| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Ecclesiastical History of England from the Opening of the Long Parliament to the Death of Oliver Cromwell
Author: Stoughton, John
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Ecclesiastical History of England from the Opening of the Long Parliament to the Death of Oliver Cromwell" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
FROM THE OPENING OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT TO THE DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL ***
Ecclesiastical
HISTORY OF ENGLAND.
VOLUME II.
Ecclesiastical
HISTORY OF ENGLAND,
FROM THE OPENING OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT TO THE
DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL.
BY
JOHN STOUGHTON.
VOLUME II.
THE CHURCH OF THE COMMONWEALTH.
[Illustration]
London:
JACKSON, WALFORD, AND HODDER,
27, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.
MDCCCLXVII.
UNWIN BROTHERS, GRESHAM STEAM PRESS, BUCKLERSBURY, LONDON, E.C.
[Illustration]
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
PAGE.
Cromwell, Vane, and Marten 1
Spoliation of the Church 6
Opposition to the New Government 11
Religion in Wales and Ireland 14
Ministerial Support 15
Moral Legislation 16
Decline of Marten's Influence 18
Religious Policy of Parliament 19
CHAPTER II.
Charles Stuart 20
Scotch Treaty with Charles 21
Royalist Intrigues 25
Charles in Scotland 31
Declaration of the Presbyterians 32
Cromwell in Scotland 35
Battle of Dunbar 37
Coronation of Charles in Scotland 39
Protesters and Resolutionists 41
The Army and the King 42
Battle of Worcester 43
Christopher Love 44
His Trial 46
His Death 48
CHAPTER III.
Little Parliament 51
Francis Rouse, Speaker 54
Harrison, Desborough, Lambert, and Tomlinson 55
Alteration of the Marriage Law 56
Report of the Tithe Committee 59
Fifth Monarchy Men 61
Feake at Blackfriars 65
Feake and Powell 68
Cromwell made Protector 72
State Affairs at the Time 75
Cromwell's Policy 79
CHAPTER IV.
CROMWELL'S ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY.
State Recognition 81
State Control 83
State Support 88
State Protection 89
State Penalties 90
Cromwell's Establishment not, properly speaking, a Church 93
Moral Discipline 94
CHAPTER V.
First Protectorate Parliament 96
Strength of the Presbyterian Party 98
Limits of Toleration 99
Treatment of John Biddle 102
CHAPTER VI.
Commissioners at Whitehall 104
Ejection of Scandalous Ministers 107
Dr. Edward Pocock 109
Trouble with Episcopalian Royalists 110
Proceedings against them 111
Major-Generals 113
Ecclesiastical Affairs in Scotland 117
---- in Wales 118
---- in Ireland 121
Sir Henry Vane 123
CHAPTER VII.
Second Protectorate Parliament 128
Cromwell's Speech 131
Case of James Naylor 133
Cromwell's Letters 134
Extempore Preaching 137
The New Constitution 138
Cromwell's Speech 141
Comprehensiveness of his Views 143
His Liberal Opinions 145
Commissioners for Approbation of Public Preachers 146
Tithes 147
Catechising 149
Debates on Sabbath Observance 150
Cromwell's Second Installation 153
Re-assembling of Parliament 156
Cromwell's Opening Speech 157
Debates 158
Cromwell's Last Speeches 160
Parliament dissolved 162
Council of State 163
CHAPTER VIII.
Presbyterian System 165
Herrick at Manchester 168
Martindale 171
Newcome 173
Sion College 174
Meetings of the London Synod 175
Presbyterianism in London 177
Church Discipline 179
Edmund Calamy 182
William Jenkyn 183
William Bates 185
Samuel Clarke 185
Peter Vink 187
Richard Baxter 187
Thomas Wilson 196
Thomas Hall 197
Thomas Gataker 198
Dr. John Gauden 201
Dr. Thomas Fuller 202
Abraham Colfe 204
CHAPTER IX.
Congregational Churches 207
Congregationalism and the State 211
Joseph Caryl 216
Nye and Greenhill 217
Matthew Mead 218
William Bridge 219
John Flavel 220
John Howe 220
Congregationalism in Scotland 225
---- in Ireland 226
Cathedral Worship 228
CHAPTER X.
Early Baptists 230
John Tombes 238
Henry Jessy 239
Thomas Ewins 240
John Bunyan 241
Baptists in Wales 243
---- In Ireland and Scotland 244
CHAPTER XI.
Oxford University 247
Owen, Vice-Chancellor 249
Academical Reforms 253
University Costumes 253
Oxford Celebrities 254
Evelyn's Visit 258
Loyalty of the University to Cromwell 260
Walton's Polyglott 261
Owen's Criticism 263
Cambridge University 265
Sydrach Simpson and William Dell 269
Akehurst 271
Evelyn at Cambridge 273
Presbyterianism in the University 274
Dr. Witchcot 276
Dr. Lightfoot 277
Dr. Cudworth 278
Patrick--More--and Smith 279
Cambridge Studies 281
---- Theology 281
Cambridge and Oxford compared 284
University of Durham 286
St. George's Chapel, Windsor 290
Public Schools 291
CHAPTER XII.
Episcopalians--George Bull 294
John Hacket 296
Barksdale 296
Peter Gunning 297
Parsons 298
Farindon 298
Nathaniel Hardy 301
Godfrey Goodman 302
Ussher 303
Joseph Hall 305
Morton and other Bishops 306
Bishops who survived the Return of Charles II. 308
Bramhall 309
Cosin 318
Morley 319
Basire 321
Jeremy Taylor 322
Sanderson and Hammond 324
Hammond's Letters and Death 330
Thorndike 335
Episcopalians 337
Forms of Prayer used by them 340
Episcopalian Loyalty 342
CHAPTER XIII.
Mysticism 348
Rise of Quakerism 349
George Fox 349
His Meeting with Cromwell 358
His Disciples 359
Persecution of Quakers 362
James Naylor 363
Number of Sects 365
Floating Mysticism 369
CHAPTER XIV.
Private and Social Life 371
Baptism 371
Education 374
Marriage 376
Puritan Women 378
Family Worship 380
Observance of the Lord's Day 381
Belief in Witchcraft 383
Clerical Costume 387
Churches 388
Public Worship 389
The Lord's Supper 391
Psalmody 393
Seasons of National Humiliation 394
Recreations 395
Social Habits 399
The Protector's Court 401
Visitation of Sick and Burial Service 405
CHAPTER XV.
Varieties of Spiritual Life 408
George Herbert 409
Hammond 411
Fuller 412
George Dalston 413
Quarles 415
Montague and Grenville 416
Evelyn's Son 418
Richard Fairclough 420
John Lamot 421
Sir Nathaniel Barnardston 422
Christian Women 423
Ages of Christendom 428
Differences between Sects 430
Idiosyncrasies of Individuals 431
State of Religion 433
CHAPTER XVI.
Early English Colonization 443
Pilgrim Fathers 451
Laud's Colonial Policy 455
Colonies during the Civil Wars 459
Colonies during the Protectorate 463
New England 463
Rhode Island 467
Barbadoes 469
Virginia 472
West Indies 475
Maryland 477
East Indies and Levant 480
CHAPTER XVII.
Continental Churches 483
Durie and Laud 484
Sir Thomas Roe 486
Protestant Alliance 487
Persecution of the Piedmontese 490
Cromwell's Interference 492
Collections for the Sufferers 495
Cromwell and Louis XIV. 499
Other Persecuted Protestants 500
Cromwell's Foreign Policy 503
Treatment of the Jews 504
CHAPTER XVIII.
Cromwell at Hampton Court 508
His Last Interview with Fox 510
His Last Days 511
His Last Words 517
His Death 520
APPENDIX.
I. Letters respecting the Trial of Strafford 524
II. Plan of Church Reform 526
III. Articles of the Church of England, with the alterations
made by the Assembly 528
IV. Solemn League and Covenant 535
V. Minutes of the Westminster Assembly 538
VI. Number of the Ejected Clergy 539
VII. Draft of a Bill for Revising the English Translation
of the Scriptures 543
VIII. Extract from the Records of the Church at Bury St.
Edmund's 545
IX. Note on Ritualism 547
[Illustration]
CHAPTER I.
All ecclesiastical power in England having been long before snatched
from royal hands, the death of Charles I. produced no effect upon the
condition of the Church. The control of its political destinies had
from the year 1641 rested with the House of Commons; and with the
remnant of that assembly the control continued, when the kingdom became
a Commonwealth in name as well as in fact.
[Sidenote: 1649, February.]
The Presbyterians, immediately after Pride's purge, lost their place in
the government of this country, upon which the political Independents
at once assumed supremacy in the State. Of the old ecclesiastical
reformers who belonged to that party, and had made themselves
conspicuous in the year 1641, the chief now remaining in power were
Oliver Cromwell, Sir Henry Vane,[1] Henry Marten, Oliver St. John, and
Sir Arthur Haselrig; and these remarkable men all took their seats
at the table of the new Council of State, being installed as members
of it in the month of February, 1649. The other persons occupying
places beside them were nothing more than satellites. Neither St.
John nor Haselrig held any leading position. The former was more a
lawyer than a statesman, and his cold nature and reserved disposition
gave him neither influence with his equals nor popularity with his
inferiors. Haselrig was no less distinguished by his rashness. Having
been simply a follower of Pym, he had not, since his master's death,
acquired sufficient influence to make himself a leader; and his want of
judgment, though it did not exclude him from the council board, left
him without much weight in its deliberations.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell, Vane, and Marten._]
Vane, Cromwell, and Marten, therefore, were now the English
_triumvirate_. Vane and Marten were staunch republicans. Staunch
republicans they had been from the beginning. How far Cromwell was
really so--whether indeed he ever could be considered one at all--are
questions on which much may be said; but at any rate, the government
which he now joined was republican in fact, and to that government,
for the present, the majority of Englishmen felt compelled to submit.
The patriotism of the new rulers cannot be fairly questioned. The
vulgar notion of their selfish ambition appears, when we consider the
circumstances in which they were placed, little short of an absurdity;
yet there can be no doubt that the majority of the people did not
sympathize with them, but only tolerated for a season what they could
not altogether prevent.
[Sidenote: 1649, February.]
Before recording what was done by the Council of State, it is fitting
to notice somewhat further the character and opinions of the men who
mainly guided its deliberations and plans. Marten, who was as distant
as possible from being a Puritan, had little liking for the sermons
and prayers which at times would be forced upon him, and he most
enjoyed himself whilst entertaining friends in the Vale of the White
Horse, with hospitalities which must have appeared scandalous in the
eyes of his staid and sober compatriots. A man of the world, and, if
report speaks justly, a man of licentious habits, he was at the same
time honest and genial, and, like many shrewd folks of his class, knew
how to behave in the presence of religious people so as not to shock
their sensibilities. Cromwell and Vane--in this respect the opposite
of Marten--were sincerely religious. The question in reference to the
former has been set at rest by the publication of his speeches and
correspondence, all of which are plainly animated by a spirit of devout
earnestness. Not only on state occasions, when performing his part
before the world, not only in intercourse with men of strong puritan
feeling, from whom it might be supposed he had some point to gain,
but also in the most retired privacies of domestic life, Cromwell
expressed sentiments of evangelical piety. That hypocrisy should be
carried to such a length, that a man should be so cunning as always
to wear a veil of apparent religious sincerity in his most private
correspondence, without ever betraying himself, is simply incredible;
and besides, the incidental way in which religion is introduced into
his letters, shews that it was nothing patched upon a character of a
different kind, but something which was part of the very texture of his
whole being and his entire life. It is not our province to solve the
problem, how certain acts of the puritan general and certain habits
of the puritan statesman are to be reconciled with the possession of
sincere Christianity; yet we may be allowed, in passing, to observe
that such an ugly fact as the Drogheda massacre would be less terrible
to Cromwell's contemporaries--to men familiar with the barbarities of
the Thirty Years' War and the exploits of Count Tilly--than it is to
us. Fanaticism, and what may be termed a fierce prudential policy, had,
doubtless, more to do with Cromwell's deeds in Ireland than cruelty
of disposition. "I am persuaded," he says, "that this is a righteous
judgment of God upon these barbarous wretches, who have imbrued their
hands in so much innocent blood, and that it will tend to prevent the
effusion of blood for the future." No one can help seeing in these
words a revengeful justice excited by the Popish massacres of 1641,
like that which would nerve the arm of an English officer when fighting
with Sepoys by the well of Cawnpore. There are some parts of Cromwell's
political conduct which we will not attempt to defend; we would not
avail ourselves for that purpose even of what is said by Lord Bacon on
"simulation and dissimulation;" but we do think that, whilst condemning
certain forms of statecraft in the policy of the great statesman of
the Commonwealth, we ought to allow him the benefit of a comparison
with preceding rulers. To mention only Queen Elizabeth, accounted
by the Puritans of Cromwell's day as one of the most illustrious
sovereigns that ever sat on the throne of England, it may be maintained
that her diplomacy, in its strategic cunning, went beyond anything
recorded in the life of Oliver Cromwell.[2]
Vane's sincerity cannot be questioned. He might be an enthusiast.
His religious opinions might be visionary and wild. A cloudy mysticism
might belong to his theology, and enthusiasm might mingle with his
devotion; but as to the genuineness of his character, the transparency
of his ways, and the pure truthfulness which lived in the centre of his
soul, no one acquainted with his history can have any reasonable doubt.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell, Vane, and Marten._]
The religion of these two men, however, presented very different
aspects. A tinge of mysticism, indeed, is to be detected in the colour
of Cromwell's piety; but it is the predominant hue of Vane's whole
life. Vane could rise to heights of philosophical speculation, which
Cromwell had no power and no desire to reach. Nothing strikes us more
than the robust English common sense of Cromwell's mind, compared with
which that of Vane appears full of German transcendentalism. Vane, no
doubt, had a theory of church polity, as well as of secular government,
more complete, more consistent, and more accurately wrought out than
Cromwell ever held; but he had far less of that inward mysterious
force which, working outwardly, wins the mastery over others--far less
of that inexplicable secret which makes a man, in the judgment of
posterity, _a king of men_.
[Sidenote: 1649, March.]
In ecclesiastical politics, Cromwell and Vane were agreed; and, so far
as they walked in that path, Marten accompanied them. All three were as
anti-presbyterian as they were anti-episcopal, and hated the spiritual
despotism of synods as much as they did the rule of Archbishop Laud.
They were pledged to toleration, and wished to give full play to the
activity of the sects, so far as was consistent with the stability
of the new government. Vane could well elaborate the philosophy of
religious freedom; but Marten, perhaps, advanced still further in
relation to its exercise. He reached practical conclusions which were
thought to imply religious indifference, though the same conclusions
are now firmly held by many, the earnestness of whose piety none would
question. In a petition presented to the House of Commons in 1648, and
generally attributed to his pen, these passages occur: "That you would
have exempted matters of religion and God's worship from the compulsive
or restrictive power of any authority upon earth, and reserved to the
supreme authority an uncompulsive power only of appointing a way for
the public, whereby abundance of misery, persecution, and heart-burning
would for ever be avoided." "That you would have removed the tedious
burden of tithes, satisfying all impropriations, and providing a more
equal way of maintenance for the public ministers." In the same tone
reference is made to the laws against blasphemy and heresies; men, it
is said, being easily mistaken, and Divine truths not needing human
support.[3]
An extraordinary crisis had now arrived in ecclesiastical affairs.
The fate of the Church had become subject almost entirely to the will
of three men, one of whom was an utter worldling, another a spiritual
theorist, and the third an evangelical Independent, and at the same
time a man full of political sagacity.
[Sidenote: _Question of Toleration._]
A declaration of Parliament, stating the grounds of their late
proceedings, and the republican nature of the present government,
appeared in the month of March.[4] The document entered fully into
a defence of the measures which had issued in this result; but the
authors were exceedingly cautious in their ecclesiastical references.
They state that their design had been to deliver England from tyranny,
to prevent a new war, to establish a safe peace, and to provide for
the due worship of God according to His word, the advancement of the
true Protestant religion, the maintenance of godly ministers, and "a
just liberty for the consciences, persons, and estates of all men,
conformable to God's glory and their own peace."[5]
[Sidenote: 1649, April.]
These vague expressions are remarkable, especially when it is
remembered that the declaration, though published by Parliament, must
have emanated from the Council of State. In reference to the doctrine
of toleration, it lagged behind the "Agreement of the People of
England," a document which is ascribed to General Ireton, and which
was presented in the name of the army to the House of Commons in
January, a few days before the King's execution. For that political and
ecclesiastical manifesto, whilst it recognized the national profession
of Christianity and the duty of publicly instructing the people, adds
the significant words, "_so it be not compulsive_;" and also, whilst
it excluded Popery and Prelacy from toleration, and approved of the
maintenance of religious teachers out of the public treasury, it also
protested against perpetuating tithes, enforcing religion by penalties,
and the disturbing of those who "profess faith in God by Jesus Christ,
however differing in judgment from the doctrine, worship, or discipline
publicly held forth," provided they did not disturb the public peace.[6]
[Sidenote: _Spoliation of the Church._]
To such lengths Ireton and certain other officers wished to push the
new government; but extreme men in the army were not then, as is often
supposed, the rulers of the country, either in religious or in secular
affairs. The statesmen possessed the supreme power, and of that power
Cromwell exercised the largest share, simply because he possessed
as much of the sagacity and wisdom required for the cabinet, as of
the valour and generalship needed in the field. And hence it was,
that although the army rushed forward towards extreme ecclesiastical
measures, the government paused, and declined to adopt any plan for
the abolition of tithes; and also maintained so much reticence in
expressing what was designed in relation to the extent of religious
liberty. The Presbyterians had become alarmed at the paper drawn up by
the army, and the ministers of the county of Essex had plainly declared
what were the evils which they apprehended in consequence.[7] In their
worst apprehensions, many other clergymen throughout the country
deeply shared; and the new rulers were not so firmly seated on their
thrones that they could afford unnecessarily to provoke the anger of
such a number of influential persons. To expound fully at that moment
their ecclesiastical policy would inevitably have exasperated their
opponents; and therefore they maintained a prudent reserve, and acted
with extreme caution.
What the Council said is recorded in their Declaration, what they
did may be traced in the Acts of Parliament passed at that time. The
new financiers of the State, in order to meet the pressing necessities
of the Commonwealth, availed themselves of cathedral property. The
ordinance of 1646 for abolishing Bishops, and selling their lands,
had taken no notice of the titles and of the possessions of Deans
and Chapters. These possessions presented a rich quarry to the needy
masters of the realm; consequently, at the end of April, the House of
Commons was found at work upon this new spoil.[8] An Act was passed
for abolishing the offices of Deans and Prebendaries and Archdeacons,
and for investing the endowments of cathedral chapters in the hands
of trustees, for the supply of the necessities of the Commonwealth.
Other Acts followed for the purpose of removing obstructions to the
sale of these estates, and affording encouragement to purchasers. Yet,
we may add, that although the stalls of cathedrals were swept of their
occupants, with no legal authority remaining for the appointment of
successors, Bishop Wren continued the forms of presentation to prebends
at Ely, as he had done all along from the commencement of the civil
wars. His regular collations to preferments, as they fell vacant,
appear in the records of his see.[9]
[Sidenote: 1649, June.]
Amidst this wholesale spoliation of the Church it must be remembered
the public support of religion was not neglected. An Act of the 8th
of June provided maintenance for preaching ministers and other pious
uses out of the appropriate tithes belonging to the late hierarchy.
No charge remained on cathedral estates for the service of religion.
Such property had undergone a thorough secularization;[10] but the
appropriate tithes pertaining to the Bishops were reserved and placed
under trustees for the support of the Christian ministry. From that
source, according to the Act, salaries and augmentation of salaries
were to be supplied; so that every minister should eventually receive
£100 a year. The sum of £18,000 per annum was at once to be raised
for this purpose, and £2,000 per annum was added for increasing the
maintenance of the masterships of colleges.[11]
[Sidenote: _Opposition to the New Government._]
The Council of State and the House of Commons found it hard work to
defend their authority. To silence groans of discontent, uttered in
divers publications, they had recourse to the common expedient of
revolutionary governments, and passed an Act against the licentiousness
of the press. The army discontents also rose alarmingly around the new
rulers. Levellers, with their wild schemes, were very busy. A trooper,
described as a religious man "of excellent parts and much beloved,"
but tinctured strongly with fifth monarchy notions, had to be shot for
his share in a mutiny. Yet, such was the view taken of his case by the
people, that at his funeral, "the corpse was adorned with bundles of
rosemary one-half stained in blood." Sea green and black ribbons were
tied to the hats and breasts of the thousands who followed the coffin
rank and file; and many even of the better sort met the procession at
the churchyard.[12] It was a serious sign of disaffection for so many
persons to shew sympathy with a leveller.
[Sidenote: 1649.]
But the opposition made in the pulpit to the new rulers constituted
a still more formidable difficulty. Presbyterian preachers, who at
the beginning of the war had defended the army, could not be silent,
now that the war had led to results so very different from what they
had contemplated. No wonder then that many of them denounced what had
been done at Westminster and Whitehall. They accused the usurpers of
blood-guiltiness, and regarded the High Court of Justice as "framing
iniquity by law." They held themselves bound, they said, in duty to
God, religion, the King, the Parliament, and the kingdom, to profess
before angels and men, that they verily believed the taking away the
life of Charles was opposed to the teaching of the Bible, and the
spirit of the Protestant religion. The whole business they declared
to be inconsistent with the oath of allegiance, and contrary to
the solemn League and Covenant. Accordingly, they prayed for the
Prince of Wales as Charles II. Mr. Cawton, a Presbyterian minister,
did so before the Lord Mayor of London. While all this is not to
be wondered at, and the men who so acted for conscience' sake are
commendable for their courage, it is no matter of surprise that the
new government, in self-defence, should strive to put an end to such
dangerous proceedings. Therefore, in March, an Act appeared, forbidding
ministers in their pulpits to meddle with affairs of State, or to
hold correspondence with foreign powers. They were ordered to apply
themselves simply to the preaching of the Gospel for the edification of
their hearers.[13]
[Sidenote: _Declaration of Parliament._]
It became necessary for Parliament to vindicate its conduct. It
did so, and, in the declaration published with that view, passages
appear relating to religion, in which is recapitulated what had been
accomplished in the way of reformation; and desires are avowed for
the furtherance of the same object. The rulers profess their wish to
suppress Popery, superstition, blasphemy, and profaneness; but they
also express their desire to remove such acts and ordinances as coerce
conscience, "which have been made use of for snares, burdens, and
vexations to the truly sincere-hearted people of God, that fear Him
and wait for the coming of His Son Jesus Christ." This last clause of
course would please the army. The sheets containing it, wet from the
press, would be despatched to the camp, and eagerly would soldiers
gather round some comrade sitting by his tent door, to read the new
proclamation. The millenarian leveller would take comfort from these
words, whether they were meant for him or not. But what would the
Presbyterians think? The next sentence seems intended to soothe their
fears--and, if it did so, it would rouse alarm in the minds of extreme
men, just elated by the tenor of the preceding paragraph. "And because
we are not ignorant how injuriously our proceedings herein are charged
upon us, as if we were setting up and countenancing _an universal
toleration_, when our true aim in the liberty we give is _only_ the
necessary encouragement we conceive due to all that are lovers of God,
and the purity and power of religion, we can and do therefore declare,
in the sight of God and man, that by whomsoever we shall find this
liberty abused, we shall be most ready to testify our displeasure
and abhorrency thereof by a strict and effectual proceeding against
such offenders."[14] Here the countenance of the Presbyterian would
brighten, and that of the wild sectary would fall.
[Sidenote: 1650.]
As protestations and covenants had been the order of the day, a new
test of obedience was now contrived under the name of _an Engagement_.
The security of the State demanded something of the kind, for authority
cannot exist without allegiance. Reference to religion is indeed
avoided in the Engagement, and by the terms used in it no spiritual
supremacy whatever is claimed; Presbyterians nevertheless considered
the new oath to be inconsistent with their Covenant engagements; and,
taking this view, they gave a religious character to that which had
been carefully framed in order to prevent any such construction. The
new political test appeared to them a snare to catch consciences, and
a sword to wound them. Transformed into an anti-covenant pledge, it
kindled throughout England the fire of a fierce indignation.
On the 22nd of February, 1649-50, the House passed a law for the better
propagation of the gospel in Wales, and on the 8th of March, another
for the better advancement of religion and learning in Ireland. The
latter provided for the maintenance of seminaries in and near the city
of Dublin. Archiepiscopal manors and lands were vested in trustees
for the use of Trinity College, and for the erection and maintenance
of a free-school; the appointment of governors and masters being
vested in the Lord Lieutenant; and the trustees, with his consent,
having authority given them to make rules and ordinances subject to
confirmation by Parliament.[15] The same month saw a statute for the
more frequent preaching of the gospel, and for the better maintenance
of ministers in the city of Bristol.[16]
[Sidenote: _Religious Legislation._]
In the spring of 1650, Parliament resumed the question of ministerial
support, and a new Act was passed for pious uses,[17] for the
augmentation of livings and for the payment of heads of houses in the
Universities; £80 per annum being specially provided for "the Margaret
Lecturer of Oxford."
Other characteristic instances of religious and moral legislation
appear in the statute book for the year 1650. By virtue of an Act
passed the 19th of April, penalties were to be levied for the
desecration of the Sabbath, and for the non-observance of thanksgiving
and humiliation days. Seasons of both kinds were put on a level, which
was a position of things not at all consistent with puritan ideas of
the Divine authority of the lord's Day, Goods carried in the streets at
such times were liable to seizure; travellers and waggoners, if they
performed a journey during the hours of holy rest, were to be fined ten
shillings. Writs and warrants executed on a Sunday were to lose their
effect, and persons serving them were exposed to the payment of a fine
of five pounds. Nobody was to use a boat, a horse, a coach, or a sedan,
except for going to church, upon pain of forfeiting ten shillings. The
like penalty was to fall on those who visited taverns and alehouses.
Authority was given to officers to search for offenders, and justices
and constables were made liable to penalties if they neglected their
duties. The Act was to be read in all the churches yearly upon the
first lord's Day in the month of March.[18]
[Sidenote: 1650.]
Profane cursing and swearing were prohibited by an Act passed the
28th of June, with a curiously graduated scale of penalties, arranged
according to the rank of the offender. A lord was to be fined thirty
shillings; a baronet or knight, twenty; an esquire, ten; a simple
gentleman was to pay six and eight-pence, and people of inferior
quality, three and fourpence. A double fine followed a second offence;
and after a tenth instance of transgression the culprit was to give a
bond for good behaviour. The law made no distinction between men and
women, and gave charge to all constables vigilantly to hunt out all
offenders.[19]
There followed, on the 9th of August, a statute against certain
atheistical, blasphemous, and execrable opinions derogatory to the
honour of God, and destructive to human society, the enumeration
of which includes the most monstrous opinions, such even as the
following:--that a human being might proclaim himself to be God, to
be infinite, to be almighty; that the blasphemy of the Most High,
and other horrible acts are not in themselves shameful; that murder,
adultery, and the like, are in their own nature as righteous as the
duties of prayer; that happiness consists in sensual indulgence; that
there is no such thing as sin, or salvation, or damnation, or heaven,
or hell. Persons holding such opinions were to be punished by six
months' imprisonment, or, on a second conviction, by banishment out of
the Commonwealth. A return without licence incurred the consequences
attendant on felony.[20]
[Sidenote: _Moral Legislation._]
We have given this specification of opinions as we find it in the
Act, because no general description of it could convey an idea of the
extraordinary vagaries of thought to which it points. Taken as they
nakedly appear in this unique schedule, they must have been of an
ultra-fanatical kind, such as we should suppose only madmen would
entertain. But, upon a little reflection, it appears not unlikely
that some of the opinions pronounced execrable were, by those charged
with holding them, expressed in a different form of words from that
given in the Act, and that they really consisted only in those wild
pantheistic speculations to which transcendental thinkers of a certain
description have always been addicted. Amidst excitements which moved
human nature to the loftiest heights and the lowest depths, which
brought out conspicuously what was in man, both of good and evil, it
was not strange that the ignorant should bluntly say some of the same
absurd things which the learned have been wont to convey in specious
phrase and polished diction. At all events, there must have been a
large amount of very objectionable, and even monstrous teaching in
those days, to have called forth such minute notice and such terrible
denunciation.
[Sidenote: 1650.]
Private morals likewise were scanned and marked by these vigilant
legislators.[21] Their policy, as we have said before, was intended
to supply a defect consequent upon the abolition of the old Church
courts, proceeding as it did upon the idea handed down for ages, that
penal laws sufficed to extinguish individual vice, as well as to
suppress social crime--an idea now, after an uninterrupted continuance
of failures, almost universally regarded as utterly delusive. The
Long Parliament in these, its last days, threatened incest with death
without benefit of clergy; it marked adultery as felonious, and it
punished fornication with three months' imprisonment. A common bawd
was to be whipped, set in the pillory, branded with a hot iron, and
committed to the House of Correction for three years: a repetition of
the offence was to be treated as a capital crime. Henry Marten, looking
at the subject from what was then the common point of view, justly
observed, in the course of the debate to which the measure gave rise,
that such severity only served to increase transgression, inasmuch as
merciful people would shrink from bringing offenders to justice, and
offenders escaping with impunity would be encouraged in sin.
The laws which we have just enumerated were passed in the spring and
summer of 1650; and it was about that time, indeed shortly before the
speech just noticed, that the influence of Marten passed its zenith,
and he descended from the high position he had occupied in the rule
of the Commonwealth. The cause of that event, partly political and
partly personal, is to be found in his stern republicanism, and in his
disputes with Oliver Cromwell. An enquiry into that subject does not
come within the scope of our history, nor do the consequences of it
concern us further than this, that they indirectly touched the state
of ecclesiastical affairs: for Marten's exclusion from the Council of
State in February, 1650, and the inconsiderable part which he took in
public business after his re-admission, amounted, according to the view
which we have taken, to the dismissal or the withdrawal of one of the
memorable _triumvirate_ who had wielded for a time supreme authority in
the Church as well as the State. Vane's power was of longer duration,
but his disappearance from the lofty sphere he had occupied is an event
which we shall speedily have to notice--an event which will be found to
have left the government of England in the hands of that one man, who,
as the greatest general and statesman of his age, was alone competent
to rule his country in the hour of its peril, and the crisis of its
fate.
[Sidenote: _Moral Legislation._]
An Act of the 27th of September, 1650, places the religious policy
of Parliament in a very doubtful light.[22] It repealed old acts of
uniformity. It professed to relieve the religious and the peaceable
from the rigour of previous intolerance. Yet this very law goes on to
say, that it does not interfere with existing acts and ordinances for
the due observance of the lord's Day, and days of public thanksgiving
and humiliation; and it therefore requires that on all such days, every
person within the Commonwealth shall resort to some public place, where
the service and worship of God is exercised, or shall be present at
some other place, in the practice of religious duty. Latitude seems
to have been given to the mode of obedience, for people were not
tied up to any set form--so far they were released from the bonds of
Elizabeth's statute. Still religious worship of some kind continued
compulsory, and those who neglected religious duties altogether were to
be proceeded against as criminals. No penalty indeed is specified--it
is only declared that such as broke this law should be proceeded
against accordingly--and probably the statute proved a dead letter; but
such an enactment, although it might commend itself to the Puritan, was
utterly inconsistent with religious liberty, as expounded by Marten,
Vane, and others of the republican school.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER II.
Royalty was now a thing of the past; it had been abolished in England.
He who had perished on the scaffold came to be called plain Charles
Stuart. His son could be designated by no other name. Royal statues
were pulled down. Royal arms were no longer allowed in churches. But
loyalty, as a sentiment, arose in greater strength than ever after the
execution of the King. To Episcopalians, and to some Presbyterians
also, Charles appeared a martyr, the victim of a republican faction,
who were proceeding to destroy the Church after having already battered
down the throne. Both parties shuddered at the idea of being ruled by
men whose hands were red with royal blood. Recollections of the 30th of
January were indelible. What Ussher and Philip Henry had seen, burned
itself into their memories, and the tragedy, down to the minutest
particular, with superadded circumstances of brutality, would form a
staple of conversation in many a country walk, and by many an English
fireside, for months and years afterwards.
[Sidenote: 1649, February.]
A touching expression of Royalist sympathy occurs in the parish
register of Woodford, in the county of Essex, where there is recorded
a collection for the benefit of Charles' chaplains and servants,
about a year after his death. Their claims were urged in a petition
which stated that the King's domestics, to the number of forty, were
in great distress, and that their means of support out of his revenues
were still detained, so that they could in nowise maintain either
themselves, their wives, or their families, and therefore they sought
the charity of all good Christians.[23]
[Sidenote: _Scotch Treaty with Charles._]
Charles Stuart was in Holland at the time of his father's execution.
The Scotch estates, as early as the 5th of February, shewed their
loyalty to the Stuarts by proclaiming the Prince of Wales to be their
King. Robert Baillie here again comes to our assistance, and we find
him writing in February, 1649, to his cousin Spang, then sojourning at
the Hague, in the following terms:--
"We have sent the bearer (Sir Joseph Douglas), a worthy gentleman,
to signify so much to his Majesty, at the Hague; we purpose speedily
to send an honourable commission from all estates. The dangers and
difficulties wherewith both his Majesty and all his kingdoms at this
time are involved are exceeding great and many. The first necessary
and prime one (as all here, without exception, conceive), doth put
his Majesty and his people both, in a hopeful proceeding, and his
Majesty's joining with us in the national Covenant, subscribed by his
grandfather King James, and the Solemn League and Covenant wherein all
the well-affected of the three kingdoms are entered, and must live and
die in, upon all hazards. If his Majesty may be moved to join with
us in this one point, he will have all Scotland ready to sacrifice
their lives for his service; if he refuse, or shift this duty, his
best and most useful friends, both here and elsewhere, will be cast
into inextricable labyrinths, we fear, for the ruin of us all."[24] In
these sentences of Baillie's letter, which crossed the winter's sea in
Sir Joseph Douglas' despatch box, side by side with a more important
document, we find the key-note struck of all the diplomacy then going
on between the King and the Scotch. Spang, soon after receiving the
letter, is found busy with endeavours to promote the accomplishment of
the object designed by his fellow-countrymen. Writing at once to his
cousin to express sympathy in his horror at Charles' execution--which
Dutch ministers bewailed in sermons from chosen texts--and to shew
his exultation at the thought of what his friends in Scotland had
accomplished, this resident at the Hague informs us that he had
obtained an interview with the Prince of Orange,--the young man, who,
it will be recollected, was married at Whitehall in 1641. The writer
represents him as concerned for the Protestant religion, and says
he heard him express the opinion that Charles might be brought to
subscribe that Covenant which concerned Scotland alone, but he was not
up to the mark in reference to the other, betwixt Scotland and England.
Earnestly did the diplomatist argue the point, but with little avail.
When his Highness pressed home the question, whether Scotland, divided
herself, were really able to do anything of moment since the ruling
party in that country was too weak to suppress its enemies; Spang told
the Prince that the condition of the Presbyterians, in Great Britain
and Ireland, was not so mean but that the King, if he would cheerfully
join himself to them, as _caput et vindex fœderis_, would be sure of
success. At the close of the letter containing this report, the writer
added an earnest exhortation to his cousin to inform the reverend
brethren of his communion how much the fame of rigidity was likely
to endanger the fame of the kirk, and make Presbyterian government
hateful. He said plainly that there could be no safety, if the Scotch
did not pack up their quarrels among themselves.[25]
[Sidenote: 1649, March.]
On Thursday, the 22nd of March, "at night, the Lord brought" all the
commissioners "safe to Rotterdam." Baillie was one of them, being now
engaged in a very different business from that which took him to London
in the year 1640,--yet did he act herein in a way as true as ever to
his cause and to himself, being intent still upon the prosperity of
Presbyterianism, the enforcement of the Covenant, and the glory of God.
He and his brother commissioners proceeded to Delf, and whilst resting
there on the Sabbath, preached and conducted worship. After putting
their papers in order, they hastened to the Hague, and were in the
royal presence on the following day.
Baillie furnishes a copy of his speech to Charles, spoken in the King's
bedchamber, upon Tuesday, March the 27th, 1649, at three o'clock in
the afternoon. In the name of the Church of Scotland, the clerical
Commissioner expressed much grief for his Majesty's afflictions, and
great joy on his accession to the throne, together with deep sorrow for
the recent execrable parricide, which the great Judge of the world,
he was persuaded, would avenge. Prayers followed this address to the
new King, in which the minister fervently implored that the clouds of
present danger might fly away, and that more religion and piety might
be seen in his Majesty's days than in those of his most prosperous
ancestors. The deputation then handed to the sovereign a letter from
the Church of Scotland.
[Sidenote: _Royalist Intrigues._]
Charles, during this interview, made a favourable impression on
his visitors, as indeed he did on most people. "His Majesty," says
Baillie,[26] "is of a very sweet and courteous disposition. We hope
he is not so far rooted in any principles contrary to us, but that,
by God's blessing on our friends' labours, he may be gotten to do us
reason, whatsoever our fears be for the present. There is a very evil
generation both of English and Scotch here, who vomit out all their
evil humour against all our proceedings." Again the writer breaks
out in terms of admiration respecting the King. "He is one of the
most gentle, innocent, well-inclined princes, so far as yet appears,
that lives in the world,--a trim person, and of a manly carriage,
understands pretty well, speaks not much--would to God he were amongst
us."
When the Scotch had left Holland, the Hague became a centre of
intrigues for the overthrow of the English Commonwealth and the
restoration of the Stuarts. Except so far as they illustrate the state
of religious parties, we have here little to do with those intrigues.
[Sidenote: 1650, March.]
Certain papers, still in existence, disclose some of the secrets of the
Court in Holland during the spring and summer of 1650. Charles then, as
ever, in his exile, pursued one line of policy, which was, by honest
or dishonest means to recover the crown of Great Britain. Without any
ambition like his father, to be in repute as a diplomatist, and wholly
lacking the caution and prudence requisite for such a character, he
nevertheless eagerly listened to whatever his councillors proposed in
reference to his restoration, and at times aided their endeavours after
that object by his nimble wit and his unblushing falsehood.
As he sat in his little cabinet with a very scantily attended Council
Board, a paper, dated the 5th of March, 1650, came before him, stating
what appeared to be the wishes and views of certain Presbyterians.
"They desired that his Majesty would declare himself to his people,
that they might raise a satisfaction from it to their friends.
"That his Majesty would please to send some encouragement to such of
their clergy friends, as yet, in pulpits and elsewhere, dared publicly
to hold up his Majesty's rights and titles.
"To both which desires they seem satisfied, saving they conceive they
might have made an advantage of it too for that purpose, if his Majesty
had touched also, in particular, upon religion in his declaration.
"That they will not press for the Covenant in England, and will
endeavour to moderate the Scots in their desires; beseeching withal,
that the King will go as far as he can for their satisfaction, that he
may have a greater service by their conjunction.
"That they will rest satisfied with such a settlement in Church and
State as a future Parliament--together with such a synod as that
Parliament shall approve of--shall make.
[Sidenote: _Royalist Intrigues._]
"That though many particular persons of their party are clearly
satisfied with the King and his intentions, yet their single
endeavours, without taking more of their party along with them, will
signify little for his service; and therefore to bring them in, which
is their desire, the persons already satisfied are necessitated to
carry themselves more cautiously towards the rest; in compliance with
them, for fear of losing them through factious insinuations, which
their party is not free from.
"That amongst their party, divers (and especially in London) wealthy
persons hanker so much after the Scots, that the rest, not so much
Scotified, use to call them bigots or zealots, and labour to break off
that dependency as the greatest impediment to their ready conjunction
for his Majesty's service, in case the Scots continue unreasonable in
their desires.
"That there is yet a fear amongst their party generally that the King's
party will not be reconciled to them; and till that fear can be removed
it concerns them, in order to their own security, to move with such
circumspection, and preserve such strength in themselves as may balance
with the King's party."[27]
This paper exhibits the English Presbyterians as earnestly desiring
the accession of Charles. It indicates that there were differences of
opinions between the Scotch and themselves in relation to the Covenant,
and that amongst the latter a much higher degree of confidence was
entertained by some than by others respecting the prince's character
and intentions; whilst it also shews that sympathy with the Scotch was
cherished by the English in very unequal measures, and that those who
most nearly coincided in the views of their northern brethren were the
rich Presbyterians of the metropolis.
A second paper of rough notes, endorsed as received on the 18th of
March, containing suggestions from Roman Catholics in England, came
under consideration.
[Sidenote: 1650, April.]
Sir Nicholas Crispe and many other friends tendered their allegiance
and offered their services to his Majesty. They approved of his
constancy to the Marquis of Montrose, and preferred a union to be
formed with him rather than with the contrary faction, if a division
of parties were inevitable. They proceeded to beseech his Majesty to
have great care in whom he placed confidence, inasmuch as they feared
he had some ministers about him who could not be trusted, although they
declined to name them. They said that all possible dispatch ought to be
used; and they referred to him the question what should be done with
his Majesty's Catholic subjects. "In their opinion," to use their own
words, "they conceive it very necessary that they have some private
assurance from him of a future liberty of conscience, if God shall
restore him, and the like to some Catholic prince in their behalf.
They proposed some connivance to have been allowed for taking the
engagement, but that will be now answered too late, the day being past,
as to the banishment, though the last day given be not till the 14th of
April--after which day all are outlawed who shall not take it. If the
King order any thing herein, then to give some assurance of it under
his hand for their better satisfaction who must necessarily take it for
their preservation in order to his service." It was proposed that there
should be a descent made on the Cornish coast; and after an assurance
from the "Lords Shrewsbury, Montague, and all other Catholic nobility
and gentry," that they faithfully retained their allegiance, there
follows an expression of desire for a mitigation of the severity of the
laws against them, should God restore him to the throne, for which they
were prepared to hazard fortune and life.
[Sidenote: _Royalist Intrigues._]
The notes of Charles' reply, dated the 8th of April, are also in
existence. Amongst other things he states, "As for the Catholics, all
care will be taken to give them ease and liberty of conscience. As to
the engagement, what liberty their consciences shall give them to do,
to preserve themselves for the King's service, their continuing loyal
will render acceptable to the King, who will be sure to recompense
their merit."[28]
Communications from Papists were evidently far more agreeable than any
which came from a Presbyterian quarter. They received a prompt reply,
and both his Majesty and his correspondents shewed themselves perfectly
willing to adopt jesuitical practices, which, from all we know of the
Presbyterians, we are perfectly sure they would have scorned; to take
the Engagement with the intention of breaking it was a course perfectly
approved by the Prince and his friends. The end sanctified the means.
[Sidenote: 1650, May.]
A third paper, bearing date May the 10th, contains information
respecting the English Republicans, which had been gathered from gossip
during a journey in this country by Colonel Keynes. An informant, he
says, assured him that "a friend of his who dined on Saturday last
with Sir Harry Vane the younger, Mr. Bailey, and Judge Thorpe, and was
one who had formerly been theirs, though now converted, but did still
comply with them, so feigned as not to make himself suspected, told
him for certain, that after dinner, being all four alone, they fell
into discourse concerning their present condition; that Sir H. Vane
said that they were in a far worse estate than ever yet they had been;
that all the world was and would be their enemies; that the Scots had
left them; their own army and generals were not to be trusted; that
the whole kingdom would rise and cut their throats upon the first good
occasion, and that they knew not any place to go unto to be safe."
The whole of the report is written in a sanguine spirit, and shews
how the Royalists buoyed up the King's hopes. And although such
conversations as are here retailed are utterly untrustworthy, yet it
is quite possible that Vane, as he saw the cause of pure republicanism
was on the decline, might express himself to his friends in terms of
despondency, not unlike those which are here represented.
There is also a fourth and earlier paper,[29] belonging to the month of
March, containing general suggestions submitted for the consideration
of Charles and his council.
"As for England," he is told, "the Independents are possessed of all
the forts and towns, the navy and treasures. The Presbyterian yet
holdeth a silent power by means of the Divines, and the interest of
some gentry and nobility, and especially in London and the great towns.
Their fortunes are yet unshaken (though threatened). Besides (by former
use when they held the power), they continue an intelligence which the
King's party cannot do, which may make them considerable, when they
shall be fit for his Majesty's reception.
[Sidenote: _Charles in Scotland._]
"Some are rigid for the _jus Divinum_ of Presbytery, but the greatest
part, weary of trouble and the rod that now hangeth over them, would
repent and serve his Majesty; some purely without fraud, others being
assured to be freed from their past facts, their livings and offices
preserved to them, their moneys laid out in church lands, &c., repaid.
"The principal heads look at Government, and manage all these under
people's interests to their own, which we conceive all that love his
Majesty should give way to, and laying aside all expectations of their
own, if these men may be able to do the work to let them receive the
thanks of it.
"For his Majesty's party in England, it is so poor, so disjointed, so
severely watched by both the other factions, that it is impossible for
them to do anything upon their own single score; but if his Majesty
could find an expedient to beget a good understanding betwixt his
party and the Presbyterians they might under their shadow rise again;
otherwise nothing but a foreign force can begin the work and justify
the endeavours and affections of his friends."
[Sidenote: 1650, August.]
These notes speak for themselves, and indicate the rumours,
expectations, and schemes which were reported to Charles, and the many
ways in which religion and politics had become mixed up together in
connexion with the efforts he was making to reach the throne of his
fathers.
[Sidenote: _Charles in Scotland._]
Charles at length decided upon throwing himself into the arms of the
Scotch. The demand to sign the Covenant, though it thoroughly disgusted
him in the first instance, obtained his consent after a year's delay.
Casting aside a last regard for truth, he passed through the form of
signing the document before he left the Dutch shores; that concession
having been persistently stipulated for by his new adherents. Having
reached Scotland on the 23rd of June, he was proclaimed King at the
High Cross of Edinburgh on the 11th of July following.
Faithful to the religious cause which they had espoused, the
Presbyterians shewed great care to separate it from the interests
of Royalism, whether considered by itself or in connexion with the
prelatical party, which had been the main defenders of the throne at
the beginning of the war. This appears from the following declaration,
dated West Kirk of Edinburgh, the 13th and 14th of August, 1650. "The
Commissioners of the General Assembly, considering that there may be
just ground of stumbling from the King's Majesty refusing to subscribe
and emit the declaration offered unto him by the Committee of Estate,
and Commissioners of the General Assembly--considering his former
carriage and resolution for the future in reference to the cause of
God, and the enemies and friends thereof, do therefore declare that
this kingdom does not own or espouse any malignant party, or quarrel,
or interest, but that they fight merely upon their former grounds and
principles, and in defence of the cause of God and the kingdom as they
have done these twelve years past; and therefore as they do disclaim
all the sin and guilt of the King, and of his house, so they will not
own him nor his interest, otherwise than with subordination to God,
and so far as he owns and prosecutes the cause of God, and disclaims
his and his father's opposition to the work of God and the Covenant,
and likewise all the enemies thereof; and that they will, with all
convenient speed, take in consideration the papers lately sent them
from Oliver Cromwell, and vindicate themselves from all the falsehoods
contained therein; especially in those things wherein the quarrel
betwixt us and that party is mis-stated, as if we owned the late King's
proceedings and were resolved to prosecute and maintain his present
Majesty's interest before and without acknowledgment of the sins of
his house and former ways, and satisfaction to God's people in both
kingdoms.
["The Committee of Estates having seen and considered the declaration
of the Commissioners of the General Assembly, anent the stating of the
quarrel whereupon the army is to fight, approved the same, and heartily
concurred therein.
"THOS. HENDERSON."][30]
The Episcopalian Royalists of England regarded the Scots with the
utmost aversion, and had just been shocked by their hanging the Marquis
of Montrose, who had taken up arms for Charles I. as early as the year
1643. Moreover, they entertained deceitful hopes respecting Irish
affairs. Hence, when they were told of what the prince had done, they
could not believe their own ears.
"We are here in an amaze to understand that the King is gone for
Scotland, especially after that horrid murder of the Marquis of
Montrose, wherein the King's honour suffered as great a butchery as he
did: and my thoughts are the more troubled at his Majesty's adventure
thither because we have lately received so good news from Ireland, as
that all the Papists have submitted to my Lord of Ormond, and they
have lately given Sir C. Coote a great defeat in the north of Ireland,
and hope to master the whole kingdom by Michaelmas; which, methinks,
seems to upbraid the King's hasty counsellors, who having no patience
at all to rely on God's providence, and looking still upon mere human
strength, without any consideration of honour or conscience, are still
crying out, What else have we to do? when indeed there are times when
honest men must pray and do nothing else until God's providence open a
way fit for them to take. And now for aught appears to us they have
thrust our master upon a course of so much danger that they themselves
shrink at the sight of it, when, had they been but masters of so much
Christian patience as to have staid awhile, things probably might have
been put into a fair and an hopeful way. These are sad considerations,
and they make me fear God's heavy hand is still upon us, who will
neither be persuaded, nor indeed knocked into any religion, and to
suffer that fond instance of Henry IV. of France to persuade more with
us than all the precepts of Christ's Gospel.
[Sidenote: 1650, September.]
"I should give the poor Church for utterly lost, but that I believe
there is a good God in heaven; but, however it fare with her, some
I fear will one day sharply answer that they have preserved her no
better, and that to gain the speedier ease they have preferred rash and
wicked counsels before those that were pious and just, because they
seemed not to promise a more sudden way to prosperity."[31]
[Sidenote: _Trouble with the Presbyterians._]
Another Royalist letter in September reveals what was going on in
Scotland--the trouble the Presbyterians had with the King--and the
trouble he had with them.
