the relief of the protestants there; whence he was recalled in 1621, by reason of a dispute between him and the constable De Luines. In 1625, he was created an Irish Baron, and also Baron Herbert of Cherbury, in Shropshire. Siding with the parliament during the civil wars, his castle of Montgomery was demolished by the royalists; for which, however, he afterwards received a compensation from the republican party, 1644. He survived this but a few years; dying at his house in London, 1648.

1. His most celebrated work was written in Latin, and entitled, De Veritate, prout distinguitur a Revelatione, a verisimili, a possibili, a falso; cui operi additi sunt duo alii tractatus primus de causis errorum, alter de religione laici, cum appendice ad sacerdotes, necnon quibusdam poematibus. The object of this treatise is, to establish the authority and sufficiency of natural religion, in opposition to revelation, It was first printed at Paris in 1624, and again in 1633; and in London, 1645, 4to.

At the request of Peirescius and Elias Diodati, this work was replied to by Gassendi, who sent a copy of the answer in MS. (for it was not published) to lord Herbert, which,

however, he did not receive. But in 1647, the latter paying Gassendi a visit, another copy was taken, which his lordship brought to Eng land. It was afterwards published in Gassendi's works, under the title of Ad Librum D. Edvardi Herberti Angli de Veritate Epistola; but it is imperfect, some sheets of the original being lost.

2. The same year he published, De Religione Gentilium eorumque apud eos Causis. This book was afterwards translated into English, and printed in 1705, entitled, "The Ancient Religion of the Gentiles, and Cause of their Errors considered."

3. The work, however, which chiefly entitles lord Herbert to be ranked in the present list of writers, is his History of the Life and Reign of Henry VIII. first published in 1649, folio.

In speaking of the origin of the reformation in England, he notices the severity of invective employed by the members of the House of Commons against the avarice, the ambition, and various encroachments of the clergy. The substance of one of these speeches is preserved by lord Herbert; and it is marked by a freedom of sentiment we should scarcely

expect from the superstition of the age. In the House of Lords, Fischer, bishop of Rochester, was foremost in opposing all innovation; and scrupled not to affirm, that the motives of the Commons, in their proposed regulations, originated in their want of faith, their being infected with the Lutheran heresy, in their wish to rob the church of her just patrimony, and to introduce a new order of things. The orator replies to the good bishop in these

terms:

If none else but the bishop of Rochester or his adherents did hold this language, it would less trouble me. But since so many religious and different sects (now conspicuous in the whole world) do not only vindicate unto themselves the name of the true church, but labour betwixt invitations and threats for nothing more than to make us resign our faith to a simple obedience; I shall crave leave to propose, what I think fit (in this case) for no laics and secular persons to do. Not that I will make my opinions a rule to others when any better expedient shall be offered; but that I would be glad we considered hereof, as the greatest affair that now or hereafter may concern us.

For if in all human actions it be hard to find that medium or even temper which may keep us from de

clining into extremes, it will be much more difficult in religious worship; both as the path is supposed narrower, and the precipices more dangerous on every side. And because each man is created by God a free citizen of the world, and obliged to nothing so much as the inquiry of those means by which he may attain his everlasting happiness, it will be fit to examine to whose tuition and conduct he commit himself. For as several teachers, not only differing in language, habit, and ceremony, (or at least in some of these) but peremptory and opposite in their doctrines, present themselves, much circumspection must be used. Here then taking his prospect, he shall find these guides directing him to several ways; whereof the first yet extends no further than to the laws and religions of each man's native soil or diocese, without passing those bounds. The second reaching much further, branches itself into that diversity of religions and philosophies, that not only are, but have been extant in former times, until he be able to determine which is best. But in either of these, no little difficulties will occur.

For, if each

man ought to be secure of all that is taught at home, without enquiring further, how can he answer his conscience? When looking abroad, the terrors of everlasting damnation shall be denounced on him, by the several hierarchies and visible churches of the world, if he believe any doctrine but theirs. And

that, amongst these again, such able and understanding persons may be found, as, in all other affairs, will equal his teachers. Will it be fit that he believe, God hath inspired his church and religion only, and deserted the rest; when yet mankind is so much of one offspring, that it hath not only the same Pater Communis in God, but is come all from the same carnal ancestors? Shall each man, without more examination, believe his priests in what religion soever, and, when he hath done, call their doctrine his faith? On the other side, if he must argue controversies before he can be satisfied, how much leisure must he obtain? How much wealth and substance must he consume? How many languages must he learn } And how many authors must he read? How many ages must he look into? How many faiths must he examine? How many expositions must he confer? And how many contradictions reconcile? How many countries must he wander into? And how many dangers must he run? Briefly, would not our life on these terms be a perpetual peregrination? While each man posted into the other's country, to learn the way to heaven, without yet that he could say at last, he had known or tried all. What remains then to be done? Must he take all that each priest upon pretence of inspiration would teach him, because it might be so; or may he leave all, because it might be otherwise? Certainly, to embrace all religions, according