sons who were actually treading that path. The events, which followed, justify the historian in observing, that such systems of refinement and mediocrity are, in effect, perfect chimeras; that the cross of Christ must be undergone by those who mean to glorify God, to preserve a good conscience, to rebuke, by their lives and conversations, the evil practices of the world, and to promote the salvation of mankind. Erasmus, during many years, was employed in this nugatory scheme; and while he courted the favour of the great, and secured himself from the danger of persecution, he promoted not one of those peculiar truths of Christian doctrine, on account of which the good reformers suffered grievously from the tyranny of powerful princes and prelates." pp. 1060, 1061.

The proof contained in pp. 1095 -1102, of the tolerating principles of Luther, with respect to penal inflictions for the sake of religion, together with the observations upon it, will be read with some surprise, and more admiration.

No circumstance in the life of Luther places his character in a more unfavourable light than the Sacramentarian controversy, particularly as it was conducted between him and the Swiss divines, men of equal zeal for the reformation, of more discernment respecting the subject in dispute, and of a temper, both in the conduct of the controversy, and in the state of irreconcileable doctrinal hostility in which it left them, far more pacific, and therefore more Christian. The faults of Luther in this affair are freely admitted, and censured, by Dr. Mil

ner.

For the purpose of healing these dissensions, a conference was proposed by the Landgrave of Hesse, and held at Marpurg, in the year 1529. It ended, says our author, 'rather according to what might have been expected, than according to the Christian wishes of the good Landgrave. We are bound, he adds, to mark with the most entire disapprobation, that unchristian stubborn ness of temper which manifested itself in Luther at the conclusion of the conferences. The sacramentarians begged hard to be acknowledged as brethren. Considerable Concessions were made. And the

Landgrave exerted himself to produce a cordial friendship. But the spirit of Luther proved perfectly untractable and intolerant. Nothing more could be gained from him, than that each side should shew Christian charity to the other, as far as they could conscientiously; &c. pp. 1119, 1120.

The Helvetic reformers were much irritated by the conduct of Luther. Bullinger, one of the most eminent of the number, some years afterwards (1534) writes to Myconius:- Domini Lutheri impudentia nuper libellis quibusdam de primatu, missa, et in Erasmum scriptis vehementer doleo. Video enim hunc hominem ecclesiæ Dei plus incommodaturum quam profuit unquam. Interim vero hunc omnibus in Europa doctis in evangelio præferre non cessat Bucerus, miror quo consilio? Ecolampadium virum sanctissimum illum, prædecessorem tuum in istis furiosis rixis palam prædicat a Satana strangulatum periisse. Vide quid Monachus iste audeat ? Erasmum prorsus Arrianis annumerat, et convitiorum atque calumniarum plaustra in senem illum, et de ecclesia et litteris optime meritum effundit." On the same subject, Myconius, in his reply, says: De Erasmo et Luthero idem sentio quod tu de altero. Profuerunt initio, nunc nemo nocet perniciosius. Alter superbus et insolens est, alter avarus et ambitiosus. Deus opto faveat, imo emendet utrosque. Equidem jurare ausim, Lutherum persuasum, Spiritum Sanctum non esse nisi apud se et suos." It is pleasing, however, to remark the great variation of style with which the former of these divines speaks of Luther, immediately upon the intelligence of his death, when that event had given him, in his own view, greater liberty of renewing his literary intercourse with the principal friend of the deceased reformer, Melancthon, to whom he writes: "D. Lutherum virum doctum, et de ecclesia optime meritum, gaudeo migrasse ad Dominum, non propter causam, quam cum illo habuimus litigandam: Dominus novit :

sed quod malis liberatus maximis futurisque ereptus calamitatibus, cursum suum feliciter absolvit, et nunc cum Domino nostro, cui servivit letatur in gloria. Interim non mediocriter doleo, illo nos viro destitutos, cujus ope et consilio in communi re ligionis causa poteramus juvari. Tametsi enim pro carnis humanæ ingenio sua habuerit vitia, insigne tamen constantiæ donum consecutus, fortis et tenax fuit in retinenda sinceritate doctrinæ contra papistas, quibus nihil concedi voluit per compositiones et colloquia. Vidit haud dubie," &c.*

After what we have written, we trust we shall not be accused of any hostile intention, or of a spirit peculiarly hypercritical, if we state the few circumstances in this history which we could have wished absent. The expression "seeking sols," which, if we mistake not, occurs more than once, might, we think, have been exchanged for one equally significant, and less calculated to excite unnecessary prejadice. The being pitched against another in a contest, being an overmatch, and being gravelled, appeared to us terms beneath the dignity of such a history as the present. We are not quite reconciled to the use of capitals by way of impart ing emphasis to a word or sentence: and we were almost shocked at the appearance of a occasionally adorning the margin for somewhat of the same purpose. Throughout all the latter part of the history,

See Feeslin. Cent. prim. Epist. ab Ecdles. Helvet. Reform. &c. Num. xxxvii. viii. and xi. Num. iii. is a letter of Erasmus, not published in the Amsterdam edition of his Works, to Zuingle, dated 1523, where he says, "Omnia recusavi, que mihi hoc nomine offerebantur, ut adversus illam (Lutherum) scriberem;" and yet in 1521 he had, as he professes in his letter to Warham, begun to read Luther's Works for the purpose of answering them. Perhaps the design had been relinquished. Or he might mean, as the following words seem to import, that he had not yet actually commenced hostilities which was the fact.