"Mr. Thomas Weston and Daniel O'Neile came from the King nine days
ago. Our glorious news of Cromwell's total defeat is nothing to that
we hoped, yet he hath had a knock, and may very probably be worsted
if the Scots do their best, that is, sit still. But the ministers
press their men to fight, contrary to their commander's opinion. If
they fight they hazard a beating. The ministers have lately purged
the army of 5,000 profane persons, and Lowden went about the camp to
tell them it was the cause of God, and not to be maintained by wicked
men. Such they account all cavaliers, Montrosians, and such as engaged
with Hamilton, that is to say, their best soldiers. Whether this be
madness or treachery a little time may discover. The King must not go
to the army, for fear he may gain too much upon the soldier. He was
pressed to a declaration imputing the late bloodshed and miseries to
his mother's Popery and his father's following bad counsel and opposing
the Covenant. This the King refused to the death; whereupon instantly
the Kirk declare against him, and offer to treat with Cromwell. To
prevent the consequences whereof, the King sends to the Kirk again, by
Argyle's advice, and satisfies them, mollifying only some words in the
declaration. So, as he says in it now, that his father's ill counsel,
&c., was the occasion (not the cause) of the troubles. Argyle hath
given him great professions of his fidelity, seems to be overpowered by
the clergy, and says when the King comes into England he may be more
free, but for the present it is necessary to please these madmen. The
votes for removing from the King the company that came with him from
home, are fully confirmed by the Parliament. They make no laws which
are of force till the Assemblies of the Kirk allow them. This is the
substance of what I heard from Thomas Weston: you will have it more
fully from other hands. I write only to let you see how ready I should
be if I were able to express myself.
"Your Honour's most humble servant,
"GEORGE RADCLIFFE."
[Sidenote: 1650, September.]
This letter is dated from the Hague the 7th of September.[32] Fairfax,
from Presbyterian scruples, having declined the office, Cromwell had
now gone to Scotland as Generalissimo of the Commonwealth army,
to crush at once this Scotch attempt, which, by making Charles the
covenanted King of Scotland, prepared for making him the covenanted
King of England. Not to have endeavoured to put a stop to this
enterprise, would have been suicidal infatuation on the part of the
founder of the English Commonwealth. The great captain had crossed
the Tweed on the 22nd of July, with no such faith in the Covenant as
the Scotch brethren cherished; nay, looking on their faith in it as
superstitious, and saying even to the General Assembly: "There may
be, as well, a carnal confidence upon misunderstood and misapplied
precepts, which may be called spiritual drunkenness. There may be a
_Covenant_ made with death and hell." Weston and O'Neile had left
the King on the 29th of August, and in some slowly-sailing smack
had reached Holland, bringing "glorious" news, which turned out in
the end to be very false, and was soon followed by other news very
disastrous. By Cromwell's "defeat"--the report of which, as related,
did not satisfy Mr. George Radcliffe--must have been meant the retreat
of the army from Edinburgh after a skirmish on the 27th, "Wherein,"
says Cromwell, "we had near twenty killed and wounded, but not one
commission officer. The enemy, as we are informed, had about eighty
killed, and some considerable officers. Seeing they would keep their
ground, from which we could not remove them, and our bread being spent,
we were necessitated to go for a new supply, and so marched off about
ten or eleven o'clock on Wednesday morning."[33]
[Sidenote: _Battle of Dunbar._]
Four days before Radcliffe's letter was written, something had occurred
very different indeed from the royalist report.
Late in the blustering night of the 2nd of September, as the blasts
shook the tents at Dunbar, and the sleet cut the faces of the sentries,
Leslie on the Scotch side, and Cromwell on the English, were encamped
front to front, prepared for battle; the former sure of victory from
what he gathered as to the condition of the invaders. Cromwell intended
to begin the attack at daybreak, and, as the moon rode high, gleaming
through the rent clouds, and the first blush of dawn streaked the
horizon, he was ready; but the action hardly began before sunrise.
And yet, an hour later--when the September mist rolled off the German
ocean, and the sun broke all silvery on the waters, lighting up St.
Abb's Head, while the cry of the English commander was heard along the
line, "Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered,"--his soldiers,
with a tornado rush, had swept down the foe. Thousands were slain, the
rest routed, and by nine o'clock Leslie rode into Edinburgh, a brave
but beaten soldier.
[Sidenote: 1650, September.]
Cromwell, as he rode into the same city a conqueror, found the clergy
had left the churches. He sent a trumpet to the castle, to assure the
Governor that the clergy might return in peace, that he would not
hinder the preaching of the Gospel; only preachers must remember not
to rail at their superiors and "overtop the civil power." In reply to
the complaint that the pulpit had been opened to sectaries and laymen,
the victorious Independent put another question:--"Are you troubled
that Christ is preached? Is preaching so exclusively your function?
Doth it scandalize the reformed kirks and Scotland in particular? Is it
against the Covenant? Away with the Covenant if this be so! I thought
the Covenant and 'these professors of it' could have been willing
that any should speak good of the name of Christ; if not, it is no
Covenant of God's approving; nor are these kirks you mention in so much
the spouse of Christ. Where do you find in the Scripture a ground to
warrant such an assertion, that preaching is exclusively your function?
Though an approbation from men hath order in it, and may do well, yet
he that hath no better warrant than that, hath none at all. I hope He
that ascended up on high may give His gifts to whom He pleases, and if
those gifts be the seal of mission, be not 'you' envious though Eldad
and Medad prophesy."[34] In this rather uncouth phraseology may be
discerned a certain soldierly instinct, not very different from what is
so noticeable in the despatches of a modern general of a far different
school. Cromwell, like Wellington, could use words, even as the
soldiers at Waterloo and in the civil wars could use swords, cleaving a
subject asunder down to the very heart, at a single stroke.
[Sidenote: 1651, January.]
Presbyterian Scotland, honest to the core, stood faithful to what as
it believed was God's own cause. Shall our glorious Covenant--not of
earth, but of heaven--be crushed by this Independent captain, brave
though he be; shall it be buried on the field of this Dunbar fight? No,
no! Looking thus at the subject, the leaders, clerical as well as lay,
in spite of tormenting divisions in the nation and in the kirk, soon
busied themselves with preparations for another trial of arms. "All
of us in pulpit," writes Robert Baillie, "myself as much as others,
did promove the work. In a very short time three thousand five hundred
horse are gotten together, with hopes by volunteers, to make them above
five thousand."[35] But all went not on smoothly. Hopes were soon
blasted. Hot controversy arose as to whether the lawfulness of a war
against Cromwell could be justified by the Covenant. Some went so far
as to say: "That the commission of the Kirk would approve nothing that
was right; that a hypocrite ought not to reign over us--that we ought
to treat with Cromwell, and give him security not to trouble England
with a king--and who marred this treaty, the blood of the slain in this
quarrel be on their head!"
[Sidenote: _Coronation of Charles._]
However, the ruling party in Kirk and Court continued staunch to the
Covenant, and to the King whom they had persuaded to entrust his
crown to their keeping. That crown with all solemnity they placed
upon the Prince's head on New Year's day, 1651. The ceremony took
place at Scone, whose ancient abbey had witnessed the coronation of so
many kings of Scotland, as they sat on "the stone of destiny"--still
preserved under Edward the Confessor's chair at Westminster. But
the solemnities on this occasion appeared shorn of all the splendid
ritualism which in other days had adorned the inauguration of a new
reign. Mr. Douglas preached upon the crowning of King Joash, "a very
pertinent, wise, and good sermon." Charles then swore, in the presence
of Almighty God, the searcher of hearts, that he would prosecute the
ends prescribed in the Covenant, and agree to all Acts of Parliament
for the establishment in his Scotch realm, of Presbyterian rule, of
the Directory, the confession and the catechism of the Kirk; and also
consent to Acts of Parliament enjoining the same throughout the rest
of his dominions. The Earl of Argyle brought forth the crown, and
lifted it on the head of the chosen King. Mr. Robert Douglas prayed;
and when the Chancellor had conducted the Prince to the throne of his
ancestors, the same minister addressed to him an exhortation, pressing
on him the duty of constancy to the Covenant, and reminding him how
his grandfather James had broken his vow, the consequences of which
pursued his family--"God casting the King out of His lap"--and how
the plagues of heaven would fall on himself, if he failed to keep the
oath of his coronation day. The service closed "with a prayer, and the
twentieth psalm."[36]
Charles was forced into a confession of his father's sin in marrying
an idolatress, of his own bad education, of the prejudices against
God's cause which he had imbibed in his boyhood, and of his manifold
transgressions. He also declared his detestation of Popery and Prelacy,
and his resolution, inasmuch as he had obtained mercy of the Lord,
to be on the Lord's side, to do nothing but with the advice of His
Kirk. After all this hypocrisy he felt now in his new position--even
as he deserved--that he had a very hard time of it. Tedious forms
were imposed upon him; six sermons at one sitting being preached in
his presence. Not a walk was allowed him on a Sunday. Mewed up, as
he considered it, he had to spend hours in distasteful religious
exercises, or in such society as his keepers pleased: and if he
ventured to dance, or play at cards--which was a great delight to
his frivolous nature--some ministers, who had caught Knox's mantle,
administered reproof in a tone like that of the bold Reformer to Mary
Stuart, whose levity, fascinating manners, and some other qualities,
had descended to her great grandson.
[Sidenote: _Protesters and Resolutionists._]
Honest fanaticism, apparent throughout the treatment which Charles
received, manifested itself in some other rather curious ways.
First, in excluding from the King's army all who had incurred the
taint of malignancy, thereby cutting off from the cause of King and
Covenant half the resources at command; and, secondly, on a return
of common sense as to that matter, in proceeding to demand that old
malignants, now ready to fight the Lord's battles, should, before
they handled a pike or shouldered a musket, stand at the church door
and do penance. Accordingly, it is recorded, on Sunday, the 12th of
January, "This day Lieutenant-General Middleton was relaxed from his
excommunication, and did his penance in sackcloth in Dundee church;
and Colonel Archibald Strachan was excommunicated, and delivered to
the devil, in the church of Perth, by Mr. Alexander Rollock, the same
day." The Earl of Lauderdale, the Earl of Crawford, and other nobles,
expiated their malignancy after the same fashion. From these two lines
of policy originated the two parties known in Scotland as Protesters
and Resolutionists--the former remonstrating against the employment of
profane and ungodly men in the camp, or the court, or on the bench;
the latter resolving upon their admission, after submitting to Church
discipline.[37]
[Sidenote: 1651, August.]
[Sidenote: _Battle of Worcester._]
It is not for us to describe the tactics of the Scotch army. It is
enough to say that, in August, 1651, that army found itself in such
a position with regard to Cromwell's camp, that it was "much nearer
to England than he."[38] It seemed safer to turn south than north.
Moreover, hopes grew up of large Presbyterian help on this side the
border. The army with the King therefore marched into Lancashire;
but the army and the King, once on English soil, soon shewed that
they were seeking different ends.[39] The army cared little for the
King, and much for the Covenant. The King cared much for his crown,
and not at all for the Covenant--except to hate it. The Committee of
Ministers attending on the forces prepared, unknown to his Majesty, a
declaration of their Presbyterian zeal, and of their purpose to receive
no recruits who would not subscribe the solemn League. This to Charles,
of course, appeared insanity, and he countermanded the publication; at
the same time ordering that civility should be shewn to any one who was
disposed to enter his service. When the Scotch design became known, it
tended to check the advances of episcopal Royalists; and, likewise, the
King's want of sympathy with the Covenant served to keep Presbyterians
away. Worse still, numbers of the Scots, now convinced of his
treachery, turned their backs and marched home, and those who continued
faithful fell into discord with their comrades. No cohesion could exist
between covenanted and anti-covenanting forces. Personal jealousies,
also, increased religious antipathies; for the Duke of Buckingham
wanted to snatch the command from the hands of General Leslie. By the
time the army reached Worcester--which the King had selected for his
last throw in the game of war--the army had fallen into a state of
perfect demoralization. Discord prevailed amongst the officers, and
confusion amongst the men. The image of iron and clay fell to pieces
at the first shock. Cromwell, who had followed the Royalists from
Scotland, dashed down upon them by the banks of the river Severn, ere
they were aware of his approach. The King suddenly, as he was dining
at noon, heard of a battle, and rushed out of the house, only to find
a body of his own horsemen already in retreat. They nearly rode over
his sacred person, and paid no attention whatever to his loud war cry.
The Ironsides swept all before them. Leslie reached Yorkshire with only
1,500 Covenanters; and the rest of the troops were scattered over the
country--blown about like the chaff of the summer threshing floor.
[Sidenote: 1651, May.]
If some English Presbyterians could not conscientiously fight for
the King, others could not conscientiously fight against him. The
Covenant, according to the fairest interpretation of it, together with
their own old English sentiments, constrained them to maintain their
loyalty to the crown. Regarding the father's execution as a murder,
they declined to help the regicides in their designs upon his son.
Dr. Samuel Annesley, John Wesley's grandfather, was a type of this
class. He refused to send a horse against his Majesty at Worcester,
and despatched a servant at night from a distance of forty miles to
secure the church keys, in order that no schismatical ministers might
hold a thanksgiving service in his church in celebration of Cromwell's
victory. Several times he denounced the General as the "arrantest
hypocrite" that ever pestered the Church of Christ; as one intent on
pulling "down others only to make his own way to the throne," for which
demonstrations before "some of note in the army" he was "necessitated
to quit a parsonage worth between £200 and £300 per annum."[40]
[Sidenote: 1651, July.]
In the spring of 1651, as Charles did penance for the recovery of the
throne, he had Presbyterian friends in London and elsewhere plotting
for the same end. They despatched letters to raise money and arms on
his behalf; and some of these letters, conveyed in a vessel driven by a
storm into the harbour of the town of Ayr, fell into Cromwell's hands.
[Sidenote: _Love's Trial._]
Several ministers were implicated, especially Christopher Love.[41]
It was the same person who had made himself famous by his Uxbridge
sermon against the Royalists, and he now found himself in the Tower,
a prisoner in the hands of the Parliament. Afterwards placed at the
bar of the High Court of Justice in Westminster Hall, this young
minister was charged with a criminal correspondence to restore Charles
Stuart, first, in violation of an ordinance which denounced a traitor's
death against those who should make such an attempt; and secondly,
in violation of another ordinance, against assisting foreigners to
invade the shores of England. Love, in his defence, declared that
he only retained his covenanting principles. He referred to what he
had suffered as a Puritan, and to what he had done as a patriot,
adding, "I have been kept several weeks in close prison, and am now
arraigned for my life, and like to suffer from the hands of those for
whom I have done and suffered so much, and who have lifted up their
hands with me on the same Covenant." He solemnly declared that he had
neither written nor sent letters into Scotland; but he confessed that
the proceedings in favour of the King were agreeable to his judgment,
and for the good of the nation. He owned that he had connived at the
scheme for restoring the prince, and had concealed some intelligence
respecting it; and for so doing he besought forgiveness, and threw
himself upon the mercy of the Court. Matthew Hale appeared as counsel
for the prisoner, but no plea or intercession could prevent a verdict
of guilty, or avert the sentence of death.
[Sidenote: Love's Trial.]
The efforts made by Mary Love to save the life of her husband, and the
correspondence which passed between them, form an affecting episode.
With that courage which is inspired by a wife's affection, and which
not unfrequently converts a timid and commonplace woman into a heroine,
she laid a petition before Parliament, imploring pardon for the
condemned, pledging his friends as security for his peaceable behaviour
in time to come, and begging that the God of heaven would bow the
hearts of England's rulers to shew mercy. Yet, fearing the worst, this
admirable woman wrote to her husband in strains of ardent tenderness,
telling him to be comforted; that death was but a little stroke, and
that he would soon be where the wicked cease from troubling, and the
weary are at rest. "Remember," she said, "though thou mayest eat thy
dinner with bitter herbs, yet thou shalt have a sweet supper with
Christ that night." He responded in the same spirit of resignation
and triumph, assuring her that, as there was "little between him and
death," so "there was little between him and heaven." A second prayer
from Mrs. Love entreated that, if her husband might not be thought
worthy to breathe English air, he might at least have leave to sigh
out his sorrows in the utmost parts of the earth. Fifty-four ministers
signed a petition, in which they besought the Parliament earnestly, and
"in the bowels of Jesus Christ, who, when we were sinners, died for us,
if not totally to spare the life of their dear brother, yet that they
would say of him as Solomon of Abiathar, that at this time he should
not be put to death." A reprieve for one month followed, at the end of
which period the suspense of wife and friends settled into blank agony.
A third petition produced no effect; nor a fourth, though in that the
broken-hearted woman cried, "Your desolate handmaid waiteth with all
humility and earnest expectation at your doors, beseeching you not to
forget to shew mercy to your poor petitioner and her tender babes."
"Be graciously pleased to prevent this dreadful blow." "Whilst you
are propagating the Gospel in New England, let my dying husband, as a
prophet from the dead, be sent to endeavour the conversion of the poor
Indians."
[Sidenote: 1651, August.]
The last words of Christopher Love to his brave, loving Mary were:
"Farewell, I will call thee wife no more--I shall see thy face no more;
yet I am not much troubled, for I am going to meet the bridegroom, the
Lord Jesus Christ, to whom I shall be eternally married."[42]
[Sidenote: _Love's Execution._]
Love met his fate on Tower Hill, on the 22nd of August (together
with Mr. Gibbon), and made a long speech, maintaining that he had
been convicted upon insufficient evidence, and that certain charges
affecting his moral and political character were utterly untrue. He
protested against the Engagement, and the invasion of Scotland by an
English army; he avowed his preference to die as a Covenant keeper,
rather than to live as a Covenant breaker; and ended his words with
spiritual counsels and appeals. Ash, Calamy, and Manton, attended
their brother on the scaffold; and Baxter says "he died with as great
alacrity, and fearless quietude, and freedom of speech, as if he had
gone to bed." Manton preached in St. Lawrence church, where Love had
been incumbent, a funeral sermon, published under the title of "The
Saint's Triumph in Death." The title indicates the preacher's opinion;
and in harmony with it is a statement in the discourse, that the
departed was a "pattern most worthy of imitation--a man eminent in
grace--a man of a singular life and conversation." Christopher Love
stood on the scaffold--where so many in like awful circumstances had
stood before--under a bright August sky; but soon after the shedding of
his blood the heavens became overcast, and thunder and lightning raged
all night. At a time when Nature was interpreted by each contending
faction as being on its side, no wonder royalist Presbyterians said
"God is angry at what has been done," and no wonder republican
Independents replied, "It is a mark of Divine judgment against
implacable apostasy."
[Illustration]
CHAPTER III.
In 1653 the Long Parliament had worn itself out, and its dissolution
had become an inevitable necessity. The last gleams of its expiring
light emanated from Sir Harry Vane, whose character and genius
chiefly, if not entirely, gave to its latest debates whatever of power
and brilliancy they possessed. A true estimate of this previously
illustrious senate, in the period of its decadence, must rest upon a
full consideration of the opinions and conduct of its remaining members
regarded in general, and not upon the exceptional views and virtues of
a single distinguished individual. There can be little or no doubt that
the effect of the later proceedings of this Parliament was likely to
be the ruin of the cause for which it had fought in its earlier years;
and even the policy of Vane--who was a sincere champion of the rights
of conscience, and the toleration of all religious opinions--from being
associated with impracticable republican theories, was not calculated
to prevent that deplorable result.
[Sidenote: _Little Parliament._]
Cromwell, who alone at that moment had the sagacity to perceive to
the full extent the mischiefs which threatened his country, therefore
interposed, with an energy which was as startling as it was bold; and
which is now acknowledged by numerous careful students of history to
have proceeded from wisdom as really profound as it was, at the time,
apparently questionable. Upon the disappearance of the Long Parliament
from the chapel of St. Stephen's, there followed the disappearance of
Sir Harry Vane from the Cabinet of Whitehall. As an honest republican
he could not but condemn the course pursued by his colleague; and the
two men--who, with Marten, for some time after the establishment of the
Commonwealth were the chief pillars of England--now stood parted from
each other in this world for ever. The triumvirate was at an end. It
had given place to a virtual monarchy.[43]
But though Cromwell dissolved the Long Parliament he had no idea of
ruling England without the assistance of a popular assembly; and hence,
within three months after that extraordinary event, a new Parliament
was convened at Westminster.
[Sidenote: 1653, July.]
The theory of its constitution was unique. It was to consist of men
who were able, who loved the truth, who feared God, and who hated
covetousness; so ran the terms employed in certain directions given to
the Congregational churches to send up names to the Lord General,[44]
out of which list, together with another provided by the council of
officers, the members of the new convention were to be selected. There
were not wanting, at such a moment, people to tilt their jests--and
they asked if the image of Him who rode into Jerusalem upon an ass was
not a type of the new deliverer about to ride to a throne on the back
of one hundred and twenty asses--that being the number of the Little
Parliament.
[Sidenote: _Little Parliament._]
Upon the list of the summoned appears the name of Dennis Hollister--a
grocer in High Street, Bristol--a person who had great influence with
the magistrates of the city, and who is described in the records
of the church of which he was a member,[45] "as Diotrephes-like,
loving to have the pre-eminence," and as "sucking in some principles
of an upstart locust doctrine, from a sort of people afterwards
called Quakers." If there be any truth in such a statement, this
new member of Parliament must have been fanatical in one way, while
his fellow-members were fanatical in another; and such conflicting
phases of fanaticism made the settlement of ecclesiastical business
in connexion with the State exceedingly difficult; rendering it
necessary for Cromwell to interpose with his strong English common
sense, unless affairs were left to fall to ruin. Fanatical people
there must have been in this singularly constituted assembly, but it
numbered also persons rationally religious; and even in the fanatics
there might be redeeming qualities. What they said and did are the
truest tests by which to judge of what they really were; and it will
be seen, that amidst their follies, some of their words and deeds
were of a description not to be despised. Much is said of their birth
and station; but the grocers and leather-sellers of that day might
be rich and prosperous, and socially on a level with the merchants
and cotton-lords, who, in our own time, sit upon the benches at
Westminster.[46] There were of the number also, Lords, and Knights, and
Colonels; and two of the individuals summoned, who afterwards sat in
Charles the Second's House of Peers, as Earl of Albemarle and Earl of
Shaftesbury, have been pronounced by history as certainly not the most
respectable persons in the Little Parliament.
[Sidenote: 1653, July.]
On the 4th of July, 1653--a very sultry day--the gentlemen met in
the Whitehall Council Chamber, and seated themselves round the room
on chairs. As Cromwell, with his officers, entered, all present rose
and bowed. The General moved his hat, advanced to the middle window,
and leaning on the back of a chair, addressed them for more than an
hour. Descanting upon religion, he pleaded earnestly that all God's
saints should be treated with tenderness, and that if he had seemed
to reflect upon those who held Presbyterian opinions, he now thought
faithfulness demanded that he should love them. He had, when God had
been gracious to him and his companions, often read that passage: "He
would plant in the wilderness the cedar, the shittah-tree, and the
myrtle, and the oil tree; and He would set in the desert the fir tree,
and the pine tree, and the box tree together. That they may see, and
know, and consider, and understand together." Therefore he besought his
audience to have care for the whole flock--lambs and all--and if the
poorest and most mistaken Christian should desire to live peaceably
and quietly under the government, let him be protected. He pleaded for
a faithful ministry, such as did not derive itself from the Papacy;
the true succession being through the Holy Spirit. He never looked, he
said, to see such a day as that he now witnessed, Jesus Christ being
owned by all. The persons present might not personally be known to each
other; but the endeavour in calling that New Parliament had been, not
to choose any but such as had hope and faith in Christ. "The Lord," he
observed, "shakes the hills and mountains, and they reel; and God hath
a hill too, an high hill as the hill of Bashan, and the chariots of God
are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels, and God will dwell upon
this hill for ever." Such a speech had never before been delivered at
the opening of a Parliament.
When it was finished, a formal instrument devolving authority on the
members was placed on the table, with the General's signature and seal,
after which he left the Chamber,--politically "nothing more than the
brewer's son of Huntingdon."[47]
[Sidenote: _Little Parliament._]
Francis Rouse, provost of Eton, was elected speaker--before which
proceeding the members prayed without a chaplain--"Eight or ten
speaking in prayer to God, and some briefly from the Word." "Much of
the presence of Christ and His Spirit," says a person who was present,
"appearing that day to the great gladdening of the hearts of many--some
affirming they never enjoyed so much of the spirit and presence of
Christ, in any of the meetings and exercises of religion, in all their
lives, as they did that day." On the day following they again spent
some time in prayer, and prayer, it is recorded, "was daily performed
by one member or other, as they were found free to perform it."
Presently again they devoted a day to prayer, which "was done by the
members, principally by such as had not done service before, when also
the Lord General was present, and it was a very comfortable day."[48]
The Lord General had been specially invited to join the Assembly,
together with Harrison, Desborough, Lambert, and Tomlinson.
Major-General Harrison--a rather noble though not refined-looking
man, with flowing locks, irregular features, aquiline nose, and black
eyes, often flashing with enthusiasm--had distinguished himself at
Basinghouse, Preston, and elsewhere, as a stern soldier, and had been
heard by Baxter breaking out into a rapture at Somerton. He was now
getting deep in the study of prophecy, and was expecting the reign
of the saints to succeed the four great monarchies described by the
prophet Daniel. Desborough--a ruder and coarser man than Harrison,
as his face, eyebrows, form, and gait all betokened--who had shewn
himself a gallant soldier in the storming of Bristol, and had become
brother-in-law to Oliver Cromwell--was an Independent, and, after the
Restoration, became a member of Dr. Owen's church, in London. Major
General Lambert--who had done good service in the wars, had routed
the Scots at Linlithgow, and achieved daring feats at Worcester--was
Cromwell's particular friend, and adhered to him throughout his career,
when others turned their backs; a shrewd, clever, practical sort of
person. Tomlinson, Colonel of the Guard at King Charles' execution,
was not, beyond that circumstance, at all a noteworthy individual.[49]
[Sidenote: 1653, July.]
The Little Parliament altered the marriage law,[50] which, owing to
recent confusion, and consequent irregularities in domestic life,
needed amendment. Matrimony was considered by these new legislators
in its relation to the State, and was treated by them simply in the
character of a civil contract; possibly, in part at least, with the
view of diminishing clerical influence, but also with so remarkable an
insight into what is just and wise, as to anticipate modern legislation
in this respect both in England and on the Continent. Parties were
to obtain a certificate from the registrar of the parish, and then
solemnly before a justice of the peace to take each other for husband
and wife. The religious sanctions of the wedding bond were left
entirely to the will of the parties united, and these sometimes were
so connected with the secular part of the ceremony, that the service
altogether resembled the solemnization of matrimony at the present day
in a Nonconformist church in the presence of a registrar.[51]
[Sidenote: _Question of Tithes._]
The Parliament had scarcely commenced its sittings when it entered upon
the consideration of the important subject of tithes; and on the 15th
of July, it was determined by a majority of twenty-five--in a House
consisting of one hundred and eleven members--that the maintenance
of ministers by tithes should not be continued after the 3rd day of
November following. On the 19th of July, upon a renewal of the debate
relative to this subject, the question whether _incumbents_ possessed
a propriety in this kind of income, was referred to the consideration
of a committee specially appointed for that purpose. And to this same
committee a different business was committed on the 26th of the next
month. On that day were presented petitions from several churches in
Devonshire and Gloucestershire, seeking the further reformation of
religion, in connexion with which it was resolved: "That a committee be
appointed to consider of some way to be propounded to the House, how
ignorant, profane, and scandalous ministers may be rejected; That it be
referred to the same committee to consider of some way to be propounded
to the House, for the encouragement of such godly and able persons as
shall preach the Gospel; and That it be referred to the committee for
tithes."[52] The consideration of the question as to whether incumbents
had any property in tithes having been previously entrusted to this
committee, that question now became mixed up with the other relating to
the character of the clergy; and what the Little Parliament ultimately
did respecting the one has been supposed to have been a legislative
decision of the other, which is not the fact.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
Two parties were in contention, one disposed to retain the old tithe
system, the other bent upon supporting ministers in some other way.
Harrison led the latter division, and occupied the extreme left in
relation to the moderates, who were swayed by Cromwell, and who, as to
tithes, agreed with both the Presbyterian and Episcopal parties. The
House generally concurred in the opinion that the collection of tithes
by the clergy was a grievance; yet perhaps only a few members were
prepared to vote for putting an end to that method of support without
the provision of some legal substitute. These few, following Harrison,
were intent on having the impost repealed at once, leaving only such
other provision "as God should direct." A distinction was admitted
throughout the debate between the claims of _impropriators_ and the
claims of _incumbents_. The whole House was willing to compensate
impropriators in case of the forfeiture of their rights. It was the
case of incumbents alone which came under the consideration of the
committee. The utmost measure of change formally proposed was, to put
an end to the payment of the clergy in the old way, and to equalize
benefices by reducing those of £200 per annum and upwards, and by
increasing smaller incomes. It was also suggested that a provision
should be made to meet the wants of ministers' widows and children.[53]
[Sidenote: _Question of Tithes._]
The larger question respecting ignorant, profane, and scandalous
ministers, involved also the minor one touching presentation to
benefices; the predominant feeling of the members favoured the right
of congregations to choose their own pastors. The Puritan current
had long been setting in that direction, and arguments were now urged
to the effect that it was unreasonable for people not to be allowed
to select their own spiritual guides; much, in short, being advanced
upon the subject, of the same kind as is common in the present day. The
parties having a pecuniary interest in the maintenance of things as
they were, did all they could to keep on their side the men in power.
Such people sought protection from the Lord General against what they
deemed Parliament-robbery. However, on the 17th of November, the right
of presentation to benefices by patrons was condemned by a resolution,
and a bill in accordance with it was ordered to be brought in. The
effect of this decision was to place the election of the clergy in the
hands of parishioners.
[Sidenote: 1653, December.]
On the 2nd of December came the long-expected and much-dreaded report
of the Tithe Committee. It first recommended the sending forth
of certain authorized commissioners to enquire into ministerial
character, and next it gave a deliverance with regard to ministerial
maintenance. As this portion of the report is so imperfectly explained
by historians, we will present it to the reader as it is printed in the
journals:--
"_Resolved_--That it be presented to the Parliament: That all such as
are, or shall be approved for public preachers of the Gospel in the
public meeting-places, shall have and enjoy the maintenance already
settled by law, and such other encouragement as the Parliament already
hath appointed, or hereafter shall appoint; and that where any scruple
payment of tithes, the three next justices of the peace, or two of
them, shall, upon complaint, call the parties concerned before them,
and by the oaths of lawful witnesses shall duly apportion the value of
the said tithes, to be paid either in money or land, by them to be set
out according to the said value, to be held and enjoyed by him that
was to have the said tithes; and, in case such apportioned value be
not duly paid or enjoyed, according to the order of the said justices,
the tithes shall be paid in kind, and shall be recovered in any court
of record. Upon hearing and considering what hath been offered to
this Committee touching propriety in tithes of incumbents, rectors,
possessors of donatives, or propriate tithes, it is the opinion of this
Committee, and resolved to be so reported to the Parliament, that the
said persons have a legal propriety in tithes."[54]
An earnest debate ensued, "managed day by day," says one who was
present, "with very great seriousness, many arguments and Scriptures
being alleged," and "very little of heat or passion being shewed all
that time, only one gentleman or two that were for the report, seeing
themselves and their party so engaged, flew out a little, complaining
of the expense of time, to have given a check to the going on of the
debate."[55] The first part of the report, relating to the method of
removing scandalous ministers, upon being put to the vote, was rejected
by a majority of two, fifty-six voting against fifty-four. The second
part, relating to the mode of supporting ministers, and the rights of
property possessed by incumbents, was not put to the vote at all. The
probable rejection of it might be inferred, but no formal rejection was
expressed. What is sometimes represented as the decided abolition of
tithes amounted to no more than the rejection of a Committee of Triers.
That Committee was a favourite scheme of Cromwell's, and was afterwards
by him practically carried out; he also favoured the continuance of
the old method of supporting ministers. But the Little Parliament
indicated a wish to change that method; yet what they decided now, and
even their distinct votes against tithes in the preceding July, did not
necessarily imply that they intended to terminate altogether the state
maintenance of religious worship.[56]
[Sidenote: _Fifth Monarchy Men._]
It is desirable here once more to pause, and to consider the opinions
of Fifth Monarchy men, who were at this time becoming very numerous and
very active.
They may be divided into three classes. The first was composed of _mere
millenarians_, who entertained views not essentially different from
those which had been held in ancient times with regard to the reign of
Christ upon the earth; and whatever may be thought of these persons in
some other respects, their opinions cannot be regarded as involving
anything discreditable to their reputation, inasmuch as in substance
those opinions had received the sanction of a great scholar, Henry
Mead, and of a distinguished philosopher, Henry Moore.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
The second class consisted of _theoretical theocrats_, people who
talked in an extravagant manner respecting Divine dominion, and
generally opposed the authority of Oliver Cromwell; yet they appear
to have been inoffensive persons, not at all disposed to attempt any
violent measures for the realization of their wild and mystical dreams.
John Tillinghurst, the now forgotten author of several publications
on prophecy, which were popular at the time of which we are speaking,
belonged to this order of anti-Cromwell millenarians, who were very
bold and busy, but for the most part very harmless. Some of them wrote
and preached with great confidence upon the prophecies of Daniel and
the Revelations of St. John, only to find, in a short time, their
theories exploded by the criticism of facts.
But the third class included a number of _practical theocrats_ who
blended republican ideas with their theological speculations, and who
were quite disposed, whenever the opportunity offered, to open by force
a path by which the saints might advance to the government of the
world. Venner before and after the Restoration went even this length;
and Harrison, although a different man from Venner, was also a military
theologian, ready with carnal weapons to cast down strongholds. Certain
Anabaptists also belonged to the same division.
[Sidenote: _Fifth Monarchy Men._]
The fifth monarchy fever, in its fanatical symptoms, threatened much
mischief to English society. As in the tenth century the notion then
so common throughout Europe--that the end of the world had come, that
the whole social fabric had crumbled away, and was to give place to an
order of things just on the point of descending from heaven--proceeded
from the existing confusion of the age; so the prevalence of fifth
monarchy dreams, in the earlier part of the Commonwealth, was aided,
no doubt, by the convulsions which had so rudely shaken the whole of
the British Empire. The actual overthrow of the hierarchy, the peerage,
and the throne, with the desolations of civil war, and the disturbance
of the whole country, could not but throw the minds of many into a
maddening whirl, and dash them completely off their balance. Fifth
monarchism arose, in a great measure, out of the ruins of English
monarchism. The enthusiastic visions which absorbed certain minds were,
to a large extent, the effect of prevalent disorder. Men's brains were
crazed by what they had recently witnessed, and their insanity created
omens of other things, brighter or more terrible, which were yet to
come.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
During the sittings of the Little Parliament, the fifth monarchy
delusion reached its height; and to that delusion, though not to that
alone, may be attributed, as to their cause, certain incidents which,
although exaggerated by both Clarendon and Baxter, were not by any
means imaginary. These writers speak of this period, as if the very
existence of the Christian ministry, of rational religion, of the
two Universities, and of Christian learning in general, were then on
the point of complete extinction.[57] Things certainly were not in
that condition. What was actually done in reference to the support
of the clergy has been already described, and it can by no means
be made to sustain the sweeping assertions of those authors; yet,
notwithstanding, the interests of the great seats of education were
placed in fearful jeopardy, as will appear when we have to notice the
history of the University of Oxford at that time; nor can it be denied
that the demolition of some noble ecclesiastical edifices had been
contemplated even before the breaking up of the Long Parliament. The
Norwich Corporation, so early as 1650, debated what should be done with
the cathedral of that city; and in the same year, Yarmouth was seeking
to share in the spoil.[58] Further still, on the 9th of July, 1652, it
was referred to a committee by the House of Commons, to consider this
question: "What cathedrals are fit to stand, and what to be pulled
down." Such intended destruction betokened other spoliations, and the
Long Parliament having set such an example, the Little Parliament had
encouragement to proceed in a similar path.
The proceedings of Harrison and his party could not fail to alarm the
Presbyterians; even the Independents, with Cromwell at their head,
in spite of their broad views of ecclesiastical questions, were also
convinced that nothing but confusion could result from the wild schemes
of republican visionaries and Fifth Monarchists. The country could not
feel confidence in those who formed the slight majority of the House,
and sober-minded men apprehended nothing but ruin from the continuance
of their power. The Parliament itself, with such an even balance of
parties, and amidst so much distraction, had a consciousness of its own
incapacity, which led the members speedily to resign their powers into
the Lord General's hands.[59]
[Sidenote: _Feake at Blackfriars._]
This resignation, Cromwell's acceptance of it, and his consequent
assumption of supreme authority, drove the millenarian democrats into a
still more violent expression of extravagant views, and into still more
decidedly energetic opposition to the Lord General. Preachers of that
day, in close alliance with Harrison, advocated in the pulpit the cause
which he and his party upheld in the senate. A House at Blackfriars
is repeatedly mentioned in contemporary letters as the head quarters
of this menacing agitation. Feake--a well-known Anabaptist and Fifth
Monarchy man--there held forth in a strain of rude eloquence, and
greatly distinguished himself as leader of a large band of sympathizing
disciples. To letters written by contemporaries we are chiefly indebted
for what we know of the proceedings of these enthusiasts.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
"I know not," says the writer of an intercepted epistle, "whether you
have formerly heard of the Monday's lecture at Blackfriars, where
three or four of the Anabaptistical ministers preach constantly, with
very great bitterness, against the present Government, but especially
against his Excellency, calling him 'the man of sin,' 'the old dragon,'
and many other scripture ill names; the chief of them is one Feake,
a bold and crafty orator, and of high reputation amongst them. It
has been wondered the General has so patiently permitted them; but
yesterday I heard the true reason of it, which is, that he cannot help
it, for they preach by an Act of the late Parliament, which the council
of state cannot over-rule, and this Parliament will not abolish it;
but on Tuesday last, as I take it, they were called before a private
committee, where your General was present, who told them that the ill
odour they had cast upon the Government has given confidence to our
enemies abroad and at home, (meaning the Scots,) and would bring the
Parliament into contempt; and that whatsoever ill effect followed, they
must be accountable for it. Feake replied that he desired that what
the General said and what he answered might be recorded in heaven;
and that it was his tampering with the king, and his assuming an
exorbitant power, which made these disorders; and so held forth the
Fifth Monarchy. The General answered, that when he heard him begin with
a record in heaven, he did not expect that he would have told such a
lie upon earth; but assured him that whensoever they should be harder
pressed by the enemy than they yet had been, it would be necessary to
begin first with them; and so dismissed them. I forgot to tell you
that the General had brought Sterry,[60] and two or three more of his
ministers, to oppose spirit to spirit, and to advise Feake and the
rest to obedience, as the most necessary way to bring in the kingdom
of Christ. But it is believed we shall have very much trouble from the
Anabaptists, yet it is thought their power is nothing so great in the
army as in the House; they have none above a captain of their party
besides Harrison, who, it is thought, will betray all the rest: but
whether the General will ease himself of those in the House by the old
way of purging, or the new one of dissolving, rests in his own and his
officers' breasts."[61]
[Sidenote: 1653, December.]
The district of Blackfriars claimed to be independent of the municipal
authorities of London. The inhabitants asserted an inheritance of the
privileges of sanctuary, formerly pertaining to that famous monastery
which had given its name to the neighbourhood. Hence, to find shelter
and protection within the precincts of the ancient foundation, players,
who had been driven out of the city, here erected a theatre; and
Papists, who were proscribed by law, here assembled for worship. And
it is not a little curious that Puritans also were somewhat numerous
in the same locality; a fact which is indicated by their presenting
what seems to have been an influential petition to the Lords of the
Privy Council against the continuance of stage-plays by their dramatic
neighbours.[62] Blackfriars, as we have seen, is also mentioned among
the places in which certain Nonconformists were wont to meet in the
first quarter of the seventeenth century; and in this same place we now
meet with an Anabaptist assembly listening to the popular preachers of
millenarianism.
[Sidenote: _Feake and Powell._]
A letter from an eye-witness communicates additional information
respecting these meetings. The writer states that he had been to one of
them, and had heard Feake preach upon the subject of the little horn
described in the book of Daniel; and he states that in the course of
the sermon the preacher exclaimed, "I know some would have the late
King Charles to be meant by this little horn; but as I said at first,
I'll name nobody. God will make it clear shortly to His people who is
meant here." When Feake had concluded his portion of the service,
Vavasour Powell continued to discourse on the same subject, in a
similar strain of interpretation--still more explicitly reflecting on
public men and measures than his predecessor had done--interpreting the
king of the north to signify the late monarch, and inveighing bitterly
against the military commanders of the day, as the sole cause of the
pressure of taxation. The leading points of the sermon were, that
Christ was setting up a fifth monarchy in the world; that a spirit of
prophecy had been communicated to the saints, whereby they were enabled
to describe future events; and that the design of Christ was to destroy
all antichristian forms, including established churches together with
their clergy. Upon this third particular, the reporter states that
Powell was somewhat copious, and said "they must down, though they
were never so strongly protected, for Christ is none of their Lord
Protectors, though the army-men protect them." "Yes," said he, "and
rather than those shall down, they will pull Parliaments in pieces, and
this made them break the last Parliament; for on Saturday, the 10th
of December, the House refused to settle a commission of ministers
to ride in circuits, as the judges did, and judge who were fit to be
continued or put out of their livings, and so to maintain them upon
the old corrupt foundation still. And when the House would not yield
that these antichristian clergymen and tithes should be upheld, then,
on Monday following, in the morning, they were thrust out (I mean the
few honest men of them that were present) by violence; and the rest (as
they had agreed beforehand) went and subscribed their names to a paper
giving up their authority in the name of the whole; whereas none of
the honest men would subscribe or surrender, save only some three or
four, who have since professed their hearty sorrow to me for it. This
is true, and we must speak it out, for our mouths shall not be stopped
with paper-proclamations." ... Further, in relation to the Parliament,
he remarked, "they were broken by force, and it was a business plotted
by the great army-men, clergymen, and their party together." ... Powell
afterwards "flew into many strange ejaculations, 'Lord! what have our
army-men all apostatized from their principles? What is become of all
their declarations, protestations, and professions? Are they choked
with lands, and parks, and manors? Let us go home, and pray, and say,
'Lord, wilt Thou have Oliver Cromwell to reign over us, or Jesus Christ
to reign over us.'" "I know," he proceeded, "there are many gracious
souls in the army, and of good principles, but the greater they grow,
the more they are corrupted with lands and honours. I'll tell you, it
was a common proverb that we had among us of the General, that in the
field he was the graciousest and most gallant man in the world; but out
of the field, and when he came home to government, the worst." This
strange preacher told his congregation that "snares were laid for them,
and spies set over them, and that they might be deprived of the benefit
of meeting in that place. But then (said he) we will meet at another,
and if we be driven thence, we will meet at private houses, and if we
cannot have liberty there, we will into the fields, and if we be driven
thence, we will into corners, for we will never give over, and God
will not permit this spirit to go down. He will be the support of the
spirits of His people. He complained also of the faltering of divers
who had formerly been very forward at this meeting, but now drew back,
and therefore he prayed that the Lord would hold up the meeting."[63]
[Sidenote: 1653, December.]
Powell having concluded, somebody seated in one corner of the gallery
began to speak, and would have replied to the preacher; but, though he
strained his voice with the utmost violence to overcome the outcries
of the congregation, he was compelled, after half-an-hour's tumult,
to hold his peace. A Mr. Colaine, amidst the confusion, ascended
the pulpit, and afterwards expounded the fifth chapter of Hosea,
representing the state of things in England as parallel to that which
the prophet portrayed, and inveighing strongly against the national
clergy of Antichrist, and the parochial priests of Baal.
According to another letter, personal allusions to Cromwell even yet
more violent occurred in the discourses of these misguided men. Powell
and Feake called him "the dissemblingist perjured villain in the
world," and desired any friends of his, who might be present, to go
and report this to him, adding, that the Protector's reign would be
short, and "that he should be served worse than that great tyrant the
last Lord Protector was, he being altogether as bad, if not worse than
he."[64]
[Sidenote: _Feake and Powell._]
These fanatics threw themselves with earnestness into the Dutch war.
That conflict, looking at the political and religious character of the
combatants, strikes us as very strange, both parties being republicans,
and both being defenders of religious liberty: but it had arisen from
commercial and maritime rivalries, into which additional bitterness
had been shed by the natural sympathies of the Prince of Orange
with the Stuart family. A confederation of the two commonwealths, for
the promotion of civil freedom and the interests of Protestantism
throughout Europe, formed an English dream at the end of the civil
wars; and what had at first been contemplated as a subject for peaceful
negotiation was afterwards absurdly sought to be accomplished by naval
battles. The republican zeal and Protestant fervour of Feake and his
friends enlisted them on the side of a thorough union between the two
states, and they stipulated for it as an indispensable condition of
peace. That England should persevere till Holland could be yoked to her
in humble submission for the attainment of these civil and religious
ends, constituted a staple theme in the harangues at Blackfriars.
Conciliation and compromise were condemned. The preachers denounced in
the wildest way the statesman-like views of Cromwell, who felt anxious
to put an end to the deadly struggle of two countries, between which
policy as well as justice dictated alliance with mutual independence.
His opponents did all they could to stir up the people of England
against the Netherlanders, and one of the Dutch deputies, who went to
hear them, wrote home, declaring that their sermons were "most horrid
trumpets of fire, murder, and flame."[65] Millenarianism thus became
mixed up with political schemes; and these Commonwealth visionaries
believed that God had given Holland to the English as a "landing
place of the saints, whence they should proceed to pluck the whore of
Babylon from her chair, and to establish the kingdom of Christ on the
Continent."[66]
Between the resignation of the Little Parliament on the 12th of
October, and the date of the last of these letters, a great change
had come over the government of England. Cromwell and his council of
officers, "after several days seeking of God," had determined formally
to avow the perpetuation of what was already a fact--that supreme
authority should rest in a single person, even in Oliver himself. His
title was to be "Lord Protector," and with him was to be associated "a
council of godly, able, and discreet persons," consisting of not more
than twenty-one.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell made Protector._]
On Friday, the 16th of December, about three o'clock in the afternoon,
his Highness went in procession from Whitehall to the Court of Chancery
in Westminster. Commissioners of the Great Seal, scarlet-robed
Judges and Barons, and the Lord Mayor and Corporation of London,
with the usual accompaniments of civic splendour, were in attendance
on the occasion. There on a dais stood a chair of state, near to a
table on which lay a roll of parchment, containing, in a summary of
forty-two articles, the fundamental principles of the Protectorate
government.[67] His Highness having subscribed the document, and having
sworn to maintain the constitution which it prescribed, sat down on
his throne, and then received into his hands the great seal of the
realm, the Lord Mayor's sword, and the cap of maintenance. His portrait
at that moment has been sketched in the following graphic words:
"Fifty-four years old gone April last; brown hair and moustache are
getting gray;" "massive stature; big massive head, of somewhat leonine
aspect--wart above the right eye-brow; nose of considerable blunt
aquiline proportions; strict yet copious lips, full of all tremulous
sensibilities, and also, if need were, of all fierceness and rigours;
deep, loving eyes, call them grave, call them stern, looking from under
those craggy brows as if in life-long sorrow."[68]
As the Protector returned to Whitehall, the Lord Mayor, uncovered,
carried the sword before him; and in the banqueting house, Mr. Lockier,
the Protector's chaplain, delivered an exhortation; after which the
Lord Mayor, the Aldermen, and the Judges all departed home.[69]
[Sidenote: _State of Affairs at the Time._]
A very wonderful day's work was that of the 16th of December.[70] It
was an act of usurpation beyond all doubt, yet one which it would be
pedantic to criticise according to constitutional rules. For when a
house is catching fire, or a vessel is on the edge of a rock, people in
their senses do not expect that a strong man, who can extinguish the
flame, or steer the ship into open waters, should stand on ceremony and
wait for red-tape formalities. A crisis had come, such as must come in
the wake of great revolutions, when, however firmly we may maintain
Locke's principles of the origin of government, we find people in such
a state of perfect helplessness, and former rulers so utterly destitute
of power to rule, so incapable, so inevitably rushing to destruction,
dragging the whole country along with them--that in mercy to mankind we
feel all theories woven of the wisest webs must be laid aside, and a
competently skilful hand be allowed to gather up the scattered threads
in such fashion as it may be able. Public affairs had now reached such
a crisis that the alternative was a Protector or destruction, Cromwell
or chaos. The fire long kindling now at length burst into a blaze, and
there was only one man who could put an end to the conflagration. The
ship was within an inch of foundering, and there remained but one pilot
who had the power of steering her off the rocks.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
The Church, it should be recollected, had not ceased to be a State
Church. The constant discussion of its affairs by Parliament and the
Council of State implied its continued subjection to secular control.
