1807.] No Bucertsm : in Reply to Dr. Watkins’s Defence of Bucer. 25 
werds are: At vero Bucerus, quem morien- 
tem scribunt esse professum nondum naium 
esse Messiam, sectariis latiorem viam stra- 
wit. This last passage, which may be 
found inthe De Atheismis Hereticorum, 
is very positive to Bucer’s dying a Jew; 
little less so than the first passage 1s to his 
being boraa Jew. The silence of the 
English clerical historians about these 
facts isno disproof; it ouly shews that 
they were cautious of circulating anec- 
dotes, which might excite prejudice 
against the father of their charch. When 
do the clergy tell the whole truth? 
Dr. Watkins by this time must be con- 
vinced that Bucer was born a Jew; but 
why should he treat this as a foul asper- 
sion. Ifto be born of those families, who 
ean trace furthest back a trustworthy pe- 
digree, is to be nobly born: thatis his pri- 
vilege whois born a Jew. Ifto descend from 
these nations, whose legislation and litera- 
ture have most influenced the culture of 
posterity, is to be nobly born: that is his 
privilege who is born a Jew. In the eye of 
our national religion, it is the purest of 
all possible descents: it 1s an honour, for 
which, according to the doctrine of the 
church of England, the Almighty was 
huaself a voluntary and a successful can- 
didate. Jesus Chnist was born a Jew !— 
Let us hear no more of such miscreant as- 
sertions, as thatit is a foul reproach to be 
born a Jew. 
Dr. Watkins next pretends that Bucer 
has been represented as a furious perse- 
cutos. There is no such assertion in the 
document. ‘The burning of the Arians, 
or the burning of Servetus, is not ascribed 
tohim. ‘The spirit of persecution is in- 
deed ascribed to him, and that on very 
sufficient grounds. In a recent Life of 
Servetus by Mr. Wright, the fact is pre- 
seryed of Bucer’s saying in the pulpit that 
Servetus ought to have his bowels torn 
out. Sucha declaration from such au- 
thority may have contributed to occasion 
and encourage Calvin’s atrocious perse- 
cution of Servetus. That Bucer was in- 
tolerant toward the Cathoiics, his own let- 
ters evince: in that to Gropper (preserv- 
ed in Corpus-Christi College hbrary) he 
complains of the toleration vouchsafed by 
others to the simonies, sacrileges and ido- 
latries of the papists. A complete proof,that 
they thought him a persecutoris that,under 
Queen Mary, his body was disinterred, 
publicly burnt, and his tomb demolished. 
Dr. Watkins next asserts that the En- 
glish Reformation ought not to he charged 
with Bucerism. Let Dr. Watkins con- 
sult only Burnet’s History of the Refor- 
mation; he there (If. 156) wiil find that 
MonturtyMac., No, 160, 
the paper presented by Bucer to Edward 
VI. was made the basis of the institution 
of this reformed church; and that Bucer 
was continually appealed to for arbitrat- 
ing the controverted points. The corre- 
spondence with foreign divines was chiefly 
conducted by him, and, in the name of 
the collective protestant church, he pro- 
nounced many a verdict. He had all 
over the continent the reputation of dic- 
tating our ritual. See Venema’s Insti- 
tuctvones Historie Ecelesie, vol. viii. p. 
338; and elsewhere: See also the Letters 
ot Vossius, who gives the name Bucerism 
to the form of worship established in 
England, The passage runs thus: Cum 
vero Bucerus propius ud Konaunam Eccle- 
stam accederct quam Lutherus; Calvinus 
longius ab ea abiret, quam idem Lutherus ; 
extra Lutheranisnum due orte appellatio=- 
nes Bucerism et Calvinismi. 
Of the cunning trimming character of 
Bucer there are many traces. Calvin in 
one of his letters says: Tu Buceri obscus 
riiatem vituperas, ef merito: at nihil est 
in Bucero adeo perplexum, obscurum, flex- 
edogum atgue tortuosum. Justus Jonas in 
one of his letters says: In Bucero calli- 
dilas vulpina, perverse imiiata acumen et 
prudextiam, Such was the man, whose 
opinion, as Dr. Watkins admits, arch- 
bishop Cranmer desired to have upon the 
English Common Prayer Book, and well 
might Cranmer ally himself with such a 
man. Cranmer was from his station ne» 
cessarily the official president of the con- 
vocauon, which arranged our ritual: but 
Cranmer had attained that rank by being 
pimp to Henry VILL. and was unfit to de= 
cide on any church-atlairs without such a 
prompter as Bucer at his elbow. 
Enough has been said to prove that Bu- 
cer (1) was born a Jew, and (2) died a 
. Jew; that his intolerance grappled (3) 
with papist and (4) with unitarian; and 
that he (5) was the erand contriver of the 
church of England system, v hich (6) was 
named Bucerism after him by the conti- 
nental ecclesiastic histerians. These six 
propositions comprize absolutely every 
thing asserted concerning Bucer in the 
paper so mercilessly arraigned by Dr, 
Watkins, It is for him now to retract 
his wanton expressions, and his harsh de- 
nial, When tiis shall have been done 
with becoming apology, it will be soon 
enough to take the trouble of proving in 
similar detail the remaining propositions, 
Meanwhile the readers of the Monthly 
Magazine will, itis hoped, be guite as 
cautious to credit the assertions of the 
onpymous Dr, Watkins, as of the ano- 
‘Dymous ANTI-Bucerrsr, 
Ta 
