BOOK VI. (continued 2)

The works of the Apostolical Fathers were, next to the Scriptures, Grotius's favourite study. When he heard that the Epistle of St. Clement, which had been long lost to the world, was published in England by Junius[621], from a Manuscript brought from Egypt, and written about the time of the Council of Nice, he expressed his satisfaction to Descordes[622], in a letter from Hamburg, dated June 1, 1633. "You gave me great pleasure by informing me of the discovery of the Epistle of St. Clement of Rome. No pains should be spared to recover those Fragments, which partake much of the nature of the apostolical Writings: and they ought not to be wholly rejected on account of interpolations: we must do with them as with metals, separate the dross from the pure metal. Would to God that Father Sirmond, or some one of his society like him, would give us the Epistle of Barnabas, from which there are some quotations in Clement of Alexandria. I remember to have heard Father Sirmond himself say that the Jesuits have this letter."

St. Clement's Epistle was not sent to Grotius till after his departure from Hamburg, and arrival at Francfort[623]. He examined it immediately, and wrote his thoughts of it, July 17, to the famous Jerom Bignon, Advocate-General: After reading it over and over, he remained satisfied that it was the same which Photius had seen, and which St. Jerom, Clement of Alexandria, and before them St. Irenæus, had; and which was written in the end of Nero's reign, or some years before that of Vespasian; and that it was most authentic, without the least interpolation. As to the second Epistle, ascribed to St. Clement, he did not think it written by that Pope: but at the same time did not question its being a work of the first Century. Grotius agrees in this with the most learned Critics even among the Roman Catholics[624].

He obtained a sight of St. Barnabas's[625] Epistle, of which he was so desirous; but he had not the satisfaction to see it printed. Usher undertook to publish it in 1643; but before it was finished a fire consumed at Oxford what was already printed[626]. Two years after, Father Menard's edition appeared: but this was the year of Grotius's death. To return to his opinion concerning the points controverted between the Roman Catholics and Protestants: he speaks with great contempt of the inadmissibility[627] of grace. His treatise Of faith and works is written against this error. He maintains that it is the most pernicious system that can be introduced; that it is not to be found in any of the Fathers; and was not so much as tolerated in ancient times.

He proves that fasting was very early observed in the Church, as we may be convinced by reading St. Irenæus[628]; that Lent was always observed by the ancient Church; that the sign of the Cross has something respectable in it, and was used in the first ages, as Tertullian, and others after him, observe; that Virginity[629] is a more perfect state than marriage, as the Fathers taught; that the Romish Church preserved the ancient discipline of the Western Church with regard to the celibacy of the Priests; that Jesus Christ himself taught[630] that such as lived in celibacy were more proper for the ecclesiastical functions; that the African Church agreed in this point with that of Rome; and that, besides, the Romish Church did not refuse to communicate with Churches which permitted Priests to marry. Of all the religious orders he approved most of the congregation of the Fathers of the Oratory, and the institution of the Jesuits, because the first retired when they pleased; and the others might leave the society with permission of their Superiors.

In fine, he speaks of the Council of Trent with great respect. "Those, he says[631], who shall read its Decrees with a mind disposed to peace, will find that every thing is wisely explained in them, and agreeable to what is taught by the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers, as may be seen by the passages cited in the margin."

Such as were displeased with these pacific sentiments, objected to him that he had formerly thought otherwise. Laurentius wrote a piece on this subject, which is mentioned by Grotius in a letter to his brother[632], "Laurentius, says he, objects to me that what I have formerly written contradicts my later works: however, if they be examined by the true rules of criticism, no such contradiction will be found. Farther, if, as I have advanced in years, conversation with able men, and a more perfect examination, have made me change my sentiments, I ought not on that account to be accused of inconstancy, no more than St. Augustin, who retracted many things." He again touches on this point in his Votum pro pace[633]. "If in my youth, says he, having less knowledge than now, the prejudices of education, or a blind attachment to authors of same, carried me too great lengths, shall I not be permitted at present, when I am old, to adopt more reasonable sentiments, after long enquiry and a renunciation of all party spirit?"

It is not surprising that after such a declaration the zealous Clergy sought to render him odious. They printed a book against him, under the title of Grotius papista[634]. It is certain that he gave the preference to the Roman Catholic religion above all the others, and it has even been reported that he promised to M. Bignon, before leaving Paris, to declare himself openly a Roman Catholic[635]. It has also been said that M. Arnaud asserted, that he was informed by a man of honour, who had it from M. Bignon, that Grotius, on setting out for Sweden, declared to this last Gentleman, that as soon as he came back he would make profession of the Roman Catholic Religion. The Jesuits have published a Flemish book under the title of the Testament of Grotius[636], in which they advance that he was ready to turn Roman Catholic: the Author of Vindiciæ Grotianæ has pretended to confute this assertion by some passages in Grotius's earlier works: but his reasoning must appear absurd, since it was only in the latter part of his life that he preferred the Romish Religion. A Protestant, who could not deny that Grotius gave the preference to the Roman Catholic religion, has ventured to advance, that it was perhaps with a view to be made a Cardinal: this wretched conjecture is Osiander's; but besides that Grotius had a wife of whom he was very fond, he was a man incapable of embracing an opinion from motives of interest.

It is very certain that Grotius was most intimate with Father Petau, who cultivated his friendship (as this learned Jesuit tells us himself in one of his letters) in hopes of bringing him to an open profession of the Roman Catholic faith. This gave M. Varlois occasion to say, in his elogium of Father Petau[637], "What did he not do to gain over the illustrious Grotius to the Catholic Religion? He did not dislike us, he was even almost one of us, since he publicly declared his acceptance of the doctrine of the Council of Trent. One thing only was wanting to him, to resort to our Churches, which he only deferred till he could bring many with him to the unity of the Catholic faith." Father Briet says much the same in his Annals of the World for the year 1645. "This year died Hugo Grotius, the honour and glory of men of learning: his intention was to die a Catholic, but he wanted time; for, as he assured me, he believed as we do."

We read in the Menagiana[638], that when Grotius's death was known at Paris, Father Petau, persuaded that he was a Catholic at heart, said mass for his soul: it was even reported at that time, if we may believe the compiler of those Anecdotes, that Grotius wanted to declare himself before his journey to Sweden, but was advised by Father Petau to go there first, and return afterwards to Paris to settle, and fulfil his resolution. It is improbable that such a zealous Catholic as Father Petau would advise Grotius to defer for a moment the edification of all the Catholics by his return to the Church; but it is certain that Father Petau said mass for his friend. The tradition of this fact is preferred among the Jesuits, and there are people of credit alive who remember to have heard it affirmed for certain by Father Harduin and M. Huet Bishop of Avranches[639].

As Grotius's religion was a problem to many, Menage wrote an Epigram on this occasion, the sense of which is, that as many different sects claimed his religion, as there were towns which contended for the birth of Homer:

FOOTNOTES:

XXIII. That which contributed to the removal of Grotius's prejudices against the Catholic Church was undoubtedly the project he had formed of reconciling all the different parties which divide Christendom. He saw well the necessity of having the Catholics on his side; and he flattered himself that having gained them, he would easily bring over the rest. M. Huet did not think such a project absolutely chimerical[640]: "The religious differences, says he, which have long disturbed the peace of Christians, are not impossible to be accommodated. If the parties would set about it sincerely, without obstinacy or private interest, they would soon find ways of accommodation; but some of all parties are so warm, that they censure such of their own party as seek to accommodate differences, with no less severity than they do their adversaries. With what presumptuous rigour did Rivetus the Minister treat Grotius for proposing the means of peace? Grotius, in a modest answer, humbles his pride without naming him; humorously pointing him out by that title taken from Catullus[641], Adversus quemdam opaca quem facit bonum barba."

M. Bayle differed from M. Huet concerning the attempt to unite the different religions: he thinks it as great a chimera as the Philosophers stone, or the quadrature of the circle. The truth is, to hope for success in such a project, one must suppose in all men a sincere love of truth, and a readiness to renounce their prejudices, good understandings, and upright hearts.

In this undertaking one essential thing, which must not be forgot, is, that if the Catholic Church, by a condescendance worthy of her charity and her desire that all men should come to the knowledge of the truth, should remit some point of her discipline, she cannot shew this indulgence with regard to any tenet condemned by the Council of Trent, without betraying her principles: there is therefore only one way of reunion, namely, that those who separated from the Catholic Church acknowledge that they have no argument that can justify their schism, and humbly praying to be received into the bosom of their mother, seek to obtain this favour by sacrificing their errors.