No scheme of severance had been propounded, though certain proposals
had been made which might seem to involve such a result. However
desirable it may appear to some of our readers that the civil and
ecclesiastical powers in a country should stand each on its own basis,
and not interfere with one another's action; whatever anticipations
may be formed of a new and better era of Christian civilization, to be
inaugurated when a separation of the Church from the State shall take
place, subject to the authority of New Testament teaching, aided by the
lights of experience through the exercise of political sagacity, and
under the inspiration of Christian disinterestedness; yet every one
must see that the time had not then come for such a revolution. Such
a revolution involved not only the settlement of questions touching
ecclesiastical property and revenue, but also the determination of
two other points, namely, that religion should be left to its own
unfettered exercise, and that no man should be disqualified by his
theological opinions for the discharge of the offices and the enjoyment
of the honours of the State. Now, without doing injustice to the
character of the Little Parliament, we certainly may go so far as to
say that it never indicated the possession of that clearsightedness,
that deep wisdom, and that broad sympathy which are essential to the
satisfactory solution of the practical problems included in the change
just indicated. The members had neither the intellectual nor the moral
qualifications requisite for the task. It was in those days more
difficult than it is at present to draw the line where free religious
action comes to an end, and something else quite different from it
begins; for millenarian opinions ran over into Fifth Monarchy schemes,
and the Dutch wars had become mixed up in men's brains with the
dominion of the saints. The Little Parliament lacked the mental power
necessary in those days for carrying out the doctrines of voluntaryism,
even had they understood them. But they did not understand them. Had
they done so, they would not have clung to the idea in any form,
of the State supporting the Christian ministry, nor would they have
cherished the conviction that certain theological qualifications are
indispensable for the discharge of political trusts.
[Sidenote: _State of Affairs at the Time._]
And further, if the Little Parliament had been composed of the wisest
of mortals, and had plainly and skilfully propounded a system of pure
voluntaryism, such as is ably and successfully advocated in our own
time, still, with the Presbyterians all against them; with many of the
Independents against them; and with the Episcopalians also against
them; in short, with the bulk of the wealth, of the intelligence,
and of the power of the country against them--how useless would have
been their attempts to work out the measure. Common sense teaches,
and voluntaryism in its very nature implies, that before it can
be established as the exclusive method of dealing with spiritual
interests, a very large number of those who have to adopt it must be
convinced of its wisdom. And as to the alternative of revising the
Establishment, and placing it upon grounds adapted to the needs of
existing society, that also was an undertaking which, it is needless to
repeat, the Little Parliament did not accomplish, and one, too, with
which the whole history of that Assembly proved that it was utterly
incompetent to deal. The whole web of ecclesiastical affairs had
raveled out, and it devolved on a more than ordinarily skilful hand to
gather up the threads and arrange them in some sort of order.
[Sidenote: 1653.]
Cromwell ever shewed himself to be a practical man, by no means wedded
to any fine-spun theory. No ideal republic, such as was conceived by
Plato or by Harrington, floated before his imagination. In this respect
a marked distinction existed between him and his contemporaries of the
philosophical schools which were led by Sir Harry Vane and Algernon
Sidney; and, as in pure politics, so in ecclesiastical politics, he
aimed simply at accomplishing what he saw to be practicable. His strong
religious feelings, the mystic cast of his piety, his enthusiastic
faith in prayer and providence, never turned him aside from plain
paths of human action, where he could get common people to walk and
work beside him. Whatever idea he might have had as to what was best
in itself, and under other circumstances than those of England in his
own day, then rocking with the throes of revolution, certainly the plan
which he adopted was not that of attempting the exclusive establishment
of a voluntary system of supporting religion. He saw that to alienate
church property from sacred uses--had he wished to do so--would
arouse against him at once all the Presbyterians of the country, and
would give them a rallying point and a battle cry quite sufficient
to render them irresistible. He knew, that supported in this respect
by Episcopalians, and not without sympathy amongst Independents, the
Presbyterians would have protested against spoliation, and would have
contended for the inviolateness of tithe property with a temper too
fierce and with an amount of influence too strong for any government
to resist with success. He perceived the wisdom of conciliating the
Presbyterian party, and even on that ground he would shrink from
provoking them by the confiscation of all church revenues. His keen
eye also discerned such a spirit in some of the sects, such violent
anti-social principles abroad, such elements seething in the cauldron
of religious excitement, that he felt it would not be safe to leave all
theological teachers at that time to do and say just what they liked
without any sort of legal restraint. The liberty which he believed
it just and right to concede in reference to the discussion of simple
questions of divinity, he did not consider it just and right to afford
to all sorts of semi-political agitations; which, under the cover of
prophetical study and of transcendental schemes of society, directly
tended to overthrow all law and order, and with law and order, the very
liberty which such enthusiasts themselves really desired to enthrone.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Policy._]
What, then, was the kind of National Church which Cromwell's practical
sagacity led him to establish? Though he might not work according to
any definite theory, and was mainly prompted by the quick insight of
his own genius, yet there could not but be some principles lying at
the basis of his operations. Three politico-ecclesiastical theories of
union may be entertained: that of the Church's _mistress-ship over_
the State, that of the Church's _servitude to_ the State, and that
of the Church's _marriage with_ the State. What the Lord Protector
aimed at accomplishing appears far removed from the first of these.
He would not allow Presbyters, or Pastors, or Preachers of any kind,
any more than Anglican Priests, to lord it over the people. He would
carry the staff in his own hands. At the same time, he did not put the
Church in perfect servitude. Though Erastian in one way, his method of
ecclesiastical government does not appear to have been so in another.
Whilst the appointment and recognition of ministers receiving State
pay were placed under the authority of persons who owed their official
position to State appointment, yet the inner working, the worship, and
the discipline of Churches continued to be left free to a very large
extent. Perhaps, on the whole, Cromwell's Broad Church embodied more of
the idea of the marriage of the Church with the State than any other
Establishment which ever existed.[71]
[Sidenote: 1653.]
His ecclesiastical policy rested on five principles:--State
recognition, State control, State support, State protection, and
State penalties. How those principles were developed in Cromwell's
administration will be seen in the next chapter.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER IV.
To prevent confusion, let it be distinctly stated at once, that in
tracing the form which the new ecclesiastical establishment assumed
under the impress of Cromwell's genius, we confine ourselves in
this chapter to the legislation of nine months; consisting of those
ordinances which were issued between the end of the Little Parliament,
in December, 1653, and the opening of the first Protectorate
Parliament, in September, 1654. During this period, the foundations of
the Protector's ecclesiastical policy were laid.
I. _State Recognition._--The articles of government--the conception
and inspiration of which must be regarded as proceeding from
Cromwell--distinctly declared "that the Christian religion, as
contained in the Scriptures, be held forth and recommended as the
public profession of these nations."[72] Christianity being thus
recognized as part and parcel of the law of the land, the sanctions
of religion were introduced at the inauguration of the Protector; the
solemnities of worship and of preaching were connected with all special
public acts; and the exercises of devotion constantly accompanied the
ordinary business of Parliament. The State continued to recognize
religion by the appointment of fast days, which were of frequent
occurrence; whilst the Scotch brethren objected to this exercise of
civil authority as an Erastian intrusion into the spiritual realm.[73]
Preachers, both Presbyterian and Independent, were appointed on these
occasions; and a fast day sometimes was solemnized by a service which
lasted from nine o'clock in the morning until four in the afternoon.
[Sidenote: 1654.]
By an express article, all who professed the Roman Catholic religion
were disabled from voting, as well as from being elected; and as the
Act which had been passed against execrable opinions, treated as
culprits and subjected to penalties those who opposed Christianity,
it virtually deprived all such persons of the electoral franchise.
Infidels and heretics, also, who attacked or undermined the foundations
of the Christian faith, forfeited the rights of denizenship. But
these laws did not affect the social position of any individuals who
professed Protestantism in any of its usually-recognized forms of
orthodoxy. All the "sects" were accepted as citizens. So were the
Presbyterians. And, although Prelacy was forbidden, there was nothing
which could legally prevent an Episcopalian from going to the poll to
give or receive the vote of a freeman. Still, we must not forget that,
since the Common Prayer Book had been prohibited, any one who persisted
in using its formularies might have both his franchise and his freedom
brought into peril.[74] From these facts, it is evident that England
under the Protectorate was, in theory, a religious Commonwealth;
that the State possessed a spiritual as well as a secular character;
that Christianity was considered essential to the welfare of society;
and that an irreligious man was not regarded as a faithful subject.
But this theory of the Commonwealth as a Christian State must not be
confounded with the theory of the National Church as connected with the
Commonwealth. The lines of limitation in the two cases were not the
same. Considerable differences existed between the Christianity which
entitled all its disciples to the franchise of the citizen and the
Christianity which entitled its ministerial advocates to the support of
the State. What those differences were will be indicated as we proceed.
[Sidenote: _State Control._]
II. _State Control._--The laws made certain distinctions between what
was civil and what was sacred. They followed the early legislation
of the Long Parliament by withdrawing all secular matters from
ecclesiastical authority. Wills received careful attention from the
Little Parliament in 1653, when commissioners were appointed to
superintend that business, and to grant administrations "in the late
provinces of Canterbury and York." Their powers were defined, and the
probate fees to be taken by registrars were, after the payment of
expenses, to be appropriated to the support of the navy. The Act of
1653 was revived in 1654, and more commissioners were added to the
existing number.[75]
The main control over the Church consisted, not in any Act of
Uniformity--nor in the establishment of a particular creed--nor in
the maintenance of a simple mode of worship, but in the appointment
of a spiritual tribunal, invested with the power of determining who
were fitting persons to fulfil the Christian ministry. In the month of
March, 1653-4, an ordinance appeared,[76] reciting that there had been
no certain method adopted for supplying vacancies with able ministers,
in consequence of which the rights of patrons had been prejudiced,
and "weak, scandalous, popish, and ill-affected persons had intruded
themselves, or been brought in, to the great grief and trouble of the
good people of this nation." As a remedy, it was ordained that every
person presented to a benefice, or appointed to a lecture, should be
approved by certain Commissioners who were named for that purpose. No
mention is made of any standard of faith, of any mode of worship, or
of any scheme of polity. Episcopacy, Presbyterianism, Independency,
anti-Pædobaptism--in short, particular forms of Christianity are
entirely unnamed and unnoticed. In general terms, power was vested
in the Commissioners:--they were to grant admission to the ministry;
their certificate being a sufficient induction; but a vote of exclusion
did not acquire validity unless nine members were present at the time
when the vote was passed. Appointments made by these Commissioners
did not interfere with the rights of patronage. They had no authority
to dispose of Church benefices, or to elect lecturers; but only to
determine upon the qualifications of those whom the patrons presented
or the people chose. Nor did the law construe the decision of these
judges "to be any solemn or sacred setting apart of a person to any
particular office in the ministry." In short, the Commissioners formed
a board, and nothing more, for the examination of persons who presented
themselves for the ministerial office. So far, it bore a likeness to
the Assembly of Divines, for they had exercised similar functions in
the examination of clergymen; but then they had been more numerous,
and had been wont to consult Church standards and formularies for the
guidance of their judgment. Nothing of the sort limited the power
of the new Commissioners, and, moreover, their unfettered power was
lodged in comparatively few hands. Some creed, statute, canon, or
established usage, had in all similar cases been recognized as a rule
of action; but in this instance everything was left for determination
by the wisdom or the will of irresponsible functionaries.[77] No
distinct articles of faith were prescribed. No subscription whatever
was enforced.[78] The only way to form an idea of the character of a
Church so circumstanced is to infer what it must have been from the
known opinions and characters of such powerful officers. The Commission
was composed of men of very different characters. Some had much
prejudice and party spirit, with little judgment, and less charity. No
confidence could be placed in Hugh Peters, and in others of a similar
stamp; but there were amongst the members individuals of great wisdom
and large benevolence--such as Manton, Goodwin, Owen, and many more.
Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists were of the number; and, so
far, the constitution of the tribunal permitted access to benefices
by ministers belonging to all three denominations. The proportion
of different religious parties in the commission suggests what was
likely to be the proportion of those admitted to preferment. Nothing
hindered the admission of the members of any sect whatever, not even
Episcopalians, provided they did not use the Book of Common Prayer;
and such persons actually were admitted; but it is not probable that
many would be included in the establishment who occupied a position far
beyond the circle of the Commissioners' opinions.
[Sidenote: _State Control._]
Another tribunal appeared in August, 1654, for ejecting "scandalous,
ignorant, and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters."[79] Unlike the
former, this Commission branched out into manifold divisions, which,
in fact, formed ecclesiastical courts of assize, spreading over the
whole country. Long lists of distinguished laymen are contained in the
ordinance--including the names of the Lords Wharton, Fairfax, Lisle,
Say and Sele, Sir A. Haselrig, Sir Anthony A. Cooper, and Nathaniel
Fiennes. They were to bring before them all clergymen and teachers who
were punishable by the Act against blasphemous opinions, or who were
guilty of profanity, perjury, popish opinions, adultery, fornication,
drunkenness, haunting taverns, quarrelling, fighting, playing at
cards or dice, or profaning the Sabbath day. So ran the enumeration
of the first class of scandals, cognizable by these judges. Then
came words pointing to such as had publicly and frequently used the
Common Prayer Book since the first of January last, or should at any
time afterwards do so; such as publicly and profanely scoffed at or
reviled the strict profession or professors of religion or godliness,
or encouraged, or countenanced, "by word or practice, any Whitsun
ales, wakes, Morris-dances, May-poles, stage-plays," or similar
licentious practices; and such as declared their disaffection to the
present government. As to "negligent" ministers, they are defined to be
"non-residents," and such as omitted the public exercise of preaching
and praying on the lord's Day: but "the ignorant and insufficient" are
not defined at all, they are left to be declared and judged by the
Commissioners in every county, or by any five of them, together with
five of the ministers mentioned in the ordinance. To them, therefore,
in this respect, remained a wide margin of discretion, and individuals
guiltless of the scandals and offences before enumerated--yet being
charged in general terms by their parishioners with ministerial
incompetency--were left to the mercy and the conscience of these lay
and clerical assessors. Their character was the only guarantee that
justice would be administered; and sometimes proofs appeared shewing
how perilous a thing it was to the interests of the parties arraigned
that even to men of established integrity there should be entrusted
such large powers, especially at a time when party spirit on all sides
ran so high.
[Sidenote: 1654.]
III. _State Support._--The articles of government declared, that as
soon as might be, a provision less subject to contention and more
certain than the one existing should be made for the maintenance of
"able and painful" teachers, for instructing the people, and for the
discovery and confutation of error, heresy, and whatever is contrary to
sound doctrine. But until such provision could be devised, the existing
maintenance was not to be taken away or impeached. Also the ordinances
of 1647, as to tithes, were in 1654 declared to remain in full force;
and further still, for the more efficient support of the ministry, an
ordinance of the 2nd of September, 1654, directed that there should be
a union of small parishes and a division of large ones--authority for
that purpose being vested in a Commission, according to a common plan
then adopted in all business of that description.[80]
[Sidenote: _State Protection._]
The Long Parliament, in the month of February, 1648, had commanded
churchwardens and overseers of the poor to assess every inhabitant of a
parish, in such sums as those officers should think proper; no mention
being made of holding any vestry meetings whatever for that purpose.
The law declared that such rates should be appropriated for repairing
the fabric of the church, and keeping in order the churchyard and
walls; for providing books to be used in Divine worship; and for the
bread and wine required in the administration of the Lord's supper.
When the rate had been confirmed by two justices of the peace, the
churchwardens were authorized and required to levy payment and to
recover by "distress" where payment was refused. The justices, "in
default of such distress," might commit the defaulter to the common
gaol.[81] This church-rate law remained unrepealed, and therefore
was available for the support of worship by all those who were now
incorporated in the Establishment. In the ordinance of 1654, for
uniting and for severing parishes, reference is made to rates, taxes,
parochial rights, charges and duties, as acknowledged sources of
revenue.[82]
[Sidenote: 1654.]
IV. _State Protection._--The Articles of Government extended
protection, within certain limits, to professing Christians who did not
share in the resources and immunities of the State Church. Religious
compulsion was forbidden, religious persuasion was recommended; and it
was expressly declared, "That such as profess faith in God by Jesus
Christ (though differing in judgment from the doctrine, worship, or
discipline publicly held forth), shall not be restrained from, but
shall be protected in, the profession of the faith and exercise of
their religion, so as they abuse not this liberty to the civil injury
of others, and to the actual disturbance of the public peace on their
parts, provided this liberty be not extended to Popery nor Prelacy,
nor to such as under the profession of Christ hold forth and practise
licentiousness."[83] The shield of the law was thus placed over all
Protestant sects whose liberty in no way threatened the security of the
Government.
[Sidenote: _State Penalties._]
V. _State Penalties._--First, the Papists were deprived of all
religious freedom and of all political rights, and this act of
injustice was perpetrated as a retaliation which their own habitual
intolerance had provoked; and as a precaution which the tendency
of their system and their Jesuitical and treasonable practices had
rendered expedient. The circumstances in which Prelatists were placed
by the legislation of the Long Parliament have been explained. These
circumstances remained unaltered; and Prelacy was now conjoined with
Popery in the prohibition expressed by the articles. The supporters of
Prelacy were known to be disaffected to the Government, and whenever
that disaffection manifested itself in overt acts, the magistrates
were justified in punishing the offenders; but to inflict penalties
for using the Prayer Book was an unrighteous proceeding, no more
to be excused than was the persecution of Nonconformists for their
worship, after the Restoration. Sometimes that persecution has been
defended or its guilt has been extenuated on the ground that the very
religion of the Separatists made them disloyal; persons who condemn
that plea as being insult added to injury must not set up a similar
one on behalf of the rulers of the Commonwealth. After the mention of
Prelacy in the articles comes a denial of freedom to such as maintained
tenets inimical to the principles of public morality and order;[84]
Fifth Monarchists, therefore, preaching after the fashion of Feake and
Vavasour Powell, brought themselves within the scope of penal laws.
So did some well-known disorderly fanatics, who hung on the skirts
of Quakerism. Socinians likewise came under the legislative ban.
As the statute against blasphemous opinions remained in force, all
persons suspected of holding them were liable to be brought before the
magistrate. Yet it should be stated that Cromwell checked as much as he
could the severe application of this penal code: and when a Parliament,
under his control, undertook to specify what particulars were embraced
by the general title of heresy, there was so much caution exercised
lest words expressing vague ideas should subject "the godly party to
some danger of suffering," that not until after much debate could
even the word _atheism_ be allowed "to be part of the question."[85]
[Sidenote: 1654.]
Such were the principles of Cromwell's ecclesiastical policy, and in
it may be seen a singular combination of boldness and caution. Of
boldness--for he fearlessly innovated upon the ancient principles
and precedents of the kingdom, and also defied the prejudices
of contemporary bigots by throwing open the Establishment to
different sects, and by conceding toleration to all whose opinions
and proceedings did not imperil the stability of his republic. Of
caution--for he shrank from committing himself to theories of voluntary
church support, and of thorough church independence, however those
theories might be advocated by some with whom he would be regarded as
having considerable sympathy. And the more his policy is examined,
the plainer will it appear to be distinguished by originality no less
than by the qualities we have just indicated. Whatever its merits
or demerits, it was his own. He neither copied the forms of past
times nor followed the counsels of contemporary advisers. It is very
remarkable that no ecclesiastical personage appears controlling the
affairs of the Commonwealth. Indeed his Highness occupied the throne
without having at his right hand any prominent individual to influence
him in either spiritual or in temporal business. No member of his
Council of State was of such importance as to justify our applying to
him the appellation of prime minister. We strive in vain to detect
any clerical guidance. The principal Divines of the Presbyterian
party were but little, if at all, attached to his government; they
preferred the royalty which his rule suspended, and they disliked the
Broad Church which he so zealously upheld. Independents were about
his person, but no evidence exists of his constituting any of them
ecclesiastical advisers. The only chaplain he had of high intellectual
mark was John Howe, a man indisposed to take part in public affairs,
and whose correspondence shews that whatever his power might be in the
pulpit, he had little or no influence at court. Owen and Goodwin were
too much engaged at Oxford to have many opportunities for conference
at Whitehall. Philip Nye might be disposed to give the benefit of his
counsel, but Philip was not the person to carry weight with Oliver.
No doubt the Protector took care to ascertain the opinions of all
parties, and, as a prudent, practical man, he shaped his course so as
not to give unnecessary offence; but his own genius was the counsellor
on which he chiefly, if not entirely, relied. The outward fortunes
of the Church were completely in lay hands--the hands of the Lord
Protector of England. In the days of Charles, the country, through
Laud, had been priest-ridden, but not even in religious matters was it
presbyter-ridden in the days of Cromwell.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Establishment not a Church._]
One more remark may be made. Conforming to general usage, we have
called Cromwell's religious establishment a Church; but, accurately
speaking, it was not a Church at all. We do not mean by this what an
ecclesiastical polemic means, when he refuses to apply the name to any
organization at variance with what he considers to be New Testament
principles. By withholding the title from a particular community, he
intends to say that it is not a Church according to his idea of what
a Church should be. We abstain from all such controversies in these
pages. Our meaning is that Cromwell's establishment did not include
or recognize any internal organization whatever of an ecclesiastical
kind; it had no Church courts, no Church assemblies, no Church
laws, no Church ordinances. It repudiated Prelacy without enforcing
Presbyterianism or recognizing Congregationalism. While denying the
aid of the civil power for carrying out one method of discipline, it
gave no direct sanction to any other. It said nothing about rites and
ceremonies. Not even the two great sacraments of Christianity were
mentioned. What should be the mode of administering the Lord's Supper,
and Baptism, and whether the latter should be confined to adults, or
should be extended to infants, were open questions. What should be done
in these respects was left to the ministers and their congregations
to determine. One parish might be constituted a Presbyterian Church;
another might contain an Independent Church; a third, a Baptist
Church. But each Church, as shewn already, was independent of the
parish incumbency; and often, in the case of Congregational Churches,
the members met together in private houses. The particular society so
organized really stood outside the Establishment. Hence it follows that
the Protectorate Establishment was nothing more than an institution
for _preaching and teaching_. The ministers were acknowledged by the
State only in the capacity of instructors. The title given to State
ordinances about religion seems in accordance with this; so were
the functions of the Committee of Triers. The former were for the
maintenance, the latter for the approbation, of "_public preachers_."
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Establishment not a Church._]
So far as moral discipline akin to that of the old Church Courts
was instituted and enforced by Protectorate enactments, it was by
civil statute, not by any kind of canon law. Ordinances for the
improvement of public morals appear on the statute book of that period.
Cock-matches and horse-races were prohibited, professedly on account
of the danger attendant upon large gatherings of people.[86] Fighting
a duel upon which death should ensue was adjudged to be murder.
Challenges, and the conveyance of them, were made punishable.[87] The
Commissioners of Customs, and other officers, received authority to
suppress drunkenness and profane swearing amongst all people employed
in their departments.
These laws rested on the authority of the Protector and his Council;
and the resolutions enacting them can be traced in the order-books
of that small but potent assembly. When we turn to these records,
we discover numerous proofs and illustrations of the supreme power
which was exercised in this way over ecclesiastical causes. Decisions
respecting titles to Church livings, and the augmentation of poor
benefices, and for the payment of sums to poor clergymen, frequently
appear in those interesting minutes.[88]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER V.
All the ecclesiastical legislation of the first nine months of the
Protectorate had been in the form of ordinances, framed mainly by the
genius, and resting principally on the authority, of the Protector. In
the autumn of 1654, he summoned his first Protectorate Parliament; and
in our notices of its proceedings will be discovered the introduction
of measures by certain ecclesiastical parties for modifying the
platform of the Broad Establishment which he had laid down in the
articles of government.
The elections met with little interference from the Protector and his
Council. Glyn, and a large number of Presbyterians, took their seats.
Neither Vane nor Marten were returned. Dr. Owen, Vice-Chancellor of
Oxford, was elected for the University.
The members assembled on the 3rd of September. It was, we are told, the
Lord's Day, and they met "in the temple of the Lord," at Westminster;
"and the first work they began was to seek the face of the most
high God and Eternal Protector of Heaven, by prostrating themselves
before Him in His Divine ordinances." On Monday, his Highness went to
Westminster--regally attended by life guards, pages, and lackeys, and,
upon alighting at the door of the abbey, he proceeded to take his seat
over against the pulpit, "Members of Parliament sitting on both sides."
Goodwin preached a sermon on "the deliverance out of Egypt and the
pilgrimage towards Canaan through the wilderness"--which so gratified
Cromwell, that he repeatedly referred to it in the speech with which he
opened the Parliament, and indeed the spirit of it pervaded the whole
of that address.[89]
[Sidenote: _First Protectorate Parliament._]
This speech indicates that the Protector was environed by difficulties
arising from Presbyterians, Ultra-voluntaries, and Fifth Monarchy men.
In the estimation of the first of these classes he advanced beyond;
in the judgment of the last two he lagged behind, the leadings of
Divine truth. Not a theorist, but a practical man--in steering a
middle course, he did, as all such statesmen must do, provoke violent
opposition in partisans on the right hand and the left. His method
of ecclesiastical government, as it appears in his own speeches
and proceedings--not as we find them sometimes represented in the
generalizations of historical writers--will no more satisfy some of the
ecclesiastical reformers, or some of the ecclesiastical conservatives
of our own day, than it satisfied similar classes under his own
Commonwealth.
[Sidenote: 1654, November.]
Haselrig, the impetuous republican, and Harrison, the religious
visionary, both disliked the Protector's authority. The former
reluctantly submitted to it, but the latter, being more obstinate,
could be subdued only by military apprehension and a brief
imprisonment.[90] Afterwards, when his Highness required Members
of Parliament to declare their acceptance of certain fundamental
principles of government, many of the Republicans withdrew, leaving the
Presbyterians in a decided majority.
Debates arose on the new constitution and in the course taken by the
House respecting the ecclesiastical bearings, of that constitution the
strength of the Presbyterian party appeared manifest. The Instrument of
December, 1653, in prescribing the religious qualifications of Members
of Parliament, only stated that they must be of "known integrity,"
having "the fear of God and a good conscience."[91] But in the month
of November, 1654, when the articles of that Instrument came under
review, it was resolved that no one should be eligible to a seat who
entertained any of the opinions specified in the Act of the 9th of
August, 1650; or who should so far sympathize with Popery as to marry
a Papist, or consent to his child being educated in that religion; or
who should deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God, or sacraments,
prayer, the magistracy, or the ministry, to be Divine ordinances; or
who should be guilty of profaning the Lord's Day, or of committing
certain immoralities. It seems incredible, yet it is a fact, that the
resolution which enumerates such as were excluded, specifies those who
should thereafter drink healths.[92]
[Sidenote: _Limits of Toleration._]
Following the example of the Long Parliament, the House now resolved
to exclude spiritual persons from secular authority. To all public
ministers of religion was applied the principle which had swept the
bishops out of the House of Lords. It was determined that the Act
of 1642, for disabling persons in holy orders to exercise temporal
jurisdiction, should be in force, so as to prevent all public ministers
and preachers of the Gospel from serving in Parliament.[93]
The Presbyterians wished to limit the toleration prescribed in the
Articles of 1653. The matter was found more difficult than any which
had been previously propounded for consideration. Accordingly, a
sub-committee was appointed to wait upon the Lord Protector, and
to advise with him about some probable means of reconcilement. The
Committee found no favour in the eyes of his Highness. He evidently
had no wish to see the liberty of his subjects circumscribed by
minute specifications of doctrines. He told the members he was wholly
dissatisfied with what they were about--that he had no "propensity" to
it--that the Parliament had already taken the instrument of Government
to pieces, and had made alterations without his advice--and it did not
become him to counsel them in this particular, apart from the other
articles contained in the instrument.[94] Yet certain Divines were
appointed to explain what was meant by the words "such as profess
faith in God by Jesus Christ."
[Sidenote: 1654, November.]
Baxter, who was one of this Committee,[95] lets us into the secret of
its proceedings, by saying that he wished the Apostles' Creed, the
Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments to be the only "fundamentals"
specified; and that the objection made to his proposal was, that
Socinians and Papists would be thereby brought within the boundaries
of toleration. To which he acutely replied, that it was impossible
to devise any form of words which heretics would not subscribe, when
they explained those words in their own sense.[96] The majority of
the Committee took a different view; and--as Baxter informs us--Owen,
Goodwin, Nye, Simpson, Cheynell, and Marshall, were the most active in
framing the principles which at length were submitted to the House, to
help them in laying down lines of liberty.
[Sidenote: _Limits of Toleration._]
They were expressed in the following terms:
"_First._ That the Holy Scripture is that rule of knowing God, and
living unto Him, which whoso does not believe cannot be saved.
"_Secondly._ That there is a God, who is the Creator, Governor, and
Judge of the world, which is to be received by faith, and every other
way of the knowledge of Him is insufficient.
"_Thirdly._ That this God, who is the Creator, is eternally distinct
from all creatures in His being and blessedness.
"_Fourthly._ That this God is one in three persons or subsistences.
"_Fifthly._ That Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and man,
without the knowledge of whom there is no salvation.
"_Sixthly._ That this Jesus Christ is the true God.
"_Seventhly._ That this Jesus Christ is also true man.
"_Eighthly._ That this Jesus Christ is God and man in one person.
"_Ninthly._ That this Jesus Christ is our Redeemer, who, by paying a
ransom, and bearing our sins, has made satisfaction for them.
"_Tenthly._ That this same Lord Jesus Christ is He that was crucified
at Jerusalem, and rose again, and ascended into heaven.
"_Eleventhly._ That this same Jesus Christ, being the only God and man
in one person, remains for ever a distinct person from all saints and
angels, notwithstanding their union and communion with Him.
"_Twelfthly._ That all men by nature are dead in sins and trespasses,
and no man can be saved unless he be born again, repent, and believe.
"_Thirteenth._ That we are justified and saved by grace, and faith in
Jesus Christ, and not by works.
"_Fourteenth._ That to continue in any known sin, upon what pretence or
principle soever, is damnable.
"_Fifteenth._ That God is to be worshipped according to His own will,
and whosoever shall forsake and despise all the duties of His worship
cannot be saved.
"_Sixteenth._ That the dead shall rise; and that there is a day of
judgment, wherein all shall appear, some to go into everlasting life,
and some into everlasting condemnation."[97]
[Sidenote: 1654.]
Whatever might be the exact intention of the Divines who drew up these
propositions, we cannot but conclude--looking at the circumstances
of their appointment, and at the use made by a party in the House of
what they did, which they could scarcely fail to foresee--that they
really meant to confine toleration within the limits indicated by
these theological propositions. But the scheme fell to the ground. It
was moved that the Articles brought in as "fundamental and necessary
to salvation might pass the approbation of the House, and the Lord
Protector's consent. But upon perusal of the Articles they were laid
aside, and not thought fit to be further proceeded with at that
time."[98]
The temper of the Parliament appeared in its proceedings against John
Biddle. This man had published a book entitled "The Twofold Catechism,"
in which he maintained wild and monstrous opinions respecting the
Almighty; and denied the doctrines of the Trinity, of the Atonement,
and of Eternal punishment. The House condemned the book as blasphemous;
sentenced it to be burnt by the hangman; and referred to a committee
the preparation of a Bill for the punishment of the author.[99]
[Sidenote: _Limits of Toleration._]
Cromwell met his Parliament on the 22nd of January, 1655, and told
them that dissettlement and division, discontent and dissatisfaction
had been more multiplied during the five months of their deliberations
than for years before. Seeds were being sown by them for the renewal
of old troubles. Briers and thorns were nourished under their shadow.
In connection with the fostered confusions--on which he emphatically
dwelt--his Highness touched upon the spirit which the House had
manifested in endeavouring to abridge the amount of religious liberty;
although he did not seem at all to disapprove of the treatment which
John Biddle had received.
He ended his speech by formally dissolving the Assembly.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER VI.
Upon the dissolution of the first Protectorate Parliament, the supreme
management of affairs once more relapsed into the hands of Cromwell
and his Council. They constituted an ultimate tribunal, before which
all ecclesiastical, as well as all secular matters had to be brought,
if any doubt arose respecting the decisions of inferior authorities.
Notices of questions referred to them, or of matters in which they
saw it proper to interfere, are found in such of the Minute Books as
are still extant. But, excepting these occasional and revisionary
interpositions, the Commissioners for approving godly preachers, and
the Commissioners for ejecting scandalous ones, undertook the entire
superintendence and discipline of the Clergy.
[Sidenote: _Commissioners at Whitehall._]
The former sat at Whitehall. There country ministers, summoned from
various parts, were obliged to attend; and, in numerous cases,
where the benefice was distant and the living poor, the hardship of
travelling all the way up to the metropolis became very great. As
might be expected, men forced to pass through the ordeal complained
of arbitrariness and oppression. There were frequent grumblings about
"super-metropolitan" and "hyper-archiepiscopal" tyranny, and of
despotism worse than the Bishops'--even "overtopping Laud." Clergymen,
out of all sympathy with their judges, entered the Court full of
prejudices; and by their known character were likely to excite a
corresponding prejudice on the part of those who decided their destiny.
They walked into the room full of suspicion; they met at the Board
with abundant annoyance; and then came out irritated at the judgment
pronounced upon their case. Often-times they complained of delay,
and said they had "to wait the leisure of the underlings, clerks, or
registrars"--a complaint which probably was not without foundation, for
much business was thrown into a few hands, to be transacted far away
from the residence of the parties most interested.
Tales respecting the alleged ignorance and malignity of the Triers
met with extensive currency; and, coloured as they might be by the
parties themselves who complained of their wrongs, they were more
deeply coloured still by the prejudice or the carelessness of those
who afterwards repeated these stories to their neighbours. Hence,
after passing from one Episcopalian to another, they assumed the
darkest hues and the most monstrous proportions. Some of them, which
have been reduced to writing, exhibit the examiners in a ridiculous
light--pressing points connected with Election, Perseverance, the Work
of Grace, and the marks of the New Birth, after a fashion the most
absurd which can be imagined. One clergyman, for instance, declared
that he was asked whether Regeneration were a substance or an accident,
and in what predicament it ought to be placed? Mystical questions
were put touching the life of grace, to which mystical answers were
returned, about the breath and the heat and the sense of the soul.
It was said, that enquiries of this nature were continued until
sacred themes were dishonoured by the merest trifling. But, it must
be remembered, these are only _ex parte_ statements made by accused
persons and their friends; and such reports, even where there was no
intention to deceive, can never be trusted.[100]
[Sidenote: 1655.]
To ascertain whether the teachers of religion were truly religious,
and acquainted with the truths of Christianity, was the task assigned
to these extraordinary Commissioners; and apart from the political
relations of the tribunal over which they presided, such a proceeding
must be pronounced right and wise. Whether the Triers adopted the best
method to arrive at what they wished to know is another question.
Unfortunately, the minutes of their meetings have perished, and no
records of their proceedings exist endorsed by themselves. Could they
be heard in their own defence, what now appears to their disadvantage
might, in many cases, be considerably mitigated, if not entirely
removed. Constituted as the Commission was, the justice of the
conclusions reached depended entirely on the wisdom and goodness of
those who pronounced them. We should certainly not congratulate men
of intelligent piety, of delicate feeling, and of a wide charity, who
happened to fall into the hands of a Cheynell or a Peters; and there
were others also who might be mentioned not likely to prove impartial
judges. We should conclude, further, that ignorant, wild, and
enthusiastic spirits would be very likely to pass muster before certain
of the members. Still, the requirement of nine of their number in any
vote of rejection operated as a check upon injustice; and the character
of such men as Dr. Owen, Dr. Goodwin, and others, afforded a guarantee
that nothing dishonourable would be met with at their hands. The fact,
too, should be mentioned that the Commissioners, though opposed to
Episcopacy, allowed certain clergymen to retain their incumbencies,
notwithstanding their Episcopalian opinions.[101]
[Sidenote: _Ejection of Scandalous Ministers._]
Besides the commission of Triers, there was the commission for ejecting
scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient Ministers. Perhaps few cases
occurred in which the accusation of ignorance and insufficiency was
simply made. Commonly, a rather long array of charges was presented,
on the principle, it would appear, of catching the criminal on a
second count of the indictment if the first should fail. The same
person was accused of profaning the Sabbath, of frequenting alehouses,
of using the Prayer Book, of playing at cards, of living an unholy
life, and of being disaffected to the Government. We cannot help
believing--much as we may honour the character of the Puritans--that
in some cases they, like their adversaries, yielded to the besetting
sin of priding themselves upon their orthodoxy and their virtue; and
that they took it for granted that the men who differed from them
in creed, and whom therefore they considered intellectually wrong,
must also differ from them in life, and could not be reckoned morally
right. Two kinds of injustice would arise from placing such dissimilar
charges in the same category. Those put out of office for immorality
would be sure to say they were ejected because of their loyalty to the
Church--a circumstance which would reflect upon the character of the
Commissioners; and those who were really ejected for using the Prayer
Book, when scandals alleged against them remained unproved, would
almost inevitably incur the disgrace of being reputed as vicious--a
circumstance which involved unrighteousness towards the accused.
[Sidenote: _Ejection of Scandalous Ministers._]
In small country towns, whilst these ecclesiastical assizes were
being held, there would be no little excitement in the streets, and
many a knot would gossip round the doors of the little inn where the
tribunal sat. From what is preserved of such proceedings, however
doubtful may be the minute details, we conclude that there was plenty
of cross-swearing, and that the character of witnesses on one side
was treated by the parties on the other much after the worst fashion
of Old Bailey practice. Men of low reputation were special pleaders
in their own case, and when charged with intemperance they cunningly
mooted the question, what really was meant by drinking in excess; and
then proceeded to bring forward boon companions, who proved that in no
conviviality had the reverend gentleman ever been seen intoxicated!
Very unwisely in the course of a trial for what was truly scandalous,
discontented parishioners were allowed to come forward, and declare
that they had never profited under the ministry of the accused--a fact
which might by no means be the minister's fault. Charges of gross vice
might sometimes break down, although there remained quite enough to
satisfy the Commissioners of the utter unfitness of the individual in
question to be continued any longer as a minister of religion; but in
such cases ample room was left, owing to the medley of indictments, for
imputing injustice to the members of these judicial boards, however
equitable might be the final award. It should be added that there was
also some tempering of justice, or of injustice, with a shew of mercy.
To the widow and children of the ejected was assigned the fifth of the
income of the living.[102] Also sufficient time was allowed for those
whose preferment was sequestered to move out of the parsonage; but then
all this was followed by the cruel severity of forbidding such persons
from becoming schoolmasters in the place of their ejectment. The
vacancies made by expulsions were to be filled up by lawful patrons,
unless those patrons became disqualified by acts of delinquency, in
which case the presentation lapsed to the Lord Protector.
[Sidenote: 1655.]
The treatment of Dr. Edward Pocock has been frequently mentioned by
historians. He held the living of Childrey, in Berkshire, twelve miles
from the city of Oxford, and was greatly troubled by disaffected
parishioners. Articles were presented to the Commissioners, charging
him with using the Prayer Book, and with similar offences. The trial
came on before the Commissioners, first at Abingdon, and then at
Wantage; and for some months this learned man was abominably worried by
ignorant enemies. Chiefly through the interference of his friend, Dr.
Owen, he was at length delivered out of their clutches.[103]
[Sidenote: _Proceedings against Royalist Episcopalians._]
The antipathy of Oliver the Puritan to the Common Prayer Book, as a
rag of Popery, is apparent from the terms of the ordinance against
scandalous Ministers, and from the whole tenor of his life. But Oliver
the Protector had other and still stronger grounds of dislike to the
Episcopal Clergy, which led him to bind such suspicions around the
use of the liturgy as made it to his mind symbolical of treason and
rebellion. The Episcopalian Royalists would not be quiet. No sooner
had turbulent Anabaptists been put under lock and key, than people who
wished to see both Church and King restored were discovered all over
his Highness's dominions busy with their plots. Cavalier horsemen were
galloping to a rendezvous in Sherwood Forest. Carts full of arms and
ammunition were grinding along the ruts of Yorkshire roads. Divers of
the old gentry were scheming to seize the city of York for Charles
Stuart. Four thousand men were expected to meet on Marston Moor, to
try and reverse the decision of arms given there in 1644. Reports were
circulated of designs upon Newcastle, upon Shrewsbury, and upon
Winchester. Much more than talk occurred at Salisbury, where Royalist
insurgents, on Sunday night in the spring assize week, actually seized
the judges and the high sheriff, and endeavoured to proclaim King
Charles at the Market Cross.[104] Plots abounded amongst Royalists;
and people at home, eagerly turning their hopes into facts, wrote to
friends on the Continent, telling them that Salisbury, and Plymouth,
and Portsmouth, and Yarmouth, had all been surprised and taken. Rumour
abroad proceeded so far as to affirm that England had declared for the
King, and that the gates of the city of London had been shut against
the Protector; and that Charles was waiting in the North till it should
be safe for him publicly to appear.[105] This plot, after blazing up
in the county town of Wilts, went out through a timely and decisive
extinguishment of the first flames, and nothing remained of it but a
few dead ashes. Yet it exasperated his Highness against the Royalists;
and--entertaining the idea that ejected clergymen were still plotting
his overthrow, that they entered families to foment treason, that,
under pretence of teaching religion, they promoted disaffection, that
meeting for common prayer meant meeting to upset the Commonwealth--he
issued a most unrighteous declaration in the month of October,
1655. Grounds for suspecting the revolutionary character of certain
gatherings did exist, and a regard for the safety of government and
the order of society required that particular individuals should be
watched; but the conduct of some was no more reason for punishing all
who used the Prayer Book, than Venner's insurrection, at a later date,
was a reason for prohibiting all Nonconformist worship. The policy of
Cromwell, in forbidding clergymen to become schoolmasters, however
great might be his subsequent leniency, closely resembles the policy
of the government after the Restoration. The decree declared that no
delinquents after the 1st of January, 1655-6, should keep as chaplain
or schoolmaster any sequestered minister, or permit their children to
be taught by him. Nor should an ejected clergyman keep a school, or
preach publicly or privately, or baptize, or administer the Lord's
Supper, or celebrate marriages, or use the Prayer Book.
This declaration was intended to strike terror into the Royalist party;
and so it did. And it would appear that with this effect the Protector
was satisfied. The last clause in the document plainly shewed that he
did not mean to carry it out in the case of persons who were disposed
to remain quiet; and in point of fact, we know that, after this
declaration had been published, the worship of Episcopalians continued,
in some instances, to be winked at. The document ended in these words:
"Nevertheless, his Highness doth declare that, towards such of the said
persons as have, since their ejection or sequestration, given, or shall
hereafter give, a real testimony of their godliness and good affection
to the present government, so much tenderness shall be used as may
consist with the safety and good of the nation."[106]
[Sidenote: _Major-Generals._]
Between the first and second Protectorate Parliaments, Cromwell
ruled England by Major-Generals. The country was divided into ten
districts, each superintended by one of these military satraps. In
short, the whole realm was placed under martial law; as we should say
in modern phrase, the _Habeas Corpus Act_ was suspended. Such a step,
perhaps, had become a political necessity. Of course, the proceeding
laid Cromwell open to the awkward charge of absolutism, tyranny, and
espionage; and all he could urge in reply was the logic of a cruel
necessity, "If not good, yet best." The carrying out of such a policy
made England look for awhile too much like France and Austria in
our own times, and it sanctioned the practice of employing spies--a
practice which prevailed after the Restoration.
[Sidenote: 1655.]
As religious affairs had become inextricably woven with secular ones,
these Major-Generals looked after the Church as well as after the
world. The principle of such an interference rested upon the fact of
the union between Church and State. Teachers of religion supported by
the State must be watched by the State. Teachers of religion not so
supported, but interfering with the business of the State, must be
checked by the State. So men reasoned. Yet, although these officers
were so many military bishops, they did not aim at establishing
any kind of religious uniformity. They left Presbyterianism and
Congregationalism to work their own way amongst the English people;
yet, under pretence of curbing political disaffection and preventing
social disorder, they did what has been often done under colour of the
same pretext--they persecuted many perfectly harmless persons. Their
reports, conveyed to head quarters, place in a strong light some phases
of the religious condition of the country.
Many references are made in general terms to the zeal and diligence
which were exhibited in the ejectment of scandalous ministers and
schoolmasters. Major-General Whalley informed Secretary Thurloe that
this kind of business was going on well in the county of Lincoln; but
Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire had deferred entering upon the duty
until he could render them assistance, and he assured the Secretary
that his Highness might in that matter calculate upon the efficient
services of the learned Recorder of the two county towns.[107]
[Sidenote: _Major-Generals._]
Such persons as sympathized with the Papists were ferreted out with a
very keen scent. Major-General Haynes informed the President of the
Council, that he had sent to the garrison at Yarmouth a man named
Cleveland, simply because he had lodged in a family where Papists
resorted; and wore a genteel garb, although professing to have only
fifty pounds a year income, and could give no good account of himself;
and, besides, was possessed of such abilities as enabled him to do
a great deal of mischief.[108] Major-General Boteler also wrote to
say that, as he was passing through Rockingham Forest, he overtook a
gentleman, whom he found to be a Roman Catholic priest, wandering up
and down the country without any settled home; upon which he took him
into custody, seized his Agnus Dei and his beads, his medal of the
Virgin, his crucifix, and his books; and this functionary wished to
know what was to be done with such a dangerous person.[109]
The same officer was equally keen in the detection of disaffected
Episcopalians, and therefore apprehended one Sherman, an Episcopalian
minister, who, though of a sober life, held destructive principles,
which he preached before the Corporation of Norwich.[110] Thus to
preach was so much the worse, as that corporation contained very
disaffected persons. Another individual, formerly zealous for the
Parliament, had fallen in with Sherman, and was thought to be a still
more active agent in strengthening malignity and producing disaffection.
[Sidenote: 1655.]
The Anabaptists also figure in these despatches. Vavasour Powell
continued to be strongly suspected; but he made a favourable impression
upon Major-General Berry, a staunch Independent. This Fifth Monarchy
preacher declared that he and his friends were far from designing
to make any disturbance: they only wished, he said, to state their
complaints to the Lord Protector. "It would be too large," adds the
writer, "to relate the discourse we had about it. Only one terrible
thunderbolt he seemed to affright me withal: he told me that my
imprisoning of him would give occasion to the enemy to rejoice, and
cause the godly to pour forth prayers and tears before the Lord against
us. To that I answered, that I did account it a dreadful thing to
stand in the way of the tears and prayers of God's people, when they
were duly directed against me; but if I were found doing my duty in
the way of Providence, and many more than those thousands he spoke of
should pour forth their prayers and tears against me, I was confident,
and could with comfort lift up my head, and trust that the shield of
Providence and faith should repel those as well as other darts, and
they should not hurt me." Considerable sympathy in religious feeling
existed between these two persons. Berry hoped that they might be
of spiritual service to each other. He allowed Powell to preach at
Worcester, which he did, "honestly and soberly, in four churches, and
had many hearers."[111]
It further appears, from the correspondence of Major-General Goffe,
that the minister of the principal congregation in the town of Lewes
had adopted Feake's principles, "and bewailed the imprisonment of the
Saints." The Anabaptists of Sussex were busy getting up a petition
against the Court of Chancery, the tithe system, and the detention of
prisoners without trial; but not one of the congregation just mentioned
would sign the paper, because, being addressed to the Protector, it
recognized his authority.[112]
Major-General Whalley, already mentioned--whose duties extended over
the counties of Lincoln, Nottingham, Derby, Warwick, and Leicester--was
much encouraged at witnessing the loyalty of ministers to the
Protectorate in those parts; but, like his fellow-commanders in other
districts, he dwells much upon the immorality of the population,
which, owing to the neglect of the magistrates, was more than he could
suppress. He says: "It hath been a general complaint to me in Lincoln
and Coventry especially, that wicked magistrates, by reason of their
number, overpower the godly magistrates." "I shall give them in charge
to put down as many alehouses as shall be judged unnecessary; and
present me with a list at my next coming of what they have put down,
and what remain, and shall, with Major Beake, and some others that I
judge godly, consider further of them."[113]
[Sidenote: _Scotland._]
Other letters of this period, preserved in Thurloe's collection,
present some striking phases of ecclesiastical affairs and religious
life in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland.
Scotland was still agitated by disputes between the Resolutionists--who
had admitted malignants to command and to office, upon their submission
to mock discipline--and the Remonstrators, who adhered to their
decision of separating from all who were not faithful to the Covenant.
Lord Broghill ruled in Scotland as Cromwell's Lieutenant, and laboured
hard to bring contending factions into a state of obedience. The
absence in the North of any attempt to establish religious uniformity
is remarkable. Doctrinal and ecclesiastical peculiarities were largely
tolerated, so long as people would live quietly under the Protector's
rule. But it was otherwise when they were found guilty of political
opposition. His Lordship informs Secretary Thurloe (September the
15th, 1655) of the Remonstrators' Covenant--"wherein they say they
do not meddle with any thing of a civil concernment, but only to
strengthen themselves in matters of faith and doctrine, in these times
of defection and backsliding."[114] But his information, he adds,
was not very clear--and he had resolved, if he found the movement of
ill tendency, he would put a stop to it. Lord Broghill had long and
tedious conferences with the Edinburgh ministers, when he expressed
his determination to countenance those most who most deserved it
by peaceable submission.[115] At the same time he endeavoured to
reconcile the contending factions, and to get the Remonstrators, whom
he continued to call "the honester men," to fall in with an ordinance
of the Protector "for admitting only of deserving men into the
ministry." "Get good and holy men into your pulpits, without looking
so closely into their minor peculiarities of opinion and usage," was
the advice which Cromwell gave to people on both sides the Tweed; but
on both sides the Tweed there were men who disliked all advice of that
charitable nature. Conference followed conference, and at last Broghill
informs Thurloe (November the 27th), "the meeting of our ministers
for a reconciliation is grown hopeless."[116] It may be added, that
from another of his letters (April the 15th, 1656) we learn the stern
bearing of the Governor in Scotland towards Roman Catholics, for he
speaks of a proclamation "which makes it death for any priest to be
found in this nation after the next lord's Day; which possibly may have
blown away most birds of that feather."[117]
[Sidenote: _Wales._]
Wales occasioned much trouble. Its spiritual destitution in 1649
had occasioned "An Act for the better propagation and preaching
of the Gospel" in the principality, and for redress of certain
grievances.[118] To remedy the consequences of long neglect and
clerical immorality, Commissioners were appointed to eject scandalous
ministers and schoolmasters, and to induct in their room such as were
considered godly men. Perhaps this measure has provoked more criticism
than any other of the kind. Impeachments have been laboriously drawn
up on the one side, and as laboriously answered on the other. We shall
not enter on that discussion. Our purpose is simply to indicate what
information, as to the religious condition of Wales, is afforded by
the correspondence of the Major-Generals. One thing is certain, that,
whatever may have been beneficially effected by the Commissioners,
Wales remained in a state of melancholy destitution when Major-General
Berry thus wrote to Secretary Thurloe, from Wrexham, (December the
21st, 1655)--"Here are very few good ministers or schoolmasters." "The
ejected and sequestered ministers and schoolmasters are become like
the branch of an unfruitful vine; man cannot make a pin of it to hang
a garment on, and they are in a sad condition. One very good school at
Ruthin will be dispersed by his Highness's proclamation, and I hear
there are many vacancies that want ministers in Anglesea. Methinks
Doctor Owen might find some way to supply this defect."[119]
[Sidenote: 1655.]