Maclaine's name is mispelt Maclane. We must confess likewise, that we have seemed to feel that a greater attention might have been paid to chronology and dates. Dr. Milner is aware of the importance of accuracy in this respect, as appears from an observation, p. 844: but authors cannot place themselves in the exact position and circumstances of readers.

We are here reminded, that Duther wrote a letter to Erasmus, in the year 1524, which is referred to p. 855, and quoted at length in the Appendix, pp. 25, &c. This is the same letter, which in the last edition of Erasmus's Works is numbered 726. Dr. Milner, p. 927, represents the letter of Erasmus to Luther, numbered 806, as the answer to that of Luther just alluded to: but it must be another, and a later one, not contained in the collection of Erasmus's letters. The substance and spirit of the letter will hardly comport with such an one as that of Luther. Erasmus plainly supposes himself to have been called by Luther an atheist, an epicurean, &c.; and the terms in which the date is expressed put the matter beyond a doubt: silea II. Aprilis, quo tuæ redditæ sunt literæ, Anno 1526.

Ba

The importance of this portion of Dr. Milner's history is impressed upon the intelligent and considerate reader, if he be a Christian, by many considerations.

The atten

tion of general readers has of late, more than usual, been called to the reformation and to the character of the agents concerned in that astonishing revolution. Unfortunately for truth and piety, the subject has been pretty much confined to the hands, either of decided infidels, or of cold and merely speculative Christians. The consequence has been, an almost entire misapprehension and misrepresentation of the subject with the writers; and with the readers, as far as they have trusted their guides, a proportionable degree of delusion. It is a delusion.

likewise, be it observed, of a very pernicious tendency, as discrediting, and, so far, impeding the progress of religion in the souls of men. The Christian world, therefore, is under great obligation to an author, who, like the present, on the one hand possesses the real Christianity to enter into the true character of the reformers, and the merits of their cause; and, on the other, is endowed with the learning, judgment, and perseverance necessary to collect and arrange the voluminous materials which are extant on the subject; and thus restore the characters of those to whom protestants owe their present invaluable religious advantages, to the honourable estimation in which they ought to be held, and recover for them the influence which their heroic and triumphant faith is calculated to have, both in the revival and establishment of the same faith, upon posterity. It is no small recommendation of the present work, that it has brought together, and presented to the mere English reader, the most valuable portions of those numerous protestant collections, which, notwithstanding their worth, are exceedingly difficult of access in England, and, as long as Europe continues in its present agitated state, will remain so.

The principal impression, we apprehend, which will abide on the mind of the reader of this work will be, the new and different light in which the characters of the two heroes of their age, Luther and Erasmus, are placed. Luther, however, is properly speaking, and justly, the hero of this volume. Yet great as Dr. Milner's admiration of this reformer evidently is, he has conducted his narration, we think, with exemplary candour. The faults of Luther, perhaps all his faults, are allowed, and chastised with the due degree of censure. At times, as we proceeded, we did indeed think, that the author was disposed to favour. But on due consideration we willingly surrender the suspicion. The writer of a piece of biography, or of a

history in which some particular character predominates, has formed his opinion of the individual from a careful study, and repeated inspection, of his life, as a whole; and he comes to the consideration of the successive parts of that life, when he records them, with information and a judgment necessarily, in some degree, different from those of the reader, who, as he advances in the story, is acquainted but slightly, if at all, with the whole portion which is future, and which could not fail, if known, to cast some shade or colour upon what precedes. A second reading puts him pretty nearly in the attitude and condition of the author. Dr. Milner has certainly been very successful in vindicating some parts of the character of Luther, which have been thought not calculated to bear much light, even by his friends. He has demonstrably shewn, that the reformer, how ever zealous, and at times paradoxical, understood how to guard and qualify the doctrines most liable to abuse, as well as those who make this their principal study. There are likewise instances of submission, conciliation, and candour in the conduct of the Saxon reformer, which, as being of a class different from his characteristic virtues, discover more decisively the operation and power of divine grace in the formation of his character.

The account of Erasmus is distinguished by corrections of a different kind. The influence of worldly affections, excited by worldly temptations, in producing an inde cision and duplicity of views and conduct, and, when those were no longer tenable, an evident hostility to truth itself, is sadly exemplified in the facts which the diligence and penetration of the present historian have presented to the reader. The instruction conveyed by this least grateful part of the history is very striking and important; and it is, in a particular and solemn manner, directed to those, whose talents and influence expose them to flattery, and who are therefore likely to be