. He would have men submit to the decisions
of general councils[613]; and maintains that a pious and peaceable man
ought not to contradict them when their decrees are received by almost
all the Churches, especially those which were founded by the Apostles.
He means no doubt the Council of Trent.