In the February following, the same writer states that one great evil
which he found, and which he knew not how to remedy, was the want of
able preachers; so that if some effectual course were not speedily
taken, some of the people would become heathens. Brecon--the town
where he was staying at the time--had no preacher near it, and the
people were sinking into a state of careless contentment without any
religion whatever. To this fact of continued spiritual destitution
must be added another.[120] Wales lay torn in pieces by the political
differences of religious people. The Fifth Monarchists, amongst whom
Vavasour Powell played so conspicuous a part, were loud in their
complaints of "wickedness in high places." They drew up a paper,
signed by above 300 names, which was found in the pocket of one
Chapman, imprisoned in the Tower of London. The Lieutenant forwarded
the document to Secretary Thurloe, who has printed it in his huge
collection.[121] It is a curious production, containing, first, an
appeal to Cromwell to peruse and weigh it, and not harden his neck
against the truth; and then a second part, called "a word for God,"
which forms the burden of the testimony introduced. After referring
to particular duties in former days--such as witnessing against the
Prayer Book, the cross in baptism, and the like--the authors proceeded
to deliver their souls. _First_, they said that this nation resembled
Israel after its deliverance from Egypt. _Secondly_, that the good
old cause was laid aside and lost. _Thirdly_, that the Government
had been unwarrantably changed. _Fourthly_, that as the fruit of
this forbidden tree, many of the choice servants of God (rebellious
Fifth Monarchy-men) were imprisoned without knowing their accusers.
_Fifthly_, that heavy taxation continued. _Sixthly_, that under the
Protectorate horrible impieties, injustice, and oppression continued
to abound "from the head to the tail," witness (they remarked) the
receiving of honours, profits, customs, benefits, tenths, and first
fruits formerly paid to the Crown: _Seventhly_, that the expedition
to Hispaniola had incurred the loss of much blood and treasure--and,
_lastly_, that the existing Government was not of God's approbation.
Here, beyond all question, a flag of revolt is seen in preparation, and
no wonder Cromwell did what he could to prevent its being unfurled.
Another paper appeared on the opposite side signed by double the
number, including most if not all the Independents of Wales.
[Sidenote: _Ireland._]
The sparks of disaffection thus struck out, flew far and wide, and
soon lighted on combustible materials in the sister island. We learn
from Thurloe that the inflammatory manifesto just described, on
reaching the Irish people, found a favourable reception. "It was
greatly hugged by some." On the 14th of December, 1655, Edward Wale
of Waterford, writing to Dr. Harrison, told him that he heard strange
things of the Anabaptists, to the grief of Lord Henry Cromwell. He
marvelled what these people would have. His Lordship's demeanour had
been such everywhere since his coming, that the godly in general
spoke well of him. But the Anabaptists were not pleased. Their pride
and uncharitableness would ere long bring them low. He hoped that
their schisms, the madness of the Quakers, and the cruelties and
insolence of the Roman beast, together with differences and confusions
everywhere, would make every one ply the petition more and more,
"Thy kingdom come." Henry Cromwell himself dwelt even passionately
upon this subject. He asked Thurloe--Could his Highness believe that
the Anabaptists, and especially those in Ireland, were his faithful
friends, and that when others deserted, they would stand by him? Let
sober people be asked, and they would tell, that when others were for
owning his Highness, these men did openly deny him, and not only so,
but reproached and reviled those who acted differently.[122]
[Sidenote: 1655.]
But far worse, and much more troublesome to the Major-Generals, the
Lord Protector, and all good Protestants, were the papistical lawyers
and priests--therefore the first were summarily disposed of, and the
second closely watched, with a view to more serious punishment. Worsley
informed Thurloe of security being taken that all attorneys who were
Papists, and had been in arms against the Parliament or the present
Government, should act no more in their legal capacity.[123] A report,
entitled a "Brief Account of what is observed concerning the Irish,"
states that there had been a more than ordinary confluence of priests,
filling the minds of the discontented Irish with expectations of a
change;--that a general and private fast had been held--the same thing
having been observed before the late rebellion;--that private meetings
of the gentry were also more common than formerly; that Bishop O'Dwyer,
and a friar named Bonaventure, in Laghlyn, were appointed to receive
intelligence from abroad, and to disperse it, as orderly as possible,
according to the direction they received; that, besides, there were two
priests, who passed by turns from London to Dublin, and thence sent
papers to O'Dwyer and Bonaventure; that having received from them fresh
dispatches, they returned to England, and that Bonaventure was now gone
into Tipperary, with a letter written in cipher, brought by one of
these priests.[124]
Perhaps in these references to Thurloe we have drawn too largely on
the reader's patience, but in the tangled thicket of his immense
collection of letters, much fruit may be picked out from amidst thorns
and briars, by the historian who searches for illustrations of affairs
under Cromwell's Major-Generals. Not that anybody can expect to find
in their reports an accurate picture of what Catholics, Episcopalians,
Presbyterians, or Anabaptists really were; for it is evident these
old soldiers were full of prejudice, and must have been oft-times
misinformed; but the correspondence clearly reflects the sentiments of
those in power with reference to that portion of the English people
which gave them so much trouble. We are not able from these letters
to determine exactly what was the character of the accused, or what
was the treatment they deserved; but we are able to see how they were
judged and treated by this class of rulers, who combined in one and
the same person the soldier, the magistrate, and the ecclesiastical
overseer.
[Sidenote: _Sir Harry Vane._]
Vane, after Cromwell's usurpation of absolute dictatorship, returned to
Raby Castle, in the county of Durham--whose old grey towers, rich in
Neville memories, still lift up their heads, full of feudal grandeur
and picturesque beauty, among the trees of a lordly park, well stocked
with deer. There, in rooms far different from the present modernized
apartments, this philosophical statesman reflected upon what was going
on in England under the administration of Major-Generals, and in some
quiet chamber wrote his "Retired Man's Meditations." In the same
abode also--when in March, 1656, Cromwell commanded a general fast,
that the people might apply themselves to the Lord, to discover the
Achan who had so long obstructed the settlement of these distracted
kingdoms--Vane wrote his "Healing Question," in which he brings out
his doctrine of religious liberty more luminously perhaps than he had
ever done before. As it illustrates the progress of opinion in that
subject, and is a clearer statement of principles which in our day are
widely adopted, than can be found in any other book published during
the Protectorate, we cannot resist the temptation to transfer to these
pages the following extract:--
"Unto this freedom the nations of the world have right and title by the
purchase of Christ's blood, who by virtue of His death and resurrection
is become the sole Lord and Ruler in and over the conscience; for to
this end Christ died, rose and revived, that He might be Lord both of
the dead and of the living, and that every one might give an account of
himself, in all matters of God's worship, unto God and Christ alone, as
their own Master, unto whom they stand or fall in judgment, and are not
in these things to be oppressed or brought before the judgment-seats
of men. For why shouldest thou set at naught thy brother in matters of
his faith and conscience, and herein intrude into the proper office
of Christ, since we are all to stand at the judgment-seat of Christ,
whether governors or governed, and by His decision only are capable of
being declared with certainty to be in the right or in the wrong?
[Sidenote: _Sufferings of Vane._]
"By virtue, then, of this supreme law, sealed and confirmed in the
blood of Christ unto all men (whose souls He challenges a propriety
in, to bring under His inward rule in the service and worship of God),
it is that all magistrates are to fear and forbear intermeddling
with giving rule or imposing in those matters. They are to content
themselves with what is plain in their commission, as ordained of God
to be His ministers unto men for good, whilst they approve themselves
the doers of that which is good in the sight of men, and whereof
earthly and worldly judicatures are capable to make a clear and perfect
judgment; in which case the magistrate is to be for praise and
protection to them. In like manner he is to be a minister of terror
and revenge to those that do evil in matters of outward practice,
converse, and dealings in the things of this life between man and man,
for the cause whereof the judicatures of men are appointed and set up.
But to exceed these limits, as it is not safe nor warrantable for the
magistrate (in that He who is higher than the highest, regards, and
will shew Himself displeased at it), so neither is it good for the
people, who hereby are nourished up in a biting, devouring, wrathful
spirit one against another, and are found transgressors of that royal
law which forbids us to do that unto another, which we would not have
them do unto us, were we in their condition.
"This freedom, then, is of high concern to be had and enjoy, as well
for the magistrates sake as for the peoples common good; and it
consists, as hath been said, in the magistrates forbearing to put forth
the power of rule and coercion in things that God hath exempted out of
his commission. So that all care requisite for the peoples obtaining
this may be exercised with great ease, if it be taken in its proper
season; and that this restraint be laid upon the supreme power before
it be erected as a fundamental constitution among others, upon which
the free consent of the people is given, to have the persons brought
into the exercise of supreme authority over them, and on their behalf;
and if besides, as a further confirmation hereunto, it be acknowledged
the voluntary act of the ruling power, when once brought into a
capacity of acting legislatively, that herein they are bound up, and
judge it their duty so to be (both in reference to God, the institutor
of magistracy, and in reference to the whole body by whom they are
entrusted), this great blessing will hereby be so well provided for
that we shall have no cause to fear, as it may be ordered.
[Sidenote: 1655.]
"By this means a great part of the outward exercise of anti-Christian
tyranny and bondage will be plucked up by the very roots; which,
till some such course be held in it, will be always apt to renew and
sprout out afresh, under some new form or refined appearances, as by
late years' experience we have been taught. For since the fall of the
Bishops and persecuting Presbyteries, the same spirit is apt to rise in
the next sort of clergy, that can get the ear of the magistrate, and
pretend to the keeping and ruling of the conscience of the governors;
although this spirit and practice hath been all along decried by
the faithful adherents to this cause as a most sore oppression, and
insufferable yoke of bondage most unrighteously kept up over the
consciences of the people, and therefore judged by them most needful
to be taken out of the way; and in this matter the present governors
have been willing very eminently to give their testimony in their
public declarations, however in practice there is much of grievance yet
found among us, though more, in probability, from the officiousness of
subordinate ministers, than any clear purpose or design of the chief in
power."[125]
In such teaching the rights of conscience are planted on their proper
ground. No one, after reading Vane's words, can fail to see the truth
and justice of the lines addressed to him by John Milton:
"Besides, to know
Both spiritual power and civil, what each means,
What severs each, thou hast learn'd, which few have done;
The bounds of either sword to thee we owe:
Therefore on thy firm hand Religion leans
In peace, and reckons thee her eldest son."
[Sidenote: _Suffering Vane._]
But views of religious liberty, worthy the admiration of posterity,
were coupled in Vane's mind with an impracticable and un-English
republican theory, which stripped them of the authority with which
otherwise they might have been clothed. It was unfortunate for the
interests of freedom that, in an age when it struggled to establish its
sway, there were too often in alliance with its advocacy enthusiastic
opinions or fanatical practices, impairing it at the time, and
affording pretexts for opposing it in the next generation.
Vane acted with characteristic honesty and candour in sending privately
to Cromwell a copy of the "Healing Question," containing the sentences
we have quoted, before he proceeded to publish what he had written.
Perhaps it never reached the Protector's hands. Be that as it might,
notwithstanding the moderate tone of the pamphlet--sufficient, one
would have thought, to protect the author against any unpleasant
interference from the Government--some of the political passages which
the pamphlet contained greatly displeased the Protector; a displeasure
which was much increased by another violent publication, attributed
to Vane's pen, but not with sufficient reason. The republican
statesman was summoned before the Council. The Council required him
to give a bond for £5,000 that he would not disturb the peace of the
Commonwealth, in default whereof he should stand committed. He refused
to give the bond, and to the great discredit of both Cromwell and his
Council, they sent their honest brother patriot to prison.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER VII.
[Sidenote: _Second Protectorate Parliament._]
England could not exist long without Parliaments. The Major-Generals
had become intolerable. Sir Harry Vane and others, in their call
for another of the old constitutional assemblies of the land, only
expressed the deeply-seated desire of the nation. The Protector,
therefore, made a further attempt to govern in the ancient fashion;
and for that end writs were sealed and sent out in the month of July.
After the corn had been garnered, while still the reaper's sickle in
some parts was flashing amidst the wheat, the country was astir with
elections, and citizens and yeomen were rushing to the poll. Cromwell
and his supporters looked on with no little apprehension, finding so
much of disaffection to the Protectorate. Cavaliers and Presbyterians
could not be trusted. Anabaptists and Republicans, too, were objects
of fear. When the elections were over, the following letter, which
explains itself, was written to the Protector:--[126]
[Sidenote: 1656, August.]
"May it please your Highness,--After the election was over at
Maidstone, many of the Commissioners for securing the peace of the
county met, and upon consideration had of affairs (having seen such
a sad spirit appearing in the county against what good soever your
Highness and those under your commands have endeavoured to do, most
of the Cavaliers falling in with the Presbyterians against all
those persons that owned your Highness and present Government; and
finding in the generality of the county such a bitter spirit against
Swordsmen, Decimators, Courtiers, &c., as did appear in the field at
the time of election, the most of those that are chosen to sit in
the ensuing Parliament being of the same spirit,) were full of fears
what the consequence of this meeting might be; and would have wrote
to your Highness at present, but that there was not a full meeting,
and therefore referred it to me to give your Highness an account
of what was upon their hearts;--which was that if there was not a
restraint upon them, they had cause to fear they would put all into
blood and confusion, their party giving out they would down with the
Major-Generals, and Decimators, and the new militia, so that they do
apprehend it good for your Highness to consider beforehand what is
fit to be done. And therefore they think it necessary to appoint some
persons that shall have commissions dormant to some gentlemen, that
the honest party may know to whom to repair, and to that end, at their
next meeting, shall present you with names accordingly. They think a
recognition, as it may be penned, may keep some that are most dangerous
out, and better that they be kept out at first, than afterwards your
Highness be forced to turn them out. They think it will be your wisdom
not to suffer them to meddle with the instrument of Government, but
all that go into the House be engaged to own it as it is, and not to
meddle with altering any part of it, without your Highness's consent.
As also not to meddle with what hath been done out of necessity by your
Highness and Council, in order to the peace and safety of the nation.
Their hearts are with your Highness to stand by you with their lives
and fortunes, they finding such a perverseness in the spirits of those
that are chosen, that, without resolution of spirit in your Highness
and Council to maintain the interests of God's people (which is to
be preferred before a thousand Parliaments) against all opposition
whatsoever, we shall return again to our Egyptian taskmasters. And
therefore do earnestly beg that the Lord would direct your heart what
to do in this juncture of affairs. And if Parliaments will not do it,
then to take such to your assistance as will stand by you in that
work, which God hath begun, and will yet undoubtedly own and carry on,
maugre all His enemies; and we judge it better to persist in the work
of the Lord than now we have put our hands to the plough to look back.
And although the murmurings and discontents of God's people, together
with all our unsuitable walkings under those precious enjoyments we
have from the Lord, may provoke Him to leave us to be overcome by our
enemies, and cause us to hang our harps upon the willows, and cause
the enemy to call for one of the songs of Sion in a strange land;
yet, if the Lord shall take pleasure in us, He will cause His face to
shine upon us, and carry us well through the seas of blood that are
threatened against us, and the waste howling wilderness of our straits
and difficulties, and at length bring us to that blessed haven of
reformation, endeavoured by us, and cause all our troubles and disquiet
to end in a happy rest and peace--when all His people shall be one, and
His name one in all your dominions, which is and shall be the daily
prayers of, my Lord, your Highness's most humble and obedient servant
to his power,
"THOS. KELSEY.
"Chatham, 26th August, 1656."
[Sidenote: 1656, September.]
This advice was adopted, and between one and two hundred of the persons
returned were refused their seats because of their disaffection to the
Protectorate Government.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Speech._]
The second Protectorate Parliament met on the 17th of September, 1656.
Sir Harry Vane, now a prisoner, had been proposed in three places,
but had been elected in none. Haselrig had succeeded in securing
his return, but for a time he did not take his seat. After Dr. Owen
had preached at Westminster Abbey from the words in Isaiah xiv.
32--"What shall one then answer the messengers of the nation? That
the Lord hath founded Zion, and the poor of his people shall trust
in it,"--adjourning to the Painted Chamber, Cromwell stood up, took
off his hat, and discoursed characteristically upon the Spaniards
and Papists, and the Cavaliers--upon the late rising--the levellers
and the Fifth Monarchy men--and also upon the Major-Generals. Then
he turned to the subject of religion. His practice since the last
Parliament, he said, had been to grant liberty to all who continued
quiet and peaceable. He was against such liberty of conscience as might
be repugnant to this. Let Baptists, Independents, and Presbyterians
be countenanced as long as they were thankful to God, and made use of
their liberty--not to interfere with others, but "to enjoy their own
consciences." Men who believed in free justification by the blood of
Jesus, and lived upon the grace of God, claimed freedom as a debt due
to God and to Christ; and God would require it, if such Christians
did not enjoy what they claimed. But his Highness declared he would
not suffer one Christian to trample on the heels of another, or to
revile, reproach, or provoke him. He prayed that God would give hearts
and spirits to keep things equal, for striving after which he had
"some boxes on the ear." Even Presbyterians, at last, were beginning
to see the justice of his course, and petitions from them in certain
counties shewed how they did but desire liberty, and would "not strain
themselves beyond their own line." The Protector touched on another
topic. For his own part, he should think himself very treacherous if
he took away tithes till he could see the legislative power settle the
maintenance of ministers in another way. To destroy tithes was to cut
ministers' throats. Tithes, or some other public maintenance, formed
"the root of visible profession." He had also a word of favour for his
Commission of Triers and "Expurgators." They had a great esteem for
learning; but "neither Mr. Parson, nor Doctor in the University, hath
been reckoned stamp enough by those that made these approbations."
Grace must go with and sanctify learning. He believed, he said, that
God had "a very great seed" in the youth then in the Universities,
who, instead of studying books only, studied their own hearts. "It was
never so upon the thriving hand" as at that day. Touching upon religion
generally, the speaker added that the Cavalier interest had been one
of disorder and wickedness; that fifteen or seventeen years before
it had been a shame to be a Christian. A badge then was put upon the
holy profession. But a blessed change had come, and now--since people
esteemed it a shame to be bold in sin and profaneness--God would bless
them.[127]
The second Protectorate Parliament walked in the steps of the first,
as it regarded the suppression of error and of fanaticism by legal
penalties. The month of December saw the new senators at Westminster
plunging into discussions upon the case of James Naylor.
[Sidenote: _Case of James Naylor._]
Lord President Laurence[128] and a few others were disposed
to interpret the views of this notorious person as merely the
extravagances of a mystical temperament; but most of the members,
horror-stricken at his conduct, pronounced it utterly intolerable,
and declared that it deserved the severest chastisement from the
magistrate. Mr. Samuel Bedford[129] expressed his joy at finding that
so many had adopted such an opinion; for the nation's eyes were fixed
upon them to see what they would do for the cause of God; and he would
not have them lay down the business unfinished, but sit day and night
until it was perfected. Lord Lambert[130]--after alluding to the
unhappy man as having been unblameable in life, and a member of "a very
sweet society of an Independent Church"--intimated his own readiness
to punish the accused, should he be proved guilty of blasphemy; only,
not being hurried away by passion, like some honourable members, he
wished the subject to be referred to a committee, that nothing might be
done irregularly and in haste. Major Edward Desborough,[131] though he
did not speak with a view of mitigating Naylor's offence, pointed out
the fact that the people who encouraged him and paid him homage were,
in one sense, worse than he. Some members would immediately have sent
this delinquent to the gallows; and at length the poor man actually
was doomed to be repeatedly whipped, set in the pillory, branded with
red-hot irons, and kept in prison with hard labour during the pleasure
of Parliament.[132] Even the Lord Protector said he would not tolerate
such offenders in his dominions.
[Sidenote: 1656, December.]
At the time when this debate was carried on--touching as it did
the question whether Government has a right to take cognizance of
purely religious offences--the Protector wrote two very significant
letters, which are here introduced in further illustration of his
religious policy. One was addressed to the municipal authorities
of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, with reference to some fears which the
Independents, who were the predominant party in the town, had
expressed, in consequence of his Highness's encouragement of the
Presbyterians in that neighbourhood. After an explanation of the
circumstance, he proceeds:--
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Letters._]
"I, or rather the Lord, require of you that you walk in all
peaceableness and gentleness, inoffensiveness, truth, and love towards
them, as becomes the servants and Churches of Christ--knowing well that
Jesus Christ, of whose diocese both they and you are, expects it; who,
when He comes to gather His people and to make Himself 'a name and
praise amongst all the people of the earth,' He 'will save her that
halteth, and gather her that was driven out, and will get them praise
and fame in every land where they have been put to shame.' And such
'lame ones' and 'driven-out ones' were not the Independents only, and
Presbyterians, a few years since, by the Popish and prelatical party in
these nations; but such are and have been the Protestants in all lands,
persecuted and faring alike with you, in all the reformed Churches.
And therefore, knowing your charity to be as large as all the flock of
Christ who are of the same hope and faith of the Gospel with you, I
thought fit to commend these few words to you, being well assured it is
written in your heart, so to do with this, that I shall stand by you
in the maintaining of all your just privileges to the uttermost."[133]
The Christian spirit which breathes through this epistle commands our
sympathy and admiration. Every line testifies to that gentle love
for all the true disciples of Jesus Christ--which grew like a tender
flower, which gushed like a limpid stream, for the refreshment of his
friends, out of the depths of a strong and rugged nature such as made
Cromwell a terror to his enemies.
The other noticeable letter despatched from his Highness's Cabinet
about the same time, was intended for no other hands than those of the
renowned Cardinal Mazarin, the prime minister of France--in answer to
his Eminence's request for the toleration of Catholics in England.
[Sidenote: 1656, December.]
"The obligations, and many instances of affection," says Cromwell,
"which I have received from your Eminency, do engage me to make returns
suitable to your merits. But although I have this set home upon my
spirit, I may not (shall I tell you I cannot?) at this juncture of
time, and as the face of my affairs now stands, answer to your call
for toleration (of Catholics here). I say I cannot, as to a public
declaration of my sense in that point; although I believe that under
my Government your Eminency, in the behalf of Catholics, has less
reason for complaint as to rigour upon men's consciences than under the
Parliament. For I have of some, and those very many, had compassion,
making a difference. Truly I have (and I may speak it with cheerfulness
in the presence of God, who is a witness within me to the truth of
what I affirm) made a difference; and, as Jude speaks, 'plucked many
out of the fire'--the raging fire of persecution, which did tyrannize
over their consciences, and encroached by an arbitrariness of power
upon their estates. And herein it is my purpose, as soon as I can
remove impediments, and some weights that press me down, to make
a farther progress, and discharge my promise to your Eminency in
relation to that."[134] Cromwell did what many rulers do. Without
having an intolerant law repealed, he relaxed its execution. The time
was not ripe for perfect religious liberty. Cromwell understood its
broad principles better than Mazarin; but it was not given to the
Protector, as it has been to his posterity, to see the entire breadth
of their practical application. The letter shews some respect for the
consciences of Catholics; but it indicates, in the way of conceding
liberty to that class of religionists, difficulties over which at the
time the writer had no control. Evidently he was prepared to advance
rather than recede in his liberal treatment of a class of persons who,
by the common consent of almost all Protestants, were excluded from the
enjoyment of the political privileges of citizenship.
[Sidenote: _Extempore Preaching._]
In those days of tardy intercourse with the Continent, this last letter
had scarcely reached its destination when the gossips of London were
all astir with reports relative to Cromwell's escape from a great
personal danger. A story gained circulation, to the effect, that a hole
had been cut in the backdoor of Whitehall chapel, and that a basket of
pitch, tar, and gunpowder had been placed there, with a lighted match
hung over it, in order to blow up both the palace and the Protector.
A resolution of the Parliament to keep a day of thanksgiving followed
the discovery of this design--known in history as Sindercombe's
plot--whereupon a curious debate ensued upon the question, as to who
should preach the sermon for improving the event. Alderman Foot, member
for the city of London, proposed that Dr. Reynolds should perform the
office; when exceptions were taken to the "low voice" of that eminent
Presbyterian Divine. The same complaint was urged with regard to Mr.
Caryl, the Independent. "It is strange we should not hear as well now
as we did fourteen years ago," observed Lord Strickland--one of his
Highness's Council, and member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne--to which Mr.
Robinson, who represented Yorkshire, added the remark--"Ministers tell
us our faults. It is fit we should tell them theirs. Their reading of
sermons makes their voice lower. I doubt we are going to the episcopal
way of reading prayers, too." Another member moved that Mr. Matthew
Mead, minister of Stepney, might be selected as one of the preachers:
and he expressed an earnest hope that charity might be more manifest
on the occasion than it had been when a fast was last observed by the
Houses, for then "nothing was given at the door to the poor." From
observations advanced in the course of this amusing debate, it appears
that reading discourses had begun to be somewhat fashionable amongst
the English pulpit orators of the Puritan period; it was, however,
otherwise in Scotland, _memoriter_ delivery being the practice there;
and hence, Lord Cochrane of Dundonald, who sat for Aire and Renfrew,
suggested his fellow-countryman, Mr. Galaspy, of the Scotch kirk, as
a minister peculiarly fitted to edify the House by his ministrations,
because he was not accustomed to read his discourses. The honourable
member raised a laugh by saying "something of an evil man who read his
sermons."[135]
[Sidenote: 1657, March.]
[Sidenote: _The New Constitution._]
In the month of March, there were debates in the House respecting the
new Magna Charta of England, contained in the document first called,
"The humble Address and Remonstrance of the Knights, Citizens, and
Burgesses now assembled in Parliament;" but afterwards still more
modestly entitled, "The humble Petition and Advice."[136] A blank
had been left for the name of the chief magistrate. Was it to be the
title of _King_ or _Protector_? Major-General Ludlow called this
new programme of the Commonwealth a shoe fitted to the foot of a
monarch; yet it might be worn, he said, and walked in, by one bearing
a less pretentious appellation. For weeks there were, on this weighty
question, discussions in St. Stephen's, with conferences and speeches
at Whitehall, ending, as every one knows, in Cromwell's refusal of
the English Crown.[137] That unique episode in our national history
does not come within the scope of our narrative, but the Petition
and Advice, in which the proposal of kingship appeared, requires
consideration under its ecclesiastical and religious aspects.
The framers of the new Charter had their eye upon the Instrument
of December, 1653. Like the Constitution it was to supersede, it
disqualified Papists for political rule, and for all exercise of the
franchise. Members of Parliament and of the Council of State were
still required to be men of integrity, fearing God. All acts and
orders for the abolition of Bishops, Deans, and Chapters, and for the
sale of cathedral property, were distinctly confirmed in both schemes
of government; and, as a fundamental principle in each, it was laid
down that the Christian religion, as contained in the Scriptures,
should be held forth as the public profession of the country. But,
on comparing the long Article, number xi., in the Humble Petition,
with the corresponding Articles of 1653, numbered xxxv., xxxvi., and
xxxvii.,[138] we discover some not altogether unimportant differences.
The Article xxxv. of the first Instrument speaks of a contemplated
provision for ministerial maintenance, less subject to scruple and
contention, and more certain than the present--meaning tithes. Not a
word appears on this subject in No. xi. of the Petition. A Confession
of Faith to be agreed upon by his Highness and the Parliament is
desired in the Petition and Advice, but nothing of the kind had been
mentioned in the Articles. Moreover, in the Petition and Advice it
is distinctly said:--"That none may be suffered or permitted by
opprobrious words, or writing maliciously or contemptuously to revile
or reproach the Confession of Faith to be agreed upon as aforesaid"--a
provision to which nothing similar can be found in the Articles. Also,
in the earlier case, liberty was conceded to all persons who professed
faith in God by Jesus Christ, so that they did not abuse their freedom
to the injury of others; but in the later scheme of government, an
enumeration is attempted of primary articles of belief necessary to
be held as a condition of toleration. Freedom is limited to those who
"profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, His eternal Son,
the true God, and in the Holy Spirit, God, co-equal with the Father
and the Son, one God blessed for ever; and do acknowledge the holy
Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the revealed will and
word of God; and shall in other things differ in doctrine, worship, or
discipline from the public profession held forth." The determination
to draw a broad and distinct line between clergy and laity--which was
expressed in the resolutions of the first Protectorate Parliament, when
the Articles of 1653 came under discussion--is decidedly taken up by
this second Parliament, and incorporated in their Advice.
[Sidenote: 1657, May.]
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Speech._]
This comparison of the two Charters indicates a revived spirit of
ecclesiastical conservatism at the period when the second of them
was prepared, and seems to point to a strong Presbyterian element
in this second Protectorate Parliament. The exclusion of members
with republican predilections from seats in St. Stephen's left the
Presbyterians more at liberty to carry out their own plan of religious
policy; and it is a fact, that at the same time, they derived
encouragement from the conciliatory conduct then, and for some little
while before, manifested toward them by the Lord Protector. Cromwell
accepted the Petition and Advice, "hugely taken," as he says, with
the word "_settlement_--both with the thing and the notion"--it being
the haven into which he had long sought, in a night of storms, to
bring the vessel of Church and State. But, in a speech on the 21st
of April, he could not help animadverting on debates in Parliament
respecting the civil disqualification of public preachers. "I must say
to you," he observed, "in behalf of our army--in the next place to
their fighting--_they_ have been very good 'preachers,' and I should
be sorry they should be excluded from serving the Commonwealth because
they have been accustomed to 'preach' to their troops, companies, and
regiments--which I think has been one of the blessings upon them, to
the carrying on of the great work. I think you do not mean so 'that
they should be excluded' but I tender it to you, that if you think fit
there may be a consideration had of it. There may be some of us, it
may be, who have been a little guilty of that, (the Lord Protector no
doubt here thought of himself), who would be loth to be excluded from
sitting in Parliament 'on account of it!'"[139]
[Sidenote: 1657, April.]
Cromwell, in the same speech, could not but cast a glance of approval
at the proceedings of the Commission of Triers, of whom, however, the
Advice says nothing. "We have settled very much of the business of
the ministry," observes his Highness. "If I have anything to rejoice
in before the Lord in this world, as having done any good or service,
it is this;" "there hath not been such a service to England since the
Christian religion was perfect in England!" "We did not trust upon
doing what we did _virtute Instituti_, as if these Triers were _jure
Divino_, but as a civil good. We knew not, and know not better, how to
keep the ministry good, and to augment it in goodness, than by putting
such men to be Triers: men of known integrity and piety, orthodox
men, and faithful." Then--with a decided nod of favour in reference
to that part of the petition--he looked at No. xi. on the document,
which he held in his hand--where it was written that those ministers
who should agree in doctrine, though not in discipline, with the
public profession, should be eligible for trust and promotion in the
ecclesiastical establishment of England. After glancing obliquely at
strifes of opinion--with frowns of displeasure such as we can imagine
overcasting his huge eyebrows--he afterwards turned with radiant smiles
to recognize so much as existed of his own comprehensive church in this
new settlement of affairs. "Here are three sorts of godly men whom you
are to take care for, whom you have provided for in your settlement.
And how could you put the selection upon the Presbyterians, without, by
possibility, excluding all those Anabaptists, all those Independents?
And so now you have put it into this way, that though a man be of any
of those three judgments, if he have the root of the matter in him, he
may be admitted."[140]
[Sidenote: _Comprehensiveness of Cromwell's Views._]
The provisions for a more minute Confession of faith had received
special notice from the Protector at one of the earlier interviews
which he had with a committee of Parliament, respecting the knotty
points of their advice. He said they had been zealous for the two
greatest concernments God hath in the world--religion and liberty. "To
give them all due and just liberty, and to assert the truth of God:"
this was the point. "And as to the liberty of men professing godliness,
you have done that which was never done before. And I pray it may not
fall upon the people of God as a fault in them, in any sort of them,
if they do not put such a value upon this that is now done as never
was put on anything since Christ's time, for such a catholic interest
of the people of God." Then touching on the subject of civil liberty,
the Protector added: "Upon these two interests, if God shall account me
worthy, I shall live and die."[141]
[Sidenote: 1657.]
It need scarcely be remarked, that contemplated in the light of the
nineteenth century, the restriction of what is called religious
toleration within such bounds as were specified in the new Articles of
Government must appear very partial and narrow. But judged according
to previous legislation--compared with the Presbyterian polity of ten
years before; with the prelatical persecutions of Charles, James, and
Elizabeth's reign; with the papal cruelties of Queen Mary; and with
the capricious despotism of Henry VIII.--the measure of liberty now
conceded must be pronounced to be very liberal. Also, when compared
with other European countries at the same period, or just before,
England under Cromwell is seen to immense advantage; for Spain,
Portugal, and Italy prohibited all forms of religion except the Roman
Catholic; in France and in Germany the Protestant churches fought
rather for their own existence than for any principles of freedom
applicable to differing sects; Holland enforced the decrees of the
Synod of Dort;[142] Denmark, Sweden,[143] and Norway allowed nothing
but a rigid Lutheranism: and Geneva was intolerantly Calvinistic.
Moreover, as in point of liberty outside the Establishment the
Protectorate proceeded far beyond contemporary European powers, so also
did the comprehensiveness of Cromwell's establishment surpass every
other which existed in his day. One class of Protestant Christians only
had been aforetime in England, or was at this time abroad, allowed
by the State incorporation and support; but the Protector conceded
these privileges to Presbyterians, to Independents, and to Baptists,
in common. In several cases also he winked at the occupancy of parish
pulpits even by Episcopal clergymen.
[Sidenote: _Liberal Opinions._]
Of toleration and of comprehension there was very much more than
there had been in England, or than could be found at the same time
elsewhere; but both toleration and comprehension had respect to
different forms of polity, worship, and discipline, rather than to
different phases of doctrinal sentiment. Liberty was conceded to
various parties so long as they were orthodox and evangelical. But
when teachers lapsed into what Puritans believed to be error, when
they lost their sympathy in what Puritans believed to be Christian
experience, they became at once objects of suspicion and dislike to
the Government, and ran the risk of being deprived and silenced. There
was freedom of speech, if not State support, for all who were esteemed
true and faithful servants of Christ, in spite of their peculiar
principles and usages. But toleration belonged to them only as saints,
not as subjects. Liberty was counted a religious privilege, not a
social right. The grounds of toleration rested upon by Government,
however they might appear in the speculations of individual thinkers,
were not of the same breadth and of the same strength as they are in
the present day. But if there was less of liberty than some admirers
of the Commonwealth imagine, there was vastly more of order in the
administration of ecclesiastical affairs than those who dislike
Cromwell and his Government are disposed to admit. What has been
already advanced in these pages serves to shew that things were not
left to be shaped by chance; that a definite system of policy was
framed; that there was a defined establishment based on law; that
liberty was fenced round by distinct lines; and we may now remark, in
conclusion, on this subject, that Council books, and other documents
in the State Paper Office, prove that the ecclesiastical and other
departments of the State, throughout an imagined reign of confusion,
were really administered with singular and unprecedented regularity.
[Sidenote: 1657, April.]
Before the business of the Petition and Advice had brought to a close,
there were certain other matters been settled by Parliament. Upon a
resolution coming before the House to approve of the ordinance of March
the 30th, 1653, which appointed Commissioners for approbation of public
preachers, with the proviso that those nominated in the intervals of
Parliament should be sanctioned by Parliament, Mr. Bodurda, member
for Beaumaris, claimed that a minister finding himself aggrieved
should "have the benefit of the law;" and went on to say that it was
mischievous to entrust commissioners with the power of determining
in such cases, without affording any legal remedy for injustice. Sir
John Reynolds, an Irish member, replied, that to adopt this suggestion
would be to pluck up by the roots a design which had proved itself
already a good tree by the fruits which it had borne. Delinquents, he
urged, might claim as their inheritance what they had forfeited, and
obtain a writ of _quare impedit_; whereupon the new ecclesiastical
polity would fall to the ground. The Ordinance for ejecting ministers
came also under consideration the very same day, when some members,
as might be expected, complained of irregularity, injustice, and
extravagance, chargeable upon the Commissioners. On the other hand, it
was contended that though many irreligious Clergymen had been expelled,
there were more who desired to be so. Some Counties had not passed
through any expurgation. Hence it was "resolved that the Ordinances
for the ejection of scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers
and schoolmasters" should remain in force for three years, unless the
Parliament should take further notice of the subject in the mean
time.[144]
[Sidenote: _Tithes._]
Upon a debate in the month of May, respecting the administration of
oaths to recusants, with a view to their detection, sentiments found
expression far above the current opinion of those days. It was against
the laws of Englishmen to impose such oaths on Roman Catholics--said
Captain Baines, member for Appleby. Colonel Briscoe--who had been
returned for Cumberland--maintained the same opinion, adding that such
an imposition was a revival of the _ex officio_ oath; that it was
inconsistent with the liberty of conscience which then existed, and
which, according to the Lord Protector, had never existed before since
Christ's time; and that it would fall most heavily upon conscientious
persons, whereas to others it would only be like "drinking another
glass of sack." In the course of this same discussion, complaints
were uttered, to the effect that Papists increased, and that it was
difficult to get a jury to convict them: after which Mr. Butler, member
for Poole, declared that in one or two parishes they had multiplied
"one hundred in a year;" and he thought he might say that he himself
had convicted some hundreds.[145]
The old difficulty, how to make people pay their tithes--not yet
overcome by all the legislation on the subject in the years 1647 and
1648--presented itself to this Parliament. Cromwell's Council books
afford numerous instances of ministerial complaints respecting arrears
of income. Orders promptly made are recorded; but subsequent complaints
indicate how the execution of these orders must have been resisted.
For example, it was directed, in 1654, that an augmentation of the
chapelry of Brentford, Middlesex, by a charge on the tithes of the
Rectory of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire, up to that time paid in corn,
should be paid in money; and the Lord Protector recommended that the
income should be increased to £100 per annum. The same augmentation
became afterwards charged on other Rectories; and, in the year 1657,
his Highness and the Rector of Hanwell (Brentford being in Hanwell
parish), appointed Abriel Borfett to the Brentford chapelry. Yet, after
all these repeated arrangements, petitions for payment of arrears
abundantly prove the difficulty which existed in the way of enforcing
the claim.[146]
[Sidenote: 1657, June.]
On the 1st of June, 1657, Sir William Strickland, member for Yorkshire,
moved the first reading of a new tithe Bill; and, upon Whitelocke's
objecting to a clause in it authorizing ministers or their agents to
enter men's houses to enforce payment, as a thing never granted even in
times of Popery--no man having ever heard of a distress for tithes--the
mover replied that he was afraid some persons had a design, by bringing
disgrace on the system, to dishonour the Gospel; that there were men
who would leap over hedge and ditch, and over the whole decalogue, and
then scruple about tithes, and never willingly pay them; that some
severity was needful to preserve Church revenues; and that the same
principle which endangered one kind of property imperilled all the
rest.[147]
[Sidenote: _Catechising._]
The Presbyterians were zealous in catechising their children. The
Provincial Assembly of London had passed a series of resolutions on
the subject in 1655,[148] and now an attempt was made to legislate upon
the subject; but when a Bill for this purpose was introduced on the 9th
June, 1657, Major-General Desborough moved that it be "left behind,"
since it would "discontent many godly persons and make them mourn."
Others spoke in the same strain, but Mr. Vincent, member for Truro,
and Colonel Briscoe, begged on their knees, that the House "would not
forbear the Bill," in which earnest and impassioned plea they were
supported by so large a majority of Presbyterian members that, on a
division, the yeas were 82, and the noes but 7. "So," as the Journals
record, "it was resolved that the Bill for catechising be now carried
up." It was carried up with several other bills: whereupon the Speaker
made a short speech to his Highness "relating to the slowness of great
bodies moving, and how our fruits were like that of the harvest, not
all ripe at a time, but everything in its season; and how he hoped that
this was but the vintage to the autumn the Parliament was preparing,
and that it was not with their productions as with Rebecca's births,
where one had another by the heel, but that their generation of laws
was like that of natural generation, and that his Highness was the sun
in the firmament of this Commonwealth, and he must give the ultimate
life and breath to our laws."
[Sidenote: 1657, June.]
Thirty-eight of the Bills received the Protectoral assent, but the
thirty-ninth, the Bill for catechising, met with a strange fate. After
a little pause, his Highness, looking at the parchment before him,
said, "I am desirous to advise of this Bill." Hence the Bill dropped.
This being done, the House returned about two o'clock to report
proceedings, when Mr. Bampfield, member for Exeter, standing by the
table, declared "that his Highness never did himself such an injury as
he had done that day." Mr. Scobell, the clerk, told Mr. Bampfield he
ought not to talk so, but the stiff Presbyterian declared "he would say
it anywhere."[149]
[Sidenote: 1657, June.]
The same Mr. Bampfield made a report on the 11th of June "from the
Grand Committee for Religion," when a sub-committee was empowered to
send for godly and learned ministers and laymen to consult respecting a
better version of the Psalms. And, at the same time, upon its appearing
that the Scriptures had been grossly misprinted, it was ordered that
7,900 copies, printed in 1653, should be seized to prevent their
sale or their dispersal; and that John Field, the printer, should be
required to get in such books as were of this impression: and also
attend the House to give an account touching the misprinting of the
said Bibles.[150]
[Sidenote: _Debates on Sabbath Observance._]
The Sabbath question also came under debate this same summer month. Too
many penal laws, in the opinion of Colonel Holland, who represented
Lancashire, had already been enacted for enforcing the observance of
the day. The last Bill, he said, had been passed on a Saturday, and the
consequence was, that the next morning, he could not get to church by
land or by water, without violating the Act. The honourable member's
own waterman, after conveying him to hear a sermon at Somerset House,
became subject to a fine, and the honourable member's own boat was
seized as a security for payment. A debate ensued as to the right
of searching houses to find delinquents, when Mr. Godfrey, member
for Kent, moved that such right should be exercised only in taverns,
tobacco-shops, and alehouses. Mr. Vincent, and Colonel Chadwick--the
latter then a representative for Nottingham--thought that this
restriction would defeat the purpose in view, as the principal breaches
of the law were committed in private habitations. Lord Whitelocke,
on a division, carried an amendment to the effect that entry should
only be demanded, but not forcibly accomplished. The Bill enumerated
such offenders as, on Sundays, idly and profanely sat by their gate,
or door, _or elsewhere_, or walked in churchyards. He urged that all
these words ought to be left out; and Mr. Godfrey suggesting that
idle loungers thus described would plead that they were meditating
upon holy things, urged the omission of the terms "profane and idle
sitting," and especially the word "_elsewhere_." Major-General Whalley
objected that, if people at Nottingham, for example, might not sit by
the entrance of their rock houses on a Sunday, they would be deprived
of every breath of air. Mr. Bordura considered that as some people had
no accommodation for sitting, words should be subjoined prohibiting
them from "leaning or standing at doors." In reply to Colonel Briscoe,
who said he would not have laws too rigid, Major Burton--member for
Great Yarmouth--declared he would as soon drop the Bill altogether as
leave out the disputed clause. Then rose Mr. West--who represented
Cambridgeshire--saying they would not leave out the word "_elsewhere_,"
for there might be profaneness in sitting under a tree, or in an
arbour, or in Gray's Inn Walks. The stringent clause was thrown out
on a division of 37 against 35. Colonel Holland expressed himself as
not satisfied in reference to the time when the lord's Day should be
considered to begin; and added, that some godly people were in doubt as
to the institution altogether; and that, whereas once he himself would
have gone to six or seven sermons a-day, now he would do no such thing.
He thought he could as well serve God at home. He was for keeping the
Sabbath as much as any man, believing that though there was no precept
enforcing it, every one by nature was tied to its observance. Amidst
cries of "question," the debate continued "so late that a candle was
called in, and after a while the Bill was agreed to pass, and ordered
to be engrossed."[151]
[Sidenote: _Sabbath Observance._]
This animated conversation in the old House of Commons--which we have
thought it worth while to report, even at inconvenient length--reflects
the various opinions, both strict and lax, which were then held
relative to the question of Sunday observance. Yet, after all, perhaps,
the report scarcely conveys to us exactly what the speakers meant.
Some of them really might intend by their extravagant statements and
ridiculous method of argument only to meet their opponents' reasoning
with _a reductio ad absurdum_, although the steady, plodding diarist
who took the notes from which we have drawn up our summary did not seem
to see the matter in that light.
[Sidenote: 1657, June.]
The Act, as it appears in Scobell, prohibited travelling, entertainment
at inns, every kind of trading, and all dancing and singing, and other
amusement, inclusive even of walking during Divine service. Moreover,
if people did not attend church or chapel where the true worship of
God was celebrated, they were to pay for each instance of neglect two
shillings and sixpence, which sum, after the payment of informers, was
to be appropriated for the benefit of the poor.[152]
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Second Installation._]
At the close of the first session of the second Parliament, there
was enacted, on Friday, the 26th of June, 1657, a gorgeous ceremony,
equivalent to the coronation of the Puritan king. Purple robes,
sceptre, and sword, a chair of state--no other than the regal one of
Scotland, brought out of Westminster Abbey--and a brilliant array of
officers, judges, civic dignitaries, and the like, gave regal pomp
to the occasion.[153] The scene was exhibited under a magnificent
canopy of state in Westminster Hall, whose oaken rafters had so often
echoed with the music and revelry of Plantagenet and Tudor feastings;
and where, in 1653, Cromwell had first been installed Protector,
with less state splendour than on this second occasion, and without
the addition of any sacred rites.[154] Religious worship, however,
became associated with the present solemnity, and there also appeared
religious symbolism in a form which passed quite beyond the common
circle of Puritan ideas. The Speaker of the House of Commons referred
to Alexander, and Aristotle, to Moses, and Homer, to David, and
Solomon, and to "the noble Lord Talbot, in Henry the Sixth's time," in
order to shew what appropriate spiritual lessons were suggested by the
robes, the sceptre, the sword, and the Bible. Richly-gilt and embossed,
the Holy Book was--with the regalia--laid upon a table covered with
pink-coloured Genoa velvet fringed with gold. "His Highness," dressed
in a costly mantle lined with ermine, and girt with a sword of great
value, stood--says a contemporary record--"looking up unto the throne
of the Most High, who is Prince of princes, and in whom is all his
confidence; Mr. Manton, by prayer, recommended his Highness, the
Parliament, the Council, his Highness's forces by sea and land, the
whole Government, and people of these three nations, to the blessing
and protection of God Almighty. After this, the people giving several
great shouts, and the trumpets sounding, his Highness sat down in
the chair of state, holding the sceptre in his hand."[155] Heralds;
Garter, and Norroy, King-at-Arms; his Highness's Gentlemen; men of
the Long Robe; the Judges; Commissioners of all sorts; Robert, Earl
of Warwick, bareheaded, with the sword of the Commonwealth; the Lord
Mayor, with the City sword; Privy Counsellors and Generals took part in
the ceremony--whilst on seats, built scaffold-wise, sat the Members of
Parliament; and below them, the Judges and the Aldermen of London.
[Sidenote: 1658, January.]
When the ceremony had ended, the Protector--having saluted the
foreign ambassadors--entered his state coach, together with the Earl
of Warwick, Lord Richard Cromwell, his son, and Bulstrode, Lord
Whitelocke, who sat with him on one side; and Lord Viscount Lisle and
General Montague on the other: Lord Claypole led the horse of honour
caparisoned with the richest trappings. At night there were great
rejoicings.
[Sidenote: _Re-assembling of Parliament._]
Parliament reassembled January the 20th, 1658. Lord Commissioner
Fiennes made a speech that day before his Highness, in which he entered
at large upon the subject of toleration and charity. He spoke quaintly
of the _Rock_:--"A spirit of imposing upon men's consciences, where
God leaves them a latitude;" and of the _Quicksand_:--"An abominable
licentiousness to profess and practise any sort of detestable opinions
and principles." The object of the Petition and Advice was to steer a
middle course between the two. He strongly inveighed against bigotry,
and maintained that the right way was the golden mean, even God's way.
God, when he came to Elijah, was not in the whirlwind, the earthquake,
or the fire; but in the small still voice. So with men's religious
profession. "It must," said his Lordship, "be a small and still voice,
enough to hold forth a certain and distinct sound, but not to make so
great a noise as to drown all other voices besides. It is good, it
is useful, to hold forth a certain confession of the truth; but not
so as thereby to exclude all those that cannot come up to it in all
points, from the privileges which belong to them as Christians, much
less, which belong to them as men."[156] The members who had been
excluded were now admitted, after having taken the oath according to
the "Petition and Advice." They were extremely republican in their
ideas, and were inveterate enemies to the Protector: their influence
with their own party outside had been increased by their recent
conduct, which was regarded as proving their strong attachment to "the
good old cause." At the same time some of Cromwell's warmest friends
were removed to the other House, which had been constituted so as to
resemble somewhat the ancient House of Peers. The effect of this new
state of things upon the two parties existing among the Commons became
immediately apparent.