It was very common in the last age for men to busy themselves in finding out ways of reconciliation between the Protestants and Roman Catholics: the Reformed set about it; and I cannot forbear relating here the extravagance of Cregutius, Minister of Montelemar, who in a small treatise, which I have in Manuscript, on the question, Whether an union with the Romish Church is to be hoped for or not? decides it in the affirmative, provided (says he) the Church of Rome begin with renouncing the doctrine of transubstantiation: of which he doth not despair. Grotius with more good sense laboured from his youth in the grand project of reconciling all the parties into which Christians are divided. His good intentions were known to Europe before his escape from Louvestein: Du Vair, Keeper of the Seals, complimented him on his design. "God, says he, has ordered it so that you should owe your deliverance entirely to him, to the end that being delivered from worldly distractions, you may employ the rare talents with which he has entrusted you, in promoting that work which is no doubt most agreeable to him, namely the common peace of Christendom by a reunion of all the members which have separated from their spiritual mother, in whom they or their fathers were conceived. And for as much as it is the thing which many men of honour expect[642] from you, I cannot forbear rejoicing with them, and accelerating by my applause such a happy course." Grotius's answer confirmed the Keeper of the Seals in the idea he had entertained. "God is my witness, says he, how much I am afflicted when I compare the first ages of the Church with our unhappy times, in which the people, differing in articles of faith, have divided into factions, and thereby given occasion to wars of which even the nations of the heathen would have been ashamed. There are doubtless many good men, who grieve to see such a great evil; and, preserving charity for all Christians, ardently desire to see union restored; and are disposed to procure this great blessing by following the Apostle's counsel, to bear with the infirmities of others, and extend their patience and candour to their utmost length: but those rigid notions, which a party spirit has instilled into many, is a great obstacle to the obtaining of this happiness. May God pour out a spirit of charity and meekness on the heads of the Church, on Kings and Potentates, that, surmounting every difficulty, they may without delay restore to the Church her primitive beauty, and above all a solid peace, without prejudice to truth. Many thousands, of whom I am one, pray without ceasing for the execution of this pious design, and desire nothing more than to be employed in it."

Filled with this idea, he proposed to Lewis XIII, in his dedication Of the Rights of War and Peace, to compose the differences of the Churches, and direct the age in which he lived how to terminate them in conformity to the sentiments of that time, when all allow that Christianity was in its purity. He imagined the alliance between France and England would facilitate the execution of a project worthy of such mighty Kings: he had it so much at heart, that he thought himself destined to labour in it from his mother's womb[643]. "It is a vocation, says he to his brother, which God has given me.—I have many witnesses, he writes to Duræus[644], who knew me in my native country, and can attest not only how much I have desired, but also how much I have laboured to lessen the disputes among Christians, in order to promote gradually the restoration of unity. I might even appeal to yourself, in relation to what has since been done both in Germany and Sweden.—I shall never cease, he says to his brother[645], my utmost endeavours for establishing peace among Christians; and if I should not succeed, it will be honourable to die in such a pious enterprize."

He had the consolation to be seconded in his pacific projects by Duræus, a Clergyman in Sweden, with whom he cultivated a correspondence for advancing the coalition of Christians[646]. "What you labour in with so much zeal is precisely what I have been employed about since I began to have any relish for divine things. Experience teaches me how many difficulties we must expect both from Statesmen and Divines bigotted to their own opinions, and averse to those of others: but all these obstacles ought not to prevent our undertaking such a good work: if we do not succeed, we shall at least enjoy the satisfaction of having entertained very sublime ideas. For my part, as I have done it already, so I shall still continue to recommend to the High Chancellor your piety, your learning, your good intentions, and your zeal, to which I ardently wish success; and the accounts of your progress from time to time will give me the greatest pleasure.—Duræus's enterprize is attended with particular difficulties at this time, he writes to Berneggerus[647]: but things as difficult have often had a happy issue: besides, it affords much satisfaction to a man's conscience to have attempted what is highly useful, even though he should fail of success."

Duræus meeting with great obstacles, Grotius consoles him on that head, in a letter of the 21st of November, 1637. "What gives me hopes, he says, is your constancy, and the countenance of the High Chancellor. I have conferred on this subject with the two English Ambassadors, the Earl of Leicester and Lord Scudamore: they are of my opinion, that the present time, while Europe is engaged in war, is not favourable for convoking a general assembly of Protestants."

Duræus's project regarding only a union among Protestants, Daillé and the ablest men among the reformed Ministers approved of it, with some limitations: there was, however, little prospect of success[648] on account of the intollerant spirit of some turbulent Ministers, such as Voetius.

Grotius had much higher views; he proposed nothing less[649] than to reunite all Christians: in this, he said, he would not cease to labour; and, that it would yield him pleasure to die so well employed[650]; that he gave himself little pain about the hatred he might incur, for if men gave way to this fear, never any vice would be corrected.

What encouraged him farther, in this idea, was the number of great men who entertained it before him. "I am not the only one who hath conceived this project, he writes to his brother[651]: Erasmus, Cassander, Vecelius, and Casaubon had the same design. La Miletiere is employed at present in it: Cardinal Richelieu declares that he will protect the coalition; and he is such a happy man that he never undertook any thing in which he did not succeed: and even if there were no hopes of success at present, ought we not to sow the seed which may be useful to posterity[652]? Even if we should only diminish the mutual hatred among Christians, and render them more sociable, would not this be worth purchasing at the price of some labour and reproaches?"

Arminius may likewise be numbered with those who were desirous of reuniting Christians[653]. The method he proposed was to distinguish fundamental points from such as were not, and leave men at liberty to believe or disbelieve the latter. He communicated his project to Casaubon, who highly approved it: but how shall men settle what articles are fundamental? This question is a source of endless disputes. Besides, they must be able to answer the Roman Catholic Divines, who, building on the doctrine that has been always taught, justly pretend that whatever has been decided to be part of that doctrine ought to be regarded as fundamental. Men could not help approving Grotius's intention; but even those, by whom he was held in the greatest esteem, had no confidence in the success of his project. This made him write to Baron Oxenstiern on the subject[654]. "Even if religious differences, he says, had not given occasion to bloody wars, I should still think it the duty of Christians to restore the unity; since, as the Apostle of the Gentiles tells us, we ought to be all members of one body. But even those, who say they desire it, doubt whether the thing be practicable. I know well that all schism, the further it has extended, and the longer it has lasted, will be more difficult to heal; so many being employed to throw oil on the flames: however, there are examples of inveterate evils that have been cured in the Church. After the Council of Chalcedon there was a very great schism in the East, which continued an hundred years till the reign of Justinian, by whose authority, Pope Vigilius listening at last to terms of peace, an end was put to it. Charles V, Ferdinand, and Maximilian thought that the schism between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants of the Augsbourg confession was not incurable. Melancton and other learned men, whose writings are still extant, were of the same opinion. I have heard from great men, that Henry IV. of France said that he would undertake to obtain, for the King of England and his Protestant allies, such conditions of returning to the unity of the Church, as they could not handsomely refuse; and that he purposed to send some of his Bishops into England to confer on this subject with the Prelates of that kingdom: but this project, which had been concerted with several great men, was defeated by the King's death. I believe the chief difference between the tenets of the Augsbourg confession and those of the Council of Trent lies in the ambiguity of some expressions, which are understood differently; but may be explained, by men of understanding and friends to peace, in such manner, that no difference will remain but in those things which may be left to the free discussions of the Learned, without any injury to the peace of the Church. It is evident, from the examples of the Maronites and Greeks, that those who communicate in both kinds, and use a liturgy different from that of the Romish Church, provided it be susceptible of a Catholic sense, even were it in the vulgar tongue, may be received into the communion of the Apostolical See; and likewise those Churches which allow the Priests to marry. What has been done in Sweden and elsewhere, for the reformation of discipline, by suppressing simony and superstition, ought not only to be retained; but there is room to hope that when unity is restored other nations will follow this example, there being many among them who ardently desire, that the abuses which have crept in may be removed according to the ancient Canons. It is very difficult to render the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome useful, or at least not hurtful to the Church: but if one considers, that the Kings and Bishops of the Romish religion are as much concerned in this matter, as the Protestants, and reflects on the precautions taken in it by France and Spain, he will not despair of finding expedients for securing the authority of Kings, their right in the election of Bishops and the prerogatives of the Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops, agreeable to the Canons and the ancient Church discipline. If the Christian world could have rest from war, the Kings of the Romish communion, who are favourably disposed towards the Protestants, might prepare matters at Rome in such manner as to give hope of a happy issue. I grant that these things are attended with difficulties; but so is every great, and useful, and glorious undertaking; and in such a salutary work we may confide in the Almighty's aid."

After this manner did Grotius write to the Swedish Plenipotentiary, in the end of the year 1614, handling with greater delicacy, as he wrote to Protestants, the nice article of the Pope's Supremacy, in favour of which he had spoken more strongly in the pieces he had just published.

We learn from his first letters, that he communicated his pacific ideas to his father, and that he was early sensible of the great difficulties attending a reunion. He writes to his brother, Oct. 27, 1623[655], "What my father writes, of restoring things to the condition they were in before the Council of Trent, would be a great step; but transubstantiation, and the adoration ordained by the Lateran Council, and the invocation of Saints, which is received in all the liturgies, will be great stumbling-blocks to tender consciences."

Some years after, he imagined that the shortest way to a coalition of Christians would be to reduce the articles of faith to a small number. "It were well, says he[656], if Christians would reflect how few the points are, and how clearly expressed in Scripture, which constitute the Rule of Faith laid down by St. Irenæus and Tertullian; and as it is not allowed to doubt of these, the liberty left to men in others might contribute to the peace of the Church."

