by James, Vorstius was of course called an atheist. He was in reality
not a Socinian, but a "strict Arian, who believed that the Son of God
was at first created by the Father, and then delegated to create the
universe--a sort of inferior deity, who was nevertheless entitled to
religious homage" (James Nichols, note to App. P. on Brandt's Life
of Arminius in Works of Arminius, 1825, i, 218). Nichols gives a full
survey of the subject, pp. 202-237. Fuller (Ch. Hist. B. x, cent. 17,
sec. iv, §§ 1-5) tells the story, and pronounces the opinions of
Vorstius "fitter to be remanded to hell than committed to writing."
[87] Bayle (art. cited, Note F) says both Universities, as does
Fuller. At the Synod of Dort, however, the British representatives read
only, it seems, a decree (dated Sept. 21, 1611) of the Vice-Chancellor
of Cambridge, ordering the burning of the book there. (Nichols,
Account of the Synod of Dort, in Works of Arminius, i, 497).
[88] Gardiner, pp. 129-30. Fuller (as last cited, §§ 6-14) gives a
list of Legate's "damnable tenets." See it in Mrs. Bradlaugh Bonner's
Penalties upon Opinion, pp. 12-14.
[89] Gardiner, as cited. Fuller is cheerfully acquiescent, though
he notes the private demurs, which he denounces. "God," he says,
"may seem well pleased with this seasonable severity."
[90] In 1580 Stow records how one Randall was put on trial for
"conjuring to know where treasure was hid in the earth and goods
feloniously taken were become"; and four others were tried "for being
present." Four were found guilty and sentenced to be hanged. Randall
was executed, and the others reprieved. (Ed. 1615, p. 688.)
[91] Fuller actually alleges that "there was none ever after that
openly avowed these heretical doctrines"--an unintelligible figment.
[92] All reprinted in 1816 for the Hanserd Knollys Society, with
histor. introd. by E. B. Underhill, in the vol. Tracts on Liberty of
Conscience and Persecution, 1614-1661. They do not speak of Legate
or Wightman.
[93] Atheomastix, 1622, pref. Sig. B. 3, verso. The work was posthumous
and incomplete.
[94] Bk. i, ch. i, p. 5.
[95] In the Advancement of Learning, bk. i (Routledge ed. p. 54),
he himself notes how, long before his time, the new learning had in
part discredited the schoolmen.
[96] Filum Labyrinthi--an English version of the Cogitata et Visa--§ 7.
[97] Cp. Huarte, cited above, p. 471.
[98] Nov. Org. bk. i. Aph. 62 (Works, Routledge ed. p. 271).
[99] Id. Aph. 65.
[100] Id. ib. Cp. the Advancement of Learning, bk. ii, and the De
Augmentis, bk. ix, near end. (Ed. cited, pp. 173, 634.)
[101] Nov. Org. Aph. 89. Cp. Aph. 46, 49, 96; the Valerius Terminus,
ch. xxv; the English Filum Labyrinthi, § 7; and the De Principiis
atque Originibus (ed. cited, p. 650).
[102] Valerius Terminus, cap. i. (Ed. cited, p. 188.)
[103] Id. p. 187; Filum Labyrinthi, p. 209.
[104] Bk. ix, ch. i. (Ed. cited, p. 631.) Compare Valerius Terminus,
ch. i (p. 186), and De Aug. bk. iii, ch. ii (p. 456), as to the
impossibility of knowing the will and character of God from Nature,
though (De Aug. last cit.) it reveals his power and glory.
[105] Advancement, bk. i (ed. cited, p. 45). Cp. Valerius Terminus,
ch. i (p. 187).
[106] Advancement, bk. ii; De Augmentis, bk. iii, chs. iv and v;
Valerius Terminus, ch. xxv; Novum Organum, bk. i, Aph. 48; bk. ii,
Aph. 2. (Ed. cited, pp. 96, 205, 266, 302, 471, 473.)
[107] De Principiis atque Originibus. (Ed. cited,
pp. 649-50.) Elsewhere (De Aug. bk. iii, ch. iv, p. 471) he expressly
puts it that the system of Democritus, which "removed God and mind
from the structure of things," was more favourable to true science
than the teleology and theology of Plato and Aristotle.
[108] Id. pp. 651, 657.
[109] Id. p. 648.
[110] De Augmentis, bk. iii, ch. ii; bk. iv, ch. ii. (Ed. cited,
pp. 456, 482.)