[Sidenote: 1658, January.]
After the new oath had been administered to all the ministers--a
business which it took some hours for six commissioners to
accomplish--the Commons, preceded by their mace-bearer, as of old,
marched up to the House of Lords, where his Highness the Protector, in
kingly state, received them, and then proceeded to address the united
assembly as "My Lords and Gentlemen."--"You have now a godly ministry,"
said his Highness, "you have a knowing ministry; such an one as,
without vanity be it spoken, the world has not, men knowing the things
of God, and able to search into the things of God, by that only which
can fathom those things in some measure."[157]
[Sidenote: _Debates._]
Soon after Cromwell's opening speech, a debate arose about the
"maintenance of a godly ministry"--by which words the Lord Protector on
the one hand, and on the other, many who sat in this Parliament, would
not mean quite the same thing. In the estimation of certain members,
scarcely any revenues remained for the Clergy, notwithstanding all the
provision which had been made for them of late years. Forty or fifty
petitions lay on the table, asking for aid to support the preaching
of the Gospel; but there existed no available sources of relief. In
Lancashire it was affirmed that there were parishes, nineteen miles
square, containing two thousand Protestant communicants, besides as
many Papists--which parishes greatly needed subdivision, whilst the
ministers equally needed increased means of support. How to maintain
the clergy was the question in hand; but, according to a habit common
in public assemblies, the debate soon veered round to another point,
and presently the House was found struggling with the enquiry, Should
there be another Convocation or Assembly of Divines? One member battled
both points at once--contending there was no need of any further
assembly; and that before they raised additional money for religious
purposes they ought to pay their civil debts. A second speaker
observed that there had been already an Assembly, which had settled
foundations, but it had been dissolved, and to call another would be
very expensive--whilst persons fit to compose it would be found very
scarce. But, exclaimed a third, though what the late Assembly resolved
had been put in print, it had not been put in practice, and there
needed a new authority of the same kind, to gather out the weeds from
amidst the corn. The ordination of ministers and some outward form of
unity were also of great importance, which could be obtained only by
another ecclesiastical Convocation. A fourth condemned the proposal
altogether, inasmuch as the former assembly had sat long, had cost
much, and had effected little. With such differences of opinion that
question was speedily waived. Complaints respecting the marriage law
and the insecurity of registration next came upon the carpet; and
the non-residence of leading men in the universities was attacked
by the introduction of a Bill for its prevention; but soon a subject
arose before the House which swallowed up all other subjects of
debate. Cromwell's batch of Peers proved the rock on which the second
Protectorate Parliament went to pieces.[158] Sir Arthur Haselrig--who
took his seat with the Commons, although nominated one of the new
Peers--appears prominently in the final Republican broil, occasioned by
the attempt to give to the Commonwealth somewhat of the aristocratic
aspect of a kingdom. And here, it is affecting to recollect the change
which eighteen years had effected in reference to men as well as
measures. Of the patriots who took the lead at the opening of the Long
Parliament, John Pym slept under the pavement of Westminster Abbey;
John Hampden was at rest in the village church which bore his name;
Brooke, years before, had ended his career at Lichfield; Dering, after
his changeful course, had been gathered to his fathers; Vane and Marten
were in retirement; others had disappeared; and now, of all the most
busy actors on the stage in 1640, there remained before the public
view only Oliver Cromwell, with Haselrig, the "hare-brained" in hot
opposition, and Nathaniel Fiennes--more wise in council than valiant
in war--fighting out this last political battle at the side of the
Protector, his old friend.
[Sidenote: 1658, January.]
His Highness's speeches on the 25th of January and 4th of February were
filled with patriotism and wisdom, and with manifest touches of pathos,
in harmony with such pensive memories of this mortal state of existence
as have been just indicated; and in keeping, too, with such a foresight
of the end soon to follow, as we now are able to exercise. They are the
last two of those memorable orations which, after being long neglected,
are now beginning to be studied and understood.
In the former of these speeches, the brave and noble ruler of
England--burdened not so much with the infirmities of years as with the
cares of government, worn out not by old age, but by years of toil and
anxiety, of counsel, and of war--spoke of what was most dear to his
heart, of the Protestant interest abroad, and the Protestant interest
at home; for Cromwell was a Protestant to the backbone. Papists had
been England's enemies from Queen Elizabeth's reign downwards, and as
enemies to their country they were treated by the Protector.[159] And
besides Papists, others in his estimation threatened the interests of
the Commonwealth.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Last Speeches._]
Just at this juncture, the Republicans, in their opposition to the new
settlement, were bent upon upsetting everything. Foundation stones just
laid were being rudely torn up, and the whole fabric was fast falling
to pieces. Indeed some sectaries pleaded, in a certain foolish book,
quoted but not named, for "an orderly confusion." "Orderly confusion!"
exclaimed his Highness. "Men have wonderfully lost their consciences
and their wits. I speak of men going about who cannot tell what they
would have, yet are willing to kindle coals to disturb others." Fifth
Monarchy men, also, were now hastening in the same direction as the
Royalists. Whilst they wanted to set up a republic, they were in fact
playing the game of the King of Scots. "It were a happy thing," said
the old man, wearied out with the war of opinion, "if the nation would
be content with rule. 'Content with rule' if it were but in civil
things, and with those that would rule worst; because misrule is better
than no rule, and an ill government, a bad government is better than
none! Neither is this all, but we have an appetite to variety, to be
not only making wounds, 'but widening those already made.' As if you
should see one making wounds in a man's side, and eager only to be
groping and grovelling with his fingers in those wounds! This is what
such men would be at; this is the spirit of those who would trample
on men's liberties in spiritual respects. They will be making wounds,
and rending and tearing and making them wider than they were. Is not
this the case? Doth there want anything--I speak not of sects in an ill
sense, but the nation is hugely made up of them--and what is the want
that prevents these things from being done to the uttermost, but that
men have more anger than strength? They have not power to attain their
ends. 'There wants nothing else.' And I beseech you judge what such a
company of men of these sects are doing, while they are contesting one
with another! They are contesting in the midst of a generation of men
(a malignant Episcopal party, I mean) contesting in the midst of these
_all united_. What must be the issue of such a thing as this?"[160]
[Sidenote: 1658, February.]
Then, on the 4th of February, came those last words which wound
up all--last words which Englishmen are now studying with deep
earnestness, and with increasing insight--"And if this be the end of
your sitting and this be your carriage, I think it high time that an
end be put to your sitting, and I do dissolve this Parliament. _And let
God be judge between you and me._"
"Believe me," said Hartlib, Milton's friend; "believe me it was of such
necessity, that if their session had continued but two or three days
longer, all had been in blood, both in city and country, upon Charles
Stuart's account."[161]
[Sidenote: _Council of State._]
Ecclesiastical legislation for England, under Oliver Cromwell's
Protectorate, ended with the dissolution of Parliament. Of course there
were no more Acts; nor were there any more Ordinances, respecting
Church affairs. But the same sleepless vigilance and unwearied activity
as before, were shewn by the Protector in relation to religious as well
as other subjects. The ponderous Order Book for 1658--in which may be
traced the proceedings of Government from day to day--bears witness to
the large amount of ecclesiastical business transacted by his Highness
and his counsellors. They determined upon the supply of destitute
parishes, chapelries, and outlying populations; the settlement of
questions about tithes, church leases, and rights of presentation; the
union of parishes; the augmentation of incomes, and various grants to
public preachers.[162] There also occur orders to make collections
for the repair of a church at South Oxendon, struck by lightning;
and of another at Egbaston, damaged in the wars. It is curious to
meet with a petition of the members of the Congregational Church, at
Warwick, complaining that a constable had indicted Mr. Whitehead, a
member, for not attending the parish church, and had demanded fines
for absence; whereupon it was ordered that a letter should be written
to the Justices, to let them know, that if the case were as it had
been represented, the Council was much dissatisfied therewith, as an
abridgment of that liberty which the law allowed. More curious still
is it to meet with a complaint of reproachful and provoking language
having been used at church by a Commonwealth's man against a Royalist,
who is described as being "under obligation, with great penalties,
to his Highness for keeping the peace, and good bearing of himself
to his Highness." It is most curious of all, to find a petition from
Anastatius Cominus--a Bishop of the Greek Church, under the patriarch
of Alexandria--on behalf of himself and others, referred to the
Committee for approbation of public preachers.[163]
[Sidenote: 1658.]
How favourably these entries in the old parchment-bound folio--written
in a firm, bold, legible hand, characteristic of the men whose
proceedings they chronicle--contrast with the records of the
Protectorate Parliament! Whilst the latter were spending their time
upon bigoted efforts to curtail the religious liberties of the people;
the Council of State, with the actual sovereign of England at its
head, was employing an effective influence to check the career and to
mitigate the mischiefs of intolerance. And as this supreme executive
body tempered the narrow policy of parties, it also repressed the
misguided zeal of individuals. How significant is that expression of
displeasure at the attempted abridgment of freedom which had been made
in a miserably sectarian spirit by some who, professing to maintain
justice and charity, to say the very least, ought to have known better.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER VIII.
The schemes of politicians, the proceedings of Parliament, and the
administration of affairs by a Council of State--although necessary to
be studied in order to obtain a knowledge of external circumstances,
such as, under the Commonwealth, powerfully influenced religious
society--can convey but a very inadequate idea of the actual working of
ecclesiastical institutions at that period; and no conception whatever
of the spiritual life either of churches or of individuals. It is
requisite, therefore, that we should turn our attention to the inner
history of different communions; and not only look somewhat minutely
at their character and proceedings, but also glance at a few of the
eminent individuals who were connected with them.
Both in theory and practice, Cromwell's Broad Church included
Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists. In reviewing the state of
these parties respectively, we commence with the Presbyterians.
The Presbyterian scheme of church government,[164] as determined by
the Assembly of Divines, contains an enumeration of three kinds of
officers--namely, pastors, who both preached and ruled; lay elders,
who ruled, but did not preach; and deacons, who chiefly attended to
the necessities of the poor. Each congregation was to have its affairs
administered by such officers; and upon the Presbytery, consisting
of Pastors and Elders,[165] devolved the oversight of communicants,
the maintenance of discipline, and the administration of censures.
Censures, too, admitted of three degrees--admonition, suspension,
and excommunication. Notorious offenders were required to make an
acknowledgment of sin before the whole congregation; and if they proved
incorrigible, they were to be cut off from the communion of the Lord's
Supper, and from the right of bringing their children to be baptized.
Means, however, were to be employed for the restoration of such unhappy
outcasts.[166]
[Sidenote: _Presbyterian System._]
Next to this congregational or parish Presbytery, and superior to
it, was the Classical Assembly, composed of delegates from parish
congregations--the number sent by each not being more than four, or
less than two. Their business was to take cognizance of the conduct
of Ministers and Elders; to admit candidates to office; to enquire
into the state of congregations; to decide cases too difficult for
settlement by Parochial Elders; and to discharge such legislative
functions as did not usurp the authority of the higher courts. Disputes
between Ministers and Elders were determined before this classical
tribunal. The Provincial Synod formed the next superior court, to
which delegates went from the classical Presbyteries; meetings for the
Province of Lancaster being held in the church at Preston. Thither
appeals were carried, and there judgments were enforced; and there also
candidates for the ministry passed through a theological examination.
The preliminary trials having reached a satisfactory conclusion,
notice was posted on the church door, that the persons approved would
be ordained at the end of a month, if no objection were offered.
That solemn service included the offering of prayers, the preaching
of a sermon, the asking of the Pastor Elect certain questions, and
the imposition of hands, with the delivery of a pastoral charge. He
afterwards received a certificate of ordination.
To crown the series of church courts, a General Assembly was requisite;
but to this point of perfection Presbyterianism in England never
attained. Even in Lancashire, where the system appeared in its greatest
vigour, its movements were greatly crippled. Episcopalians resisted
it; avowing their love for Bishops, continuing to use the surplice and
the liturgy, and condemning Presbyterian marriages and sacraments.
The want of State authority for the enforcement of a complete scheme
of discipline was a great vexation to its advocates; and when the
Covenant could no longer be pressed, and the law against the Prayer
Book proved a dead letter, the predominant religionists found it
difficult to contend against the lingering popularity of ancient
forms, and sometimes strove in vain to resist the efforts which were
made to introduce ejected Episcopalians into vacant pulpits. They at
length discovered it was to their own interest to draw towards their
Episcopalian brethren; and before the Commonwealth expired, attempts
were made to establish a moderate form of diocesan rule, somewhat after
the model ascribed to Archbishop Ussher. The two parties searched for
points of ecclesiastical agreement, and went so far as to preach in
each other's places of worship. In some cases political sympathies
formed a still deeper basis of union. Disliking the Protectorate, and
longing for the restoration of royalty, both parties joined in the
famous insurrection under Sir George Booth in 1659. And a further
bond arose in a common antipathy to the sects and to all unordained
ministers.
[Sidenote: _Herrick at Manchester._]
Among the Lancashire Presbyterians were some very remarkable men.
Richard Herrick, Warden of the Collegiate church of Manchester, was
learned, munificent, disinterested, and conscientious; but he was one
of the most passionate of partizans, at a time when partizanship was
pre-eminently rife. He had little or no enmity to Episcopacy in the
abstract,[167] but only disliked certain individual bishops, whom he
considered to have been indifferent to the advances of Popery. The mild
Juxon incurred his rebuke, because, as Herrick said, he preferred his
hounds and his falcons to the defence of Protestantism. It was mainly
through the exertions of the Manchester Warden, that Presbyterianism
acquired ascendancy in Lancashire; he having promoted a petition to
Parliament for that end, signed by many thousand persons. Resolutely
did he resist the sequestration of church lands; doggedly did he refuse
to give up the charter chest, even when soldiers came to burst open
the door. His sympathy with Love caused him at one time to be placed
under arrest; and nothing could induce him to leave Manchester, where
he believed Providence had stationed him in troublous times, that
he might defend the faith which was beleaguered by so many and such
various foes. There in the Collegiate Church--now transformed into a
Cathedral--he thundered out his anathemas against Rome, and fearlessly
arraigned the proceedings of men in power. John Knox, before the Lords
of the Council, and Hugh Latimer, in St. Paul's Churchyard, never
launched more fiery bolts against the Mother of Harlots.
Herrick once addressed his audience in the following words--and we
give them as a specimen of the kind of oratory then popular, and as a
picture, though a very exaggerated one, of the state of things in some
parts of England.
"Be pleased to conceive a Parliament at this time convened in Heaven,
and God on His throne asking this question: 'Shall I destroy England?'
And so some answer after this manner, and some after that: 'Great cry
of injustice, of oppression, of wrong, of injury!" 'Blood toucheth
blood; courts of justice and committees are courts of robbery and
spoil; the poor sheep flies to the bush for shelter, and loses his
fleece!' 'Papists and malignants compound, and they oppress their poor
tenants that have engaged themselves in the public cause for the Lord
against their lords!' A fourth confirms, and concludes with the other
three: 'England must be destroyed. They have falsified the oath of God.
Oaths and covenants are like Sampson's cords; every one makes use of
them to his own interests!' To these agreed many more, so that there
was a great cry heard in the house: 'Down with it, down with it, even
to the ground!' God looked from His throne, and wondered there was not
one found--not one to stand in the gap to make an atonement to speak
in the behalf of England. After a short silence, one arose from his
seat, and said: 'Lord, wilt Thou destroy England--England, for whom
Thou hast done so great things? Wilt Thou destroy what Thine hand hath
done? What will the Atheists, the Papists, the malignants say? Surely
God was not able to save them. Save them, then, for Thy great name's
sake!' A second ariseth, and saith: 'England must not be destroyed!
Lord, wilt Thou destroy a righteous nation, if there be fifty, forty,
thirty, twenty, ten righteous there? Shall not the judge of all the
earth do that which is right? There are seven thousand at least that
have not bowed their knees to Baal! There are sixty thousand, and
more, yea, than sixty hundred thousand, that cannot discern betwixt
the right hand and the left! Thou never didst destroy a praying, a
reforming people! Wilt Thou now do what was never in Thy thoughts
before?' A third ariseth after the second, and pleads the same cause:
'England must not be destroyed! There is a Parliament in the midst of
them--physicians of great value! God hath been amongst them, and in
the midst of them; and they are still acting for God and the kingdom's
safety! Did ever Parliament perish before?' After all these, the fourth
ariseth, that there might not appear fewer to speak for than there was
to speak against England: 'England must not be destroyed! They cannot
die alone; the three kingdoms must die with them--yea, the Protestants'
churches throughout the world! Hast Thou not said that hell gates shall
not prevail against Thy people?' To these many more joined in heart
and vote, so that there was a considerable party of both sides; nor
could it be determined whether had more voices, those that spake for
the destruction, or they that spake for the salvation of England. And
having said, they were silent.
"And behold, as we read in the Revelation, there was in heaven great
silence for half an hour, both sides waiting for God's determination.
At last, God in His glorious majesty raised Himself from His throne,
and effectually cried out: 'How shall I give thee up, England?
how shall I give thee up?' And so, without conclusion and final
determination, He dissolved the session, to the admiration and
astonishment of both parties."[168]
[Sidenote: _Martindale._]
Adam Martindale, with whom we become intimately acquainted through the
medium of his autobiography--had been a tutor, and had kept school in
very strange places--even in public-houses, where he had been compelled
to share in both bed and board with such companions as Papists, and
soldiers, and drunkards. His employment as a schoolmaster had been
adopted in order to avoid enlistment as a soldier; yet he was taken
prisoner by Prince Rupert in the town of Liverpool, and made to walk
without any shoes--the troopers, as he hobbled along, snapping his
ears with their pistol-locks. Having been converted under a kind of
preaching which he compares to "a sharp needle drawing after it a
silken thread of comfort," he wished to enter one of the Universities,
and to take holy orders; but, during a visitation of the plague, he
was persuaded to preach in Manchester, an incident which led to his
immediate entrance upon the sacred office. He became minister of
Gorton,--a chapelry in the parish of Manchester,--where his relation
to the Manchester Presbytery was somewhat peculiar; for he would
not avow himself either a Presbyterian or a Congregationalist, and,
although he signed the rules of the Classical Assembly, he would
never attend any of the meetings of that body. On leaving Gorton,
he accepted the vicarage of Rosthern, in the county of Chester; the
parishioners there uniting in an engagement to pay him the sum of
£10 quarterly. Not having been ordained, he now sought ordination
from the Manchester ministers; and, upon being refused the rite at
their hands, he proceeded to London to obtain it there. After much
perplexity respecting the Engagement, he at last subscribed, but the
subscription seems to have troubled his conscience; and in his new
Cheshire incumbency, where he laboured with singular diligence, he met
with additional trials from certain "gifted" brethren belonging to a
Congregational Church in the neighbourhood who were exceedingly fond of
preaching. Nevertheless, he maintained fellowship with Pastors of that
denomination, and promoted the establishment of a voluntary union, as
distinguished from the Manchester classis, with which institution he
ever scrupled to identify himself.
[Sidenote: _Newcome._]
Henry Newcome, another Lancashire minister--more of a Presbyterian
than was Martindale--had been educated at Cambridge, and had acquired
the art of extempore utterance with much volubility, even before
his ordination, which took place in the year 1648. There can be no
doubt of the godliness and zeal of this eccentric person; but his
eccentricities were so striking, as recorded by himself, that they
impart a peculiar interest to his amusing narrative. In his earlier
days, whilst Rector of Gawsworth, in the county of Chester, he led an
active life, and spent a good deal of time on horseback--like an Arab
of the desert, but with more mischances than ever befel any one of
those skilful riders--since, for being run away with, for tumbling off
his steed, and for being nearly drowned, he had scarcely his fellow;
whilst in all such misfortunes, as well as in the deliverances which
accompanied them, he traced the hand of a special Providence. In one
of his merry moods, when certain gentlewomen from a neighbouring Hall
came to call upon him, he frightened the fair visitors by charging and
firing off a pistol in fun; and throughout life, games at billiards
and at shuffle-board formed the favourite amusement of this lively
Divine, for which purpose he frequented an alehouse hard by his
residence; although often checking his inclination in that respect,
and maintaining in reference to all his recreations a large amount of
self-discipline. He would keep close to serious business the whole
day, and then, in the evening, he would go out for a little coveted
enjoyment. "And for mirth," he says, "which I was afraid of too great
a latitude in, I thought it was my duty to let some savoury thing fall
where I had spoken merrily, or to count myself truly in debt for as
much serious discourse for every jest I had told." There occurs in his
diary a case of conscience, as to whether it was right to go and see a
"horse in the town of Manchester that was taught to do strange things
for such a creature to do." He finds seven reasons against going, and
thus concludes: "To go might be a sin, not to go I know was no sin, and
therefore this was the safer way."[169]
Next to the county of Lancaster, the Metropolis proved the most
favourable soil for Presbyterian piety. There stands in London
Wall a quaintly-fashioned edifice--like an old world with a few
inhabitants left in it to keep watch and ward--its courts almost as
silent and desolate as the Alhambra. Few people now see Sion College,
with its almshouses, founded by Dr. Thomas White, Vicar of St.
Dunstan's-in-the-West, and its library, the gift of John Simson, Rector
of St. Olave's, Hart Street; but it was a place of great resort during
the Commonwealth, when its architectural appearance differed from what
it is at present; for then a building erected in the time of James I.,
and consumed afterwards in the London Fire, covered the spot; and in
the little rooms of that monastic-like establishment, young London
clergymen found lodgings until they could be provided with houses
within the parishes which they served. The snug almshouses accommodated
ten poor men and ten poor women. The library, even at that time, was
extensive, and could boast of some curious old books and MSS., which
have since been burnt or lost; and the whole establishment was governed
by a President, two Deans, and four Assistants, who were all furnished
with a residence within the spacious precincts.
[Sidenote: _Sion College._]
Sion College fell into Presbyterian hands at the outbreak of the civil
wars. A list of the successive Presidents is preserved, including
several well-known names; and some few particulars of its changeful
story have been recorded by one of its librarians.[170] From him we
learn how the famous Edmund Calamy occupied the Presidential chair in
the year 1650, when Cromwell's soldiers, lately quartered within the
walls, were removed at the President's request; and how, the next year,
they returned, under Colonel Berkestead, for the safety of the city and
the parts adjacent--special care being had that "the library should be
kept safe, and no injury done to it." These military gentlemen proved
troublesome guests; and the clerk was forced to leave his dwelling, and
students and others who paid for their lodgings were also compelled
to quit--so that through failure of rent-payments there remained not
sufficient money to meet the claims of the officers and the poor. At
length, by an order of the Court, thanks were voted to the Protector
for removing the soldiers; his Highness at the same time being informed
of "the spoil and havoc they had made in the College."
But other matters, of greater importance than the deliverance of
the quiet spot from the intrusion of noisy troopers, occupied the
attention of those who assembled within the chambers of the College.
It was the place of meeting for the members of the London Synod;
and there they strove to put in action the ecclesiastical machinery
which had been contrived at Westminster. The old minute book of their
proceedings--strangely neglected by historians--still exists, and to
what we find written on its large folio leaves we are indebted for the
following items of information.
[Sidenote: _Presbyterianism in London._]
The Divines of the London and Westminster classes began to assemble
in May, 1647, and at once they determined on rules for the guidance
of the Moderator, the Scribes, and the members; and, to secure order,
they made, amongst others, these two prudent bye-laws: "That private
whispering shall be forborne;" and "That no man shall use irreverent or
uncomely language, or behaviour." The pecuniary contribution required
was but small, each member having to deposit twelvepence towards the
charge of the Assembly.
A careful record occurs of petitions to Parliament in the year 1647,
complaining that the number of ministers settled was too small; that
some of them baptized children in private houses, and married people
without the publication of banns or the consent of their parents, much
to the encouragement of immorality; that others admitted all sorts of
characters to the Lord's table; in short, that numerous hindrances
beset the ways of ecclesiastical government. But the Divines were
earnest men, and, though discouraged, they would not desist from their
attempts. Accordingly, they resolved and re-resolved to bring all
the young people who were above nine or ten years of age to public
catechising; to persuade heads of families to train up their children
and servants in good doctrine; to promote religious conferences in some
methodical manner; and to advance the sanctification of the Sabbath,
the daily reading of the Scriptures, and the setting up of a regular
course of morning and evening prayer. For these purposes parishes were
to be subdivided, so that households might come under the inspection of
the several Elders. The Committee also prepared forms of exhortation
for "furthering the power of godliness," and urged ministers to
demonstrate in sermons the great necessity and utility of catechising;
the lesser catechism being the enjoined formulary of instruction,
and the time appointed for its use being Sunday afternoon before
sermon. Repeated lamentations occur relative to Sabbath-breaking,
and appeals are ever and anon renewed for preaching on the subject
of this great offence. Sorrow is expressed that laws were not put in
force for promoting Sabbath observance; and it is touching to read a
sentence--written, perhaps, when few were present, and when hearts were
faint:--"What though we be poor and despised, we may not forget God's
law."
Publications composed in defence of Presbyterian government underwent
large discussion, and are copied at length in the minutes. A question
was raised in the year 1653, whether anything touching the Anabaptismal
controversy should be referred to the Province for discussion or not;
and in the year 1654, (July the 10th), Dr. Hammond's book received
consideration.[171] Seven days afterwards the committee were of opinion
"that it is not fit it should be answered by the Province, and that Mr.
Calamy be requested to answer it."[172]
But the Puritan ministers did not possess capacity to do what they
desired. Every page of their recorded proceedings indicates want of
power. They met, and met again. They debated. They resolved. They
prepared exhortations and books. They appointed preachers, and they
thanked them for their sermons. But in the old folio there are no
signs of decided synodical action. Cognizance indeed is taken of
vacancies in the ministry, and in elderships, and of motions made
for the "repairing" thereof. Triers are appointed for Elders; rules
are laid down for ordination; and notice is taken of irregularities.
But it seems scarcely anything in the way of government was really
affected. One day, Mr. Pool states the incapacity of the fifth classis
to ordain at present. Another day, there are many reports of Elderships
left incomplete. Now we read of "Mary's, Aldermanbury," that "the
minister acts not;" and then of "Matthew, Friday Street,"[173] that
"the minister hath endeavoured to get elders chosen, but cannot move
his parishioners to it." And, yet once more, it is said of "Peter's,
Paul's wharf," that the people cannot be induced to choose elders, nor
to have a minister that may act in the government. A brighter day than
usual seems to have dawned in the month of April, 1656, when special
notice is taken of the goodness of God in "the willing coming into
government," of the people of George's-in-the-Fields, by the godly
assistance of Alderman Bigg, one of the elders; and when some one rose
in the assembly and spoke of the same thing being done at Bride's.
But the minutes generally contain only complaints and exhortations,
or entries of mere form. The ministers of Lancashire carried out
discipline to some degree of perfection, but the ministers of London
never got beyond "perfected rules."[174] The Minute Book in Sion
College bears ample witness to the Christian spirit, the indefatigable
diligence, and the fervent zeal of the Divines for church order, for
family religion, and for personal piety; but it also bears witness
as ample, to the failure of all attempts to establish a complete
Presbyterian polity in London.[175]
[Sidenote: _Presbyterianism in London._]
No one can deny that the ultimate object of the endeavour was good.
The Divines were seeking--and that very earnestly--the promotion of
Christian morality and virtue. They wished to reform the manners of
the people, to make Christians of the large population of London, and
to do as much as possible towards realizing the theory of a Christian
state. But they mistook the means. So far as preaching the Gospel,
promoting education, exercising social influence, and exhibiting a
pious example went, they acted wisely and well. By such methods alone
can irreligious men be converted. The City clergy, however, proceeded
beyond this, and sought to bring under church discipline the whole
body of their parishioners, whether those parishioners had voluntarily
embraced their communion or not. Yet nothing can be more plain from
Scripture, reason, and experience, than that such discipline can be
effectually exercised only amongst people who have by their own free
will entered into fellowship with a religious society. True Christian
discipline can only touch persons who have submitted themselves
to the laws, and acknowledged the sanctions of Christianity. When
the help of the magistrate is solicited, and any kind of temporal
punishment is esteemed a proper method of religious correction, the
exercise of purely _ecclesiastical_ government is virtually given up;
the case is transferred from the spiritual kingdom of Christ to the
empire of physical force. Of course everybody can feel the weight of
the magistrate's sword, but everybody cannot and will not feel that
there is power also, but of another and still more serious kind, in
a pastor's crook. This difficulty was felt in the middle ages. In
Archbishop Winchelsey's Constitutions at Merton, in the year 1305,
mention is made of heretics who relinquished the Articles of the
Faith, opposed ecclesiastical liberties, and refused to pay tithes and
other dues. It was commanded that the people should be effectually
_persuaded_ to submit, and that those who did not voluntarily obey
should be compelled by suspension, excommunication, and interdict. But
heretics did not care for spiritual censures any more than they did
for persuasion; and nothing further at that time could be brought to
bear upon such offenders. The evil increased.[176] At length the civil
power was called in to counteract it, and at last came the Act _de
Hæretico Comburendo_.
[Sidenote: _Discipline._]
What is effective in a voluntary Church is utterly ineffective in
one not voluntary; and when the ministers of an establishment aim
at extending ecclesiastical discipline over the ungodly by means of
civil penalties, they raise at once the cry of despotism, tyranny,
oppression, and the like. The threatened delinquents appeal to the
State in defence of their personal rights, imperilled, as they say,
by the inroads of clerical ambition and the menaces of spiritual
pride. This sort of appeal in modern times is always successful; and
the secular power, jealous of the ecclesiastical, puts a check on its
activity. Consequently, discipline becomes an impossibility. English
history proves, so far as a State Church is concerned, that there is
no alternative but some sort of High Commission Court, with all the
odium it inspires, and all the ruin which it ultimately brings--or
the relaxation of discipline altogether. It should, however, be
recollected that the London Elders, clerical and lay, in their zeal
for discipline only strove to effect what many Episcopalians before
and since have declared to be most desirable.[177] And, moreover, the
ineffective activity, the fruitless discussions, the inoperative
resolutions, and the complimentary votes of the Synod at Sion House,
find a strict parallel in the proceedings of like assemblies in many
places. Even Convocation cannot be excepted. Indeed that body, in
comparison with its pretensions, is signally powerless. No one who
maintains the importance and usefulness of the last-mentioned assembly
can consistently ridicule or despise the efforts of their Genevan
predecessors under the Commonwealth. It will be well if all Englishmen
learn from these facts a lesson of moderation and charity; and while
pointing out what they conceive to be flaws in systems, and foibles in
characters, take care to honour all really good men, whatever their
communion or opinions, and not forget to concede purity of motive in
all cases where the opposite is not perfectly plain.
But if the system of Presbyterianism did not flourish in London,
many of the Presbyterian ministers who laboured there, distinguished
themselves alike by their ability, their learning, and their virtues;
and, although failing to bring their fellow-citizens generally within
their own ecclesiastical penfolds, they gathered a large number of
wandering souls into the flock of the Good Shepherd. Edmund Calamy
continued, throughout the period of the Commonwealth, his diligent,
instructive, and eloquent ministry, in the parish church of St. Mary,
Aldermanbury--that beautiful edifice--then recently repaired and
adorned--with its ancient and goodly monuments in memory of famous
citizens and their families, and with its adjoining churchyard and
cloisters--all the buildings swept away so soon afterwards by the
terrible fire.[178] Thither multitudes were accustomed to flock to hear
the Gospel, and the narrow streets leading to the place of worship
were blocked up service after service, with "three-score coaches"--the
minimum number of vehicles which, according to the preacher's grandson,
conveyed the wealthy Presbyterians to the old church door.[179] The
well-known portrait of the Divine--exhibiting his large eyes, aquiline
nose, and well-formed mouth, surrounded by a thin moustache and beard,
and with his close-cut hair peeping from beneath his black skull
cap--enables us to imagine him, standing in his pulpit, proclaiming
with fervour the great doctrines and duties of Christianity; whilst,
at the same time, as we are told--in contrast with the earlier habits
of his brethren--he cautiously avoided any references to political
affairs. Yet he did not prove false to his ecclesiastical principles,
for he took a large share in composing an elaborate _Vindication_
of them, published under that title,[180] and in preparing another
book bearing the Latin name of "_Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici et
Anglicani_."
[Sidenote: _Jenkyn._]
William Jenkyn--already noticed as a sufferer in connection with the
alleged plot which brought Love to the scaffold--had been deprived of
his preferment at Christ Church, Newgate-street, because of his having
condemned the execution of Charles I., and also for having refused to
observe certain thanksgiving days appointed by Parliament. Feake, the
notorious Fifth Monarchist, succeeded him in his living, and though
Jenkyn was relieved from the sequestration, he was for a time either
unable or unwilling to eject his successor. But the parishioners,
anxious to enjoy the services of their former incumbent, established
a lectureship, and appointed him to conduct it, with which office he
combined a similar one at St. Anne's, Blackfriars. When Feake became
obnoxious to the Government, and was displaced from Christ Church,
Jenkyn recovered the benefice. The more regular features, the less
masculine expression of countenance, and the amply-flowing locks of
this eminent preacher, were familiar to a congregation perhaps as large
as that which witnessed, from week to week, the personal appearance
of his friend and neighbour, Edmund Calamy. With like zeal, and with
like caution, Jenkyn "wholly applied himself to preach Christ, and him
crucified;"--he delivered a long course of sermons upon the names given
in Scripture to the Redeemer of mankind, and expounded the Epistle of
Jude at great length in a series of Discourses which are well known to
the admirers of Puritan theology. A convert to Puritanism in his youth,
when a student at Cambridge, and suffering persecution on that account
from his father, he became afterwards, we might almost say, an heir
to Protestantism in its most unequivocal form, through his marriage
with a granddaughter of John Rogers. Memories of that martyr who was
imprisoned in the Compter and in Newgate, and was afterwards burnt
in Smithfield, would surely often cross the mind of the Presbyterian
minister, as he entered the gates of Christ Church, situated in the
very midst of the spots hallowed by such associations.
[Sidenote: _Bates--Clarke._]
The church of St. Dunstan's in the East, between Tower-street and
Lower Thames-street--conspicuous before the fire of London, from its
having a lofty steeple covered with lead, and containing a monument
of Sir John Hawkins, one of Elizabeth's heroes[181]--was the scene
of the ministrations of the renowned William Bates. Comely in person,
with bold features, and richly curling locks; graceful with the
action of a finished orator; of superior natural endowments and
considerable literary culture; possessing a memory of extraordinary
retentiveness; and a voice so sweetly musical that he won the name
_of the silver tongued_; with large stores of theological knowledge;
and also gifted with a Nestor-like eloquence, which fell in gentle
flakes--this extraordinary pulpit orator was in high repute amongst
the upper classes, and indeed amongst people of all grades. And what
was infinitely better still, he was a man of rare piety and devotion.
"Into what transports of admiration of the love of God," says John
Howe, "have I seen him break forth when some things foreign, or not
immediately relating to practical godliness, had taken up a good part
of our time! How easy a step did he make of it from earth to heaven!
Such as have been wont, in a more stated course to resort to him, can
tell whether, when other occasions did fall in and claim their part in
the discourses of that season, he did not usually send them away with
somewhat that tended to better their spirits, and quicken them in their
way heaven-ward. With how high flights of thought and affection was he
wont to speak of the heavenly state! even like a man much more of kin
to that other world than to this!"[182]
Samuel Clarke, the Puritan martyrologist--who diligently imitated the
example of John Foxe--occupied the perpetual curacy of St. Bennett
Fink. He came up from the country, he tells us--where he had been
ministering first in a parish of remarkably intelligent Christians,
"though the best of them went in russet coats, and followed husbandry;"
and afterwards in another cure, from which, notwithstanding his
usefulness, he was disposed to remove, in consequence of the conduct of
some troublesome sectaries. Walking one day along Cheapside, he met his
sister and an old friend, close to Mercers' Hall. As they were chatting
together in that famous thoroughfare--with its projecting stories and
signboards, its quaint gables, and its odd little shop-fronts--two
of the parishioners of St. Bennett Fink--then destitute of a
clergyman--accidentally passed by. "You want a minister," said Clarke's
friend, "and if you can prevail with this gentleman you will be well
fitted." He was persuaded to preach on the following Sunday. When
the time for the appointment of a new pastor came, there were ten
candidates. What followed had better be described in Clarke's own
words, since they afford a curious example of parish elections in those
days. "When they were met in the vestry the debate was, who should be
put into nomination, and all agreed that Mr. Carter, Mr. Bellars, and
myself should be set down in a paper, to which they were to make their
marks. Mr. Bellars had but one or two hands, and for Mr. Carter there
was Mr. Greene, a Parliament man, and some six more of the greatest of
the parish, before any appeared for me; but then a godly man beginning,
so many of the rest followed, that the choice went clearly on my side.
All this while I knew nothing hereof, or what they were about, being
not acquainted with any one in the parish, nor employing any friend
to speak to them in my behalf. But that day I preached at Fish-street
for Mr. J. Smart, and in the evening supping there, there came a
committee-man from Bennett Fink parish, to acquaint me with my free
election, and to entreat me to accept of the place--taking notice of
the concurring providences of God, I durst not refuse the call."[183]
[Sidenote: _Vink--Baxter._]
Peter Vink--whose autobiography, written in a style of elegant
Latinity, bears witness to his domestic sympathies, his trust in
God, his catholic spirit, his charity to the poor, and his unfeigned
humility[184]--after holding the rectory of St. Michael's, Cornhill,
became Curate of St. Catherine Creed, Leadenhall-street. Simeon Ash,
described as a man of great sincerity, humility, benevolence, prudence,
and patience, preaching the Gospel in season and out of season, so as
not to please the ear but wound the heart, was Rector of St. Austin's,
and died on the eve of St. Bartholomew, 1662.[185]
Though Presbyterian polity made but little way in England, voluntary
associations, having a somewhat Presbyterian appearance, obtained
in the county of Chester, in Cumberland, and in Westmoreland--and
particularly in Worcestershire. Richard Baxter was the most influential
minister in the last-mentioned neighbourhood; and, at the desire of
his brethren, he drew up an agreement for so much of church order and
discipline as might meet the views of Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and
Independents. Of course it was impossible to blend the three elements
without producing a _tertium quid_ different from each, and such as
could scarcely satisfy the thorough adherents of any one of these
systems. But a few large-hearted men might be found, who, in the matter
of church government could conscientiously make some compromise for the
sake of union; and Baxter has given their names and described their
proceedings. They held monthly meetings at certain market towns for
conference respecting discipline. At Kidderminster and Evesham these
meetings were regularly carried on. At the latter place, three Justices
of the Peace, three or four Ministers, three or four Deacons, and
twenty of "the ancient and godly men of the congregation," "pretending
to no office as lay elders," met together to establish this new form of
ecclesiastical economy. They sought to bring scandalous offenders to a
right mind, reproving them if obdurate, encouraging them if penitent.
The day after the parochial meeting had been held, a conference of
the whole association took place, when incorrigible individuals were
brought before the assembled clergy and received fresh admonition.
We are told that no less than three successive days were spent in
fervent intercession with God on behalf of hardened offenders; and if
all proved in vain, they were at last solemnly cut off from church
communion.
An attempt was made to promote efficient preaching by means of funds
collected at what was called "the yearly feast of the Londoners of the
county." A lecture was instituted, to be conducted by four ministers,
each taking his turn once a month in places where such services were
most needful. To avoid giving offence to any one, these itinerant
preachers were appointed to visit the congregations of abler men; and
they were strictly cautioned wherever they went, to say nothing which
might diminish the influence of the humblest pastor, and steal away the
hearts of the meanest of the people.
[Sidenote: _Baxter at Kidderminster._]
Baxter's scheme did not touch any ecclesiastical point beyond that of
discipline. He, doubtless, was himself prepared to go much further,
and to contrive a comprehensive policy which should embrace elements
belonging to the three denominations of Christians mentioned in his
Agreement. Though commonly called a Presbyterian, he did not object
to some things characteristic of Episcopacy, and to others peculiar
to Congregationalism. Such a Presbyterian as Baxter, with such an
Episcopalian as Ussher, and such an Independent as Howe, might
possibly have framed a plan of ecclesiastical government, embracing
Congregational election, Episcopal presidency, and Presbyterian union,
within certain local limits--so as to constitute a number of federal
groups, without any subordination of Courts, or any development of
a Hierarchy, or any Congregational isolation. But for all this the
Worcestershire clergy were not prepared. Baxter did not attempt what
was Utopian, but only what was practicable. So far as he went, he seems
to have succeeded, and if the experiment had been longer tried, it
might have issued in something less imperfect.[186]
But whatever opinions are held on such vexed questions, there will
be but one, respecting the disinterestedness and zeal of this great
Divine. We learn from one of his unpublished letters, that he declined
several good livings--one of them being valued at £500 a year--simply
that he might remain in the parish with which his name will evermore
be identified, and where his annual income did not exceed the sum of
£90. He remitted tithes where people could not pay them; and when
he felt it his duty to recover them by law, rather than "tolerate
the sacrilege and fraud of covetous men," he gave both his own "part
and the damages" to the poor. The history of his parish labours is
a beautiful episode in church history. Preaching was his forte. His
practical works contain the substance of many of his discourses.
His treatises on "Crucifying the World," "Saving Faith," "Sound
Conversion," "Peace of Conscience," together with his "Call to the
Unconverted," were all composed at Kidderminster; and they abound in
specimens of forcible reasoning and eloquent appeal. Evangelical and
practical, instructive and awakening, convincing and pungent--now
grappling with the understanding, and then aiming at the heart--he
must sometimes have both convinced and confounded his hearers by his
fidelity and acuteness, and then have melted them down completely by
his extraordinary fervour. Working out his logic, not in frost but
fire, he flung from his lips burning words, which made men start and
weep. He had a clear articulate tone of enunciating truth, such as is
possessed only by healthy souls, and is utterly different from the
indistinct mutterings of those who, by mimicry, have caught up a few
religious commonplaces. Nobody can mistake the one for the other; and
Baxter's congregation in the old church of St. Mary must have felt that
a God-taught man stood before them, as they crowded within those walls
to hang upon his lips.
[Sidenote: _Baxter at Kidderminster._]
Before the wars, he preached twice on Sunday, but afterwards he
preached only once; conducting however a Thursday service, and other
occasional services of worship in the week. On Thursday evening
his parishioners were wont to come to his house, where one of them
recapitulated the last discourse; and all were encouraged to ask
religious questions. The "exercise" ended with prayer, in which the
people sometimes engaged. On Saturday evening he held a meeting to
improve the "opportunities" of the former Sabbath, and to prepare for
the next day. Days of humiliation frequently occurred. Twice a week
he and his assistant took fourteen families between them for private
catechising and conference. He spent an hour with each household, no
other persons being present; and thus he occupied the afternoons of
Monday and Tuesday--his assistant spending the morning of these days in
the same employment. His correspondence shews what efforts he privately
employed to recover men from a course of sin.
Long epistles of reproof, remonstrance, and appeal still exist,
and we well remember once lighting on a large and closely-written
letter among the Baxter MSS., dated "this Saturday night, at eleven
o'clock, with an aching head and heart, and weeping eyes." We venture
to supply an extract from a letter in that collection, addressed to
his parishioners:--"The remembrance of the years of mercy which God
vouchsafed me among you is pleasant to me; yea, it is the pleasantest
part of all my life in the review. I do with pleasure think of Dudley,
where I first preached occasionally, because of the great congregation
of a willing, poor people that used there to crowd for instruction; and
I do with pleasure remember the liberty which I had at Bridgenorth,
by means of the great privileges of the place in times of prelatical
violence. I do with much thankfulness remember the safety, quietness,
and mercies of many sorts which I and some of you enjoyed at Coventry,
while the nation round about was in war, and the merciful preservations
which we had in those unpleasing times. But the thought of my comforts
among you is sweeter to me than all, because my successes were nowhere
so great. It comforteth me to think from what a state of riotous
profaneness and ignorance your Town is changed, and how commonly now
the fear of God prevaileth, and how few, if any, there be now that
oppose it; and that you can reproach the prayerless and contemners
of godliness with the charge of singularity, as such were wont to do
the godly. It comforteth me to remember how many upright souls are
already departed in peace, and safely arrived at the desired rest,
having fought a good fight and finished their course, and now enjoy the
crown of righteousness. It comforteth me to remember how willingly you
received the crown of righteousness. It comforteth me to remember how
willingly you received the word of truth, how diligently the ablest of
you were my helpers, how peaceably you all lived, without any schism,
or any separated meeting, or any erroneous sect--unless two or three
infidels and three or four drunkards might be called sectaries; and
how all the attempts of Anabaptists and Quakers, &c., never, to my
knowledge, prevailed to the perverting of any among you, though we gave
them leave publicly to dispute for their cause. It rejoiceth me to
think how, by your concord, and freedom from heresy and schism, living
in love and unity, your example confuteth those that would now persuade
the ignorant that there was nothing but schism and confusion in those
times, and how much your leading example did to further piety and
agreement in the towns and country round about, especially your common
submission to catechising and personal conference and instruction, when
almost all the town came willingly to my house, and the parish received
Mr. Sergeant to theirs; and that in all things you were specially
exemplary in humility, and none of you ever evaded the ministry, or
went beyond the duties of your place; as also how willingly many
hundreds of you submitted to Church discipline, and in what comfortable
order we did live. But it yet more comforteth me to remember what
society I there had with humble, loving, peaceable, painful, faithful
ministers of Christ; how lovingly and comfortably we met and conversed
together; how readily, through the country, they consented first to
the association and concord for the exercise of so much discipline
as the Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Independents were agreed in; and
afterwards all to join in personal conference with, and catechising
or instructing of, all their people that consented. How free those
ministers were from all heresy, schism, contention, and difference
with one another, never engaging themselves to any faction or dividing
party, but holding communion with all true Christians on the terms of
primitive simplicity, purity, and love! And it comforteth me to hear of
the patience and fidelity of those of them that still survive, and also
of your own constancy, and that piety among you doth rather increase
than decay."
[Sidenote: _Baxter at Kidderminster._]
Before dismissing Richard Baxter, there are three things respecting
him which may be properly noticed here: the first, as an example of
the popularity of his preaching; the second, as an instance of his
independence and honesty in relation to Cromwell; and the third, as
indicative of his charity and wisdom in promoting the interests of
Christian union.
When Baxter preached that alarming and heart-stirring discourse at St.
Lawrence Jewry which is entitled "Making light of Christ," the crowd
was so great, that Lord Broghill, and the Earl of Suffolk, who brought
the preacher to church in his coach, were "fain to go home again,
because they could not come within hearing," and the crowd shewed so
little respect to persons, that the old Earl of Warwick had to sit in
the lobby; and Baxter adds--"Mr. Vines (the incumbent) himself, was
fain to get into the pulpit and sit behind me, and I stood between his
legs." "The Sermon on Judgment," published in "Baxter's Works"--another
characteristic specimen of his mode of exposition and appeal--was
delivered at the request of Sir Christopher Pack, Lord Mayor of
London, in the old Gothic cathedral of St. Paul;[187] and the preacher
tells us he delivered it to the "greatest auditory he ever saw." We
find him also in the pulpit of Westminster Abbey, addressing immense
congregations.
Baxter once, and only once, preached before Cromwell, when he chose for
his subject the divisions and distractions of Christendom. He shewed
how mischievous a thing it was for politicians to encourage divisions
for their own ends, and to fish in troubled waters, thus keeping the
Church in a state of weakness, and pointed out, at the end of his
discourse, the necessity and the means of union. The preacher heard
that his plain speaking had displeased his audience; yet, to use his
own expression, "they put up with it." But Cromwell sent for Baxter,
and began a long and tedious speech respecting God's Providence in the
change of governments, and how He had owned that change already, and
what great things had been achieved in consequence of it both at home
and abroad. Baxter, wearied out of all patience, at length observed,
that he took our ancient monarchy to be a great blessing, and craved
pardon, as he asked his Highness in what way England had forfeited that
blessing. Awakened into passion by this home thrust, Cromwell replied,
that it was no forfeiture at all, but a "Divine dispensation;" and then
he "let fly" at the Parliament, especially at four or five members who
were Baxter's particular friends. A few days afterwards, the Protector
addressed to the impatient preacher another slow and tedious speech
upon liberty of conscience; and the preacher returned to the Protector
a paper containing his own views upon the same subject. Baxter's paper
would be to Cromwell as tiresome as Cromwell's talk could be to Baxter.
Yet the whole of this remarkable intercourse between two remarkable men
shewed the courage of the one, and the magnanimity of the other, and
the perfect sincerity of both.
[Sidenote: _Baxter's Popularity._]
Baxter, at a later period, preached in Westminster Abbey, before the
House of Commons, a sermon containing the following passage, which
is as worthy of attention at the present day as when the impassioned
Divine delivered it under the arched roof of that great national
temple:--
"Men that differ about Bishops, ceremonies, and forms of prayer, may
be all true Christians, and dear to one another and to Christ, if
they be practically agreed in the life of godliness, and join in a
holy, heavenly conversation. But if you agree in all your opinions and
formalities, and yet were never sanctified by the truth, you do but
agree to delude your souls, and neither of you will be saved for all
your agreement."[188]
[Sidenote: _Wilson--Hall._]
Another striking example of devotedness amongst the Presbyterian Clergy
of the Commonwealth might be found at Maidstone. Thomas Wilson, the
Vicar, was a stricter man, and of severer habits than Richard Baxter.