Afterwards he went much farther. "I could wish, he says to his brother[657], Nov. 14. 1643, that Utengobard, when his health will permit, would write something, if he has not done it already, on the necessity of restoring the unity of the Church; and by what means it may be done. Many think that the true way would be to distinguish between what is necessary, and what is not; and to leave men at full liberty in the latter: but it is as difficult to know what is necessary, as to know what is true. The Scriptures, they say, are the rule: but interpreters vary on the passages referred to. I know not, therefore, whether it would not be best to adhere to the sentiments of the Catholic Church concerning faith and good works: for I think they hold all that is necessary to be believed in order to salvation. As to other articles which have been determined by Councils, or received by the first Christians, we must adopt the moderate interpretation, and such we shall find on every point. If any one cannot prevail with himself to be silent in relation to things, of which he has no certainty, but will disturb the unity of the Church, instead of labouring to restore it, matters will proceed from bad to worse."

Sometimes Grotius imagined he should succeed. Nov. 23, 1641, he writes to Gerard Vossius[658], that Codurus, Justellus, and Melitiere, three of the most learned Protestants, had thanked him for what he had written on the Consultation of Cassander. "I perceive, says he to his brother, by conversing with the men of most learning among the Reformed, and explaining my sentiments to them, that they are of my opinion: their number will increase if my treatises are dispersed; in which, I can truly affirm, I have said nothing from a party spirit, but followed truth as closely as I could."

He writes to his father[659], that he was not without hopes of some good effect from his incessant labours to restore peace to Christendom. "That day will at length shine forth, of which we now perceive the dawn: for many great, pious, and learned men, of both parties, begin to see how unreasonable it is to neglect the reformation of manners while we are framing new tenets, and censuring old ones, which require only a good comment. This excellent design I recommend to your prayers; it was you gave me the first hint of it."

He writes to his brother[660], June 15, 1641, "I have received a visit from some Catholic Counsellors of State, and Codurus the clergyman, who expect the coalition will quickly take place, and pay great regard to my opinion. May the God of peace direct the whole to the advancement of truth and piety."

He received the agreeable account, that the pieces he had written to promote the coalition were approved of in Denmark, Sweden, England, Germany, and Poland.

He imagined several Catholics entered into his views. Divers doctors of the Sorbonne, he said[661], thanked him for the remarks he wrote on the Consultation of Cassander. "The ablest men among the Catholics think what I have done, he tells his brother[662], is written with great freedom and moderation, and approve of it."

"We ought not, he says in another letter[663], to regard only the present age, but posterity also: yet I find some people who think they shall live to see the union restored."

He imagined his manner of handling the controversy was approved of by the ablest men of the Romish Communion, and even at Rome because there were most great men in that city.

For some time he entertained hopes that Cardinal Richelieu would favour him: Jan. 19, 1641, he writes thus to his brother[664]: "When my book is published, many Protestants will see that the reconciliation of the Churches is easier than they imagined: for the principal basis of the Reformation may subsist with the Pope's consent, provided the affair be managed with mildness and without giving him offence. I write this on good grounds: Cardinal Richelieu thinks the thing will succeed: he has said so to several."

Grotius had either been misinformed, or the Cardinal changed his language: for the former writes to his brother[665], March 24, 1642, "As Cardinal Richelieu speaks differently from what he did some time ago about the peace of the churches, I am afraid this change conceals some ill design against the Reformed."

Grotius, finding at length that the project of a coalition was impracticable without the approbation of the Catholics, contracted an intimacy with Father Petau, to whom he communicated all his works relating to religion and the reconciliation of the churches. In a letter of the 3d of December, 1640, he desires him to send him his remarks on his works, "That, says he, by your assistance I may add, suppress, or correct, as shall be most necessary for promoting truth and peace. Would to God that I had as much genius and learning as some others: I would accomplish what it is great barely to attempt."

He communicated to Father Petau the manuscript of his answer to Rivetus[666], desiring him to point out what was not agreeable to truth, or had not a tendency to promote peace. "I am resolved, says he, to publish my answer as soon as I have your opinion, to which I pay great regard."

Father Petau gives us the history of his acquaintance with Grotius, in his XII^th letter[667]. "I had, says he, a great desire to see and converse with him; we have been long together, and very intimate. He is, as far as I can judge, a good man, and of great candour. I do not think him far from becoming a Catholic, after, the example of Holstenius, as you hoped: I shall neglect nothing in my power to reconcile him to Christ, and put him in the way of salvation."

Father Petau mentions him again in another letter, written to Cardinal Francis Barberinus[668]. His Eminence had applied to that learned Jesuit for information in what state Grotius had left, at his death, his work on the Antiquities of Sweden. Father Petau makes him this answer. "I had some connection with Hugo Grotius, and I wish I could say he is now happy. Our love to learning began our acquaintance, which I kept up in hopes of being useful to him. Accordingly I saw him often, and he also visited me, and wrote to me frequently." He concludes with assuring the Cardinal, that he would enquire of his widow about his work relating to Sweden.

Grotius's several attempts to restore the peace of Christendom made him be looked upon as a good man by pacific people; but they occasioned him much uneasiness from those, who, being obstinately attached to the opinions of the first Reformers, regarded all that kept any measures with the Romish Church as Apostates. He laid his account with contradictions. Feb. 23, 1641, he writes to Israel Caski[669], "Those who had the same design that I have were generally evil-treated by both parties, and met with the fate of such as would separate combatants: but the God of peace will judge them with justice. They have also on their side pious and learned men, whose merit outweighs the number of the others.—I believe, says he to his brother[670], my Remarks on Cassander will please few, because there are not many skilled in the Scriptures and Antiquity: most people are bigotted to their opinions. I except against such Judges; I regard them not; nor have I any desire to know what they say. I have granted nothing to the Roman Catholics, but what antiquity gives them." The zealous Clergy, not content with writing against him themselves, every where stirred him up enemies: he speaks in his letters[671] of one Seyffectus of Ulm, who, instigated by Rivetus and others of that party, wrote against him.

Several learned men, who had the highest esteem and the most perfect friendship for Grotius, conceived a violent hatred to him on seeing him lean towards the Catholics. He had been extremely intimate with Salmasius: he had received letters from him filled with the most expressive testimonies of friendship[672]; and Grotius had informed him of the happy change of his fortune, because he looked upon him as one of his best friends: they had long kept up a learned correspondence by letters, in which we find a reciprocal esteem and the greatest politeness; but when Grotius set up for a Mediator, Salmasius publicly declared, that he disapproved of the way of reconciliation proposed by Grotius[673]; and from that time his friendship changed into bitter enmity.

Sarrau, Counsellor in the parliament of Rouen, who had been one of Grotius's best friends, as we may see by the letters that passed between them, withdrew his friendship when he thought him in the interest of the Romish Church. May 31, 1641, he writes[674], "What is reported for certain, that Grotius is gone over to the Popish party, is not true: but with great concern we see him every day employed in something very like it: he will not suffer us to rank him in any class of Protestants whatever, because he has used them all too ill in his Treatises on Antichrist and the Consultation of Cassander."

Sarrau also writes to Salmasius[675], that it was publicly said these projects of reconciliation had set the High Chancellor and several other Lords against Grotius. He flattered himself, however[676], that Sarrau approved of his project: for he writes to his brother, William Grotius, "Among some others of the Reformed, Sarrau, who was a Counsellor in the parliament of Rouen, and is at present in that of Paris, praises my design." But it is probable that Grotius took compliments for realities. It is certain that Grotius's schemes displeased Sarrau, and that there was a coldness between them, for the latter writes thus to Salmasius, Feb. 10, 1644[677], "I am not reconciled to the Swedish Ambassador: if I had an inclination to it I believe it might easily be done. The alteration in our friendship does not proceed from my fault, but solely from his plan of pacification, which I do not approve. I esteem him highly, on account of the great services he has done to learning; and shall even never cease to love him: but, far from commending or approving his late pieces, I am greatly dissatisfied with them: however, I would not have the many excellent things he has done slighted on that account. Every one acknowledges you to be the first man in the republic of letters; but it cannot be denied that he holds the second rank. You have no superior, nor even any equal; suffer him to be after you the first."

The celebrated Schurman, whose extensive knowledge had at that time gained her a very high reputation, signifies to Rivetus, Jan. 20, 1643[678], the general discontent of the greater number of the Reformed against Grotius. "Hitherto, says she, every one had a high idea of Grotius's genius and erudition. But since he departed from sound reason, changed the object of his studies, and insulted by gross invectives the whole body of Protestants, and the principal authors of the reformation, everyone seeks for Grotius in Grotius. Nothing can be more ridiculous or foolish than to see a man, who neither agrees with others, nor with himself, as you have well shewn, undertake, without our desire or consent, to reconcile us with the Roman Catholics, and positively decide that we may, and that we ought to come into his views."

Ruarus[679] had predicted to Grotius himself, that he would reap no other fruit of his labours, than the hatred of both parties: but he was at the same time persuaded that no worldly interest entered into Grotius's views, more honest in this respect than the zealous protestant clergy, who were ready to adopt the most gross and groundless calumnies, provided they were levelled against Grotius.