[111] Id. bk. ii, ch. i. (Ed. cited, p. 428.)
[112] De Augmentis, ed. cited, p. 73.
[113] No. xviii, Diomedes. Ed. cited, p. 841.
[114] De Principiis atque Originibus, p. 664.
[115] Nov. Org. i. 89; Filum Labyrinthi, § 7; Essay 16.
[116] Francis Osborn, pref. to his "Miscellany," in Works, 7th
ed. 1673.
[117] Cp. Valerius Terminus, ch. i.
[118] This is noted by Glassford in his tr. of the Novum Organum
(1844, p. 26); and by Ellis in his and Spedding's edition of the
Works. (Routledge ed. pp. 32, 473, note.)
[119] De Augmentis, bk. iii, ch. iv, end.
[120] Essay 57, Of Anger.
[121] Valerius Terminus, ch. xxv.
[122] De Principiis, ed. cited, pp. 648-49. Cp. pp. 612-43.
[123] Id. p. 648.
[124] Valerius Terminus, ch. ii; De Augmentis, bk. v,
ch. iv. Ed. cited, pp. 199, 517.
[125] Cp. Brewster, Life of Newton, 1855, ii, 400-404; Draper,
Intel. Devel. of Europe, ed. 1875, ii, 258-60; Dean Church, Bacon,
pp. 180-201; Fowler, Bacon, ch. vi; Lodge, Pioneers of Science,
pp. 145-51; Lange, Gesch. d. Materialismus, i, 197 sq. (Eng. tr. i,
236-37), and cit. from Liebig--as to whom, however, see Fowler,
pp. 133, 157.
[126] Novum Organum, ii, 46 and 48, § 17; De Aug. iii, 4; Thema
Coeli. Ed. cited, pp. 364, 375, 461, 705, 709. Whewell (Hist. of
Induct. Sciences, 3rd ed. i, 296, 298) ignores the second and third
of these passages in denying Hume's assertion that Bacon rejected the
Copernican theory with "disdain." It is true, however, that Bacon had
vacillated. The facts are fairly faced by Prof. Fowler in his Bacon,
1881, pp. 151-52, and his ed. of Novum Organum, Introd. pp. 30-36. See
also the summing-up of Ellis in notes to passages above cited, and
at p. 675.
[127] Aubrey, Lives of Eminent Persons, ed. 1813, vol. ii, pt. ii,
p. 383.
[128] See notes in ed. cited, pp. 50, 53, 61, 63, 68, 75, 76, 84, 110.
[129] Fowler, ed. of Nov. Org. § 14, pp. 101-104.
[130] Id. § 14, p. 108; Ellis in ed. cited, p. 643.
[131] Rawley's Life, in ed. cited, p. 9; Osborn, as above cited;
Fowler, ed. of Nov. Org. Introd. § 14; T. Martin, Character of Bacon,
1835, pp. 216, 227, 222-23.
[132] Cp. Fowler, Bacon, pp. 139-41; Mill, Logic, bk. vi, ch. v, §
5; Jevons, Princ. of Science, 1-vol. ed. p. 576; Tyndall, Scientific
Use of the Imagination, 3rd ed. pp. 4, 8-9, 42-43; T. Martin, as
cited, pp. 210-38; Bagehot, Postulates of Eng. Polit. Econ. ed. 1885,
pp. 18-19; Ellis and Spedding, in ed. cited, pp. x, xii, 22, 389. The
notion of a dialectic method which should mechanically enable any
man to make discoveries is an irredeemable fallacy, and must be
abandoned. Bacon's own remarkable anticipation of modern scientific
thought in the formula that heat is a mode of motion (Nov. Org. ii,
20) is not mechanically yielded by his own process, noteworthy and
suggestive though that is.
[133] Pref. Epistle.
[134] Works, ed. Dublin. 1766, p. 159; ed. 1910, p. 344.
[135] Kohlrausch, Hist. of Germany, Eng. tr. p. 385.
[136] Moritz Ritter, Geschichte der deutschen Union, 1867-73, ii, 55.
[137] Menzel, Geschichte der Deutschen, 3te Aufl. Cap. 416.
[138] Cp. Gardiner, Thirty Years' War, pp. 12-13; Kohlrausch, p. 438;
Pusey, Histor. Enq. into Ger. Rationalism, pp. 9-25; Henderson,
Short Hist. of Germany, i, ch. xvi.
[139] Kohlrausch, p. 439. A specially strong reaction set in about