We trust to make it appear in the sequel, that the rapidity with which the Reformation was diffused, was the result of the pouring forth of a different spirit altogether. Meantime we would beg leave to ask D'Aubigné to answer this plain argument, specially adapted to the case as he puts it: if the suddenness of the Reformation be a proof that it was brought about by the "pouring forth anew of that life which Christianity had brought into the world;" would not the contrary feature of Christianity-its gradual operation*-be a conclusive evidence, that this latter system was not the work of God? And if this argument be not valid, what truth is there in D'Aubigné's entire theory? Would not his reasoning, if reduced to the strict laws of logic, rather prove, on the contrary, if it proved any thing, that the Reformation, differing avowedly as it does in an essential feature from Christianity, was not effected by the agency of the Holy Spirit, but was the mere result of violent human passions, which usually bring about sudden revolutions, both in the religious and in the social system?

It is curious to trace the further development of his favorite theory.

"Two considerations will account for the rapidity and extent of this revolution. One of these must be sought in God, the other among men. The impulse was given by an unseen hand of power, and the change which took place was the work of God. This will be the conclusion arrived at by every one who considers the subject with impartiality and attention, and does not rest in a superficial view. But the historian has a further office to perform-God acts by second causes. Many circumstances, which have often escaped observation, gradually prepared men for the great transformation of the sixteenth century, so that the human mind was ripe when the hour of its emancipation arrived."+

Now, we have given no little attention to the subject, and we claim at least as much impartiality as our historian of "the great Reformation;" and yet, with the facts of history before us, we can arrive at no such conclusion, but have *This we merely suppose with D'Aubigné, who assumes that such is the fact. f D'Aubigné, Preface, p. v.

WHY ITALY WAS NOT CONVERTED.

105

reached one precisely contrary. And the reasons which have forced us to draw this latter inference are so many and so cogent, that we are even under the conviction, that no one who will "consider the subject with impartiality and attention, and does not rest in a superficial view," can fail to agree with us.

In examining the secondary causes, by which God "gradually prepared men for the great transformation of the sixteenth century," our historian assigns a prominent place to the central and commanding position of Germany.

"As Judea, the birth-place of our religion, lay in the centre of the ancient world, so Germany was situate in the midst of Christian nations. She looked upon the Netherlands, England, France, Switzerland, Italy, Hungary, Bohemia, Poland, Denmark, and the whole of the north. It was fit that the principle of life should develop itself in the heart of Europe, that its pulses might circulate through all the arteries of the body the generous blood designed to vivify its members."*

He alleges the following most singular reasons why Germany was prepared for embracing the Reformation:

"The Germans had received from Rome that element of modern civilization, the faith. Instruction, legislation-all, save their courage and their weapons, had come to them from the sacerdotal city. Strong ties had from that time attached Germany to the Papacy."+-Therefore was she "ripe" for a rupture with Rome! This connexion with Rome "made the reaction more powerful at the moment of awakening."

Again: "The gospel had never been offered to Germany in its primitive purity; the first missionaries who visited the country gave to it a religion already vitiated in more than one particular. It was a law of the Church, a spiritual discipline, that Boniface and his successors carried to the Frisons, the Saxons, and other German nations. Faith in the 'good tidings,' that faith which rejoices the heart and makes it free indeed, had remained unknown to them." §-Therefore, when Luther and his brother reformers announced these "good

* D'Aubigné, Book i, p. 76.

↑ Ibid.,

p.

79.

+ Ibid., pp. 78, 79.
§ Ibid., p. 78.

tidings" in all their purity for the first time-fraught too with endless variations and contradictions-The Germans were prepared for the "awakening," and received the gospel with enthusiasm!! Truly, our fanciful and romantic historian loves to reason by contraries, and to startle his readers by palpable absurdities!