So much contradiction chagrined him greatly, and altered his temper[680]: by seeking to establish peace among men, he lost the tranquility of his own mind, which he had preserved in his deepest adversity. It is said he became suspicious, and peevish, and lost that politeness towards his friends, which had so advantageously distinguished him from other men of learning. It is even reported (but by one of his enemies, indeed) that one day he abused M. du Puis in his [Grotius's] own house, and turned him out of doors, for presuming to contradict him[681]. Yet it is evident from his letters, that he was most intimate with the two illustrious brothers, Mess. du Puis, and was under high obligations to them. "You have always been my best friends (he writes to them, Nov. 19, 1633[682]) and almost my only ones since Rigaut went to Metz, Salmasius to Leyden, and Tilenus died."

A letter to his brother[683], Nov. 1, 1641, clearly shews the change of his temper. Blondius having used Reigersberg, Grotius's friend and relation, very ill, he writes to his brother William: "If Blondius should speak to you, tell him I have a son here, who will send him a challenge, for affronting the Senator Reigersberg." This menace, which seemed to be an approbation of duelling, much surprised William Grotius, who had read in the Rights of War and Peace[684], that this doctrine was clearly condemned by the gospel. Grotius proves in another part of the same book, "That honour being nothing but the opinion we have of our distinguishing qualities, he who bears with a slight injury, thereby discovers a patience above the common; and thus, instead of lessening his honour, adds to it; and that if some people, from a wrong judgment, bestow improper epithets on this virtue and turn it into ridicule; these wrong judgments change not the nature of the thing, nor lessen its real value. This has not only been acknowledged by the first Christians, but by the ancient Philosophers, who, as we have elsewhere shewn, ascribed an impatient resentment of insults to meanness of soul. Should any one even publish things capable of hurting us with good men, that will not authorise us to kill him. If there are authors who maintain the contrary, it is an erroneous opinion which clasheth even with the principles of natural law: for killing the person who attacks our reputation is a bad way of defending it." Thus Grotius thought in his best days. We have enlarged on this head, to shew into what contradiction, and excess of weakness, great men may fall. William Grotius was no doubt astonished at his brother's vivacity, and probably gave him some check for it; for Grotius afterwards writes to him, "What I wrote to you, relating to my son and Blondius, I did it not because I approved of such things, but because that or something worse might happen."

FOOTNOTES:

XXIV. The hatred, which his projects of reconciliation drew upon him, contributed to the revival of the invidious accusation of Socinianism, which had been formerly laid against him: they founded it on his silence concerning the Trinity in his treatise Of the truth of the Christian religion, on his praises of Crellius, his connection with the Socinians, and, in fine, on his setting aside, or weakening several passages which established Christ's divinity, particularly that in which it is said, that Christ was before Abraham; Grotius explaining it with the Socinians of Christ's existence in the eternal decrees of God.

It was not only his declared enemies, such as Desmarets, Osiander, and many others, that wanted to make him pass for a Socinian: some celebrated Roman Catholics, among whom we may number M. Bossuet, maintained that he was a favourer of Socinianism.

It is true he did not always express himself with the greatest exactness, and sometimes enlarged more on the necessity of good works, than on that of regulating our faith according to the decisions of the Church[685]: but besides that his expressions are susceptible of a favourable sense, it is evident that there are several tenets, the belief of which he thought necessary for salvation: this manifestly appears from the detail he enters into concerning these doctrines in his later works.

If even some mistakes have escaped him, of which the Socinians might take advantage, these will not authorise us to accuse him of being a favourer of that heresy. We know that never any carried a love to truth, or an abhorrence of falsehood, farther than he did: now he always expressed the greatest aversion to Socinianism: he writes to Gerard Vossius[686], in 1613, that there was no body of any authority in the republic, who held not Socinianism in abhorrence. He wrote against Socinus the book entitled A defence of the Catholic faith concerning Christ's satisfaction against Faustus Socinus of Siena, in which he proves that there is nothing contrary to justice in Christ's suffering, though innocent, for offenders; that even the Pagans believed that God punished the crimes of the fathers on the sons; and that, in the early ages of the world, the innocent children were often punished with the guilty fathers. In fine, he shews that the opinion of Socinus is repugnant to Scripture, which tells us that Christ's death has reconciled us to God, according to the expressions of St. Paul, that he died for us, and that by his death our sins are expiated.

He was very orthodox on the article of original sin; for, he says, the only true opinion on this matter is that of the ancient Church, which is well set forth by the Council of Trent.

The Socinians were far from thinking Grotius so favourable to them: Ruarus writes to one of his friends, "You have reason to think, that hitherto no body has written so learnedly against Socinus, as Grotius: he was always much attached to the doctrine of Christ's divinity, even in his earlier years." Grotius wrote to Walæus[687], in 1611, "I do not look upon the Samosatenians, and others, like them, as Christians, nor even as heretics; for their doctrine is repugnant to the belief of all ages, and all nations. They retain Christianity in name, but destroy it in fact. I therefore make no great difference between them and the Mahometans, who even do not revile Christ." M. Bossuet, tho' far from being prejudiced in favour of Grotius, allows however that he did not deny the divinity of Christ, nor the efficacy of his sacrifice.

In several of his letters he clears himself from the charge of Socinianism in such a manner as leaves us no room to doubt his regarding it as a very dangerous heresy. "I give myself little trouble, he writes to his brother[688], June 4, 1639, about the calumnies spread against me by the worst of men, in relation to Socinianism. They may be easily confuted before equitable judges by the writings which I have already published, and by those I shall yet publish. I have defended the sentiments of the ancient Church concerning the Trinity, Christ's satisfaction, and future punishments, by Scripture and the consent of antiquity; and have confuted the contrary opinions. Calvin might more justly be[689] accused of Arianism, than I of Socinianism." Sorbiere, who had been his Secretary; discovering a great propensity to some opinions of Socinus, Grotius earnestly admonished him[690] to abstain from such dangerous innovation.

One of the principal grounds on which they went, was, as we have already seen, his silence concerning the Trinity, in his book Of the truth of the Christian religion: but he has justified his method in such a manner, that this objection cannot be sustained by an equitable judge: he seems to have foreseen it; for, writing to his brother from his prison at Louvestein whilst he was composing this treatise in Dutch verse, "My intention, he says, is not to explain the doctrines of Christianity, but to make the profane, the Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans acknowledge the truth of the Christian religion, and afterwards have recourse to our sacred books to be informed of its tenets. The Trinity, and Christ's divinity could not be introduced into my arguments; for these doctrines will never bring over unbelievers to the Christian faith, and those who attempt to demonstrate them by other arguments than such as are drawn from scripture, absolutely lose their labour: but the authority of the scriptures being once established, these doctrines ought to be held proved." He omitted therefore all mention of these points, not because he disbelieved them, but because he judged it more proper to prove first the divinity of the sacred books, and the mission of Christ: and, as we have already observed, the same method has been followed by the most successful writers on the Truth of Christianity.

He has been much reproached with his letter to Crellius. Grotius had written against Socinus, and Crellius, to vindicate his master, answered Grotius with a politeness and good-breeding seldom found in a polemical divine. Grotius thought it his duty to reply to him, and the measures he kept with this adversary were looked on by his enemies as a betraying of the truth. Here follows the letter, which has been so much talked of. "I was so far from being offended, most learned Crellius, with your book against mine that I inwardly thanked you at that time, and now do it by this letter, first, for treating me with so much civility, that the only thing I have left to complain of is your complimenting me in some places too much: next for informing me of many very useful and entertaining things, and exciting me by your example, to examine thoroughly into the sense of the sacred scriptures: you judge very rightly of me, that I bear no ill-will to any one who differs from me, without prejudice to religion; nor decline the friendship of any good man. I have found in your book of the True Religion, which I have already gone through, and shall read again, many judicious remarks: and I congratulate the present age, that there are men in it who make religion consist, not so much in subtle controversies as in amendment of life and a continual progress in holiness. God grant that my writings may produce these sentiments in the minds of my readers: I should then think my life not spent in vain. The treatise on the truth of the Christian religion I wrote more for my own satisfaction, than for the instruction of others. I don't see how it can be useful, after so many other works on the same subject, but by its brevity. If there be any thing in it that pleases you, or such as you, it is a happiness beyond my expectation. My great aim, in the Rights of War and Peace, was to suppress, as much as was in my power, that savage barbarity unworthy not only of a Christian, but of a man, which, to the misfortune of nations, is now too common, of beginning and carrying on wars by caprice. I hear with pleasure that this work has got into the hands of Princes: God grant they may retain what is good in it; for that would be the most agreeable fruit I could reap from my labour. If ever any occasion should offer of serving you, of your friends, be assured that I shall be ready to give you proofs of my high esteem. Since I can do no more, I sincerely pray that God would protect you, and those who promote religion."

There is another letter from Grotius to Crellius, which has made much noise. After thanking him for a book he had sent him, he adds, "I am resolved to read your works again and again with care, having already reaped much benefit from them. I have always loved peace, and love it still; and am grieved to see so much enmity between those, who call themselves Christians, for such trifling matters[691]."

Crellius having shewn these letters to several, the Socinians and Grotius's enemies spread a report, that he favoured Socinianism: even extracts of these letters were printed. He protested against the abuse made of them, and maintained[692] that if people would candidly read his works, they would easily be convinced of the injustice of ranking him with Socinians.

