[78] Hallam, Lit. Europe, ii, 371, 376; Pattison, Isaac Casaubon, 2nd ed. p. 286 sq. [↑]
[79] Pattison, as cited, p. 290; G. W. Johnson, Memoirs of John Selden, 1835, pp. 56–70. [↑]
[80] Memoirs cited, pp. 60–61. On the whole question see the Review appended by Selden to his History after a few copies had been distributed. [↑]
[81] Poems of Sir John Davies, ed. Grosart, 1876, i, 82, 83. [↑]
[82] Essaies Politicke and Morall, by D. T. Gent, 1608, fol. 9. [↑]
[84] Act i, sc. 1. Jonson himself could have been so indicted on the strength of certain verses. [↑]
[85] He had been offered professorships of divinity at Saumur and Marburg. [↑]
[86] Gardiner, History of England, 1603–1642, 4th ed. ii, 128. Cp. Bayle, art. Vorstius, Note N. By his theological opponents and 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). [↑]