He rose at two or three o'clock on Sunday mornings, called his family
together at seven, and read the Scriptures and sang psalms till between
eight and nine, "that all might be ready to attend public ordinances."
Then he began the service at the parish church by "singing two staves
of a psalm," and praying for a blessing, and afterwards he expounded
the Scriptures for one hour, according to the "hour-glass in his
desk." The same space of time was occupied in preaching. Having spent
most of the interval between one service and another in singing hymns
and in similar devotional exercises, he reappeared in his pulpit in
the afternoon, and did as he had done in the morning, only that he
expounded the New Testament instead of the Old. In the evening he
called his neighbours together, and asked questions respecting the
sermons they had heard, and, after a recapitulation of them, with
additional singing, he concluded with prayer. We should have supposed
that the religious services of the day were now concluded; but instead
of that being the case we are informed that the minister went to his
patron's house to supper, where there would be a hundred or more
persons assembled, including the principal magistrates of the town, to
join with their excellent Vicar "in the conclusion of the day"--when
more remarks, questions, and prayers, were added to those already so
abundantly offered. Not less than nine or ten hours were thus spent in
acts of worship, so that the Sabbath could not be a season of rest;
still, at least to Thomas Wilson, it was a day of light and gladness.
Every Monday and Tuesday he held theological conferences; every
Thursday he preached a market-lecture; and every Friday he expounded
the Scriptures at a private meeting. His biographer bears admiring
testimony to the change which he wrought by these unremitting labours
in the town of Maidstone, and informs us that one of the Judges on the
circuit held up the place as a choice and unparalleled example. Those
who on Sunday had been wont to frequent the public-house, and to play
at cudgell, football, or cricket, and had mocked the godly burgesses
and their wives on the way to church,--now attended sermon themselves,
and had actually come to believe that it was a sin even to draw water,
or to walk in the fields, or to pluck a rose on the Lord's Day.[189]
Pages might be filled with illustrations of like earnestness, with a
similar lack of wisdom; but room remains for only one more example of
the Presbyterian parish Minister of the Commonwealth. Thomas Hall spent
"three apprenticeships at King's Norton--in addition to a lustre of
years (rather more than four), at Mosely." His preface to "The Font
Guarded," a publication belonging to the year 1651, compliments his
parishioners after the following fashion:--"You have been a people very
loving and free to the ministry. Many people deal by their ministers
as carriers do by their horses, laying great burdens on them, and then
hang bells about their necks; but ye have not so learned Christ. Your
gratitude hath not been verbal but real, with your purse, as well as
with your persons, you have promoted the Gospel for many years together
in your town, to the refreshing of many hungry souls about you, in
which number I acknowledge myself to have been one."
This individual affords an example of a common trouble in those days,
occasioned by the preaching of sectaries who, in the estimation of the
Presbyterian pastor, had received no legitimate call to the office
which they exercised. He complained, that such persons interrupted him
in the midst of his discourses, and rudely challenged him to a public
dispute. Yet he could congratulate his parishioners upon the unity of
spirit which they enjoyed, although they formed a large body, and were
many of them "knowing people." To his great joy, his flock conformed
not to the canons of the Bishops but to the canon of Scripture; and
there were but few families which had not submitted to examination
before approaching the sacrament.
[Sidenote: _Gataker._]
Many clergymen in those days had no fixed opinions on the question of
church government, not believing that any particular ecclesiastical
system is taught in the New Testament. Any one who held Bishops to
be of Divine appointment, or who maintained the Divine right of
Congregationalism, were of course chargeable with a dereliction of
principle if they adopted the Presbyterian polity; but the case was
far otherwise with men who did not believe that there is Divine
authority for one kind of church order more than another. Such
persons, too, as would have preferred, or would have been satisfied
with moderate Episcopacy, and yet believed that Bishops and Presbyters
were originally identical, might with good faith submit to the
Presbyterianism of the Church of England. Of this class was Thomas
Gataker the younger, a man eminently learned in an age of abundant
erudition[190]--the friend and correspondent of Archbishop Ussher, and
the author of Latin treatises filled with rare and curious knowledge.
First Lecturer at Lincoln's Inn, and then Rector of Rotherhithe, he
manifested throughout the political and ecclesiastical changes of
the times a singular pecuniary disinterestedness; and has, in a very
peculiar book, written for his own vindication, given a full account
of his preferments--thus throwing much light upon the incomes and
upon the cares of Commonwealth clergymen.[191] At Rotherhithe he came
to a dwelling-house much mangled and defaced by the late Incumbent's
widow, through spite and spleen against some of the parishioners with
whom her husband had been in prolonged contention. The wharf by the
river opposite to the parsonage-house was ready to drop into ruins,
for the repair of which--although two or three persons contributed
something--the main expense came out of Gataker's own purse. The fabric
of the church, which was supported with "chalky pillars," of such a
bulk as filled up no small part of the edifice, being found faulty, and
"threatening a fail if not a fall, unless speedily prevented;"--the
minister had to contribute largely to remove these incumbrances, and
to place strong timber columns in their place. A ship catching fire on
the Thames, close by the Rectory, endangered the thatched roof, which
the Rector had to exchange for tiles. He also relates in his copious
narrative how, in the earlier period of his incumbency, he let out the
whole tithe and glebe for one hundred pounds a year, subject to several
deductions. At length ten pounds a quarter more was promised, to be
assessed upon the wealthier sort of inhabitants--the poorer people
being spared--and to be gathered by the churchwardens for the time
being, and by them quarterly paid. "Which yet," he says--for we had
better leave him to tell the rest of his story in his own way--"the
most part came short more or less every quarter, as by my receipts
may appear. And I may truly and boldly avow it, that during all the
time of mine abode in this place--what in maintenance of my family; in
affording a competency to an able assistant for me in the work of the
ministry, and to a young scholar to write out divers things for me; in
enlarging my house, which was somewhat scanty, for the more convenient
lodging of mine assistant and scribe, and a student, one or two,
(such of our own country as had left the University, and were fitting
themselves for the ministry)--or strangers that from foreign parts came
over to learn our language and observe our method of teaching--and
gaining a room of more capacity for the bestowing of my library; in
reparation of my house and of the wharf before it; in furnishing myself
with books; in relief to the poor (wherein I shall spare to speak what
I added voluntarily in a constant course unto that I was assessed); in
these and the like put together, with what went to the higher powers--I
spent, one year with another, all that ever I received in right of my
rectory, as by proof sufficient I could make to appear."[192]
[Sidenote: _Gauden._]
Dr. John Gauden--famous as the reputed author of "Icon Basilike"--is
also well known as a Royalist and an Episcopalian. He has been
made notorious by the charge brought against him of ambition and
covetousness; for having eagerly sought preferment; for being
dissatisfied with his first bishopric after the Restoration; and for
saying "Exeter had a high rack but a low manger."[193] Yet Gauden,
at first, was as much a Puritan as a Royalist; he preached "against
pictures, images, and other superstitions of Popery," in a sermon
before the Long Parliament, for which he was presented with a silver
tankard, and in the following year with the Deanery of Bocking.
Nominated a member of the Westminster Assembly, he was superseded by
the Parliament who chose Thomas Goodwin in preference to him. Gauden
is said to have taken the Covenant, a report which he denied; but his
name is found in the Presbyterian classis of Hinckford, in Essex. His
friendly feeling towards the Puritan party appears from his conduct at
the Savoy Conference, after the Restoration. "He was our most constant
helper," says Baxter, "and how bitter soever his pen might be, he was
the only moderator of all the bishops, except our Bishop Reignolds;"
he had "a calm, fluent, rhetorical tongue, and if all had been of his
mind, we had been reconciled."[194] Disposed to conciliation, though
a known Royalist, and conforming in some degree to Presbyterianism,
Gauden was allowed, like others of that class, to continue his public
ministrations, and retain his preferment. In 1658 he officiated
publicly at the funeral of Robert Rich--heir to the earldom of Warwick,
and husband of Cromwell's daughter Frances.[195]
[Sidenote: _Fuller._]
Gauden was, at least virtually, a Presbyterian conformist. Dr. Thomas
Fuller became one avowedly; openly declaring his preference for
Episcopacy, he at the same time, with equal openness, submitted to
Presbyterian arrangements. "Not to dissemble," he says, "in the sight
of God and man, I do ingenuously protest that I affect the Episcopal
government (as it was constituted in itself, abating some corruptions
which time hath contracted) best of any other, as conceiving it most
consonant to the word of God, and practice of the primitive Church."
"But I know that religion and learning hath flourished under the
Presbyterian government in France, Germany, the Low Countries. I know
many worthy champions of the truth, bred and brought up under the same.
I know the most learned and moderate English Divines (though Episcopal
in their callings and judgments) have allowed the Reformed Churches
under the discipline, for sound and perfect in all essentials necessary
to salvation. If therefore denied my first desire, to live under that
Church government I best affected, I will contentedly _conform to the
Presbyterian government_, and endeavour to deport _myself quietly and
comfortably under the same_." Fuller's fortunes were somewhat varied.
For a little while--in the year 1647--he preached at St. Clement's,
Eastcheap, and at St. Bride's, Fleet Street. The next year he was
silenced. "It hath been," said he--addressing Sir John Danvers, in
whose house he abode awhile--"the pleasure of the present authority,
to whose commands I humbly submit, to make me mute, forbidding me,
till further order, the exercise of my public preaching; wherefore I
am fain to employ my fingers in writing, to make the best signs I can,
thereby to express, as my desire to the general good, so my particular
gratitude to your honour."[196] About the year 1649 he received by
presentation from the Earl of Carlisle the perpetual curacy of Waltham
Abbey, "wherein as many pleasant hills and prospects are as any place
in England doth afford." Under the shadow of the Norman church, which
Fuller describes as "rather large than neat, firm than fair;" he wrote
incomparable books, and found within its walls on Sundays the "best
commendation of a church," even "a great and attentive congregation."
Historical associations were connected with the parish, most grateful
to this Incumbent. It was there one night, at Mr. Cressy's home,
that Cranmer had supped with Henry the Eighth, on his way home from
a royal progress, and had suggested to the monarch--wearied with the
dilatoriness of the Papal Court--a more summary method of getting rid
of Queen Catherine. It was there, too, that John Foxe had compiled his
"Acts and Monuments." And it was there, also, that Bishop Hall had,
a few years before, "climbed the pulpit week by week," to repeat,
_memoriter_, every word he had written of his sermons;--some of which
included portions of his popular "Contemplations," which were first
published during his ministry at Waltham. Whilst in that parish, Fuller
completed his "Pisgah Sight," and his "Abel Redivivus;" and in the
same place there occurred the following well-known incident:--Having
to appear before the Triers, he said to John Howe, "You may observe,
sir, that I am a somewhat corpulent man, and I am to go through a very
strait passage; I beg you would be so good as to give me a _shove_, and
help me through." When asked by the Commissioners "whether he had ever
had any experience of a work of grace on his heart," Fuller gave the
memorable reply--"that he could appeal to the Searcher of hearts, that
he made a conscience of his very thoughts."[197] In the year 1652 he
was restored to the Eastcheap Lectureship, which he held in connexion
with the Waltham curacy. In the year 1658 he obtained the rectory of
Crawford, and died in 1661.
[Sidenote: _Abraham Colfe._]
A characteristic specimen of the quiet parish Presbyter (not Priest)
who was more given to works of mercy than to controversial argument,
yet who did all his good deeds after a quaint Puritan pattern, is
to be seen in what is related of the life of Abraham Colfe, Vicar
of Lewisham. He looked after the education of boys; and founded a
parish school, with exhibitions for the universities--and a room for
a library--and endowments for the purchase of Bibles and other books.
He built almshouses for godly people, who could repeat the Creed
and the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments. He gave away bread
to the poor, and money for the marriage of one or two maidservants
every year. He paid the clerk for taking care of the boys' Bibles,
and for keeping in order the church clock, and he also instituted a
sermon for the fifth of November. This record of his benefactions will
indicate what sort of man was Abraham Colfe; and further glimpses
of his character--not a peculiar one in those days--are caught in
his Will, from which we may gather what were his likes and dislikes:
he hated gamesters, and frequenters of alehouses, and all who were
given to "wanton dalliances," or who lavished unnecessary expenses in
following "vain, gaudy fashions of apparel;" he disapproved of all who
wore "long, curled, or ruffin-like hair"--strangely associating such
persons with the profane and heretical. Moreover, in reading Latin or
Greek authors, this same Kentish Incumbent approved of pointing out the
errors and vices which there appeared--and such as drew the young to
Popish superstition, Epicurean licentiousness, or downright Atheism,
instead of drawing them to godliness and a holy life. Nor would he let
boys wear "long, curled, frizzled or powdered hair"--but enjoined upon
them the importance of cutting it short, and of wearing it in such a
manner as that their foreheads should be seen, "and no part of it be
allowed to grow longer than one inch below the lowest tips of their
ears."[198]
Some of the clergy in those times were very flexible. The district
of Craven, in Yorkshire, is very remarkable for the examples of this
description which it afforded. As in the sixteenth century--when the
incumbents of that beautiful part of England gently bowed to all
ecclesiastical changes, from the enactment of the Six Articles to the
Act of Uniformity of Queen Elizabeth--so was it with their successors
in the seventeenth century. Not a name is contributed from that quarter
to the list of either Walker or Calamy. Surplice or Genevan cloak,
Liturgy or Directory, Episcopacy or Presbyterianism, a King or a
Commonwealth--all came alike to the accommodating Rectors and Vicars
of that charming locality.[199] Others of a similar temper were found
amidst less beautiful scenery.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER IX.
As Congregational Churches were in theory select Societies, they
shewed great care in the admission of members; and as they believed
that all pastoral authority under Christ was communicated not
through apostolical succession in the ministry itself, but through
the community which invited some Christian teacher to preside over
it, the members, at least in some cases, themselves performed the
service of ordination. Met together in the name of their Divine
Lord, they solemnly elected their Bishop by holding up their hands,
and then by fasting and prayer they appointed him to his work. They
also made a detailed confession of their faith in the doctrines
of Christianity--the chosen minister also on his part doing the
same--after which the representatives of other and neighbouring
Churches who were present, and who were affectionately welcomed on the
occasion, united in approving what had been done, and in giving the
right hand of fellowship to the assembled brethren and to their new
spiritual overseer.[200]
There were officers in these societies of a description not found in
Congregational Churches of the present day. Frequent mention is made
in Nonconformists' records of persons called _Teachers_--who appear to
have assisted the pastor in his pulpit labours and in his spiritual
oversight of the flock, without being exactly on a level with him in
his position as President of the community. Mention also is made of
_Ruling_ Elders, who must have resembled the Presbyterian order so
denominated, and who were distinguished from _Preaching_ Elders by
the circumstance of their not being public teachers, and of their not
administering the Sacraments. Deacons were chosen in the same manner
as were Bishops; and the exercise of gifts, in the way of occasional
exhortation by the former, received encouragement from the latter;
one of whom quaintly said to his people that if this exercise of
prophesying were not maintained, they would be justly regarded by other
Churches as in a state of decline, and the gifts of the Spirit bestowed
upon them "would dry up and prove unprofitable." Deaconesses or widows
also occupied a permanent official position in these communities, and
accounts exist of meetings assembled for choosing Christian helpers of
that kind.
The Churches sought advice of each other, and when important religious
questions agitated the public mind they held convocations for the
interchange of opinion and for the expression of a common judgment. For
example:--that phase of the millenarian controversy which related to
the opinions of the Fifth Monarchists, and which exercised a strange
fascination over minds of a particular cast, secured the greatest
attention, and excited extraordinary interest.[201]
When cases of scandal occurred, they were subjected to careful
investigation. The accused party was summoned to appear before his
fellow-members; the Elders, after giving him notice, read to him the
charges which were brought against him; and upon his failing to offer a
satisfactory explanation, the Church unanimously voted that, according
to Scripture, he should be accounted a heathen man and a publican.[202]
[Sidenote: _Congregational Churches._]
To comprehend clearly the relation in which Congregational pastors
and their flocks stood to the civil government of the country, it
is necessary to study a number of minute and--to the majority of
readers--unimportant, if not uninteresting particulars. Such pastors
were also Rectors, Vicars, City lecturers, and Preachers in Cathedrals.
They are described in municipal records as "town preachers," and as
"our ministers." In some cases there were four persons so united--two
of them being Presbyterians, and the other two Independents. Assistance
was sought from Government for paying these public instructors, and
a salary of one hundred pounds per annum was in some cases voted out
of the impropriation funds. Applications were occasionally made for
Acts of Parliament to authorize the levying of contributions for the
support of such ministers, and for the repair of their churches. When
indeed attempts were made at Yarmouth to impose rates upon the town for
these purposes, the Congregational pastors formally protested against
it, as contrary to the Gospel, and as injurious to the Church; the
members desiring that none of the brethren "might have any hand in the
acting of the same." That this resolution however only referred to the
rating as an objectionable mode of obtaining assistance, and not to the
appropriation of existing revenues for religious purposes, is apparent
from the circumstance, that one of the ministers of that very Church
was at the time receiving a salary from a source of the latter kind.
In numerous cases no scruple existed with regard to the sustenance
derived from tithes; and the extinction of this impost fell under the
strong condemnation of the same persons who deprecated the collection
of municipal rates for the support of the ministry.[203]
Congregational city lecturers preached before civic assemblies at
feasts and fasts and thanksgivings; and it is perhaps worth while to
observe in passing how careful the Puritans and even the Independents
were to maintain, on such occasions, a considerable measure of ancient
pomp: strict injunctions being given at Norwich, when the Corporation
went to public worship, that the aldermen should "be in their scarlet,"
and that the livery should "attend upon the sword in gowns and
tippets." Old formalities, savouring of superstition, were, of course,
carefully dropped, and it was ordered, for instance, in the city just
mentioned, that on guild-day there should be neither any beating of
drums or sounding of trumpets--nor any snap-dragon, or fellows dressed
up in fools' coats and caps--nor any standard carried with the George
thereon--nor any hanging of tapestry or pictures in the streets. But
with these prohibitions, allowance was given for the firing of guns;
and the Corporation wended its way in solemn state down London-lane to
the Dutch Church, where the Independent city lecturer preached to the
municipal magnates, clad in red cloaks, with embroidered scarfs, and
a full complement of lace collar--as may be seen in their portraits,
still hanging in the Guildhall Council Chamber. At Yarmouth, also, the
members of the Corporation marched in state to the Congregational place
of worship, and were liable to a shilling fine, if at the service they
neglected to wear their gowns.
[Sidenote: _Congregationalism and the State._]
The instances here afforded of the relation then existing between
Church and State refer exclusively to the position occupied by
individual ministers, through their occupancy of certain public
ecclesiastical offices. As Rectors, Vicars, Lecturers, and Town
preachers, they had a political status which did not and could not
pertain to them as Bishops of Congregational communities. It was
in their parish, or public relation, not in their merely pastoral
office--which sometimes bore a very private character--that clerical
Independents obtained recognition from the political authorities of the
land.
Churches frequently met in private houses, although the pastors
were parochial incumbents. Over their proceedings in that capacity
the secular power, according to the principles of the Protectorate
government, could exercise no control so long as the members conducted
themselves like other loyal citizens. The theory evidently was, that
in purely spiritual affairs these churches were not subject to State
interference, because in their Congregational capacity they did not
receive State support.[204]
[Sidenote: _Congregationalism and the State._]
But a difficulty arose. A Congregational pastor, holding an incumbency,
might be regarded by some of his parishioners, who did not adopt his
views, as bound to administer the sacraments to them, as well as to
the members of the select community which he had chosen to organize.
If he refused to do what they demanded, they would be likely to assert
what they considered to be their legal rights. A case of this very
kind was submitted to Justice Wyndham whilst he was conducting the
Derby assizes, in the year 1658. Certain inhabitants in the parish of
Aston-upon-Trent complained that their minister, Thomas Palmer,[205]
would not administer the Holy Sacrament. He at once admitted the
fact, and then there ensued a conversation between the Judge and the
accused, which the latter has happened to leave upon record. And it
is easy to give some colouring and life to the whole of this singular
transaction--which the disinterment of an old paper has brought to
our knowledge--if we exercise our imagination a little so as to
paint his lordship in scarlet and ermine, occupying an ancient kind
of judicial chair, ornamented with the arms of the Commonwealth--and
a number of counsellors, in full costume, arranged before him--the
jury sitting in their box--with a large attendance of people, in
cloth cloaks, or leather jerkins, crowding the space available for
spectators, when the following colloquy took place:--
_Judge._ "But do you not know that you are bound by the law to
administer the sacraments to your parishioners?"
_Palmer._ "No, my Lord. I know no such law in force compelling me
to administer the holy sacraments to my parishioners; neither are
ministers now enjoined any such thing when inducted into any living.
Yet, I humbly suppose if any such law were still unrepealed, it ought
to be repealed, when so much against the law of Jesus Christ."
_Judge._ "Oh, you will teach Parliaments, &c. But if you do not know
there is such a law in force you shall know it. Clerk, read the statute
of the 1st of Edward VI., &c. What say you to this?"
_Palmer._ "My Lord, I will not dispute the law read, but humbly pray
your Lordship to inform me whether ignorant, profane, and scandalous
persons be included in the statute?"
_Judge._ "No."
_Palmer._ "Then I may deny to administer to such."
_Judge._ "What have you to do to exercise an arbitrary power over other
men's consciences? Let a man examine himself, &c."
_Palmer._ "No, my Lord, I have no such sole power in me as a minister,
but I conceive it is in the Church, and that is the reason I have not
administered these holy ordinances, as not having visible godly people
to join with me in approving who are fit and who are not fit."
_Judge._ "But why did you not give the people liberty to get another to
administer the sacrament to them, and when you promised it?"
_Palmer._ "My promise and their desire was (in words) with limitation
of a godly orthodox Divine. But my parishioners nominated and offered
to me such old, malignant ministers, formerly of the King's party, as
I could not approve of, and I would not approve of; and this sorely
displeased."
_Judge._ "You, and such as you are, are the causes of the divisions of
the nation. But I say if I be upon my journey, and coming to an inn, if
the innkeeper refuse to lodge me I have my action against him, and I
know not but the like will hold in this case."
_Houlden_ (parishioner). "But, my Lord, what must we do?"
_Judge._ "I know not; but if you will bring it before us we will do you
right."
The Judge advised the complainants to withhold the tithes, because
the incumbent did not administer the sacrament, and they immediately
entered into a combination for that purpose.[206]
[Sidenote: _Congregationalism and the State._]
The facts now related are only such as were likely to occur under a
system intended to unite two things so perfectly incompatible as the
independent position of a Congregational minister and his acceptance of
a parochial cure. What were considered as rights of conscience on the
one hand, necessarily came into collision with what were considered on
the other hand as rights of law.[207]
Churches in some instances consisted of more than one congregation.
For a considerable period the Independents of Norwich and Yarmouth
formed a single community; the members travelling from one place to
the other to celebrate the Lord's Supper, although they had distinct
religious services on other occasions in their respective localities.
It frequently happened that old Churches were requested to assist in
the formation of new ones. Indeed, they sprung one out of another,
like the branches of a banyan tree, covering whole districts with
their shadow and their fruit. This happened especially in Norfolk and
Suffolk; the Church records in those counties containing numerous
passages illustrative of the culture of such off-shoots. But it may be
observed, that this multiplication of fellowships, which was the result
of zeal, also appears to have been under the control of wisdom; a
reverential regard being paid to the customs of primitive Christianity.
The members had a salutary dread of schism; they did not delight in
needless separation, but kept together as long as they could, and were
exceedingly unwilling to break their mutual bonds, and only entered
into new organizations when the increase of their numbers, or some
local circumstances, rendered the step unquestionably desirable. On the
same principle of promoting the greatest good, existing communities
were, under peculiar circumstances, dissolved, that the elements might
enter into more effective combinations.[208]
In London and the suburbs Independent ministers holding parish
preferments formed a small minority. Joseph Caryl, a grave-looking man,
well-known now as the author of an "Exposition of the Book of Job,"
and well-known then as the principal Congregational pastor within
the city walls, occupied the Rectory of St. Mary Magnus. His position
and influence may be inferred from his having been sent to attend upon
Charles I., at Holdenby, and also to assist in the treaty of Newport,
from his accompanying Oliver Cromwell in his expedition to Scotland,
and from his afterwards becoming one of the ministerial triers under
the Protectorate. A friend, who knew him well, observed, that his
labours were great, and his studies incessant; and that his sincerity,
faith, zeal, and wisdom, imparted fragrancy to his name amongst the
Churches and servants of Jesus Christ.
[Sidenote: _Nye--Greenhill._]
Philip Nye, who has been repeatedly mentioned in these volumes, held,
together with the living of Acton, the rectory of St. Bartholomew by
the Exchange; and William Greenhill, who wrote a volume on the prophecy
of Ezekiel, was incumbent of the village of Stepney. He had been
chaplain to the King's children--the Dukes of York and Gloucester, and
the Lady Henrietta Maria--and was, in this respect, like Philip Nye,
one of the members of the Westminster Assembly. His faithfulness as a
preacher, his rebukes of prevalent iniquity, and above all his intense
appeals to the citizens of London respecting their immoralities, remind
us of Chrysostom; not, however, as to his golden eloquence, but as
it regards his faithful ministrations at Antioch and Constantinople.
"Let our great city and citizens look to it," exclaims Greenhill,
"there is scum in the city, and not a little. Is it gone out or boiled
in? Was not the sword lately at your gates? Was there not yesterday
great sickliness within your walls? Is not trading diminished? Have
there not been strange murders amongst you? Have not many sad fires
been kindled, broke out, and consumed your habitations? Was there not
a plot, which hath cost some their lives, to fire your city? God
hath been warning you by these judiciary dispensations, and are you
bettered by them? Have all you have seen, feared, or felt, caused your
scum to depart from you? If so, it is well; well will it be with you,
well with your city, and well with your undertakings, and well with
your posterity; but if it be boiled in, and you are the worse for all
the boiling judgments and providences you have been in and under,
know that some dreadful calamity, if not destruction itself, hastens,
and will certainly take hold of you and your city, without speedy
repentance."[209]
Matthew Mead, who, after the death of Jeremiah Burroughs, became
associated with Greenhill in the parish of Stepney as morning Lecturer,
may be numbered amongst the Independent clergymen in the neighbourhood
of London. He was distinguished by a large-hearted catholicity, which
induced him to reject any conditions of ecclesiastical fellowship
beyond such as consist in the maintenance of a pure and holy life. "He
took little pleasure," as we are informed by his congenial friend, John
Howe, "in embroiling himself or his hearers in needless and fruitless
controversies. The great, substantial doctrines of the Gospel were his
principal study and delight; such as lay nearest the vitals and heart
of religion and godliness." The subjects which he insisted upon in the
course of his ministry indicated this to be his spirit and design.
Being constantly moderate and unexceptionably sound he continued ever
remote from rigorous and indefensible extremities, and drove at his
mark without diversion; not so much aiming to proselyte souls to a
party as to win his fellow-men to the service of Christ.[210]
In the provinces perhaps there might be a much larger proportion of
Independent Rectors, Vicars, and Lecturers than there was in London,
since nothing is clearer than the fact of a general increase of
Independency during the Protectorate.
[Sidenote: _Mead--Bridge._]
William Bridge filled the office of town lecturer at Yarmouth, and,
whilst he was absent from home during the sittings of the Westminster
Assembly, the Corporation allowed him fifty pounds a year. At the same
time he continued pastor of the Congregational Church in the Norfolk
sea-port; frequently returning to his charge, and constantly attending
to their affairs. We also find him preaching in the Metropolis and its
neighbourhood, and also before the House of Commons. So acceptable were
his services, that the Council of State in November, 1649, unanimously
elected him to be their chaplain, promising two hundred pounds per
annum for his discharge of the duties of the office. The prospect of
a doubled salary and of enlarged influence would have been a strong
temptation to a man of mercenary or ambitious views; but Bridge's only
question seems to have been how he could best accomplish his Divine
Master's will. He consulted his congregation upon the subject, and
they, with a disinterestedness akin to his own, recommended him to
confer with the Council of State, and then to act as the finger of
Providence might seem to direct. The conference ended in his declining
the chaplainship; a decision which bound him still closer than ever to
the hearts of his people.
John Flavel, the author of "Spiritual Husbandry," and Joseph Alleine,
the author of "The Alarm to the Unconverted," were so moderately
Presbyterian in their views, and were, from the circumstances in
which they were placed, so unable to carry out a Presbyterian form
of Church polity, that in point of fact they may be reckoned as
Congregationalists. But we must pass by these to notice particularly
another person, superior in intellect and learning to these
excellent men, and one who, though he cannot be numbered with rigid
Congregationalists any more than they, certainly adopted Congregational
opinions.
[Sidenote: _John Howe._]
John Howe was a man of such comprehensive mind, and of such
all-embracing affection, that he instinctively shrank from every form
of ecclesiastical division except such as is required by Christian
conscientiousness. He held schism in the utmost abhorrence, and panted
for the realization of the broadest possible union; and whilst parish
minister of Torrington, in Devonshire, he promoted meetings with
neighbouring pastors for mutual edification and fellowship, which
formed a miniature of that more extensive scheme which Baxter was,
throughout his life, toiling in vain to carry into execution. In the
little town just mentioned "some of the happiest years of his life
were spent; here his labours were rendered signally useful, and here
he preached those discourses, the substance of which was afterwards
embodied in two of his most useful and impressive treatises: his
'Delighting in God,' and his 'Blessedness of the Righteous.' Though
when he first went to Great Torrington he could have been little more
than twenty-four years of age, his persuasive style of preaching, and
his still more persuasive example, soon secured him the esteem and
affection of his people. A striking proof of his influence over them,
is afforded in the fact (incidentally mentioned in one of the letters
extracted from the Baxter MSS.) that though, at his first coming to
Torrington, he found the Church divided into two parties, he succeeded,
'through God's blessing on his endeavours,' in restoring union.[211]
Howe came up from Torrington to London in the winter of 1656, and went
to hear a certain preacher at Whitehall, on the Sunday before the day
on which he intended to return home. His noble figure and expressive
face struck the Protector, who already had Milton for a secretary,
and Hale for a judge, and he wished to listen to the proclamation of
the Gospel from a young man of such remarkable promise. After having
heard a sermon from Howe, Cromwell would not allow of his returning
to his country cure, but insisted upon his becoming a court chaplain,
and undertook to provide a suitable minister for the Church which he
had left in Devonshire. Howe unwillingly acceded to the request, and
remained in office until after the Protector's death. It will throw
light upon the relative position of Independents and Episcopalians
at that time; upon the intimacies existing amongst them, and the
friendly services sometimes performed by the one for the other; as
well as serve to illustrate the liberality of Cromwell towards those
who differed from him, if we may be allowed to mention the following
circumstance:--Seth Ward, afterwards Bishop of Exeter, was candidate
for the principalship of Jesus College, at Oxford. His opponent was
Francis Howel, who had obtained from his Highness a promise of the
appointment. Ward, through the help of his friend the chaplain,
secured an audience with the Protector, being commended to him by the
same friend as a man of extraordinary learning and worth. Cromwell,
embarrassed by his promise to Howel, called Howe aside, and further
consulted him respecting the merit of his University companion. The
issue was, that he told Ward, on such a recommendation as he had
received, he was disposed to shew him some token of regard, at the
same time pleasantly asking what he thought the principalship of Jesus
College might be worth. On being informed respecting the amount of the
income, he promised he would allow him annually just that sum. As this
incident illustrates the influence of the chaplain with the Protector,
the regard of the Protector for the chaplain, and the liberality of
both towards one of a different "denomination," another incident may
also fittingly be introduced, to shew the faithful preaching which
there was at Whitehall, and how it was regarded by the "magnanimous
usurper," even when it crossed his own prejudices. Cromwell believed
that spiritually-minded men in answer to prayer received Divine
intimations, indicating their requests to be according to the Divine
will, and also testifying how they were about to be fulfilled. This
"particular faith in prayer," as it was termed, extensively prevailed
amongst the people who formed Cromwell's Court, and received much
encouragement from what was taught them in the Whitehall pulpit. John
Howe, who saw plainly that such an idea opened the door to fanatical
excesses, determined to expose the error, and therefore delivered a
calm and thoughtful discourse upon its fallacy and mischief. Cromwell's
brow darkened, and he looked uneasy. A person of distinction came up
to the preacher on leaving the pulpit, and enquired whether he knew
what he had done. "My duty," replied Howe, "and I can trust the issue
with God." He informed Calamy that he observed Cromwell was cooler
in his behaviour afterwards than he had been before, and that he
sometimes seemed as if he wished to speak on the subject, but never
did. The courage on the one side; with the annoyance felt, and yet
the forbearance manifested on the other; the prevalence of enthusiasm
at Whitehall; and the checks which it received from men commonly
identified with its upholders, are conspicuously demonstrated in this
incident, and they reveal in a very striking way the mingled good and
evil of those eventful days.
[Sidenote: _John Howe._]
The correspondence of Howe at that time with Richard Baxter, and the
replies of the Catholic Presbyterian to the Catholic Independent place
in a clear light the views which they entertained with regard to union.
Baxter, in one of his letters written in a suspicious temper, wished
to awaken Howe's jealousy to a careful but very secret and silent
observation of the "infidels and Papists, who were very high and busy
under several garbs, especially of Seekers, Vanists, Behmenists;" in
the same letter he praised the Lord Protector as a man of a Catholic
spirit, and "desirous of the unity and peace of all the servants of
Christ." The writer also expressed his own wish, that the ruler of
England would take some healing principles into consideration and
expound them to one or two leading Episcopalians, Presbyterians,
Congregationalists, Erastians, and Anabaptists. Baxter thus indicated
where he himself thought of drawing the line of comprehension, and with
great significance (and it shews liberality and prudence combined),
added, by way of postscript, "I pray you persuade men not to despise
those they call Royalists and Episcopalians, either because they are
now under them, or because of contrariety of worldly interests, for
these signify less than carnal hearts imagine, and who knows what a
day (and a righteous God) may bring forth." Howe agreed with Baxter's
object in the main. But as to means, he was more prudent, and thought
it best to bring Presbyterians and Congregationalists together before
proceeding any further. Philip Nye is referred to in the correspondence
by Howe, as a person of so much importance "that he would either be
consulted with, or, at least, would in some way hear of (the proposal),
and if he disliked, hinder it;" and Nye's views of Christian fellowship
appear to have been much narrower than those of either Howe or Baxter.
The designs and efforts of the two last named individuals came to
nothing. Ripeness could not be found in court or country, in this party
or in that, for any such comprehension as Baxter clearly prefigured
in his mind, and Howe, with less definiteness of view, but with equal
if not greater catholicity of affection, most ardently and anxiously
desired. To attempt an organic union of divers sects is but a Utopian
dream. Even to attempt plans of co-operation, correspondence, and
mutual harmony before sympathy of feeling, and a close attraction of
hearts has been engendered in the Church of Christ, is unwise and
useless; but it is not Quixotic to endeavour to establish and increase
friendly intercourse and brotherly interchanges of sentiment between
those who divide our Protestant Christendom--to draw towards one
another in kindly fellowship while mutually conceding the full rights
of conscience--and to hope that a day will come when, rising above
ancient prejudices and traditional walls of separation, sects and
parties who share in the profession of a common faith, may enjoy in
this world full intercommunion of instruction and of worship.
[Sidenote: _Congregationalism in Scotland._]
Following for a moment the fortunes of Independency beyond the bounds
of England, we remark that Congregationalism did not take root in
Scotland. Robert Browne travelled thither in the year 1584, and dwelt
in lodgings by the Canongate. He inveighed against the Reformed Church
of Scotland and the Presbyterian ministers of Edinburgh; it is said
not without protection and encouragement from the Court. John Penry,
too, crossed the Tweed; and King James afterwards complained that
such men having "sown their popple," certain brain-sick and heady
preachers caught their spirit. Yet up to the period of the civil
wars no traces of Independency can be found amongst the Scotch. A
person named Orthro Ferrendail, an Irishman, preached in a private
house, in the city of Aberdeen, in the year 1642, "at night, within
closed doors," what was curiously stigmatized as "nocturnal doctrine
or Brownism." Congregational principles were adopted by only a few
individuals, yet this created no small stir amongst the Presbyterians.
The General Assembly of the year 1647 prohibited the reading of
Independent and Baptist books, and the harbouring of people who
were infected with their errors; and further they instigated the
magistrates of the country to assist ministers in resisting all
schismatical innovations. Independent officers and soldiers belonging
to the English army could not so easily be dismissed or silenced, and
one of the military chaplains wrote a little book on Independency,
describing it as "A Little Stone out of the Mountain." To this quaint
publication an answer was returned by a theological professor, bearing
a title of corresponding quaintness, "A Little Stone pretended to
be out of the Mountain, tried and found to be a Counterfeit." The
English Commissioners pleaded with the General Assembly on behalf of
toleration and of Congregational discipline, but the plea met with an
indignant reply. Yet a few ministers, including Patrick Gillespie,[212]
were favourable to the condemned tenets, and Independent Divines
are mentioned as discharging their ministry within the parishes of
Kilbride, in Lanarkshire, and of Kirkintilloch, in the county of
Dumbarton. Persecution appeared in some quarters, and sectaries were
excommunicated, imprisoned, and hunted from place to place so that
their lives were embittered. These scanty facts indicate at least that
Congregationalism found no congenial soil in regions north of the
border.[213]
[Sidenote: _Congregationalism in Ireland._]
The Brownists are reported to have visited Ireland, with some success.
Dr. Owen, when in Dublin, lamented the ignorance of religion prevalent
in that city, but found "a numerous multitude of as thirsty a people
after the Gospel" as he had ever met with.[214] Certain distinguished
Independents went over after the completion of Cromwell's conquests,
of whom one was Dr. Samuel Winter, appointed to the provostship of
Trinity College. Dr. Thomas Harrison accompanied Henry Cromwell, and
preached for some years in Christ Church, Dublin. Samuel Mather, a
member of the well-known Mather family, also an Independent, became
a minister in Ireland; and being a man of singular moderation, when
commissioned by the Lord Deputy to displace the Episcopal clergy,
he declined the office, on the ground that he had come to Ireland
to preach the Gospel, not to hinder others from doing so. Stephen
Charnock also spent some time in the island. John Rogers, a Dublin
pastor in 1651, may be added to the list, for he thus expresses his
ecclesiastical opinions:--"Concerning the Church of Christ, I know that
it is one body universal and catholic, and that it is of all saints,
past, present, and to come, invisible and visible, yea spiritual
and formal. But this I also believe, that God hath left rule in His
word for particular congregations here upon earth, as the visible
to make up His one entire and universal body."[215] John Murcot, an
extraordinary young man, who occupied one of the Dublin pulpits, was
another Congregational preacher.[216] Churches of this denomination
existed in Youghall, Carrickfergus, Limerick, Tredagh, and other Irish
towns.[217] Most of the Irish Independents accepted State support, but
a few were averse to maintenance by tithes. The difference between the
latter and their brethren is mentioned by the Lord Deputy, who also
alludes rather sarcastically to the mutual jealousies of Independents
and Anabaptists.[218]
[Sidenote: _Cathedral Worship._]
Before quitting the subject of the connexion between Independents
and the Commonwealth establishment, it is interesting to notice that
whilst the cathedrals and principal churches in England were in the
hands of the Presbyterians, a few of those magnificent edifices were
occupied by them in common with the Congregationalists. This was the
case with Exeter Cathedral, the edifice being divided into two parts
by a brick wall, as are some of the large churches in Scotland and
on the continent at the present day. The choir called "East Peter's"
was used by the Presbyterians. Under the vaulted roof--upon which,
among the fruits and tendrils of the filbert and the vine, the
Presbyterian worshipper might have seen a coronation of the Virgin, and
angels censing the mother and child--Robert Atkins, their minister,
esteemed one of the best preachers in that part of England, fulfilled
the ministerial office with eminent popularity and success. At the
same time the exquisitely-stained glass of the east perpendicular
window--all radiant with the glory of Roman Catholic saints--shed on
him its tinted lights while he stood in the pulpit, in his Genevan
gown, with the hour-glass at his side. The nave called "West Peter's"
was occupied by a congregation of Independents, who under similarly
incongruous circumstances entered the gorgeous porch--decorated
with crowds of images--to listen to the ministry, and to follow the
devotions of their pastor, Lewis Stukely. There he preached and
prayed, while the beautiful minstrels' gallery--with its array of
winged angels, having citterns, trumpets, guitars, and all manner of
instruments of music--retained its position untouched, and preserved
its adornments unharmed. Wells Cathedral--still shewing on its proud
front the three hundred magnificent sculptured figures, which form a
Bible in stone--was used by the Presbyterian, Dr. Cornelius Burgess;
but it was ordered that the inhabitants of St. Cuthbert's parish,
forming, it may be presumed, an Independent congregation, should make
use of it also as their place of worship.[219]
The noble church of the Holy Trinity at Hull was also used jointly
by Presbyterians and Independents, as well as the less noble, but
scarcely less interesting church of St. Nicholas, in the town of Great
Yarmouth.[220]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER X.
Besides the Presbyterians and Independents, there were ministers of
another persuasion, who accepted preferment in the Church of England
under the Commonwealth.
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
The existence of the Baptists may be traced back to an early period.
One of this denomination, a yeoman of the guard at Windsor, suffered
martyrdom under Queen Mary.[221] In the time of Elizabeth, the
Antipædobaptists were complained of by Bishop Jewel "as a large and
inauspicious crop." A Church of that order appears to have existed at
Ely, in the year 1573. Flemish Baptists took refuge in this country
about the same time; and another English congregation, apparently of
Antipædobaptist principles, was discovered in 1586; a third, in 1588,
is described as meeting in the fields for prayer and exposition of
Scripture. It is said that they dined together, and collected money to
pay for their refreshments, giving the surplus to their brethren in
bonds. No forms were used. A liturgy seemed to them stinted prayer--a
mere babbling in the Lord's sight. They denied the authority of the
Queen in ecclesiastical matters, and counted it unlawful to attend
the parish church. They owned no necessity to wait for reform by
the magistrates, saying, wherever stones were ready, they ought to
build with them at once, as the apostles did. It is distinctly stated
that these people held it unlawful to baptize children.[222] In the
year 1589, it was affirmed that there were several Anabaptistical
conventicles in London and other places.[223] A prisoner named
Maydstone, holding Baptist opinions, is mentioned in 1597 as under
sentence of death in Norwich gaol. The Baptists were foremost in the
advocacy of religious freedom, and perhaps to one of them, Leonard
Busher, citizen of London, belongs the honour of presenting in this
country the first distinct and broad plea for liberty of conscience.
It is dated 1614, and is prefaced by an epistle to the Presbyterian
reader; and a very remarkable epistle it is, deserving a renown which
it has never acquired. The writer says, he is sure that the country
will be distracted with oppression and persecution until liberty of
conscience be allowed. His plea is no new doctrine, but as old as the
Word of God. It is the birthright of peaceful people, denied by the
subjects of popes, bishops, and selfish priests, a blessing for the
want of which the Christian part of the universe hath suffered "a
continual agony and earthquake." Appealing to King James, Busher says,
"that Jews, Christians, and monks are tolerated in Constantinople,"
and asks, "If this be so, how much more ought Christians to tolerate
Christians?" "It is not only unmerciful, but unnatural and abominable;
yea, monstrous, for one Christian to vex and destroy another for
difference and questions of religion." "Wherefore," he goes on to say,
"in all humility and Christian modesty, I do affirm, that through the
unlawful weed-hook of persecution which your predecessors have used,
and by your Majesty and Parliament is still continued, there is such
a quantity of wheat plucked up, and such a multitude of tares left
behind, that the wheat which remains cannot yet appear in any right
visible congregation." Boldly, and in the broadest way, this early
apostle of liberty condemns all persecution whatsoever, not excepting
even persecutions carried on against Papists; and he contends that by
persecuting them we Protestants encourage them to persecute us. People
tainted with treason are to be denied the liberty of congregating
together, but no others. And further, this writer demands, "That it be
lawful for every person or persons, yea, _Jews and Papists_, to write,
dispute, confer and reason, print and publish any matter touching
religion, either for or against whomsoever."[224]
Other publications of the same character were written by members of the
same communion, and in 1620 the Baptists issued a humble supplication,
abounding in references to the Fathers and to ecclesiastical history.
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
In the Yarmouth Corporation Records there is a letter to the Lord
Chief Justice of England, written by the Bailiffs in the year 1624,
respecting the Baptists in that town: "Right honourable, our duties in
all humble wise remembered. We received certain letters, signed by your
lordship, but without either date or place, from whence, reproving our
predecessors, as having no care in the execution of a warrant made to
them by your lordship and Justice Dodridge (upon a certificate from
the Lord Bishop of Norwich at the last assizes in Norfolk, touching
the conventicles and meetings of Separatists and Anabaptists within
this town, and of a list of their names surprised at such conventicles)
for the apprehending of them, and sending them to the Lord Bishop of
Norwich, to be examined and further ordered, and for the re-committing
of Cayne, and apprehending of Uryn, the one dwelling and conversing
amongst us, the other frequenting this town as a merchant, so as by
such negligence your honour might conceive that some among us do
secretly connive, if not favour those ways (except that by a speedy
execution of your lordship's warrant directed unto us, the contrary
may appear) advising us to be so careful thereof, as we may give a
good account at the next assizes of our service therein. May it please
your honour, upon the receipt of your letters, we conferred with the
bailiffs of the town, for that time being, and required of them to
have the said warrant, with purpose to put the same in execution; who
answered us that they never had, nor before now heard of, any such
warrant. Now, so it is, saving your honour's favour and reformation,
not so much for want of date of your lordship's letter, or place from
whence it was directed, as for want of such warrant from your lordship
unto us, or our said predecessors, we presumed to forbear to execute
such business, humbly beseeching your lordship to grant us such your
warrant to the former effect, and to pardon us herein; and for our
parts, not knowing any of us to connive, or favour those ways, we
will be willing and ready, in all we can, to execute the same, and
whatever else your lordship shall give us in charge. And so, praying
to the Almighty to increase and prosper your days in all honour and
happiness, we rest, your honour's at command,
"J. TRINDLE, }
"THOMAS JOHNSON, } Bailiffs."[225]
The portion of the "Yarmouth Records" relating to this period are
defective, and consequently the information is imperfect; but it is
certain, that not long after the date specified, several persons
denominated Anabaptists were imprisoned in Yarmouth, and continued in
confinement until the year 1626, when it was resolved by "the Town" (as
the Corporation is usually designated), to apply to the Lord Archbishop
in Parliament and the Lord Treasurer, to have them removed. What became
of them is not known, but most likely they were discharged, as Abbot,
the then Archbishop of Canterbury, was a man distinguished by his
leniency towards Nonconformists.
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
The "Records of the Church at Broadmead, Bristol," furnish an account
of the formation of a Baptist community in that place. The steps by
which it reached its ultimate ecclesiastical character are minutely
traced. Mr. Canne, a well-known Baptist minister, came to Bristol,
and debated the matter of baptism before "an abundance of people on
a green." He led the people to "step further in separation," so that
they would not so much as hear any minister who "did read the Common
Prayer." Thus, in language characteristic of such documents, it is
said, that the Lord led them by degrees, and brought them out of popish
darkness into the marvellous light of the Gospel. Baptism by immersion
afterwards became the practice of the Church, but still Baptists and
Pædobaptists remained with each other in fellowship at Bristol, as they
did in some other places.[226] Having been joined by some persecuted
Welsh brethren, the Church met in "the great room" at the Dolphin, and
"sometimes at a baker's house," until the city fell into the King's
hands, when most of the professors were fain to journey to London under
the conduct of Royalist soldiers. But the guard proved treacherous,
and actually stripped and robbed the prisoners after they reached the
metropolis. They commonly met at Great Hallows, but those of their
number who had been baptized as adults, communed at the Lord's Table
with the Baptist Church under the pastoral care of William Kiffin. When
Bristol surrendered to the Parliament, the greater part of the Church
returned, but soon became "a chaos of confusion." We may add that
Mr. Kiffin, with whom these Bristol Nonconformists united in London,
describes, in a MS. History, the formation of a distinct Baptist
Church, in 1633, gathered out of the Independent community then under
the pastoral care of Henry Jacob.
Some Arminian Baptists published a Confession of Faith in 1611.[227]
Another confession, issued by the Calvinistic Baptists, containing
fifty-two articles, appeared in 1644. The Calvinistic doctrine
of predestination is distinctly affirmed, but in article xxv. the
preaching of the Gospel for the conversion of sinners is declared to be
absolutely free; and in article xxix. believers are defined as "a holy
and sanctified people." The Congregational order of Church Government
is propounded in article xxxvi. and baptism, on a profession of faith,
in article xxxix. A note to article xlviii. on civil government,
declares "it is the magistrate's duty to tender the liberty of men's
consciences, Ecc. viii. 8, (which is the tenderest thing unto all
conscientious men, and most dear unto them, and without which all
other liberties will not be worth the naming, much less enjoying),
and to protect all under them from all wrong, injury, oppression, and
molestation."[228]
By the Parliamentary ordinance of April, 1645, forbidding any person
to preach who was not an ordained minister, in the Presbyterian, or
in some other Reformed Church--all Baptist ministers became exposed
to molestation, they being accounted a sect, and not a Church.[229]
A few months after the date of this law, the Baptists being pledged
to a public controversy in London with Edmund Calamy, the Lord Mayor
interfered to prevent the disputation--a circumstance which seems to
shew that on the one hand the Baptists were becoming a formidable body
in London, and, on the other hand, that their fellow-citizens were
highly exasperated against them.[230]
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
Before we close this brief notice of the rise and early progress of
the Baptist denomination, it may be remarked in connection with their
conspicuous advocacy of the fullest religious toleration, that they
furnish a striking example of the union of such advocacy with the
maintenance of dogmatic Christianity in that which may be termed its
most evangelical form. And, indeed, the same remark is applicable to
many of the Independents. Nor can there be any question respecting
the originality of the doctrines of religious liberty as held by the
Baptists, for it is manifest that they derived them neither from the
teaching of antiquity, nor from the writings of learned and gifted
contemporaries. Their sentiments on the subject can by no means be
considered as the expression of the genius and spirit of the age in
which they lived: for intolerance was at the time all but universal in
England and throughout the continent of Europe. So far as they were
indebted to history for their principles of freedom, the debt was
due to the sufferings of their fathers--for as Bayle says, the sect
"boasts of a great number of martyrs: its martyrology is a large volume
in folio."[231] And no doubt the discipline of pain in their own
experience had a share in both their intellectual and moral culture,
and that much of the grand lesson which they were enabled to teach had
been learned in the school of affliction. The love of liberty and the
endurance of oppression constituted the inheritance which they had
derived from their spiritual ancestry.