It is certain, that, notwithstanding the terms which he makes use of in writing to Crellius, he did not at bottom approve of his book: he writes thus in confidence to his brother[693], "I have read Crellius's book: he writes with candour, and doth not want learning; but I cannot see how he will promote religion by departing from the Scripture manner of speaking authorised by antiquity."

"If I have not answered Crellius, he says in another letter[694], it was for prudential reasons, and even by the advice of the Protestants of France, who think that the questions being unknown in this country, ought not to be made public by a confutation. It is easy to refute them with glory, though every one is not capable of it: but, it is still better that they should remain unknown." He speaks, in the same letter, of Socinus as a man very little versed in the sentiments of antiquity, and whose errors he had confuted in many of his works. "Must I also excuse myself, he asks, for not shutting my door against Martinus Ruarus, who desired to see me? The time was not lost that I spent in conversing with him, nor am I sorry for his visit. I acquainted him with my reasons for enquiring into the opinions of the ancient Churches, and for following them: I shewed him that the doctrine of satisfaction was no ways contrary to reason, even in the judgment of the Jews, and brought him some signal proofs of it. I did not conceal what violence it was to the Scripture, and of how dangerous consequence, to deny the eternity of hell torments; and I flatter myself I advanced more with him, than those would have done who abound in reproaches; nor do I see why I should abstain from writing to him, when I find the pillars of the Greek Church corresponding by letters even with Pagans. For my part, I am resolved and accustomed to preserve friendship for all men, particularly Christians, although erring; and I shall never blush at it."

He advances almost the same reasons to clear himself from the charge of Socinianism, in a long letter to Gerard Vossius[695], of which we shall make no extract to avoid repetitions.

In fine, those who knew Grotius best have defended him on this head. The celebrated Jerom Bignon, who lived in much intimacy with him, could not bear to [696]hear him accused of Socinianism: he said he knew him perfectly, and so far from being a Socinian, he had sometimes seen him almost in a disposition to turn Roman Catholic. His intimate connection with Father Petau, whose zeal for the orthodox faith was equal to his profound learning, is a clear evidences that the Jesuit did not think him a Socinian. No man was more exposed than Grotius to groundless accusations. An anonymous piece was written against him, accusing him of being a Semi-Pelagian: he did not think proper to publish a defence; but he mentions this accusation in a letter to his brother[697] of the 29th of May, 1618. "In my treatise De ordinum Hollandiæ pietate, I have mentioned Semi-Pelagianism as a very grievous error. The sentiments of the Remonstrants are very different from Semi-Pelagianism, for the Priests of Marseilles, who were called Semi-Pelagians, or the remains of the Pelagians, in speaking of the necessity of grace, denied that grace preceded good motions in the foul, at least in some men: the Remonstrants, on the contrary, maintain, that all that is spiritually good in us, even the beginning of it flows from antecedent grace. Consult the Synod of Orange, by which the Priests of Marseilles were confuted. But those that believe predestination is a consequence of prescience, or that grace is given to all men, or in fine that it may be refilled, are certainly not Semi-Pelagians."

They carried their calumnies so far, as even to accuse him of Judaism. We read in the Patiniana[698] that M. Bignon, Advocate-General, affirmed that Grotius had acknowledged, if he would change his religion, he would turn Jew. John Mallet, in his book Of Atheism[699] has not only advanced that Grotius judaised in his Commentary on the Prophets, but that if he had lived much longer he would have become a Turk.

Even the immortality of the soul, said others, he did not believe[700]: this ridiculous tale is grounded on these words of the Chevreana[701]: "Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, formerly told me, that having asked the celebrated Grotius, whether the immortality of the soul could be demonstrated, he answered, Not well, my Lord; not well."

It is universally known that these books in Ana are of little authority. We must be informed of all the circumstances of this pretended conversation before we can determine Grotius's meaning: one thing is certain, that he has proved the immortality of the soul by arguments drawn from reason in his treatise On the Truth of the Christian Religion[702].

FOOTNOTES:

XXV. If Grotius's merit stirred up envy, and if his projects of reconciliation procured him hatred, the more irreconcilable as it was founded on a religious pretext, he had also a great number of friends and judicious persons for him, who did justice to his virtue and his talents. We shall not enter into a detail of all the testimonies in his favour, they would fill a large volume: we shall confine ourselves to the Elogiums of those whose suffrages deserve most attention. We have already seen, that even when a boy he was highly extolled by the greatest men of his age. Isaac Pontanus, Meursius, James Gillot, Barlæus, John Dousa, M. de Thou, the great Scaliger, Casaubon, Vossius, Lipsius, Baudius, celebrated his childhood. He justified the great hopes that were so early conceived of him, and the praises he received were an additional motive to merit the public esteem. Baudius compared him to Scaliger[703], who, he said, was his favourite author. This he wrote on the third of March, 1606, when Grotius was yet much under age. In a scazon, written in his praise, he calls him [704]a great, an admirable, and an original man. "If any, says he in a letter dated October 8, 1607[705], can form a just notion of Grotius's merit, which exceeds all that can be said of it, I am one; and I think him equal to any office. Ignorant people, who judge of virtue by years and a long beard, may object to him his youth; but in my opinion that makes for him, since in his earliest youth he possesses the prudence and ripeness of understanding of the most aged."

The celebrated Peyresc having made a journey into Holland in 1606, would not leave the Hague[706] till he had made acquaintance with Grotius, already famous for universal learning. "Though he was but very young, says Gassendi[707], when Peyresc heard of his arrival at Paris, he said, that France, by gaining Grotius, had a sufficient reparation for the loss of Scaliger; and that if some others had been the ornament of the age, he was the wonder of it; and it is with reason (adds M. Mesnage, after relating this story of Peyresc) that we still consider Grotius as a prodigy of learning, since he has made a greater proficiency in most of the sciences, than many of those who have wholly applied to one of them in particular."

In the funeral Elogium of Peyresc, delivered at Rome December 2, 1637, mention is made of the learned men with whom he was connected. James Bucard, who spoke it, distinguisheth Salmasius and Grotius from the rest, styling them the Princes of literature and of the fine arts. We cannot conceive a higher idea of Grotius than the celebrated Gerard Vossius entertained, as appears from the beautiful poem written by him in honour of his friend: we would give it at length if it were not too long, but we cannot omit the last stanza:

He never mentions Grotius without admiration. "He is, says he[708], one of the greatest ornaments of our times, or rather the miracle, the eternal honour, of Holland, and of his age." He wrote to Meursius[709], "If we would do him justice, there is none we can place above him, nor even any we can compare with him."

Utengobard, who had been his master, said, that to speak after Grotius, was to expose one's self to be laughed at.

Balzac has employed his most eloquent phrases to express his thoughts of Grotius: he writes to Mesnage, "Is it true, what you tell me, of the Swedish Ambassador, and shall I be so happy to share in his esteem? I tell it you as solemnly as if I were by the altar on which we swore to be friends, that my ambition was dead, but you have revived it, and my transports would be as great as yours, if my blood were as fine and sparkling: who would not glory in the esteem of one whose birth our age ought to be proud of? he is a modern whom the President Jeannin sets in opposition to the greatest of the ancients." In another letter written to Chapelain[710], he says: "Whatever comes from Grotius is a high recommendation of him to me; and besides the solidity of his learning, the strength of his reasoning, and the graces of his language, I observe in it an air of probity, that one may put entire confidence in him, excepting in what regards our Church, to which he is unhappily a stranger."

Colomiez, in his Bibliotheque choisie[711], has collected some of the Elogiums which had been then made of Grotius: "The President Jeannin, says he, according to the relation of Balzac, opposes Grotius to the greatest men of antiquity. Salmasius, in his notes on Solinus, styles him Virum excellentissimæ doctrinæ in omni genere litterarum; Selden, in his Mare clausum, virum acuminis et omnigenæ doctrinæ præstantiâ incomparabilem; Gerard Vossius, in his Latin Poems, Seculi nostri grande ornamentum; Pricæus, on the xivth of St. Matthew, Virum ingentem, quem non sine horrore mirati sumus: In fine, M. Blondel, who was not lavish of his praise, says of him in his Sibyls, that he was a very great man, whether we consider the sublimity of his genius, the universality of his learning, or the diversity of his writings; in fine, says Colomiez[712], he appears a great critic in his Martianus Capella, his Aratus, and his Stobæus; in his Notes on Lucan and Tacitus a great historian, a great statesman, a great divine; but however excellent these different works may be, we must however acknowledge that Grotius's Letters and Poems much surpass them; and that if he appeared great in those, in these he is incomparable. But what astonishes me is, that he should have written so many letters, and made so many verses, and all should be of equal strength, that is, that all should partake of the powerful and divine genius which animated that great man." Episcopius, who was regarded as an oracle by his party, looked on Grotius as his oracle. "Your opinion, he writes to him[713], shall be to me the decision of an oracle; for I know your love to truth and friendship for me to be such, that in giving it you regard only truth."

Christian Habsoeker and Philip Limborch speak of him with raptures in the Preface to the Letters of illustrious men: "At the name of the incomparable Grotius, who is above all praise, and even all envy, we are in a sort of transport. How shall we sufficiently praise the virtues of that most illustrious hero, whom all true scholars regard as the most learned of the Learned: we shall only relate the prophecy concerning him in 1614 by Daniel Heinsius in some verses which ought to be put under his picture."