No less curious is his reason for explaining why the Italians did not receive the new gospel:

"And if the truth was destined to come from the north, how could the Italians, so enlightened, of so refined a taste and social habits, so delicate in their own eyes, condescend to receive any thing at the hands of the barbarous Germans? Their pride, in fact, raised between the Reformation and themselves a barrier higher than the Alps. But the very nature of their mental culture was a still greater obstacle than the presumption of their hearts. Could men, who admired the elegance of a well cadenced sonnet more than the majestic simplicity of the Scriptures, be a propitious soil for the seed of God's word? A false civilization is, of all conditions of a nation, that which is most repugnant to the gospel."*

Those who have read Roscoe's "Life and Pontificate of Leo X.," will greatly question the accuracy of this picture of Italian civilization. We shall prove in the sequel, that, both before and during the time of the Reformation, Italy did much more than Germany, to evidence her admiration "for the majestic simplicity of the Scriptures." At present we will barely remark, that the gist of D'Aubigné's theory consists in the assertion, that Italy was too enlightened, too refined in taste and social habits, too delicate in her own eyes, and consequently too proud and presumptuous to receive the new gospel; while Germany, being on the contrary, less enlightened, less refined, and more corrupt in doctrine and morals, was a more genial soil-just the one, in fact, which was most “ripe” for its reception, and most likely to foster its growth! We most cheerfully award to him the entire benefit of this novel and marvelous speculation on the most suitable means of disposing men's minds for the willing reception of gospel truth.

* D'Aubigné, Book i, p. 84.

WHY SPAIN WAS NOT CONVERTED.

107

To confirm this singular theory still further, he thus accounts for the singular fact that Spain did not embrace Protestantism:

"Spain possessed, what Italy did not—a serious and noble people, whose religious mind has resisted even the stern trial of the eighteenth century, and of the revolution (French), and maintained itself to our own days. In every age, this people has had among its clergy men of piety and learning, and it was sufficiently remote from Rome to throw off without difficulty her yoke. There are few nations wherein one might more reasonably have hoped for a revival of that primitive Christianity, which Spain had probably received from St. Paul himself. And yet Spain did not then stand up among the nations. She was destined to be an example of that word of the divine wisdom, 'the first shall be last.'"*

What a pity! We have little doubt ourselves, that these were precisely some of the principal reasons, why Spain did not stand up among the nations who revolted against Catholicity in the sixteenth century: and her having passed unscathed through this fiery ordeal of reckless innovation, may also serve to explain to us, how she was enabled "to resist even the stern trial of the eighteenth century, and of the revolution." Her people were too "serious and too noble," their mind was too "religious," and their clergy had too much "piety and learning," to allow them to be carried away by the novel vagaries of Protestantism.

Among the "various circumstances which conduced to the deplorable result"— of her remaining Catholic, D'Aubigné mentions her "remoteness from Germany," the "heart" of Europe "an eager desire after riches" in the new worldthe influence of her "powerful clergy”—and her military glory, which had just risen to its zenith, after the conquest of Grenada and the expulsion of the Moors. In reference to this last cause, he asks emphatically: "How could a people who had expelled Mohammed from their noble country, allow Luther to make way in it?"+-This question is at least characteristic! Was there then, in the ideas of the serious and noble Spaniards, so little difference between Luther and Mo† Ibid., p. 86.

* D'Aubigné, Book i, p. 85.

the middle ages was concentrated in her. It might been said, that the paths were everywhere trodden grand manifestation of the truth."*-Perhaps this ve servation of the intellectual and spiritual life of the ages, was a principal reason why France continued Ca A little farther on,† he continues: "The (French) peo quick feeling, intelligent, and susceptible of generous em were as open, or even more so than other nations, to the It seemed as if the Reformation must be, among them, th which should crown the travail of several centuries. the chariot of France, which seemed for so many gene to be advancing to the same goal, suddenly turned at t ment of the Reformation, and took a contrary direction. was the will of Him, who rules nations and their kings. greatly admire his pious resignation to the will of God! sentiment may perhaps console him for his disappoin "that the augury of ages was deceived," in regard to F He adds, in the same pious strain: "Perhaps, if s received the gospel, she might have become too pow He winds up his affecting Jeremiad over France wit and similar passages:

"France, after having been almost reformed, found in the result, Roman Catholic. The sword of her I cast into the scale, caused it to incline in favor of Alas! another sword, that of the reformers themsel sured the failure of the effort for reformation. The that had been accustomed to warlike weapons, ceased lifted up in prayer. It is by the blood of its confess by hat of its adversaries, that the gospel triumphs. + Ibid., p. 87.

* D'Aubigné, Book i, p. 86.

I