What has been said of the polity and discipline of Independents will
apply generally to the polity and discipline of the Baptists. These
two religious denominations substantially agreed with each other; the
main and almost the only difference between them, having relation to
the mode of Baptism, and to the recipients of the rite. When Baptist
ministers held livings they stood in the same relation to the national
establishment as did their fellow Congregationalists, admitting
members, exercising discipline, and conducting their business quite
independently of the political powers.
[Sidenote: _Tombes--Jessy._]
John Tombes, an Oxford Bachelor of Divinity of superior ability and
learning, and standing high in the estimation of all parties, had felt
difficulties respecting infant baptism long before the commencement
of the wars. Not receiving answers to certain questions which he
proposed on the subject to the Westminster Assembly, he renounced his
former practice, and avowed Antipædobaptist opinions. This brought
him into collision with some of his parishioners, whilst minister of
Fenchurch.[232] Though forfeiting that incumbency for not baptizing
infants, he was deemed eligible for the preachership of the Temple,
and obtained that honourable post. But he soon lost this preferment
also, in consequence of his publishing a treatise on the subject
which so much occupied his thoughts. The people of Bewdley, in
Worcestershire--his native town--were however allowed to choose him
for their minister, and there it was that he held the public dispute
with Richard Baxter, already described. Seeing no prospect of any
alteration in the Establishment with regard to baptism, he "gathered a
separate Church of those of his own persuasion, continuing at the same
time minister of the parish." The perpetual curacy of Bewdley having
become impoverished by the sale of ecclesiastical property, Tombes
received the parsonage of Ross, which he subsequently relinquished for
the Hospital at Ledbury. Retaining the Hospital, and removing from
Bewdley, he became once more minister of the parish of Leominster, in
Herefordshire, the place in which he had held his first preferment.
His name appears amongst Cromwell's Triers; a circumstance involving
this important consequence, that "the Commissioners agreed to own
the Baptists as their brethren, and that if such applied to them for
probation, and appeared in other respects to be duly qualified, they
should not be rejected for holding this opinion. And hence it came
to pass, that at the Restoration several parishes were found to have
Baptist ministers fixed in them."[233] Yet throughout this good man's
life, after he had embraced Antipædobaptist views, his peculiarities in
that respect exposed him to much trouble and sorrow.
Henry Jessy, a Cambridge Master of Arts, after holding the living of
Aughton, in Yorkshire, accepted the pastorship of an Independent
congregation in the borough of Southwark; but in consequence of several
of the members embracing Baptist opinions, he examined the controversy
for himself, and this ended in his submitting to be immersed, and in
his becoming a zealous advocate of the practice. Yet he continued to
admit Pædobaptists to the Lord's Supper, and lived in charity with his
Independent brethren. During the Commonwealth, he spent every Lord's
Day in the afternoon "among his own people," giving instruction and
sustaining discipline; but "in the morning he usually preached at St.
George's parish church, in Southwark," of which he had become Rector.
Besides being renowned for ministerial diligence, catholicity of
temper, and liberality to the poor, he took great interest in revising
the authorized version of the Scriptures, carrying about with him
constantly a copy of the Hebrew and of the Greek Testaments, quaintly
calling one "his sword and dagger," and the other his "shield and
buckler." He sought the aid of learned friends in the revision of his
work, and would often exclaim, "Oh, that I might see this done before I
die."[234] He further made large collections for the Jews at Jerusalem,
and together with the money which he obtained he sent them letters with
the view of converting them to the Christian faith.
[Sidenote: _Ewins--Bunyan._]
There lived at Bristol a remarkable man, one of those born orators in
whom genius makes up for defect of culture, and who in all ages have
distinguished themselves by their rude unfettered eloquence. Thomas
Ewins was a mechanic, with little or no education; but becoming a
preacher he speedily rose to eminent popularity. Elected pastor of the
Baptist church in the city just mentioned, and objecting to tithes and
all compulsory payments, accepting only free gifts, he nevertheless
ordinarily preached at Christ Church before the Mayor and Aldermen, and
conducted lectures at St. Nicholas' and other churches--thus sustaining
a sort of semi-relation to the Establishment. "The Broadmead Records"
contain specimens of his preaching, and also a curious diagram which he
drew of certain blazing stars observed in the heavens, portending, as
he thought, the approach of Divine judgments.
Another example of a Baptist preacher in a parish church is taken from
the "Life and Death of Mr. John Bunyan:"--
"Being to preach in a church in a country village (before the
restoration of King Charles) in Cambridgeshire, and the people being
gathered together in the churchyard, a Cambridge scholar, and none
of the soberest of 'em neither, enquired what the meaning of that
concourse of people was, it being upon the weekday, and being told that
one Bunyan, a tinker, was to preach there, he gave a boy twopence to
hold his horse, saying, 'He was resolved to hear the tinker prate;' and
so went into the church to hear him. But God met with him there by his
ministry, so that He came out much changed, and would, by his goodwill,
hear none but the tinker for a long time after, he himself becoming
a very eminent preacher in that county afterwards. This story," the
writer adds, "I know to be true, having many a time discoursed with the
man, and therefore I could not but set it down as a singular instance
of the power of God that accompanied his ministry."
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
The Baptists became numerous under the Commonwealth.[235] Numbers of
members were admitted to their Churches, and these Churches formed
themselves into associations. At the meetings which were consequently
held, questions relating to order, worship, and discipline came
under discussion. Disputes arose respecting what is termed "open"
and "strict" membership--in other words, respecting the question,
whether individuals not adopting Baptist views were proper persons for
membership in Baptist Churches.[236] A controversy also sprung up as
to the propriety of hearing the Gospel as it was preached by ministers
who had not been baptized, according to the Baptist idea, and also with
respect to the practice of joining in psalmody with those who were
unbaptized.[237]
Nonconformists in Wales previous to the outbreak of the civil wars,
and for some years afterwards, are said to have been Congregational
Pædobaptists. The formation of the first Antipædobaptist Church in the
principality is ascribed to the year 1649. Vavasour Powell--who has
appeared in these pages in connection with the Fifth Monarchy men--and
who had been from about the year 1640 an indefatigable preacher of the
Gospel amongst his fellow-countrymen--for he was a Welshman--adopted
Antipædobaptist views in the midst of his missionary career; and after
that change he may be presumed to have advocated his newly-adopted
opinion. But he does not appear to have been at all a bigoted man, or
to have sought the establishment of Churches upon the strict communion
principle.[238] After the year 1649, a few more Baptist congregations
were gathered, and a small association of four of these met in the town
of Carmarthen in the year 1651, when questions were mooted touching the
practice of singing psalms, and the laying on of hands in the office of
ordination.[239]
In Ireland, Baptist opinions spread, and Churches were planted in
several cities and towns within that island. Cromwell's soldiers,
including some who were Baptists, preached in Scotland,[240] and a
chaplain of Fairfax's publicly disputed with a Scotch minister upon
the question whether infant baptism was grounded on the Word of
God.[241] The famous Colonel Lilburne was a Baptist, and in the north
he zealously propagated his own distinctive principles. The Scotch
Presbytery soon declared against "the new dippers."[242]
There has been occasion to notice more than once the existence of
two classes of Independents--the one entertaining broader views of
toleration than did the other, and, at the same time, more closely
approximating to modern voluntaries than did some of their brethren.
There must have been a similar difference amongst Baptists. The
distinction comes before us again. Owen and Goodwin did not object
to State support, nor do we discover in the writings of any of the
chief Independents of the Commonwealth an exposition and defence
of the voluntary principle. We have seen that several Independents
and Baptists were parochial incumbents. Ministers, however, of
both denominations, especially of the latter, at that time held no
benefices. This might not arise always from conscientious scruples
respecting an establishment, but it is probable that in many cases it
did so.
[Sidenote: _Baptists._]
The larger section of the Baptist ministers and Churches stood outside
the pale of Cromwell's establishment, and probably, in general, they
preferred that position. The well-known Hanserd Knollys, a Cambridge
graduate, after resigning a living, and gathering a Baptist Church,
would only accept the free contributions of his hearers, eking out
his subsistence by school-keeping. The Fifth Monarchy Anabaptists
distinctly and boldly opposed tithes, and protested against all
State endowments. John Canne, in his "Second Voice from the Temple,
to the Higher Powers," 1653, violently inveighs against a national
ministry, as "essentially derived from the Pope," and after pointing
to Presbyterians and Independents, as those who "do appear most for
tithe;" archly adds, "yet the truth is, neither of them, by the law of
the land, have any title to it; for they are not such incumbents or
ecclesiastical persons as the law allows."[243]
The most united and consistent opponents of both State alliance and
State allowance were the people called Quakers, and other mystic sects
who took up their position altogether outside of Cromwell's Broad
Church.
To them we shall pay attention in a subsequent chapter, but, in the
meanwhile, it is necessary that we should supply some account of
the state of the Universities, and also point out the position of
Episcopalians in reference to the Establishment.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XI.
The civil wars, and the changes consequent upon the taking of Oxford,
left the University in a deplorable condition. Many Fellows and
Scholars were dead. Men of learning and high character had been
ejected. No admissions from Westminster, Eton, St. Paul's, Merchant
Tailors, or other public schools had taken place during five or six
years; and parents, in times so troubled, had naturally felt unwilling
to send their sons to a place which was almost as much of a camp as of
a school.
But prospects brightened after the war. Some who had fled when the city
of Oxford was garrisoned now returned, and were promoted according to
seniority. Graduates too came from Cambridge, and helped to fill up
vacancies; also young men long kept at home, entered their names upon
the college books, and supplies from public schools were to some extent
renewed.
Scenes of festivity revived. On the 17th of May, 1649, the University
prepared for the arrival of two distinguished visitors. Fairfax and
Cromwell, with a staff of officers, were on their way to receive
academic honours; and on their arrival, being welcomed with great
rejoicing, they were at once conducted to the apartments of the Warden
of All Souls, where they received a magnificent entertainment. Heads of
houses paid their respects, and one of the fellows of the hospitable
college in which they were lodged delivered a congratulatory speech,
which Wood reports to have been a bad one, "but good enough for the
occasion." The hero of Naseby assured the authorities that he and his
companions were well aware no commonwealth could flourish without
learning, and that whatever the world said to the contrary they meant
to encourage it more and more. He and his companions, with their suite,
dined at the table of the President of Magdalen, and afterwards played
bowls on the college green. In the afternoon, the degree of Doctor of
Laws was conferred on the generals, and that of Master of Arts on the
principal officers. The chieftains were robed in scarlet, and with the
exception of the hood and square cap--which some Puritans scrupled to
wear--and the silver staves--which the beadles had not been able to
obtain from their predecessors in office--the appearance of things in
the Convocation House remained much as usual. All the members standing
bareheaded, Proctor Zanchy presented the guests to the Vice-Chancellor,
and delivered a short speech. The speech is not reported, but if an
incident, such as occurred when South was conducting a soldier to
receive an honorary degree, had taken place on this occasion, the
witticism of that orator would have been very appropriate:--"_Præsento
vobis virum hunc bellicosissmum_," commenced the speaker. Just then
the warrior happened suddenly to turn round, "_Qui nunquam antea
tergiversatus est_," added the ready wit.
The Earl of Pembroke, who had been Chancellor, died in January, 1650.
At a convocation held twelve months afterwards, the University elected
Cromwell to the vacant office. Warriors seem not the fittest persons
for such a post, but as respects the University which placed Wellington
in the chair once occupied by Cromwell many will agree with Kohl:
"These are the two most remarkable Chancellors of Oxford, ever heard
of."
[Sidenote: _Owen Vice-Chancellor._]
When Dr. Fell had been ejected from the Deanery of Christ Church, Dr.
Edward Reynolds, a Presbyterian, succeeded him for a short period,
after which Dr. Owen, the Independent filled the office. Although he
had been a student in the University his Independency had excited
such strong prejudices, that on his taking a Doctor's degree some
did "intend to battle him, when he came to dispute, thinking that
as he had been so long time absent from the University, he would be
unready both in speaking Latin and disputing. He was better prepared,
however, than they were aware of, and keeping them to the strict rules
of disputation, he managed the whole exercise with such exactness as
frustrated their expectations."[244]
Owen was admirably fitted for the station which he occupied. To a
rare amount of theological learning he united personal endowments and
accomplishments, such as carry with them an indefinable influence, and
command respect even from the prejudiced. He had a dignified presence,
a face not soon to be forgotten, eyes of penetrating brightness, lips
of firm resolve, a countenance generally very grave, and which could be
very stern, profuse locks curling over the shoulder, and altogether the
air and bearing of a gentleman. His appearance had arrested Cromwell's
notice. "Sir," said the general, laying his hand on Owen's shoulder,
"you are a person I must be acquainted with." "That," replied the
Divine; with the courtliness of a cavalier, "will be much more to my
advantage than yours." They became friends. Cromwell honoured Owen,
and nominated him to the Vice-Chancellorship after the Parliament had
appointed him to the Deanery.
Although Owen rose to the Vice-Chancellorship in September, 1652, it
is remarkable that there is no annual oration by him for the year
1653.[245] The circumstance becomes significant on a perusal of
the oration for 1654, and some light is thrown on the state of the
University during the year when the oration was omitted. In 1654, the
speaker pointedly alludes to some extraordinary perils the University
had just survived.[246] There had been a conflict, he said, out of
which the University rose, not with trophies, spoils, and garlands,
but with scars, and with torn standards, dragged in dust. He and his
learned colleagues had fought for what had been handed down from
antiquity--the depository of past ages, and the seed-plot of precious
hopes. They had put to flight wine-shops, ale-sellers, mimics, farces,
buffoons, the public riots, and disgraceful scenes infesting the
streets. Halls and edifices had been deserted and insulted, tottering
to their fall, supporters had gone, props were removed, and things
presented a melancholy spectacle; but God had preserved and wonderfully
restored the University, after winds and storms had assailed it in
vain. Under Owen's rhetorical Latin, so characteristic of the age, we
discover the fact that the former year, when the annual oration had
been omitted, was one of strange confusion in Oxford.
[Sidenote: His Speeches.]
The oration of 1657 further indicates the difficulties of the year
1653, and touches upon some which seemed far more threatening than
any mentioned in the former speech. Five years--said Owen--had passed
since his elevation to office, and for two years after that elevation
the critical situation of the University had been a subject for
astrologers and newspapers--to such a pitch did things arrive that
to have advocated public schools would have been reckoned offensive
to religion. Everything disgraceful was imputed to the advocates of
learning. Affairs were in confusion, and on the edge of the pit, and
the University was saved by a miracle. "When," he adds, "it appeared to
what length audacity, rage, and ignorance would carry those from whom
better things might have been expected, the Supreme Arbiter of Events
so frustrated their efforts in a moment, that with all their strength
they scarcely could take care of themselves who _three days before_
were in the act of devouring us. Nothing remained to these wretched
creatures except great disgrace, everlasting infamy of the unprincipled
attempt upon the seats of learning, which God in His displeasure
averted."[247]
This passage points to a kind of danger different from that which is
deplored in the earlier oration. Then the Vice-Chancellor spoke of
internal confusions, of the undisciplined condition of the colleges,
and of the riotous conduct of the gownsmen and townspeople: now his
speech relates to external attacks, to opinions afloat in the country,
and to unprincipled attempts made by enemies of learning for the
overthrow of the Universities altogether. The "three days" are most
significant words, and we cannot help connecting the expression with
that critical period when the Little Parliament was arrested by
Cromwell in its destructive career.
The tendencies of that Parliament have been indicated, and although
Clarendon is a prejudiced witness in the case, yet making on that
ground some abatement from his evidence, it appears there is truth in
his remark, that the House proposed the sale of lands belonging to
the Universities, and that the moneys arising from such sale should
be employed for the public service. No proof exists, as far as we
are aware, of any resolution or motion to that effect, yet it seems
more than possible that such things might be talked of in the Little
Parliament by some of the more fanatical of its members. There must
have been some good reason for the remark which Cromwell made in a
speech he delivered in the year 1657. "What the issue of that meeting
(the Little Parliament) would have been 'seemed questionable,' and was
feared; upon which the sober men of that meeting did withdraw; and
came and returned my power as far as they could,--they did actually
the greater part of them,--into my hands, professing and believing
that the issue of that meeting would have been the subversion of your
laws, and of all the liberties of this nation, the destruction of the
ministers of this nation, in a word the confusion of all things."[248]
Further evidence might be cited to the same effect,[249] nor are there
wanting proofs, as will be seen hereafter, that perilous changes were
contemplated, and that even certain ministers of religion at that time
so undervalued learning as to lead the attack which was made on the
Universities. Dell and Webster, who made themselves conspicuous in this
respect, will be noticed in connection with Cambridge.
[Sidenote: University Costume.]
During the period in which Owen held the Vice-Chancellorship at Oxford,
he devoted himself to the accomplishment of academical reforms. He was
anxious to abolish the use of unnecessary oaths, to multiply public
exercises for the improvement of students, to prevent gownsmen from
leading idle lives, to modify the public acts so as to render them
occasions for useful discussion, and to abolish the custom of allowing
the _terræ filius_ (as he was called) to indulge in unseemly satire and
vulgar abuse. But he did not succeed in all his plans, in consequence
of the opposition which was made by parties in the University.
One curious custom abolished by the Parliamentary visitors before Owen
became Vice-Chancellor may be mentioned here. Upon the decease of any
one of the heads of houses, or of any other distinguished person, the
University bellman put on the gown and formalities of the defunct, and
with his bell proclaimed in every hall and college that it had pleased
God to take out of this world the individual whom the official so
strangely represented. He gave notice, at the same time, that on such
a day the deceased would be solemnly interred. Besides abolishing this
odd practice, the visitors prohibited the bellman's going before the
corpse from the college to the church.[250]
Anthony Wood is sadly distressed at the Vice-Chancellor's irregular
proceedings with regard to college habits,[251] and, indeed, this is
the principal complaint which he urges against his administration.
"Instead of short hair, collar-band, and cassock in the pulpit," the
Oxford historian complains, "we might have beheld long powdered hair,
large hands, and shirts half hanging out at their sleeve, and they
themselves accounting nothing more ridiculous than starch formality.
As for caps, square or round, none were worn publicly only in some
colleges at refection or scholastic exercises." Hoods, he says, were
used at length by none but the Proctors, and the Vice-Chancellor sat
with his hat on, 'and that cockt.' He went "in quirpo like a young
scholar, with powdered hair, snake-bone bandstrings, (or bandstrings
having large tassels), lawn band, a large set of ribands pointed,
at his knees, and Spanish leather boots with large lawn tops."[252]
The representation brings the Puritan before us in the costume of
a Cavalier, and, if correct, is certainly irreconcilable with the
pictures commonly drawn of the class of persons to whom Owen belonged.
A Roundhead thus attired is a very anomalous being, and the description
makes us suspect that, let the Dean have dressed as he might, he could
not have pleased his angry critic. Indeed the Puritans have been
represented by certain historians in such a way as to remind one of the
pictures of Brueghel, who so accustomed himself to paint witches and
imps, that when he tried to depict a man he was sure to make him look
like a devil.[253]
[Sidenote: _Oxford Celebrities._]
It may be interesting here to pause for a moment, and to notice some of
the remarkable individuals who were connected with the University at
the time of the Commonwealth.
Amongst the Canons of Christchurch was Ralph Button, who, on his
election to a Fellowship at Exeter College, won from Dr. Prideaux the
witty compliment, that all who were elected besides him were "not
worth a _button_;" and, amongst the gownsmen, who in those days paced
the quadrangle, or loitered in the green meadows of that magnificent
foundation, were other men of whom Oxford has since been proud. A pale,
delicate young student might have been seen there, who was destined to
carry his genius into the regions of metaphysics, and to expound with
rare sagacity and power the principles of religious toleration. There,
also, was a hearty-looking Bachelor of Arts, with a keen, but scarcely
good-humoured expression, whose eloquence and wit afterwards rendered
him one of the cleverest, if not one of the best preachers of the
Church of England. John Locke and Robert South were both Christchurch
men, and another distinguished contemporary of a different character
was Philip Henry.
On reaching the grey tower of Magdalen we might have seen presiding
over that foundation, Dr. Thomas Goodwin, one of "the two atlasses and
patriarchs of Independency,"[254] as Wood calls him--already mentioned
in this work as a member of the Westminster Assembly--and we might have
met with two of the Fellows--John Howe[255] and Theophilus Gale--who,
by their increasing familiarity with Greek literature, were then laying
up ample stores for the construction of their great works, "The Living
Temple," and "The Court of the Gentiles."
Dr. Daniel Greenwood, whom Neal styles "a Profound Scholar and Divine,"
and whom Wood admits to have been "a severe and good governor," was
Principal of Brazen Nose, and Dr. John Conant was Rector of Exeter,
respecting whom Prideaux, amongst his numerous witticisms, observed,
"_Conanti nihil difficile_." Dr. Robert Harris, President of Trinity,
is described as skilful in Hebrew Chronology, Church History, and
Patristic Literature; and Dr. Edmund Staunton, President of Corpus, has
been called a Walking Concordance, on account of his minute knowledge
of the Holy Scriptures. Dr. Joshua Hoyle, Master of University College,
previous to his residence in Oxford, had been Divinity Professor
in Dublin, where he spent more than fifteen years in studying the
Popish controversy, and in answering the works of Bellarmine. Henry
Wilkinson--commonly styled Dean Harry--Principal of Magdalen Hall,
secured so much esteem from the Royalists, that at the Restoration they
were anxious to retain his services, but he refused to conform. He is
described by Wood as "courteous in speech and carriage, communicative
of his knowledge, generous and charitable to the poor; and so
public-spirited--that he always minded the common good more than his
own private concerns." Dr. John Wilkins, of Wadham, who married Oliver
Cromwell's sister, and was afterwards promoted to the mastership of
Trinity College, Cambridge, was almost equally eminent as a theologian,
a critic, a preacher, and a mathematician. The University of Oxford
at the same time counted in the number of her professors, Pocock, the
Orientalist; Seth Ward, the astronomer; Wallis, the geometrician; and
Lewis De Moulin, a learned foreigner: besides others who, though now
little known, were of high reputation in their own day. Owen said, in
1653, and, perhaps, with still more confidence, he might have said it
a few years afterwards, that the heads of Houses at that time merited
honour of the Church for candour, diligence, erudition, and politeness;
and that the University had never been surpassed by any society in the
world, in point of proper respect and esteem for piety, for manners,
orderly and Christian, and for a due regard to doctrines, arts,
languages, and science.[256] In addition to those now mentioned there
were other remarkable persons dwelling within the University precincts.
In the Bodleian library, Henry Stubbe held the office of second keeper.
A reader of all kinds of books, at home in ecclesiastical and profane
history, as well as in mathematical studies, he also spoke Greek and
Latin with much ease; and, according to his eulogists, could "talk on
various sciences with an eloquent tongue, or with his dexterous pen
write so as none could equal, answer, or come near him."[257] In a
recess of the library, Elias Ashmole often sat pouring over old coins,
for he had come to make a catalogue of the numismatic collection given
to the Bodleian by Archbishop Laud. Among the gownsmen were many
young scholars and divines rising into distinction, whose names were
afterwards to command respect in the republic of letters, or in the
offices of the Church: Wadham could point to Sprat, afterwards Bishop
of Rochester--Queen's to Compton, who became Bishop of London--Lincoln,
Magdalen, Hart Hall, and Corpus Christi all numbered amongst their
students future prelates. Sir Christopher Wren, at that time
accounted a prodigy of genius,[258] Dr. Whitby, the fierce but able
anti-Calvinist; Matthew Poole, the commentator; and Anthony Wood,
the antiquary and historian, were also educated at Oxford during the
Commonwealth.
[Sidenote: _Oxford Celebrities._]
It is interesting to find that John Evelyn visited Oxford on the 6th
of July, 1654, "the eve of the Act," and that he fully records in his
diary what he witnessed during his stay at the University.
There were exercises, he informs us, in the schools, and after dinner
the proctor opened the Act at St. Mary's. The prevaricators indulged
in drollery, and the doctors engaged in disputations. On Sunday, Dr.
French preached to the students, advising them to seek true wisdom, not
in books of philosophy, but in the Scriptures alone. The same day, Dr.
Owen delivered a sermon, in which he "gave Episcopacy a brush." The
following afternoon came long speeches from Proctors and Professors,
and the Vice-Chancellor; and these were followed by the bestowment of
diplomas (four in theology, and three in medicine), with the ancient
ceremonies of cap, ring, and kiss. The Presbyterian "Inceptor" had a
rub at the Episcopalians. A magnificent entertainment in Wadham Hall
closed the day, and the next morning a Latin sermon was delivered.
[Sidenote: _Evelyn's Visit._]
Barlow, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln, was librarian of the Bodleian,
and shewed his friend the following rarities:--An old English Bible,
"wherein the Eunuch mentioned to be baptized by Philip is called
the gelding;" the Acts of the Council of Basle, with its bulla, or
leaden affix; a MS. by Bede; the old Sarum ritual; a curious piece
of penmanship by a French lady; and an hieroglyphical table, painted
on asses' hide. But the thousand MSS., furnishing part of the library
built by Archbishop Laud, especially the Oriental ones, of all the
Oxford wonders which Evelyn saw, were most illustrious. In the closet
of the tower were exhibited Indian weapons, urns, and lamps, together
with the Koran, written on a sheet of calico, made up into a priest's
vesture or cope.
The Convocation House, the pleasant diarist goes on to inform us,
was finely wainscoted. The Divinity School had a gothic carved roof,
and the Schools of Physic and Anatomy were adorned with "the skin of
a jackal, a rarely-coloured jackatoo (or prodigious large parrot),
two hummingbirds, not much bigger than our humble bees," and other
curiosities. St. John's Library had two skeletons, and a store of
mathematical instruments--the gift of Archbishop Laud. New College
still wore its "ancient garb," and at Magdalen the library and chapel
were in pontifical order, with a double organ, and the altar turned
tablewise. Christ Church Library contained an Office of Henry VIII.,
brilliantly illuminated, the gift of Cardinal Wolsey. The physic garden
contained canes, olive trees, rhubarb, and the sensitive plant.
Wadham College had become a receptacle for curiosities under the
scientific Dr. Wilkins. Transparent apiaries,--built like castles and
palaces,--preserved honey without destroying the bees. A speaking
figure, with a concealed pipe in its mouth, dials, thermometer, a
"waywiser," a "monstrous magnet," and divers objects, artificial,
mathematical, and magical, crowded the Warden's lodgings and gallery.
The Royal Society had its cradle in the quaint rooms over the college
gateway. There met "the invisibles," as Boyle called them, "the
virtuosi," as they termed themselves:--eschewing politics and divinity,
and preferring to discourse upon "the circulation of the blood,"
"the valves of the veins," "the lymphatic vessels," "the Copernican
hypothesis," and kindred themes. We may add, that music-meetings
occurred in the house of William Ellis, late organist of St. John's,
"opposite to that place whereon the theatre was built." There George
Stradling, Fellow of All Souls, shewed himself "an admirable Lutinist;"
whilst Ralph Sheldon,--a Roman Catholic, living in Halywell, near
Oxford--was applauded for his "smooth way" of playing on the viol;
and Ellis the host himself presided at the organ, or performed upon a
virginal, or a counter-tenor violin. William Glexney, who had belonged
to a choir before the wars, is mentioned as a good player on the
bass viol; and Thomas James, of Magdalen, is named as holding weekly
meetings in his chamber, practising much on "the Theorbo lute."[259]
The University of Oxford, under the Protectorate, professed as much
loyalty to his Highness Oliver Cromwell, as it had ever done to his
Majesty King Charles. No addresses could be more deeply charged with
grateful expressions and ingenious compliments than those laid at
the feet of the great warrior and prince of the Commonwealth. Some
curious specimens of them are preserved in a little volume, entitled,
"Musarum Oxoniensium ΕΛΑΙΟΦΟΡΙΑ"--written to celebrate the peace which
Cromwell concluded with the Dutch in 1654. Owen takes the lead, and
for once invokes the muse. Zouch, Harmer, Bathurst, Busby, Locke,
Philip Henry, and others, dwell on the same subject in Greek, Latin,
or English verse; but what is most remarkable, South figures among
the most glowing eulogists--he who, thirty years afterwards, in the
pulpit of Westminster Abbey, denounced Cromwell as a bankrupt, beggarly
fellow, and ridiculed him as first entering the Parliament-house with a
threadbare, torn cloak, and a greasy hat, perhaps neither of them paid
for.[260]
We subjoin part of his eulogy, having first ventured to render it into
English rhyme:--
"Great ruler of the land and sea profound,
Thy praise the elements conspire to sound;
Thy genius deeper than the mighty deep,
Thy fame spreads wider than the billows sweep.
If thou ascend thy chariot, either pole
Bears up the wheels which still triumphant roll.
Thy martial scabbard, hanging by thy side,
Ensheaths thy country's power, and life, and pride.
'Tis thine alone to rule the raging main,
And bind proud Neptune in thy sovereign chain.
Thou bravest victor, with triumphant hand,
Scatt'rest thy trophies over sea and land.
In gentlest, noblest deeds, thy days abound,
The peaceful olive binds thy honours round.
Batavia's realm, rejoicing in thy smile,
Now shares the friendship of our British isle;
That isle, encircled by its ocean guard,
And by the victories of thy peerless sword."
[Sidenote: _Walton's Polyglott._]
Before leaving Oxford, notice should be taken of a learned work
published during the Commonwealth, and in which Oxford scholars took
a principal part. A prospectus for the publication of "Walton's
Polyglott" appeared in 1652; the publication was completed in 1658,
having occupied four years. Pocock, the professor of Hebrew and
Arabic, was one of Walton's principal helpers. Walton, himself--a
Cambridge man, who had fled to Oxford during the wars, and lost
all his preferments by the changes of the times,--employed his
leisure from public duties by the indefatigable toil which has
immortalized his name. Other ejected Episcopalians shared prominently
in the undertaking,[261] and their names are found attached to the
prospectus; but perhaps no one yielded so much literary assistance
as did Professor Pocock. The credit of the enterprise and of its
admirable accomplishment belongs to the Episcopalians,--with whom
Pocock, although permitted to hold office at Oxford under the reign
of Independency, was identified. In the hour of their humiliation
they achieved what deserves the gratitude and praise of posterity;
and, at the same time, it is much to the honour of Cromwell that he
patronized and assisted them in their work--notwithstanding they were
his political antagonists, and the work itself upon which they were
engaged crossed the prejudices of some of his favourite theologians.
The duty on the paper which was employed in the printing of the volumes
was, through the influence of the Protector,[262] remitted by an order
of the Council of State; and the same favour was granted to Bee, the
editor of the "Critici Sacri." This favour induced Castell, the author
of the "Heptaglott Lexicon," to seek the like indulgence. That work,
however, was not published until after the Restoration.
[Sidenote: _Owen's Criticism._]
When Walton's _Magnum Opus_ left the press,[263] it awakened great
interest in the critical world. The science which has been so much
advanced by the discoveries of a Mill, a Griesbach, and a Tischendorf,
was then only in its infancy. Jealously watched by the old-fashioned
students of Hebrew and Greek, who feared injury to the authority of the
Bible and the cause of religion, from any reflection on the perfect
integrity of the _textus receptus_, no wonder that "the voluminous
bulk of various lections as nakedly exhibited"--and likely, it was
thought, "to beget scruples and doubts in the minds of men"--excited
alarm in some who were deeply anxious for the welfare of the Church.
Dr. Owen was of this number, and his are the words just quoted. Zealous
alike for the purity of the text, and the authority of the points, he
followed Buxtorf and Glassius; and looked upon Capellus and Grotius
as dangerous innovators. He went so far as to say: "What use hath
been made and is as yet made, in the world, of this supposition, that
corruptions have befallen the originals of the Scripture, which those
various lections at first view seem to intimate, I need not declare. It
is in brief the foundation of Mahometism, the chiefest and principal
prop of Popery, the only pretence of fanatical anti-scripturists, and
the root of much hidden Atheism in the world."[264] This is a curious
passage in the history of literature. That so learned and liberal
a man as Dr. Owen should have talked thus, may in our time provoke a
smile from tyros in criticism. But he who wrote after this fashion
must be judged by the state of things existing in his own time, not
by the state of things at present. Owen, although as an Independent
he would be deemed a revolutionist, really was in theology, and in
some ecclesiastical respects likewise, a very decided Conservative.
Zealous for what he counted reform, he dreaded removing old landmarks.
Let him have the credit as well as the reproach of Conservatism. In
his treatise on the integrity and purity of the Scripture text--from
which the above passage is extracted--he animadverted upon the
Polyglott, its prolegomena and appendix. The essay shews that he was
more of a theologian than a critic--a fact of which he seems to have
been conscious himself. It would have been better for his fame if he
had not touched the subject: and most of his admirers will regret
that, so far, he can be quoted as one of a class, too numerous still,
who, trembling without cause for the ark of God, set themselves in
opposition to the progress of Biblical enquiry. Without attempting to
defend the Vice-Chancellor in this matter, we may add, that the tone
of his criticisms is respectful and modest, and will bear honourable
comparison with other controversial productions of that age.[265]
Pocock answered Owen with critical learning, such as Owen had not at
his command, and with a force of reasoning which Owen could not repel;
but with a contempt and violence which Owen had done nothing to provoke.
To pass from Oxford to Cambridge, of which it has been said--and it
is equally true of the sister University--that "separated as yet from
the capital of the kingdom by a tedious horse journey of two days, and
destitute of any better conveyance for letters than its well-known
carrier," it was "still one of the great centres of the literature, the
science, the talent, and, unhappily also, the religious strife of the
nation."[266]
The Engagement was pressed upon the Masters and Fellows. The majority
were Presbyterians, with some Episcopalians who, through private
influence, had retained office without subscribing the Covenant.
Opposed in almost equal degrees to the new test, both parties found
their position and emoluments in immediate jeopardy. At first the
enforcement was gentle, but in June, 1650, a committee received
authority to examine those who had not taken the oath, and to fill
up vacancies caused by their ejection. Yet, before the end of the
month, Cromwell being at Cambridge, received the Vice-Chancellor and
others, to whom he gave an assurance that there should be no further
proceedings against non-subscribers, for he had used his influence with
Parliament to put a stop to them.[267] Probably that influence checked
the intended severity; for, during the next twelve months, persons
who did not submit to the Engagement, were allowed to retain their
fellowships. For a time friendly intercession prevailed: learning,
piety, and social virtue shielded Episcopalian delinquents. It was a
season of great suspense and excitement. Letters passed on the subject
between Cambridge men and their distant friends. The former discussed
University affairs in quadrangles, halls, and chambers, and in their
walks by the banks of the Cam. Fellows of different parties were
narrowly watched. Staunch Episcopalians were anxious to see whether
boasters about decision would be true to their principles; and sad
discouragement came from men who kept their fellowships by at last
taking the oath, after having stoutly denied that they would ever do
so. This we learn from the letters of Sancroft, whose conscientiousness
then in his refusal of the Engagement--and afterwards at a still more
critical period of his life as a non-juror--every one ought to honour.
His own case illustrates in part what has been just remarked, inasmuch
as friendly interference deferred his ejectment for a season. "The
Committee," he writes to his brother, November the 17th, 1650, "sat
last week here, and summoned some of St. John's to appear at London;
but I heard nothing of them. Some would persuade me, and I am sometimes
prone to believe it, that I have some secret friend who doth me good
offices, though I know it not." When danger became imminent, and the
Committee sat at the "Bear" and summoned Sancroft, he would not go;--he
playfully describes himself as "trussing up his baggage, _i.e._, a viol
wrapped in a dozen flannel napkins, two towels and two table-cloths,
two old shirts, and a carpet; also a little box with his hanging watch;
also an alarum with lines and weights." He was expelled in July.[268]
[Sidenote: _Cambridge University._]
It is somewhat startling, amidst this story of anxieties, ejections,
and impoverishments for conscience' sake, to turn to the oration
delivered by young Isaac Barrow, on Commencement-day, the following
year, 1651, and to hear him speaking thus:--"If it be true, as rumour
tells, that you have so tired of all substantial fare as to nauseate
the banquet of eloquence and the feast of sound philosophy--that
nothing has for you any relish except painted comfits and unmeaning
trifles--that not even wisdom will please you, unless without its
own peculiar flavour; nor truth, unless seasoned with a jest; nor
reason, unless soaked in fun; then in an unlucky hour have I been
assigned as your purveyor, neither born nor bred to such a frivolous
confectionary. The insatiable appetite of laughter keeps itself within
no bounds. Have you crowded to this place for the purpose of listening
and studying, and making progress; or only for the sake of laughing
at this thing, and making a jest of that other? As if folly herself
kept court amongst us--as if here were the market-place and universal
emporium of nonsense, you drink in with greedy ears jibes, and squibs,
and ribaldry, and then, when well considered and improved, set them
all a-circulating again. There is nothing so remote from levity which
you do not instantly--such is your alchemy--transmute into mirth and
absurdity. And let a discourse be such as to move no laughter, nothing
else will please--neither dignity, nor gravity, nor solidity--neither
strength, nor point, nor polish."[269]
One cannot suppose that this description applies to the Fellows or
older members. But it must have been true of undergraduates and other
young men. They--unless Barrow has gone beyond all bounds in his
declamation--were a very noisy, boisterous, laughter-loving set.
In truth, undergraduates were then what undergraduates have been
ever since, full of fun, which at times leaped up in unseemly forms.
Cambridge and Oxford commemorations, in the middle of the seventeenth
century, were no contrasts to Cambridge and Oxford commemorations in
the nineteenth. On reading Barrow's grandiloquent speech, it is easy
to fancy shouts rolling round the hall in wit and humour--not unlike
what our newspapers report of University festivals in our own time.
And although Heads of houses and Fellows would decorously behave
themselves on those occasions--from official prudence no less than from
Puritanical propriety--let it not be supposed that the Puritans were
men who never laughed and joked; for it is remarkable how often in
their memoirs we find allusions to the "facetiousness" of persons, who,
judged of from their portraits, were as solemn as the grave.
Even after the University had, in some good measure, been brought
within the terms of the Engagement, military visitors seem to have
given trouble; for Oliver Cromwell caused the following order to be
posted up at head quarters, addressed to all under his command, and
to all whom it might concern:--"These are to charge and require you
upon sight hereof not to quarter any officers or soldiers in any of
the colleges, halls, or other houses belonging to the University of
Cambridge, nor to offer any injury or violence to any of the students
or members of any of the colleges or houses of the said University, as
you shall answer the contrary at your peril. Given under my hand and
seal the first of July, 1652."[270]
[Sidenote: _Simpson--Dell._]
The following year saw troublers of the peace far worse than any of
Cromwell's troopers. Sydrach Simpson, one of the five brethren of the
Westminster Assembly, who had been appointed Master of Pembroke Hall,
in the room of Mr. Vines--a Presbyterian ejected for refusing the
Engagement--had, at the commemoration of 1653, defended the University.
He had said, in his oration, that they who had endeavoured to pull
down schools were men formed to be enemies of religion, like Julian
the Apostate--that all Divinity is swaddled in human learning--that
Paul was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel--that if the Spirit
taught without means, men might as well be without ordinances as
colleges--that knowledge is to be obtained not by inspiration, but
study--that arts and tongues are the cups in which God drinks to
us. After this fashion--in phraseology often very peculiar and yet
expressing considerable wisdom--the Independent Master of Pembroke
had appeared in defence of his University. Thereby he incurred the
ire of William Dell,[271] Master of Caius--whose conduct in the army
excited the displeasure of Richard Baxter, and who, for his very
broad advocacy of toleration, incurred no small reproach from other
Presbyterians. His opinions as to the manner of supporting religion
approached much nearer to those of modern voluntaries than did the
opinions of many persons at that time; but they were coupled with views
of human learning, an educated ministry, and collegiate institutions,
such as happily most modern voluntaries would disallow. Entertaining
no hostility to learning on its own account, Dell protested against
it as a qualification for instructing men in Christianity. He denied
that it assisted in the understanding of Scripture. He maintained that
the grace of God, and an inward experience of religion, were alone
requisite for saving souls.[272] And the irrational declaration of this
singular individual (who, however, it is only just to say, declared
his willingness to sacrifice his office in support of his views) was
coupled with the most vehement denunciation of University statutes,
school divinity, and academic dress--of caps and scarlet robes, gloves,
rings, kisses, doctrinal dinners, and music--and of the Cambridge
"prevaricator," so like, he said, to the Oxford "_Terræ filius_."
Diplomas he lightly esteemed, and drew an irreverent comparison and
contrast between school degrees and Christ's degrees--meaning by the
latter our Lord's sonship, unction, victory over temptation, teaching
of the Word, and the like; in which respects Christians are to be
conformed to their Master, taking their degrees in the school of
spiritual discipleship.[273] In connection with Dell's attack upon
University studies may be mentioned the publications of John Webster,
in 1653, entitled "The Saint's Guide," and "Academiarum Examen," works
in which the author enforced "the same principles as were advocated
by Dell," and that "not without some shrewdness and ability." The
"Examen" was answered by two Oxford men, Wilkins and Ward. Webster
had been educated at Cambridge, and he, together with William Erbery,
a Baptist preacher of considerable talents, held a public discussion
in the October of 1653, "at a church in Lombard-street, against the
establishment of the Universities and the maintenance of a national
clergy."[274]
[Sidenote: _Akehurst._]
Excitement and habits of free speech would produce a good deal
of extravagant talk in the University, and reports--sometimes
inaccurate--would reach the ears of persons in authority. Cromwell
heard that blasphemy and Atheism were uttered at Cambridge. He made
enquiries. Evidence on the point against a person named Akehurst,
vice-master of Trinity, having been collected by Dr. Lazarus Seaman and
Dr. John Arrowsmith, they reported the facts to his Highness.[275] But
a friend, in defence, wrote the following remarkable letter:--
"May it please your Highness--To receive my report concerning Mr.
Akehurst, vice-master of Trinity-college, who is accused before thee
of Atheism and blasphemy, &c. Mr. Akehurst is a man known to myself,
who hath been of late in great troubles both of body and mind, and
his ease and refreshment hath not been comparable to the misery he hath
endured, so that my very soul hath mourned over him. And what will not
a man say sometimes in the bitterness and anguish of his spirit, when
the arrows of the Almighty stick fast in his sides, especially when the
torment of his mind hath been such sometimes, that he could give no
account whence it proceeded, nor whither it tended, it being occasioned
by no foregoing thoughts, which might disturb his soul? Mr. Akehurst is
one whose soul cannot be satisfied with blind tradition in the things
of God, and therefore has travailed to find out a reason of His ways by
reading, meditation, by discourse with men; and finding them weak and
insufficient, and sometimes not favouring their own discourse, hath in
the anguish of his spirit reproached their shortness, parrot-language,
in such expressions as seem to reflect upon God, whereas it might be
but a charging of their apprehensions, misconceptions, scantness,
unsavouriness, &c. I am persuaded that whatsoever proceeded from Mr.
Akehurst, was not to wound or weaken the true faith of any; but an
earnest desire to receive satisfaction himself, and withal to shake
all presumptuous and careless faith, which produced nothing; not to
withdraw any from God, but settle himself and others on more rational
foundations. All the course of his life, of late, hath been a perpetual
breathing after complete satisfaction, that he might justify God in all
his proceedings; so that he hath been wholly careless of his credit,
if so be any whereof he might find rest to his soul. These things have
I written, not that I would excuse any levity of spirit, or lavishness
of humour, which sometimes probably might possess him; but all things
being considered, the bruised reed may not be broken, nor the smoking
flax quenched. The Lord direct thy Highness to steer betwixt, and to
judge aright. Thus have I declared my mind. Let not my folly in this
address, if there be any, be prejudicial to another; for this paper
proceeded from me alone.
"My Lord, I call to witness the living God, that I desire, not that any
contempt of his Majesty may not pass unreproved, or any slighting of
his truths, but that there may be a due balancing of things, that the
glory of God may suffer on no hand; and therefore have I writ with much
fear, lest I should be found a liar for either party. The Lord make you
as wise as Solomon!"[276]
[Sidenote: _Evelyn at Cambridge._]
John Evelyn, whom we have seen at Oxford, also visited Cambridge,
and has left us notes of the state in which he found the University.
He describes St. John's as being an edifice well built of brick, and
having the best library of any of the colleges, with ornaments of
_pietra commessa_ (marble inlaid of various colours), and containing
amongst its curiosities "a vast old song book" and other MSS., and
a portrait of Archbishop Williams. Trinity was renowned for its
quadrangle, which our diarist, however, considered inferior to that of
Christ Church, Oxford, although he acknowledged that the fountain was
graceful, and that the chapel and library were fair: the illuminated
MSS. and the other antiquities greatly interested the Royalist visitor.
King's College Chapel, with its groined stone roof, answered his
expectation. Clare Hall, of "new and noble design," but "not finished;"
Peter House having "a delicate chapel;" the fine college of Sidney;
Catherine Hall, "a mean structure;" Emanuel, a "zealous house;" Jesus
College, "one of the best built, but in a melancholy situation; and"
Christ's College, the modern part, of "exact architecture," are all
noticed: but Cambridge evidently was eclipsed in Evelyn's estimation
by the glories of his own Alma Mater. He pronounces the schools
"despicable," the public library "mean:" but he has a word of praise
for the market-place of the town, and for "old Hobson, the pleasant
carrier's beneficence of a fountain."[277]
[Sidenote: _Presbyterians in the University._]
After what has been said of John Dell, no one can form a favourable
idea of the state of Caius College under his administration. But other
heads of Houses were persons of a very different stamp. Dr. Thomas
Hill, master of Trinity, and Dr. John Arrowsmith, master of St. John's,
were both old-fashioned Puritans. Both were decidedly Presbyterian.
Both were Evangelical and devout, and both, fired with religious zeal,
were anxious for the spiritual welfare of the University. Neither of
them, perhaps, possessed much scholarship or any refinement of taste,
and their quaint writings, long since forgotten, seem to be such as
the most intense admirers of quaintness could hardly read now-a-days
with any interest--yet they alike encouraged theological studies, and
valued learning as an indispensable pre-requisite for a good Divine.
Dr. Lazarus Seaman, also a Presbyterian--who had succeeded Dr. Cosin
as master of Peter House--appears from Wood's testimony to have been
skilled in Oriental languages, in casuistry, and in the history of
ecclesiastical controversies. He had even won favour from Charles I.,
when attending him in the Isle of Wight, as one of the Parliamentary
Commissioners. Dr. Tuckney, another Presbyterian--who had succeeded Dr.
Holdsworth in the mastership of Emanuel, and afterwards Dr. Arrowsmith
in the mastership of St. John's--when exhorted to have regard to
the godly in his elections, replied, with a dash of humour--"No one
should have greater regard to the truly godly than himself, but he was
determined to choose none but scholars; adding, they may deceive me in
their godliness, they cannot in their scholarship."[278] The number of
Presbyterians at Cambridge, as compared with Oxford, is accounted for
by the fact that the change at Cambridge occurred at the beginning of
the wars, when the Presbyterians were in power, and that the change at
Oxford took place at the end of the wars, when the Independents were in
the ascendant. Under the circumstances, Oxford would naturally be more
of an Independent, and Cambridge more of a Presbyterian University.
Dr. Minshall, a Conformist at the Restoration--chosen, according to the
statutes, master of Sidney, on the death of Dr. Ward--held that post
for life with a high reputation. Dr. Simpson, as master of Pembroke,
acquitted himself with a love of learning, and a zeal for godliness
corresponding with his oration at the commencement of 1653; he died in
1658 with joy befitting his holy life.
The college presidents at Cambridge during the Commonwealth best known
to fame are Witchcot, Lightfoot, and Cudworth.
[Sidenote: _Witchcot--Lightfoot._]
On the ejection of Dr. Collins--who would not take the Engagement--Dr.