Those lines are in fact the most complete Elogium that can be made of a man.

Heinsius and Grotius had been most intimate in their youth: the divisions which happened in the Republic destroyed this close union: Heinsius joined the Contra-Remonstrants, and was Secretary to the Commissioners of the Synod of Dort. Grotius had reason to complain of him on several occasions: nevertheless, talking with Cardinal Richelieu about him, Grotius greatly commended his genius and learning. He gives an account of this conversation to his brother; adding, "In this manner I am wont to revenge myself on those who hate me." Cardinal Richelieu, though not prejudiced in favour of Grotius, ranked him however among the three first scholars of the age: the other two were Claudius Salmasius, and Jerom Bignon. This famous Advocate-General said of Grotius[714], that he was the most learned man who had appeared in the world since Aristotle.

Foreigners who loved the sciences would not leave France without seeing Grotius. John Christenius, who was at Paris in 1629, had more satisfaction in seeing him, than in the whole kingdom beside: he writes thus to John Kirkman, June 20, 1629. "The pleasure I have had, received considerable addition not only from having seen, but also often conversed with that great and eloquent man who has no fellow, I mean Hugo Grotius; for whom I have the highest esteem, and have been for many years of the same opinion with all who know that he possesses singly what would be sufficient to entitle many to great praise. He is master of all that is worth knowing in sacred and profane literature. Besides the Eastern languages, there is no art nor science with which he is not perfectly acquainted: this appears from his agreeable conversation: ask him about any thing, he immediately gives you an exact answer, and in such a manner as to excite the admiration of those who hear him. After talking about the sciences, if you enquire of him what passes in this part of the world, or the other, you will imagine you heard the answer of an oracle who delivers what is most worthy to be known. His virtue is above all I can say of it, and I want eloquence sufficiently to extol so great a man."

Sarrau[715], who had been prejudiced against Grotius since his leaving the Protestants, ventures not however to decide whether Salmasius or Grotius excelled in literature; and he hesitates to make the determination, even in a letter written to Salmasius, wherein he appears much dissatisfied with Grotius. "Whether the first place in literature in this age be due to you or to him, posterity will judge more equitably than this generation."

On hearing of Grotius's death, he writes to Salmasius in these terms[716]: "Hugo Grotius was certainly a great man in name and in fact: he was the star of our age. How great a loss has learning sustained! Whilst books and sciences are held in honour his name will flourish. For my part, whilst I live I shall glory in my intimacy with him. You now reign singly (he concludes, addressing himself to Salmasius) I pray God you may reign long." He calls him elsewhere[717] the Coryphæus of learning sacred and prophane.

Queen Christina, hearing of his death, wrote to his widow to make her compliments of condolence, and to get the manuscripts he left. "My Ambassador, she says, may have acquainted you in part with my high esteem for his admirable learning and the good services he did me: but he could not express how dear I hold his memory, and the effects of his great labours. If gold and silver could contribute any thing to the redeeming such a valuable life, I would chearfully employ all I am mistress of for that purpose." She concludes with asking his widow to procure her all the manuscripts of this learned man, whose works had always given her great pleasure: assuring her that they could not fall into better hands, and that the author having been of use to her in his life-time, it was just that she should not be deprived after his death of the fruits of his illustrious labours.

Duncomius wrote to Gerard Vossius, February 2, 1646[718], "It is certain and beyond dispute that Grotius was a very illustrious hero, usque ad stuporem ferè et miraculum; that he joined science with wisdom; that he was above all praise; and that he was deeply skilled in divine and human learning."

Meric Casaubon, son of Isaac, had no less esteem for Grotius than his illustrious father had had before him. In his preface to Hierocles's book Of providence and destiny, "Hugo Grotius, he says, was a great, an incomparable man: in him was seen what is very rare, a peaceable spirit, with much judgment, and infinite erudition." Augustus Buchner[719] calls Grotius the greatest ornament of his time, the oracle of human wisdom, and the wonder of the age.

Lewis du Moulin comparing Grotius with Salmasius[720], allows Grotius much more judgment, but gives to Salmasius a greater extent of knowledge. In another place[721], where he censures Grotius for the part he had acted with regard to religion, he bestows on him, after all, in other respects the highest praises. "Neither the present nor the last age, he says, hath produced a man superior to Grotius in judgment and erudition. He was great in everything: a very great Divine, Lawyer, Orator, Poet, Philosopher; his genius, far from being confined within the limits of the bar, was scarce bounded by those of nature."

Guy Patin writes[722], February 24, 1662, "They have finished in Holland, in nine volumes in folio, an edition of all the works of Grotius, whom I formerly knew: he was the finest genius of his time; a man of surprising knowledge, and perfect master of polite and useful learning." "He and Salmasius were the greatest scholars or their time," he writes in another letter[723]. And in another place, "Peter Grotius, says he[724], was son of the first man of his age."

"I would not mention the most learned and greatest man of this country, says Wicquefort[725], were I not forced to it by the remarks published at Brussels on what I have said of him in my Memoirs: it will be readily conceived that I mean Hugo de Groot. I admire, with the rest of the world, the genius, the probity, and the works of this great man; and besides this there are particular considerations, which inspire me with a veneration for his memory."

Morhof calls him the phoenix of his age[726]: Hofman gives him the same commendation.

"He is the greatest of men, says Meibomius[727], the light and support of letters; on whom we can bestow no praise but what will fall short of his virtue and erudition. His uncommon penetration makes us compare him to an eagle in the clouds," says Oldenburg.

In 1727 was printed at Hall in Saxony, under the false name of Delft, a book entitled Hugonis Grotii Belgarum Phoenicis manes ab iniquis obtrectationibus vindicati. The author, who was said to be M. Lehman[728], speaks of Grotius as the greatest man Holland ever produced, and fit to be compared with the most illustrious of other Countries, and he flatters himself that the Dutch will in the issue agree with all nations, that he was the greatest ornament of their country. He gives his thoughts of Grotius in the following lines.

Salmasius, who so unmercifully fell foul of Grotius's memory, had formerly been one of his greatest admirers. Grotius gave him the title of Most Eminent, which Pope Urbin VIII. had a very little time before attributed to the Cardinals. Salmasius answers him[729] August 8, 1630. "You not only offend the Cardinals, but, more than most eminent Grotius (super eminentissime) you offend me, by giving me a title which you much better deserve yourself."

These two Princes of Literature, as they were styled, had at this time a great reciprocal esteem and friendship for each other. We learn from Grotius's letters[730], that Salmasius, notwithstanding the advantageous idea he entertained of his own knowledge, sometimes consulted him. He changed all of a sudden: Grotius imagined[731] it was to make his court to those in power in Holland; but Sarrau, who knew both, assures us[732] that Salmasius's coldness wholly proceeded from the change of Grotius's sentiments in religion. The news of Grotius's death was scarce spread over Europe, when Salmasius poured out all his venom in a letter written from Leyden, Nov. 20, 1645, to Sarrau[733].

"You think Grotius, says he, the first among the learned; for my part, I give that rank to Vossius. I do not think it is necessary to wait for the judgment of posterity, to know whose opinion is most just: it will be sufficient to consult the learned in Italy, Germany, in this country, and even in France: but till we have their suffrages let us go through all the sciences, and examine the extent of Grotius's capacity. There is no one whom I would desire to resemble less in divinity: he is every where a Socinian, both in his treatise On the Truth of the Christian Religion, and his Commentary on the Old and New Testament. As to Philosophy, he can scarce be compared with the moderately skilled. If we consider him with regard to the art of Disputation, I have never seen a person reason with less force, as is evident from his pieces which Rivetus and Desmarets have answered. There are several who may be ranked with him as to knowledge of polite learning, and even a great number who excel him: not a few have had as much Greek and Latin, and many of the learned have been more masters of the Oriental Languages. His Florum sparsio in jus Justinianeum shew his skill in the Law. A Professor of Helmstat has undertaken to confute his book Of the Rights of War and Peace, and has told some friends, whom I have seen, that he would prove that every page contained gross blunders[734]. He was a great Poet; but every one here prefers Barlæus; some even Heinsius. But besides, when the point to be decided is priority in learning, poetry is set aside by consent of all good judges. Vossius excels Grotius in every thing. This is not only my opinion, but that of all the learned in Italy, Germany, Poland, and Holland, as I have had an opportunity to know by their letters, their writings, and their conversation. If we compare their writings, which of Grotius's works can we prefer to those of Vossius? Is it his Notes on Martianus Capella, written when he was but a boy? Is it his Aratus? in which he has ostentatiously introduced some Arabic terms, for he scarce knew the elements of that language, as he acknowledged to me himself in some letters which I keep, written in answer to my enquiry about some Arabic words that puzzled me. Will you tell me of his Notes on Lucan? what Vossius has done on the fragments of the ancient Tragic and Comic Writers appears to me of much greater value. We know from other pieces what a poor critic Grotius was, though a great man in some respects. As inconsiderable as I am, I would not have my name prefixed to his Commentary on the Old Testament; for nothing can be more childish, or unworthy a man of his great character, than many of his notes. I shall take notice in another place of his Commentary on the New Testament, and frankly declare what I think of it. Such are my sentiments of the person who merits the first place in literature. I have the suffrages of many of the learned in different branches for me, and shall name them when you inform me who are of your opinion."

This letter, in which hatred, jealousy, and partiality openly shew themselves, rather hurt Salmasius than injured Grotius's character: the contempt with which he speaks of the excellent treatise Of the Rights of War and Peace, which is worth all that Salmasius ever wrote, incensed the whole republic of letters against him. It has been observed that all that was good in his pieces On the power of Kings, is taken from Grotius, whom he hath not once named; and that when he departed from him, he sinks much beneath Grotius. But such was Salmasius's character: jealous of the reputation of those who might be put in the scale against him, he had too high an opinion of himself, and too much despised others, in the judgment of the wise Gronovius. Grotius's wife being informed of the indiscreet stories published by Salmasius against the memory of her husband, gave him to understand, that if he would not forbear, the only answer she should make to his invectives would be the publication of his former letters to Grotius, filled with elogiums. For the rest, Salmasius's invectives injured only himself: and it was said publicly, that he plucked the hairs of a dead lion.

Two medals were struck in honour of Grotius, which we find in the end of the first volume of the History of the United Provinces by Le Clerc, one of his greatest admirers. The first has on one side the bust of that great man, with his name, HUGO GROTIUS, which is to him instead of an elogium: and on the other a chest, on which are the arms of Sweden and France, to express his retreat into France, and his embassy from Sweden at that Court: at the side of the chest is the castle of Louvestein, and opposite to it a rising sun, with these words: MELIOR POST ASPERA FATA RESURGO; I rise brighter after my misfortune. In the exergue is, natus 1583, obiit 1645. The second medal, larger than the first, also represents Grotius on one side with the time of his birth and death. HUGO GROTIUS NATUS 1583, 10 APRILIS, OBIIT 1645, 28 AUGUSTI: on the reverse is this inscription in Dutch verse: the Phoenix of his Country, the Oracle of Delft, the great Genius, the Light which enlighteneth the earth.

FOOTNOTES:

XXVI. It remains that we should relate what we know of Grotius's family. After his death, his wife communicated with the Church of England; which, it is reported, she said she did in conformity to the dying intentions of her husband. It is certain[735] that Grotius had a respect for the Church of England; but it is difficult to believe, that he should desire his wife to declare he died in the communion of that Church: for, besides that this fact is not easy to be reconciled with his later works, it has no foundation but a letter written June 23, 1707, which is supported only by a hearsay ill-circumstantiated.

Grotius's wife died at the Hague in the communion of the Remonstrants; which, according to Le Clerc, was not contrary to her husband's last orders, as the Remonstrants allowed of communion with the Church of England.

Grotius had three sons and three daughters by his marriage. His eldest son, Cornelius, studied in Holland under the direction of his grandfather[736]. Grotius sent for him afterwards to Paris, where he himself superintended his studies. He wrote to his brother, William Grotius[737], Aug. 16, 1630, that Cornelius had learned the Hebrew grammar; that he was studying the Greek and Logic; and had made himself matter of the Art of Oratory, without neglecting Poetry, for which the young Cornelius had a particular turn. Some very good verses, written by him, are published in the poems of Vincent Fabricius. Grotius made him read Vossius's pieces on rhetoric, which he thought could not be excelled; he afterwards wanted Cornelius to study the Roman Law, and the Laws of Holland: he also made him read Physics and Metaphysics; but his progress in these sciences was inconsiderable, according to Du Maurier, on account of his indolence and love of pleasure. Grotius sent him after this to make his court to the High Chancellor, who passed the beginning of the year 1636 at Straelsund: Oxenstiern received him very graciously, and took him into his service as Latin Secretary[738]. Grotius was at the height of his joy on seeing his son in a capacity of meriting the esteem and protection of such a great man as Oxenstiern: he flattered himself[739], that the honourable place, which his son held, would induce him to shake off his indolence; and he made him frequent remonstrances on this subject: but Cornelius's natural temper prevailed, and he considered his employment as attended with too much trouble. He imagined that a military life would suit him better[740], and wrote to his father on that head. Grotius opposed this new turn for some time; but his remonstrances producing no effect, he wrote to Muller[741], April 4, 1638, that his son had preferred Mars to the Muses, and that he had thought fit to yield to his choice, as war was also a road to glory; and moreover the time, which Cornelius had spent in literature, would not be absolutely lost for war. He added, that the Duke of Weymar being the greatest and most experienced general of his age, he was very desirous that his son should serve under such an able master; and that he would send him with a reinforcement that was marching to that Prince, who, he hoped, would assist him with his advice. Cornelius was very well received by the Duke[742]; and for some time kept up an exact correspondence with his father by letters, who complimented him on his diligence in writing. The Duke of Weymar promised to advance him, if he paid a proper regard to his father's counsels. Cornelius was by nature so inconstant, that he soon took a dislike to the army: he had even thoughts of returning to his father, who diverted him from it as a step which would dishonour him.

On the Duke of Weymar's death, Reigersberg advised Cornelius to write that Prince's history. Young Grotius mentioning this project to his father, he pressed him to execute it, because it would give him an opportunity of expressing his gratitude to a Prince who had laid him under great obligations, and done such important services to Sweden. Besides, this work would be of use to the author, by obliging him to study the Art of War, in order to speak of it properly. Cornelius contented himself with projecting this design[743]: he changed his service, and entered into the Marshal de Chatillon's army, in which he continued not long: he made the campaign of 1640, in quality of Cornet in the Colonel's company of a German regiment of horse in the French service. Soon after he got a company: however he wanted to serve in the Valtoline[744]. He had not been long there before he took a fancy to enter into the Venetians service; and, without consulting his father, went to Venice to make his contract with them: but it is probable they could not agree; for Grotius writes[745], July 16, 1644, "Cornelius will return from the Antenorides without doing any thing." This fickleness of temper much displeased Grotius[746], who in the latter part of his life spoke of his son with great indifference.

In the sequel, when the States of Holland wanted to indemnify such as were unjustly persecuted during the overgrown power of the Stadtholders[747], they gave Cornelius Grotius a company in the guards; to Peter, a troop of horse; and to Mombas, their brother-in-law, a regiment; with leave to dispose of them, or sell them to the best advantage: which was contrary to custom and law.

It was in 1633 that the States thus sought to repair the injuries which Grotius had formerly suffered. Cornelius died unmarried. Peter, Grotius's second son, was more like his father. In his infancy he was very sickly: having received a hurt in his leg[748], the Surgeons and Physicians treated it so ill, that he remained lame all his days. His father, thinking his education would be cheaper in Holland than at Paris, sent him to his native country. The young Grotius gave great satisfaction to his parents, as we learn by a letter from Grotius to his brother William[749], Oct. 4, 1630, "Your accounts of my son give me great pleasure: if he goes on in the same manner, he will have reason to be satisfied with me." Gerard Vossius directed his studies; and by a letter[750] of thanks from Grotius to him, we learn that he was of an indolent turn. "The exhortations you give Peter are worthy of the friendship you have always entertained for me and mine. I cannot think why my children should be so idle; perhaps it is because they see their father's diligence has turned to so little account."

In 1634 Peter Grotius was sent to[751] Amsterdam to learn the use of the globes and navigation: Grotius intended that he should afterwards serve in some expedition at sea: he seems at this time to have designed him for a Sailor. Peter had an inclination to learn Arabic under the learned Golius at Leyden: but his Father would only suffer him to visit this eminent professor, and consult him about the pronunciation of that language, which he thought his son might learn without a master at his leisure hours.

Grotius was desirous that his son should make a voyage to the East-Indies[752], or, if that was too long a voyage, that he should go to the Brasils, or some other part of America, to learn what was not to be learnt at home, and might be of use to him afterwards.

Vossius, in the mean time, gave ample testimonials not only of Peter's progress in the sciences, but also of his moral conduct. He wanted to join, to the studies recommended to him by his father, that of Law; and Grotius was not against it. He appears to have been somewhat uneasy about what this youth would do: May 17, 1635, he writes to Vossius, "I should be glad to know what my son's health will permit him to do, and to what his inclination leads him: there are some things which will prevent his being agreeable at court, or his undertaking long journies by land. I am not against his trying the sea; but I would not force any of my children against their inclination. The make of his body would require a sedentary life; but I am afraid he has too much vivacity to bear with it. I would beg of you to consult with himself and his friends on this subject; and at the same time to give me your own opinion."

He writes again to Vossius some time after, that if his son had a dislike to long voyages, he would nevertheless have him study Commerce and Navigation rather than the quibbles of the Law: "Not but a general knowledge of public law, and the laws of his own country, may be of use to him whatever manner of life he chuses: but I would not have him make it his principal study; and remember Horace's precept, to keep his eye ever on the mark. If it is out of regard to me he wants to translate the Tragedy of Sophomphaneus, he deserves to be commended, even if he should make some mistakes: however I should not be sorry if it were done by one more advanced in years, and better skilled in poetry."

This youth, uncertain what course to take, was in doubt whether he ought not to seek his fortune in Sweden under the credit of his father's name. Grotius, hearing of this design, writes to his brother[753], "If my son thinks to raise himself in Sweden, I see no other way of doing it, than by a perfect knowledge of Navigation and Commerce. The profession of a Lawyer is not lucrative, nor doth it succeed with every one."

Vossius was still well pleased with him[754]. The ardour he discovered for the study of the Law determined Grotius to propose to him a translation of the Institutes of the Law of Holland into good Latin, like that of the Digests; and he asked his brother, William Grotius, and all his friends, to encourage and assist his Son in the execution of this design, which might be useful to the public and to the author. He wrote to Gerard Vossius[755] to the same effect. William Grotius laboured with his nephew in this translation. Grotius, in returning him his thanks for assisting his Son, desires him to make him read, as he went on, what was contained in the Digests relating to the matter he was translating.

In summer, 1636, Peter Grotius had an offer of going to the Brasils in Count Nassau's retinue. Grotius approved of it, provided his Son might have a creditable post, in which he might learn Navigation: he was the more desirous that his Son might make this voyage, as the present state of his affairs would not permit him to keep him in the way the latter chose to live.

If this project did not succeed, Grotius wanted that his Son should pass the winter at the Hague in the study of the Law, and come to France in the spring, 1637, to take his degree in the university of Orleans; then return to the Hague to study some time longer, and afterwards go to Amsterdam to practise as an Advocate, this profession being there most lucrative.

The voyage to the Brasils did not take place. Peter Grotius came to his father in summer, 1637. He seems to have been well satisfied with him, as we may judge by a letter written to his brother[756], Aug. 15, this year. "Peter is arrived here: he is much indebted to you, to his grandfather, and all his friends and relations, for instilling into him such good principles. I am very well satisfied with his diligence." He writes six months after[757], "I am only afraid for his ambition, which is the vice of youth: he will live with more ease, and gain more as an Advocate. I would beg of you, that as soon as he returns, which will be immediately, you would put him upon studying the precedents in law. But what is chiefly to be inculcated is diligence and love of labour." Peter was preparing to return to Holland, when a Surgeon undertook to make him walk without halting[758]. There were some hopes of his succeeding in whole or in part; but the event did not correspond with the Surgeon's promises, and Peter set out soon after for Holland, in the end of April, 1638. Grotius did not regret the time his Son had passed in France. "The time Peter has been here, he says to his brother[759], was not lost either for him or me: for he has learnt several useful things, and it has been a great pleasure to me to communicate what I have learnt to one of my children, or at least to have put him in a way of informing himself. I recommend him to you, and would beg of you to give him such exercises as may fit him to hold a distinguished rank amonst the Orators and Advocates, that his merit may silently reproach the Dutch for what they did against his Father. But, above all things, I would recommend to you the cultivation of those sentiments of piety which I have instilled into him, and to keep him from bad company."

Grotius wrote to Vossius[760], when his Son set out on his return to Holland, begging of him to continue to watch over the studies of this youth; and assuring him at the same time, that the friendship, which the city of Amsterdam preserved for him, was the only reason which induced him to consent that any part of him should live in a country where he had been so ill-treated.

Vossius and William Grotius were highly satisfied with Peter Grotius, and made great encomiums on him to his father, who wrote to his son, commending his diligence in the study of the Law. He informed him at the same time of a successful method of pleading, which he himself had formerly used with advantage. We have spoken of it elsewhere[761]. He was desirous of settling him as soon as possible at Amsterdam, that he might learn navigation and commerce, the municipal laws of the town, and whatever might contribute to raise his fortune. He wanted to accustom him to a labour, by which he might live without his father's assistance. "If he thinks, says Grotius to his brother[762], to make his fortune with what money he will get from me, he is greatly deceived: let him do as I did, and cut out a path for himself; otherwise he must not count upon my liberality." April 21, 1640, he caused him to be chid[763] for running about too much, and for his learning Italian and several things for which he had little occasion. "That is not the way, says he, to please me, nor to be useful to himself."

In fine, Peter Grotius began to plead at the Hague, in[764] spring 1640. There was a prospect at that time of getting him made Pensionary of Boisleduc: this design required some money, which Grotius refused not to advance; but he could scarce believe that the Prince of Orange would consent to have his son in this place, unless he abjured Arminianism. Besides, Peter Grotius had so little experience in the law, that his father did not yet think him capable of filling a place, the difficulties of which he knew by experience: he would much rather have had his son go to Amsterdam, to follow the bar, and seek some advantageous match, that his children might one day enter into the magistracy of a city, which alone kept alive expiring liberty.

Peter Grotius seems to have had a dislike to Amsterdam; for his father writes thus to his brother William Grotius[765], March 9, 1641. "I have consulted with my wife about Peter's affairs: we are of opinion that he should go to Amsterdam, if he can be prevailed with; if not, you must tell him to come here: he will serve me for Secretary, and I shall give him lectures in law, which perhaps he would not have received from any other. Let him bring with him what he has translated of the Institutes of the Laws of Holland." Grotius soon changed his opinion; for he writes to his brother[766], April 13, in the same year: "I would not have Peter come here: therefore keep him with you."

The irresolution of Peter Grotius chagrined his father: "I am much afraid, he writes to his brother[767], that he will some day smart for his continual disobedience." Grotius told his son[768], that he must expect no letters from him, unless he sent him the Latin translation of the Institutes of the Laws of Holland, which he had long before enjoined him to set about. Writing to his brother[769], he says, "I am much afraid, that the counsels which Peter follows, and will follow hereafter, are inconsistent with a good conscience. I am resolved to refer the whole to God, and not intermeddle in it. I should be sorry to have a repetition of the grief I suffer on his account."

Some time after, he was better satisfied with him, and wrote to his brother William[770], Feb. 28, 1643, "I commend Peter highly for applying to the bar: it is the way to acquire much useful knowledge, to gain a character, and in time to lay up something, or to rise higher." This is all that Grotius's letters inform us about his son: the sequel of whose life is more interesting.

In 1652, he married, for love, an Attorney's daughter, rich and handsome; but his mother and his other friends disliked the match. In the year following, a powerful party wanted to get him made Greffier of Amsterdam; but Veue Linchovius opposed him with great virulence and violence; maintaining that such a place ought not to be given to the son of an out-law, whose religious sentiments were erroneous. The declamations of this hot-headed man preventing Grotius from being nominated to the place, he bore the disappointment with great tranquility. In 1655, he purposed to publish a complete edition of his father's works, as appears by the privilege of the Emperor Ferdinand III. dated Oct. 2, 1655, prefixed to his theological works. This edition, which unfortunately he did not go on with, was to be in nine volumes in folio. The first was to contain his Annotations on the Old Testament; the second, the Commentary on the New; the third would have comprehended his smaller theological pieces; the fourth, the treatise De Jure Belli & Pacis, the Apology, and the work De Imperio summarum potestatum circa Sacra; the fifth, Law Tracts; the sixth, Writings Historical; the seventh, Philological Works; the eighth, Poetical Translations, the Anthologia, Stobæus, and the Extracts from the Tragedies and Comedies; and, lastly, the ninth, his Poems and Letters. It is probable, that this design was defeated by Grotius's departure from Holland. It was not till long after, in 1679, that the handsome edition of Grotius's theological works was published in three volumes in folio, dedicated to King Charles II. of England by Peter Grotius, Feb. 28, 1678. The bookseller promised, in an advertisement prefixed to it, to print all Grotius's other works, even those that had never been published; but he did not fulfil his engagements.

Grotius's enemies still opposing his son's advancement, he entered into the service of Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, to whom Hugo Grotius had done singular service during his misfortunes. This Prince nominated him his Agent at the Hague.

The ferment in mens minds having subsided, and the face of affairs being changed in Holland, Peter Grotius was nominated Pensionary of Amsterdam in 1660; which important place he filled for seven years with great reputation. This office was the height of Hugo's wishes for his son. The Count D'Estrade, at that time Ambassador from France in Holland, was dissatisfied with the Pensionary of Amsterdam, who opposed the interest of the French King, in resentment of that Prince's having driven Mombas, Peter Grotius's brother-in-law, out of France. Feb. 1, 1633, he writes to the King, "I have not been at Amsterdam, because the Pensionary M. de Groot is brother-in-law to M. de Mombas, whom your Majesty ordered to quit the kingdom for some affair in which you were dissatisfied with his conduct: since that time M. de Groot has constantly opposed your Majesty's interest at Amsterdam. He is a man of spirit and firmness; and has much credit in that city. I shall neglect nothing to bring him back to his former sentiments." The King answered him, May 23, 1633, that he had had reason to be dissatisfied with Mombas's conduct; that if any consideration could make him forget it, it would certainly be a regard for M. de Groot, whose person, says the King, I esteem: In fact, Lewis XIV, as he writes to his Ambassador, Sept. 22, 1665, dropt his resentment against Mombas out of consideration for the Pensionary of Amsterdam. After the conclusion of the triple alliance, the necessity of regulating the subsidies with the northern powers induced the States of Holland to send Grotius to Denmark and Sweden. He went first to Copenhagen, and afterwards to Stockholm, where he assumed the quality of Ambassador in ordinary. The States used only to keep a Minister of the second rank at this Court; but it was thought proper, says Wicquefort, to do something more than common for such an extraordinary person; and he was ordered to make a splendid entry at the expence of the States.