Witchcot became provost of King's. Neither a Presbyterian, nor an
Independent, he held Episcopal views, with extreme moderation; and
afterwards conformed to the Church of the Restoration, as he did to
the Church of the Commonwealth. He had never sworn to the Covenant;
he probably looked upon the Engagement simply as a bond of political
submission; and on the whole, he seems to have belonged to the class
of persons who do not hold the Divine right of any particular form
of ecclesiastical government, but decide that question upon grounds
of expediency;--adopting what they consider to be the best practical
method for propagating the principles and promoting the morals of
Christianity. The few posthumous publications of this Divine, collected
by his admirers, are not sufficient to support his fame, which arose no
doubt from his preaching and conversation, his candour and catholicity,
his amiableness and benevolence. Witchcot's reputation is a striking
example of the power of personal influence. "He had great credit," says
Burnet, writing many years afterwards, "with some that had been eminent
in the late times, but made all the use he could of it to protect
good men of all persuasions. He was much for liberty of conscience;
and being disgusted with the dry, systematical way of those times,
he studied to raise those who conversed with him to a nobler set of
thoughts, and to consider religion as a seed of a deiform nature (to
use one of his own phrases). In order to this he set young students
much on reading the ancient philosophers, chiefly Plato, Tully, and
Plotinus; and on considering the Christian religion as a doctrine sent
from God, both to elevate and sweeten human nature, in which he was a
great example, as well as a wise and kind instructor."[279] A man must
have had some extraordinary qualities to produce such influence, and
to create such a reputation, leaving them behind for years afterwards
surrounded by such a lustrous halo.
Dr. Brownrigg had been ejected from Catherine Hall as a non-Covenanter,
and Dr. Spurstow, who had succeeded him there, was subsequently
dismissed for refusing to take the Engagement.[280] The vacancy thus
occasioned was supplied by the appointment to it of Dr. Lightfoot.
Lightfoot, who has been already mentioned as one of the Assembly of
Divines, surpassed both his predecessors at Catherine Hall in depth
of learning and literary repute. Whilst his Erastian opinions would
remove difficulties out of the way of his submission to the changes
which occurred in the government of the Church and the University--his
extraordinary attainments as a Rabbinical scholar, and the wide range
of his general knowledge, eminently fitted him for the high scholastic
position which he attained at Cambridge. Perhaps no other Englishman
ever possessed such a consummate acquaintance with the whole range
of Hebrew and Biblical literature, so far as it existed in his own
time; and although his works bear a somewhat varied and fragmentary
appearance, and include questions of chronology, as well as enquiries
into texts and versions, comments and paraphrases--they all relate
more or less to that which was the great object of his life--a harmony
of the four Evangelists, and the elucidation of the sacred narrative
from the writings of the Rabbis. We are not aware of any other writer
who has done so much in the same way to aid the study of the New
Testament.[281]
The brilliant reputation of Dr. Cudworth--who succeeded the
Episcopalian Dr. Pask--in the mastership of Clare Hall, and who
afterwards held the mastership of Christ's college, is almost enough,
in some respects, to eclipse the lustre of the other two. Like his
contemporary, Lightfoot, he addicted himself much to the study of
Hebrew antiquities, having been in the year 1645 chosen Regius
Professor of Hebrew; and, also like both Lightfoot and Witchcot,
he entertained very broad views of ecclesiastical polity; but his
unrivalled acquaintance with Plato and the Platonists, and with the
Alexandrian philosophers and fathers, was a peculiar distinction which
has made him a sign and a wonder ever since. His "Intellectual System"
is a marvel in literature. Yet, strange to say, though it be the most
patient sifting Atheism ever received, this book from its candour,
and its honest scrutiny into everything which can be advanced against
the fundamental truth of all religion, brought upon the author the
most cruel and absurd attacks--attacks which proceeded so far that he
was even charged with holding the very Atheism which his prodigious
powers and resources had been employed to overturn. This unrighteous
controversy however, is, after all, but a specimen of the blinding fury
which even in our own day inspires certain persons--as ignorant as they
are honest--in their championship of orthodoxy, and in their suspicion
of error. It also illustrates the prejudice and malignity often
existing in the hearts of bigots against persons, who with the deepest
convictions of truth, combine a candid disposition, a tolerant temper,
and a charitable judgment of their adversaries.
[Sidenote: _Cudworth--Patrick--More--Smith._]
At the same time there existed at Cambridge a noted band, including
men of great learning, intellect, and piety--who sympathized with
Lightfoot, Witchcot, and Cudworth--especially with the last two, in
their more select studies, and in their most generous sentiments.
Simon Patrick, Fellow of Queen's, was a man whom the turn of his
mind--though more devout and practical than speculative--did not
prevent from appreciating and admiring the endowments and culture of
his more gifted friends. Henry More--the Platonist and mystic, and a
disciple of Descartes, with his "Song of the Soul," and his "Conjectura
Cabalistica"--written at the request of a Quaker--full of admiration
for Pythagoras--remained Fellow and Tutor in Christ's college, although
he was offered the mastership of that foundation before it fell to
the lot of Cudworth. But in the same direction, John Smith, fellow of
Queen's, went far beyond Simon Patrick and Henry More--combining as he
did much of the practical piety of the first, with all the speculative
genius of the second. His sermons are extraordinary productions, full
of deep and comprehensive thought; which, whilst tinged with mysticism,
are truly Evangelical, and eminently adapted to build up a holy life.
Burnet remarks respecting the individuals whom we have named, "All
these, and those who were formed under them, studied to examine further
into the nature of things than had been done formerly. They declared
against superstition on the one hand, and enthusiasm on the other.
They loved the constitution of the Church, and the Liturgy, and could
well live under them. But they did not think it unlawful to live under
another form. They wished that things might have been carried with
more moderation. And they continued to keep a good correspondence
with those who had differed from them in opinion, and allowed a great
freedom both in philosophy and in divinity. From whence they were
called men of latitude, and upon this, men of narrower thoughts and
fiercer tempers fastened upon them the name of Latitudinarians. They
read Episcopius much; and the making out the reasons of things being a
main part of their studies--their enemies called them Socinians. They
were all very zealous against Popery. And so, they becoming soon very
considerable, the Papists set themselves against them to decry them as
Atheists, Deists, or at best Socinians."[282]
It is curious to find such men in the very heart of a Puritan age.
They were founders of a new order of religious thought, new, at least,
in reference to the mental habits in general of that period. They did
not assail Puritanism, nor, indeed, assume an attitude of opposition
to other good men of any class--they preferred to build up rather
than to pull down, to heal rather than to wound; but certainly their
sympathies did not run in Puritan lines. They appreciated the eminent
piety of many contemporaries of that school, and they lived with them
upon terms of friendship; but, for their own part, they maintained
broader views of theology than did their brethren. Their interest in
the study of Plato and Plotinus, and their elevation of what is moral
over what is merely intellectual gave to their method of enquiry, and
to the conclusions which they reached, a certain cast, which plainly
distinguished them from the kind of teaching found in the Westminster
Confession, and in the standard works of the Puritan Divines.
[Sidenote: _Cambridge Studies._]
Differences have always obtained in the mode of contemplating
Christianity, according with various types of mind and with various
descriptions of culture and circumstances. Aristotelian and Platonic
forms of thought, so obvious in theological history, are amongst its
common facts; and when we recollect that such forms are the inevitable
consequences of original varieties in the intellectual nature of
mankind, they appear also to belong to its greatest mysteries.
Occasionally overlooked, even by philosophers, and habitually forgotten
by controversialists, the remembrance of them is so important, that
if forgotten, the changes and collisions which occur in the progress
of theological enquiry--whether in primitive, mediæval, or modern
times--must remain unintelligible. And the spectacle of the logical
dogmatist on the one hand, and the sentimental mystic on the other,
deriving different impressions from the same object--and then looking
each other in the face, with expressions of marvellous surprise,
that they cannot both see one and the same thing in one and the same
way--can never be explained by those who do not keep before them the
fact just noticed. As there were different ineradicable idiosyncracies
in Clement and Tertullian, in Origen and Augustine, in Bernard and
Abelard, in Bonaventura and Thomas Aquinas, in John Tauler and John
Calvin--so there were idiosyncracies equally ineradicable in John Smith
and John Owen, in Ralph Cudworth and in Richard Baxter. The influence
of circumstances in reference to the Cambridge school coincided with
the intellectual character of the members, and contributed to the
development of its theological peculiarities. Early education, the
stimulus derived from other minds, in some respects very different,
and the reactions consequent upon the unfolding of tendencies to
their furthest extreme, are all to be reckoned amongst the factors of
religious opinion. The theology of the men to whom we now refer was
partly the result of that training which they had received in Greek
philosophy, and which had formed part of the Cambridge system in their
early days[283]; and of that study of the Greek fathers, which had
been promoted, perhaps, by the example of Andrewes; partly, also,
it was a reaction both against the stiff ritualism of the Laudian
party, and against the rigid and severe doctrinalism of the Puritans.
A good example of what constituted the pith of the teaching which we
have briefly noticed, occurs in an introduction to "Smith's Select
Discourses," written by his friend, Dr. John Worthington.[284]
[Sidenote: _Cambridge Theology._]
Godliness he explains as signifying "infinitely more than a power to
dispute with heat and vehemency about some opinions, or to discourse
volubly about some matters in religion, and in such forms of words
as are taking with the weak and unskilful; more than a power to pray
without a form of words; for these and the like may be, and frequently
are done by the formal and unspiritual Christian; more than a power to
deny themselves in some things that are easy to part with, and do not
much cross their inclinations, their self-will, their corrupt designs
and interests, nor prejudice their dear and more beloved lusts and
pleasures, their profitable and advantageous sins; and more than a
power to observe some lesser and easier commands, or to perform an
outward obedience arising out of slavish fear, void of inward life and
love, and a complacency in the law of God." And further, he dwells
with delight on "the mighty acts and noble achievements of the more
excellent, though less ostentatious Christians, who, through faith in
the goodness and power of God, have been 'enabled to do all things
through Christ, knowing both how to abound, and how to be abased;'
enabled to overcome the world without them, and the love of the world
within them; enabled to overcome themselves--and for a man 'to rule
his own spirit' is a greater instance of power and valour than 'to
take a city,' as Solomon judgeth;--enabled to resist the powers of
darkness, and to quit themselves like men and good soldiers of Jesus
Christ--giving many signal overthrows to those lusts that war against
their souls, and to the mightiest and strongest of them, the sons
of Anak; and by engaging in the hardest services of this spiritual
warfare, wherein the Pharisaical boasters dare not follow them, they
shew that there is a spirit of power in them, and that they can do more
than others."[285]
Yet, whilst we are quite disposed to do justice to these admirable
individuals, we cannot but discover in the later effects of their
example some things which must be exceedingly deplored. Their breadth
of charity was followed by an amount of latitudinarianism with which
they themselves were not chargeable. And their attempts to determine
and establish the higher position of what is moral, in comparison
with what is intellectual in Church life and in Church creeds, led
ultimately to an inexcusable neglect of the distinctive doctrines of
Christianity. The profitableness of virtue, and the reasonableness
of religion, became the all-absorbing themes. Hard, dry Rationalism,
bearing a Christian name, with never-ending discussions on evidences,
appears throughout the first half of the eighteenth century as
a development of the weak side of the Cambridge divinity in the
seventeenth.
[Sidenote: _Cambridge and Oxford Compared._]
Between this and the Oxford theology of the Commonwealth period, a
remarkable contrast presents itself. The most distinguished Oxford
Divines then were Owen and Goodwin. Howe--who in genius and feeling
was far less remote than they were from Cudworth and Smith, and who
possessed a still nobler intellect, and also presented a life of still
rarer beauty than either of his fellow Independents--was but a young
man at the time of which we speak, and could exercise no such influence
as belonged to the Dean of Christ Church and the President of Magdalen.
The theology of these two Divines was Puritan to the core, and whilst
betraying Puritan defects, it exhibited, in a high degree, Puritan
excellencies. It sometimes assigned to a really subordinate theory the
place belonging to a supremely important fact; it failed to distinguish
adequately between Divine premises and human inferences; also it was
deficient in sympathy with pure thought, spiritual desire, and honest
endeavours after goodness beyond its own circle; and it lacked that
breadth of sympathy which was cultivated by the Cambridge worthies,
which redounded so much to their honour. But then let it be remembered,
that on the part of the Oxford Puritans there existed a loyalty to
that which is peculiar, and characteristic in the Gospel of Christ--a
loyalty which redeemed their worst weaknesses. They loved the Gospel
as a message of free mercy to the children of Adam, as a revelation
of redeeming grace through the mystery of the cross; and they dwelt
largely, emphatically, and in a way not to be misunderstood, upon what
makes the New Testament a book of life and joy to conscience-stricken
men. And the veins of gold running through their works rendered them
a mine of wealth a hundred years afterwards, when people impoverished
by Rationalism flocked to it as to a spiritual California. Indeed, the
Methodism ultimately fixed outside the establishment by Whitefield and
the two Wesleys--who were all three nurtured at Oxford--was largely
dug out of Puritan beds of Christian ore. In the largest measure, and
in the directest way, this was the case with Whitefield's theology.
With respect to John Wesley, although Oxford Puritanism was not without
influence upon his mind, yet that influence was less direct than it
seems to have been in the history of his Calvinistic friend, and in
Wesley's case it was certainly mixed with powerful ingredients which
were derived from Cambridge sources. The school of Divines just noticed
stood high in his estimation,[286] and he was affected by them not only
through the perusal of their writings, but likewise through the medium
of an eminent disciple of theirs--William Law, who was one of Wesley's
personal friends.
Still more decidedly the Evangelicalism of the last century fostered
within the establishment by Romaine, and Berridge, and Venn, was
derived from the influence of Owen and his companions; and thus
defects attaching to the theology which had sprung up at Cambridge
were supplied by the theology which had been cherished and promoted
at Oxford. Too long these schools of thought have stood apart. Is not
the time come for uniting evangelical faith and zeal, as decided and
fervent as were those of Owen and Goodwin, with a sympathy for all
truth--with a recognition of the relations of Christianity to the
entire universe of thought--with a catholic charity in judging other
men--and with an estimate of the supremacy of spiritual goodness, in no
respect less broad, but in every respect more healthy than that which
prevailed in some of the colleges within the University of Cambridge
two hundred years ago?
We shall terminate, without endeavouring to complete the list of
Cambridge notabilities, by simply mentioning Edward Stillingfleet,
Fellow of St. John's, afterwards Bishop of Worcester; David Clarkson,
Fellow of Clare, an eminent Nonconformist Divine; John Tillotson,
who succeeded Clarkson in his Fellowship, and at last attained the
Primacy; Francis Holcroft, another Fellow on the same foundation,
occupying, along with Tillotson, a chamber over the college gate--and
distinguished alike by his attainments and by his sufferings for
conscience' sake; John Ray, the well-known naturalist, Fellow of
Trinity; and William Cave, the author of "Primitive Christianity," who
graduated in the year 1656, and who died Canon of Windsor.
[Sidenote: _University of Durham._]
A new University was attempted. The Grand Jury of the county of Durham,
at the summer assizes in the year 1650, presented a petition to
Parliament, praying that lands of the Dean and Chapter not then sold
might be granted for founding a college of students in that city. After
the winter assizes of 1651-2, another petition from the Grand Jury was
dispatched to Westminster, pressing the subject upon the attention
of the legislature. The project went to sleep a while; and then, in
the year 1656, Oliver Cromwell--who had from the first favoured the
plan, in spite of characteristic remonstrances from George Fox--issued
an ordinance for a collegiate establishment in the Palatinate. The
credit of the suggestion is due to gentlemen of the county: the merit
of proceeding to carry it into effect to the Lord Protector. Lambert,
Montague, and Rouse--a Committee of his Highness's council--had
recommended the scheme as of great advantage to the northern parts of
England, both in reference to promoting the preaching of the Gospel,
and the wise education of young men; and in accordance with the
recommendation, the ordinance ordained and appointed the institution
under the name of the Master or Provost, Fellows and Scholars of the
College in Durham, of the foundation of Oliver, Lord Protector of the
Commonwealth. It was to occupy the site of the Deanery, Prebendal
houses, Cathedral Church, and Castle, and to continue a College for
ever. The charter authorized one Provost, two Preachers or senior
Fellows, and twelve other Fellows--four to be Professors, four to be
Tutors, four to be Schoolmasters. Moreover, it created twenty-four
scholarships. Philip Hunton was nominated Provost, and was to receive
above £200 per annum out of the rich Rectory of Sedgefield, in the
Bishopric of Durham, besides holding the living of Westbury, in
Wilts, whence he was ejected in 1662. A concise treatise, "Concerning
Monarchy," published by this person in the year 1643, entitles him,
in the estimation of some, to be considered a worthy precursor of
Sidney and Locke--of which, at least, this proof appears, that the
book was burnt in the school quadrangle of Oxford in 1683.[287]
To William Spinage, Fellow of Exeter, Oxford--"a good Divine," "a
great philosopher and disputant," and "a man of much integrity and
zeal"--and to Joseph Hill, Fellow of Magdalen, Cambridge--a popular
tutor, and a zealous Proctor--were assigned the positions of first
Preachers or senior Fellows. Thomas Vaughan, John Kister, Robert Wood,
and John Peachil--all University graduates--were to be the first four
Professors. Nathaniel Vincent--pronounced by Wood a "considerable
scholar," described by Calamy as serious, humble, godly, of sober
principles, and great zeal and diligence, and known as the author
of several practical treatises--was appointed one of the first four
Schoolmasters.[288]
The Cathedral Church, Churchyard, and Free School, with the unsold
estates of the Dean and Chapter, and an annual revenue, in addition, of
£900 out of certain manors, rectories, and impropriations, constituted
the endowment. Moreover, the library of books, the manuscripts, and
the mathematical and other instruments belonging to the Cathedral were
made over to the same institution. The Provost, Fellows, and Scholars
were to be a Corporation for purchasing and holding property, having a
common seal, and to be governed by laws made by the Lord Protector and
his Council. The ordinance gives a long list of visitors, including Sir
Thomas Widdrington, Speaker of the House of Commons, Lords Fairfax,
Grey, Wharton, and Falconbridge, Sir Henry Vane, and Sir Arthur
Haselrig. Amongst the clerical visitors occur the names of the eminent
Edward Bowles of York, and of Richard Gilpin--a name of great honour in
the north. Like Bernard Gilpin, who was of the same family, he refused
the bishopric of Carlisle, and like that illustrious preacher and
parish priest, he was preeminent for pastoral diligence and for pulpit
eloquence.[289] The Corporation of the College was empowered to set
up "a printing press and a rolling press," and to buy "paper, iron,
tin, and letters," free of customs. The right was granted of printing
Bibles, and of licensing books for publication, together with the
monopoly of all works issuing from their press. The Provost, Fellows,
and Scholars were to be exempt from "watching, warding, or mustering,
or any hue and cry," and from all civic and rural offices, from that
of mayor down to that of scavenger. They were also exempted from all
customs, and their horses were not subjected to any liability--as
the charter expresses it--"to ride post." The instrument bears date
the 15th of May, 1657.[290] The next year Oliver Cromwell died, upon
which came a petition to the Protector Richard, praying that he would
complete what his father had begun. But opposition arose on the part of
Oxford and Cambridge. They petitioned against a third University, and
especially against conferring degrees--which, by the way, is a power
not mentioned in any part of Oliver's ordinance. The whole project of
course fell to the ground at the Restoration.
[Sidenote: _University of Durham._]
Sir William Petty, in a letter to Hartlib, Milton's friend, proposed
a third University in the Metropolis, and also a school for all
classes--none to be excluded by reason of the poverty and inability of
their parents; "for hereby," says the writer, "many are now holding the
plough which might have been made fit to steer the State."[291] The
unsuccessful schemes of the Commonwealth have been accomplished, to
some extent, in our own time, in the Durham and London Universities,
and it is to the credit of the men of that day that they anticipated
the wisdom of posterity.
Before closing this chapter, we may glance at certain ancient
foundations in which religion was blended with chivalry and with
education. The order of the Garter disappeared. One of the Canons of
St. George's Chapel, Windsor, in the reign of James I., had dwelt
with intense admiration upon its worship and service. God was there
daily and continually served--said this writer in a spirit of amazing
superstition--_like a God with the greatest magnificence_, and with all
means of devotion, such as music and outward ceremonies. The knights
had made solemn vows for the protection of the Church, and the relief
of orphans and widows. There the grounds of their courage and fortitude
were laid, and with sacrifices of silver and gold, they offered their
hearts to the Most High. Thus the Canon painted in glowing colours the
installations which he had witnessed in the gorgeous chapel within
the castle precincts--not forgetting to notice the blue coats and
chains of gold worn by the attendants. Indeed, it had been a display
little in harmony with Protestantism, and it all vanished like "the
baseless fabric of a vision" under the touch of the Presbyterian
Parliament.[292] Deans, Canons, Minor Canons, and Clerks were ejected,
with only liberty left "to carry forth all their goods, utensils,
household stuffs, and books to their several abodes." The furniture
and decorations of the Chapel were seized; Edward the Fourth's coat of
mail, with its gold, and pearls, and rubies, being amongst the most
valuable portions of the spoil. The church plate, handed over to the
treasury at Guildhall, went into the melting pot, and was coined into
money to pay the soldiers. The sacred edifice, cleansed of "all such
matters as are justly offensive to godly men," was used for a lecture,
set up "to be exercised every lord's Day, in the afternoon, to begin
when other sermons usually end, and one day in the week." Yet after
this ecclesiastical revolution so little was the building injured,
that, when one June day in 1654, Evelyn and his wife drove down to
Windsor in a coach and four, he alluded in his Diary to "the church and
workmanship in stone" as "admirable."
[Sidenote: _Public Schools._]
The old public schools of England,--whose glory it is to unite
Christian instruction with classical learning--were ecclesiastical
foundations; and these, under the rule of Parliament, and during the
reign of the Protector, met with little interruption and sustained
no real injury. Eton, after a temporary suspension of its statutes,
had, in the year 1645, its former usages restored; and the election
of scholars then recommenced "in manner as had theretofore been
accustomed."[293] Francis Rouse--who translated the Psalter into
English verse, who was one of the Protector's Council, who became
Speaker of the Little Parliament, and who obtained a seat in Cromwell's
House of Lords--had been Provost of the College from the time of the
ejection of Dr. Stewart in the year 1644. Rouse died in 1658, and was
buried at Eton with much pomp. Upon the consequent occurrence of a
vacancy, Whitelocke, then Constable of Windsor Castle, by the advice
of his friends, endeavoured to secure the vacant office--which he
described as "a thing of good value, quiet and honourable, and fit for
a scholar;" but on applying to his Highness, the candidate found the
place reserved as "a bait for some others."[294] Nicholas Lockyer, an
Oxford man, one of Oliver's chaplains, received the appointment.
[Sidenote: _Public Schools._]
The election of scholars at Westminster had, in the year 1645, been
vested in Commissioners, and also in the Master of the school, the
Master of Trinity, Cambridge, and the Dean of Christ Church, Oxford--if
"the said Dean were not a delinquent." The ordinance would give to
Dr. Owen, when he presided over Christ Church, the rights with regard
to the school which had been exercised by such dignitaries of old.
In the Act of April, 1649, for the sale of ecclesiastical property,
the foundations of Westminster, Winchester, and Eton were expressly
excepted from its operation.[295] The old Westminster school-room,
with its chesnut roof--which once covered the dormitory of the monks
of St. Peter--had its rows of boys (Puritans amongst the rest), under
the tuition of Puritan teachers, occupying the forms and studying
their Latin primers, as in days of yore. The then Head Master,
appointed about 1639, was no other than the famous Richard Bushy, whose
portrait--reminding one a little of the spare-looking but keen-eyed
Richard Baxter--still adorns the Deanery. There he wielded his ferule
for fifty-seven years, not sparing the rod lest he should spoil the
child.[296] One of his under-masters was the once well-known but now
forgotten Edward Bagshawe, an Oxford student, who had shewn himself a
turbulent and domineering person, not only in his college, but in the
University--where he disturbed the Vice-Chancellor "with interposed
speeches without formalities, and with his hat cocked," in which guise
he was wont to read his catechetical lecture. But Master Richard
Busby would not allow in office such a "pragmatical and ungrateful"
personage, and therefore "outed" him in 1658, when Littleton, a Christ
Church man, was put in his room.[297] The revenues of the public
schools of England were more or less affected by the disturbances of
the period, but in other respects they seem to have held on the even
tenor of their way.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XII.
Cromwell's establishment excluded Prelacy, but it did not altogether
exclude Prelatists. It was possible for them to hold parish livings.
The use of the Prayer Book, the performance of Episcopal rites, and
the exercise of diocesan superintendence were disallowed. Still, those
who approved of such things could preach if the Triers permitted. Not
a few must have accepted this abridged freedom, otherwise we could
not account for the large proportion of clerical conformists at the
period of the Restoration. Numbers had no very decided opinions in
matters relating to Church government and forms of worship; but some
persons of fixed views--on the principle of not doing what they felt
to be unscriptural, only omitting what under other circumstances they
would have gladly performed--were anxious still to labour as parish
pastors for the good of souls. The Episcopal Clergy who remained in the
Establishment, without in any way professing Presbyterianism, may be
divided into two classes.
[Sidenote: _Bull._]
I. Those who, notwithstanding the law against it, continued to use more
or less of the Book of Common Prayer. George Bull, afterwards Bishop
of St. David's, was a distinguished individual of this class. Having
received orders as deacon and priest the same day from the hands of
Dr. Skinner--the ejected Bishop of Oxford, who after his ejectment
continued to perform the rite of ordination--this young man, then only
twenty-one, settled at St. George's, near Bristol, upon an income of
£30 a year. By his preaching, his prudence, and his charities, he is
said to have won the favour of Quakers, and "other wild sectaries," and
even to have reclaimed some from their "pernicious errors." Stories
are told of his notes being blown out of the Bible over the Church,
amidst the laughter of the congregation; and of his adroitly turning
the circumstance to account by proceeding with his sermon _extempore_.
Another anecdote is related of his being interrupted by a Quaker, with
whom he expostulated so calmly, that the people lost all patience,
and would have fallen violently on the poor delinquent, had not the
preacher come down from the pulpit to save him from their assaults. He
constantly repeated the common prayers without referring to the book;
thereby, it is said, exciting admiration even in some who counted
the prohibited volume a beggarly element, and a carnal performance.
Nelson, his biographer, speaks of his diligence in visiting his
flock, in instructing the ignorant, in comforting the afflicted, and
in correcting the erring. He seems even to have kept up some sort
of parish discipline;--summoning to a conference those who absented
themselves from communion and worship, and engaging in controversy with
those who seduced any of his parishioners. Bull aimed at doing in the
parish of St. George's, after the Episcopalian type, what Baxter did
at Kidderminster, after the "Presbyterian way," and, on the whole, he
appears to have been successful.[298]
John Hacket, afterwards Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, was allowed
for a time to read the Common Prayer at Cheam, to the living of which
he had been presented through the interest of the Lord Keeper Williams.
At length the Surrey Committee required him to forbear using the
forbidden formulary, "when he found himself under the necessity of
omitting such parts as were most offensive to the Government."[299]
After this limited measure of interference, he continued to hold his
living.
[Sidenote: _Barksdale--Gunning._]
Mr. Barksdale, an Episcopalian, held the living of Sudeley Manor, in
Gloucestershire--the burial place of Catherine Parr. His employment
of the Liturgy, and his method of proceeding with reference to the
Lord's Supper, appear in a tract of the period, which, because it
affords an example of the public discussions then common, deserves the
reader's notice. Mr. Helme, who seems to have been a Fifth Monarchy
Baptist, held the neighbouring vicarage of Winchcomb, and between
these neighbours a controversy arose. Lists for the combatants were
prepared in Winchcomb church, and a large congregation assembled within
the battlemented walls of that edifice to witness the ecclesiastical
tournament. The Episcopalian begged the Baptist to allow him "to stand
in his pue," that he "might be seen and heard the better, and be free
from the crowd;" a request not granted, as the Baptist wanted "the
pue for himself." He entered at the appointed time, attended "by a
justice of the peace" and three other friends. His opponent had "a pue
_in opposito_," which he had "caused to be erected." The incumbent of
Winchcomb had gathered a church out of the parish, and the point mooted
by his neighbour of Sudeley was, "Whether it be lawful to minister and
receive the Holy Sacrament in congregations called mixed?" Barksdale
maintained the affirmative; but, in the progress of debate, admitted
the propriety of doing--without sanction of the rubric--what resembled
the Presbyterian practice of "fencing the table." The congregation
of his hearers, he confessed, was mixed, not so the company of his
communicants. His practice was, after certain preparations, to repeat
aloud, when the sacrament was to be administered, "all that are not
prepared depart, you that are prepared stay." After some had departed,
the rest he looked upon as prepared. The question of Episcopacy also
came under discussion. Mr. Barksdale maintained, very fairly, that "the
ministers of the Church of England and the good people adhering to them
ought to hold their assemblies without disturbance"--and that "the new
men should allow to others equal liberty with themselves, remembering
that Englishmen were living under a free Commonwealth." From the tract
it seems that some people threatened to proceed against Mr. Barksdale
for using the Common Prayer, and for other offences.[300]
Peter Gunning, afterwards Bishop of Ely, read the Liturgy in the
Chapel at Exeter House, and "asserted the cause of the Church of
England with great pains and courage, when the Parliament was most
predominant."[301] He was allowed "a contention for the truth" (1658)
in two public disputations with Henry Denn, on infant baptism, before
thousands of people, in the church of St. Clement Danes--and, with the
assistance of Dr. Pearson, he had a conference with two Romanists,
reported by them in a pamphlet entitled, "Schism Unmasked." Wood
remarks that there was no considerable sect with which Gunning did
not dispute; yet he met with no interference, beyond the Protector's
rebuke, and an occasional disturbance whilst he was conducting
liturgical worship.[302]
William Parsons, Rector of Birchanger, suffered under the
Presbyterians, and was kept in jail nineteen weeks for his loyalty to
Charles I., but afterwards he returned to his living, and usually read
the Common Prayer during the Protectorate.[303] Notwithstanding his
Episcopalianism, he was created Doctor of Laws at Oxford under Owen's
Vice-Chancellorship.
II. The second-class of Episcopalians in the Establishment were those
who held office without using the formularies of their Church.
[Sidenote: _Farindon._]
Pearson was lecturer at St. Clement's, Eastcheap, and it was there
that he delivered the discourses which formed the substance of his
noble Text Book on the Creed. Farindon, less known, but worthy of being
coupled with his famous contemporary, affords another instance of the
same kind. Ejected from his Vicarage and from his divinity readership
after the commencement of the civil wars, he, in the year 1647, became
the Minister of St. Mary Magdalene, Milk Street. A second time he had
to quit his preferment, and soon afterwards, he was a second time
restored. The dates are uncertain, but Farindon is supposed by his
biographer to have remained in his pastorate "from 1654 to 1658,
the year of his death."[304] During his forced retirement, a clerical
friend twice occupied his pulpit, and made an eloquent appeal to the
congregation on his behalf, telling them that such persons had been
seen in that church "as were able to create a temple wheresoever they
went--men, each of whom, single and alone, made up a full congregation,
nay a synod;" so that some persons had not unfitly named that place
"the scholars' church."[305] Hammond and Sanderson were the Divines
referred to, and the passage indicates the high estimation in which
Farindon's preaching was held--and justly so. A collection at the
doors for the ejected minister followed each of these discourses, and
the whole of what was contributed amounted to more than four hundred
pounds--a sum then double in value what it would be at the present
time. Upon his second restoration, he delivered a sermon, which was
admirable for its ability, eloquence, and temper. He chose for his
text, "Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are; ye have
not injured me at all."[306]
The following account from a contemporary autobiography is interesting
in connexion with Farindon:--I had usually frequented St. Gregory's,
Dr. Mossam's, Dr. Wild's, Dr. Gunning's, or some other congregations
where the orthodox clergy preached and administered the sacraments;
but the soldiers often disturbing those congregations, it was not so
convenient for my father to appear there. Coming into Milk Street
church one Sunday, I found very few in it, but Mr. Robinson helped
me to a seat, and there I heard Mr. Farindon, that excellent scholar
and preacher. It was his first day. Mr. Case had been there for some
years, and the parishioners were now divided about a successor; some
would have an Independent, others a Presbyterian, and there were
several meetings and competitions, but no agreement, nor like to be;
whereupon Mr. Robinson desired he might put one into the pulpit until
they could agree; and said they should choose whether they should pay
him or not. And so he got the pulpit and put Mr. Farindon into it,
which he kept two or three years. I went home and told my father I had
found a church where he might safely go, where was room enough, and
where he might hear a most excellent orthodox preacher. My grandmother,
Mrs. Moundeford, then dwelt in that parish; so the next Sunday my
father and myself went thither, and Mr. Farindon preached again; my
father's coach standing in the street near the church, gave occasion to
some to look in, and in a short time the congregation so increased that
it was very difficult to get a place.[307]
Farindon was an intimate friend of the memorable John Hales; and
Aubrey, amidst his charming gossipings, enables us to picture the
latter spending much of his time at Lady Salter's, at Eton, he
having been a fellow of the College there. "He lodged, after his
sequestration, at the next house, the Christopher Inn, where I saw
him, a pretty _little_ man, sanguine, of a cheerful countenance, very
gentle and courteous. I was received by him with much humanity. He was
in a kind of violet-coloured cloth gown, with buttons and loops, (he
wore not a black gown), and was reading Thomas à Kempis; it was within
a year before he deceased. He loved canary, but moderately, to refresh
his spirits. He had a bountiful mind."[308]
[Sidenote: _Hardy._]
Dr. Nathaniel Hardy--author of a somewhat famous Exposition of
the first epistle of John, and an Episcopalian of the Puritan
school--continued to minister in St. Dionysius Backchurch, in Fenchurch
Street, one of the buildings destroyed by the Fire of London. He
preached a funeral sermon upon the death of Charles I., and annually
commemorated "the royal martyrdom." At his "loyal lecture," collections
were made on behalf of the deprived clergy;[309] yet, notwithstanding
his royalist sentiments, the bold preacher remained unmolested. Some of
the episcopal clergy became chaplains, of which we have an interesting
example in the life of Dr. Richard Sherlock, uncle of Dr. Wilson, the
celebrated Bishop of Sodor and Man. Driven by the troubles of the
time to seek shelter in Oxford, he afterwards found refuge in the
family of Sir Robert Bradrosse, of Borwick, in Lancashire. There, as
we learn from a memoir of him by his eminent kinsman, he proved his
ministerial fidelity by rebuking the evils which he witnessed amongst
the Royalists, and by expostulating with his patron. "He desired him
to consider what injury he did to the distressed Church, for which
he always expressed so commendable a zeal. He intimated to him that
this was both the cause of her sufferings, and that which made her the
scorn of her enemies, that her friends did her more dishonour than
they could do her hurt; so that she may truly say, in the words of
Zechariah, 'These are the wounds which I received in the house of my
friends.'"[310]
There remained a number of Episcopalians who did not conform in any way
to the new order of things. They were deprived of their preferments,
and it will be our endeavour now to trace their fortunes. We begin
with the deprived prelates.
Godfrey Goodman, Bishop of Gloucester, died in the year 1655, after
having run a remarkable career. It is said that an entry in a volume
now in the Chapter Library at Gloucester corroborates the suspicion
of his early leaning to Romanism.[311] As early as the year 1626 he
found himself in trouble on account of a sermon he had preached, in
which he had asserted the doctrine of the real presence. Perhaps the
consciousness of his tendencies led him to wish to have a coadjutor in
his episcopal office, and then eventually to resign his bishopric;--a
wish which is made apparent in a letter written to him by Archbishop
Laud, in the year 1634.[312] When the canons were submitted to the
Convocation of 1640, he at first refused to sign them;[313] for which,
as Fuller states, he was sent to the Gatehouse, where "he got by his
restraint what he never could have gained by his liberty, namely, of
one reputed popish, to become for a short time popular, as the only
confessor suffering for not subscribing the canons."[314] Nalson says
nothing respecting his imprisonment, but only mentions that Goodman
refused a second and a third time, and then at last put his hand to the
book, declining to say that he did so _ex animo_. Laud told him that
his refusal proved him to be a Papist, or a Socinian, or a sectary.
This conclusion he himself denied, but Nalson adds, it "proved true,
for he died a Papist."[315]
[Sidenote: _Ussher._]
A contrast to Goodman is found in Ussher. Upon his leaving Oxford,
where last we met him, and his proceeding to visit Lady Stradling, at
her Castle of St. Donate's, in Glamorganshire, there occurred to this
eminent Divine an odd adventure, which indicates what must have been
the state of the country and the circumstances of travelling at that
period. The Welsh then being in a state of rebellion against English
governors--as the ejected Primate of Ireland, with his daughter,
were quietly riding along the road, they fell into the hands of some
straggling insurgents, who dragged them from their horses, and stripped
them of their baggage. Books and MSS. were wantonly strewed about
the highway; but the respect in which the Prelate was held appears
when we learn, that the neighbours from time to time brought back to
him his scattered treasures, so that on their being put together he
"found not many wanting."[316] Coming to London he filled the office
of preacher at Lincoln's Inn, employing his leisure from public
duty upon that wonderful monument of learning, his "Annals of the
Old Testament,"--in which he unfolded a system of chronology, since
widely adopted in the reformed churches. Cromwell sent for Ussher,
and conversed with him upon the promotion of the Protestant religion
at home and abroad; at the same time offering him a lease of certain
lands pertaining to the see of Armagh. When failure of sight and
other infirmities had unfitted the Bishop for preaching any longer,
he resigned his office at Lincoln's Inn, and sought in seclusion the
consolations of that Gospel which he had faithfully proclaimed. When
Cromwell published his ordinance against the Episcopalian clergy,
they requested Ussher to employ his influence to mitigate the severity
of his Highness's anger.[317] He succeeded at first in obtaining from
the Protector a promise that the Episcopalians should be unmolested,
if they did but quietly submit to the government of the Commonwealth,
a promise which was as much as could be fairly expected; but, during
a second interview, Cromwell confessed that his Council had advised
him not to grant any indulgence to persons so implacably disaffected
as the Episcopalians were, since it might prove very dangerous to the
State. Anything which passed between two such men is interesting to
posterity; and therefore a further story is preserved, to the effect,
that Cromwell--suffering at the time from a boil--remarked to his right
reverend visitor, "If this core were once out, I should be soon well."
"I doubt the core lies deeper," is the reported reply. "There is a core
in the heart which must be taken out, or else it will not be well."
"Ah," rejoined the Protector, "so there is indeed." Supposing the story
to be true, the self-application of such reproof did no less credit to
Cromwell, than its honest administration did to Ussher. Leaving the
smoke and bustle of London for the breezy downs and rural scenery of
Reigate, the aged scholar there pursued his studies so far as failing
strength permitted him; and, there, with a calm mind, joining in prayer
with the chaplain of the Countess of Peterborough, he at once ended
his days and his sorrows. The Protector ordered a public funeral for
the deceased Bishop, and contributed £200 towards the expenses--an
order which, whatever might be the extra cost entailed by it upon
his relatives, was intended as a mark of honour, and was so regarded
by his friends and by the clergy of London. The latter followed the
plumed hearse from Somerset House to Westminster Abbey, accompanied by
a guard of soldiers and a vast concourse of people. Cromwell permitted
the burial service of the Prayer Book to be used on the occasion, a
circumstance which appears the more remarkable, when we recollect that
it occurred just after the severest of all his measures against the
Episcopal Church.[318]
[Sidenote: _Hall._]
The pious Joseph Hall--the English Seneca--after the "hard measure"
meted out to him by Parliament, went to live in the hamlet of Heigham,
just outside one of the gates of the old city, of which he had been
Lord Bishop. There, in a rented house--now the little Elizabethan inn
bearing the sign of the Dolphin[319]--he spent the remnant of his
days in seclusion and poverty; suffering from strangury and stone;
but bearing both his privations and his disease with the patience and
magnanimity of Christian faith. His will, after bequeathing his soul to
God, directed his body to be interred without any funeral pomp--with
this "monition," that he did not hold God's house a meet repository
for the bodies of the greatest saints: but his executors, whilst
"admiring the lowly mind of the departed," buried him in the chancel of
the little church; where the people of the hamlet still behold every
Sunday his mural monument in black marble, bearing the figure of a
gilt skeleton, which holds in its hand a scroll inscribed with the
admonitory words, "_Debemus morti, nos, nostraque_."
Morton, Bishop of Durham, a man of High Church views, had, in the
height of the popular fury against Prelatists, been assailed, as he
rode in his coach through the streets; and when some one remarked, "He
is a good man," "No matter," the Polyphemus of the mob replied, "he is
a Bishop." Eight hundred pounds a year was voted him by Parliament,
which, however, as it is reported, was never paid; but he did receive
the sum of one thousand pounds, with which he discharged his debts and
purchased an annuity. He was turned out of his house in London just
before the execution of Charles. Having lived awhile successively with
old Royalist friends, including the Earl of Rutland, he travelled up
one day to London, and was overtaken and joined on the road, in the
friendly fashion of those times, by Sir Christopher Yelverton, who had
some share in the humiliation of the Church. Ignorant of his travelling
companion, the knight, as their horses ambled on side by side, asked
the bishop who he was; the Bishop, having in this respect the advantage
of the knight, replied, with a dash of brave Episcopal pride which
rose above present humiliation, "I am that old man, the Bishop of
Durham, notwithstanding all your votes." To the enquiry whither he
went, he replied, "To London, to live a little while, and then die."
The incident is worth relating, as a specimen of the kindly English
feeling which in many an unknown case tempered party animosities. Sir
Christopher entered into friendly discourse with the ejected Bishop,
took him home to his seat in Northamptonshire, appointed him tutor
to his son, and left his friendship as an heirloom to the pupil--who
imbibed his tutor's love for Episcopacy, and in 1659 reverently closed
the old man's eyes in his 95th year.[320]
[Sidenote: _Other Bishops._]
Ralph Brownrigg, of Exeter--of whom, when made a Bishop, Fuller
observes he was "_defied_ by some who almost _deified_ him before, in
whose eyes he seemed the blacker for wearing white sleeves"--after
losing his bishopric found shelter at Sonning, a pleasant little
village on the banks of the Thames, not far from the town of Reading.
There, in the hospitable mansion of Thomas Rich, he enjoyed respectful
entertainment during the Protectorate; and about a year before his
death received the appointment of preacher at the Temple. "The deserved
opinion of his goodness," we are informed by Fuller, "had peaceable
possession in the hearts of the Presbyterian party; and I observed at
his funeral that the prime persons of all persuasions were present,
whose judgments going several ways met all in a general grief for his
decease. He was buried on the cost of both Temples, to his great but
their greater honour."[321]
Thomas Winniffe,[322] who was a Bishop with Puritan predilections, and
who was raised to the see of Lincoln at the beginning of the Church
troubles--by way of conciliation, when it was too late--found little
besides sorrow in the possession of his mitre. Driven from his house at
Westminster he went to live at Lambourne, in Essex, "having formerly
been the painful minister thereof;" and there he died in the year 1654,
leaving a goodly reputation for piety and learning.
John Owen and Roger Manwaring, two Welsh bishops, the first of
St. Asaph, the second of St. David's--like the rest of those just
enumerated--died before the Restoration, Owen, in the year 1651,
Manwaring, at Carmarthen, in 1653.[323]
The fortunes of the Bishops who survived the return of Charles the
Second, and the re-establishment of Prelacy, demand a few notices.
In the sequestered village of Langley, in the County of Bucks,
King, Bishop of Chichester, spent some years at the seat of his
brother-in-law, Sir Richard Hobart. Wren, "that bird of ill omen,"
driven from his nest at Ely, had to undergo some severe retaliation
for past offences; and became so reduced in circumstances, that when
his son took a degree at the University of Oxford in the year 1660,
the father had not wherewith to pay the fees. Juxon, the amiable
Metropolitan who attended Charles on the scaffold, retained the use
of Fulham Palace up to the year 1647--"reserved, like Ulysses by the
Cyclops, for the last morsel" and, after the Whitehall tragedy, he
retired to his manor of Little Compton, in Gloucestershire, where he
remained until the Restoration. Skinner, Bishop of Oxford, during the
whole period of the Commonwealth enjoyed the Rectory of Launton, where
he read prayers and conferred orders. Warner, Bishop of Rochester, a
man of wealth--and, after compounding for his estates, possessing
a handsome residue--largely helped his suffering brethren, at the
expense of some self-denial, which led him to say--for he was a man
of humour with a little self-complacency--"that he did eat the crag
ends of the neck of mutton himself, that he might leave the poor the
shoulder." Brian Duppa, an ecclesiastic of moderate opinions, and a
graceful courtier, who succeeded Davenant at Salisbury, spent some
time at Richmond in solitude and devotion; but he availed himself of
opportunities to preserve and revive the Episcopal Church. From one of
his letters we learn that in the year 1653 meetings were being held to
consult "_ne ecclesia aliquid detrementi caperet_, especially in such a
sad juncture of time, when the well-being of it could hardly fall into
consideration, and the great care was, that though stripped of all her
outward helps, yet there might be a being left her."[324] Piers, Bishop
of Wells, whose Episcopal administration had irritated the Puritans,
lived at Cuddesdon, upon a considerable estate of his own, which the
party in power "had been so merciful as to leave him."
[Sidenote: _Bramhall._]
There was at that time another Prelate who by his ability, devotion,
and attainments, adorned the Irish bench. Bramhall, Bishop of
Londonderry, fled to the Continent after the ruin of the Royal cause,
and then having returned to Ireland, and undergone great dangers and
difficulties, he fled again and had a narrow escape. "This escape of
his is accounted very wonderful, for 'the little bark he was in was
closely hunted by two of the Parliament frigates, many of which
were on that coast; and when they were come so near that all hopes of
being saved were taken away, ... on a sudden the wind slackened into
a perfect calm, and, as it were, flew into the sails of the little
vessel, and carried her away in view.'" "On his arrival in foreign
parts, Providence supplied him with a considerable sum of money, of
which he greatly stood in need; for having had seven hundred pounds
long due to him, for salmon caught in the river Bann, and sent abroad,
which debt he looked upon as lost, he was now so fortunate as to
recover it; which proved a seasonable relief both to him and to many
Royalists that partook of his generosity. During this second time
of his being abroad, 'he had many disputes about religion with the
learned of all nations, sometimes occasionally, and at other times by
appointment and formal challenge;' and wrote several things in defence
of the Church of England. He likewise purposed to draw a parallel
between the liturgy of the Church of England and the public forms of
the Protestant Churches; and 'for that end designed a journey into
Spain;' 'but he met with an unexpected diversion in his first day's
journey into that kingdom;' 'for he no sooner came into the house where
he intended to refresh himself but he was known and called by his name
by the hostess. And his lordship admiring at his being discovered, she
soon revealed the secret, and shewed him his own picture, and assured
him there were several of them upon the road; that, being known by
them, he might be seized and carried to the Inquisition, and that
her husband, among others, had power to that purpose, which he would
certainly make use of if he found him. The Bishop saw evidently he
was a condemned man, being already hanged _in effigie_, and therefore
made use of the advertisement, and escaped out of the power of that
Court.'"[325] As an example of the reverses suffered in those days, and
to indicate the strange employments to which the highest dignitaries
might have to betake themselves, it may be mentioned, that Bramhall
acted as prize-master to Charles at the port of Flushing, where, in
person, he sold captured freights, and had often to complain of the
indignities to which he and his fellow Royalists were exposed.
[Sidenote: _Bramhall._]
Although not compiling memoirs of these sufferers, yet to interest
the reader, as well as illustrate the circumstances and sentiments of
Episcopalians during the Commonwealth, we venture to notice certain
passages in Bramhall's writings, which were composed by him during
the period of his exile. In his "Just Vindication of the Church of
England," printed at London (1654), the author (who wrote in Holland)
complains of the Episcopalians having to suffer so much for their
principles--"being chased as vagabonds into the merciless world to beg
relief of strangers." Then, comparing the conduct of Papists abroad and
at home during an earlier period with the conduct of English Churchmen
of his own day towards indigent brethren, he charges the latter with
neglecting to manifest sympathy and help. Foreign princes and their own
countrymen of the same communion had founded colleges in other lands
for Roman Catholics who were driven from England; and the age before
the civil wars had been as fruitful in works of Protestant piety and
charity as any age preceding it since the conversion of Britain. Hence,
although foreign assistance could not be hoped for, yet a larger supply
from home might have been expected, inasmuch as English Episcopalians
then were much more numerous than English Catholics had been at the
period referred to. "Hath the sword," he goes on to ask, "devoured up
all the charitable Obadiahs in our land?" or, is there no man that
lays "the affliction of Joseph to heart?" A great lack of love and
zeal amongst brethren of the same faith in England alone could justify
these interrogations--for Bramhall laments no want of ability in his
friends to succour the wanderers, but only a want of will. The exiled
Prelate could only cast himself and his companions upon the help of
Heaven. "God, that maintained His people in the wilderness without the
ordinary supply of food or raiment, will not desert us until 'He turn
our captivity as the rivers in the south.' Where human help faileth,
Divine begins."[326]
[Sidenote: _Bramhall._]
Turning to Bramhall's "Vindication of himself and the Episcopal clergy
from the Presbyterian charge of Popery,"--a book written about the
year 1659, though not published till 1672[327]--in reply to Baxter's
"Treatise of the Grotian Religion," we find in it a defence of the
conduct of Episcopalians in the days of their prosperity. Baxter had
complained of the persecutions inflicted by them upon the Puritans.
According to him, in some places, it had been much more dangerous for
a minister to preach a lecture once or twice on the lord's Day, or
to expound the Catechism, than it had been never to preach at all.
Bramhall replies: "If preachers shall not content themselves to sow
the wheat over again, but shall sow tares above the wheat; if they
shall seek to introduce new doctrines, new disciplines, and new forms
of worship, by popular sermons, different from and destructive to those
which are established by law, who can blame the magistrates, political
and ecclesiastical, if they begin to look about them? A seditious
orator is dangerous everywhere, but nowhere more than in the pulpit.
Then blame not magistrates, if they punish seditious or schismatical
preachers more than one who is no preacher. All laws, and all prudent
magistrates, regard public dangers more than particular defects."[328]
The Bishop did not see that he employed a two-edged sword, and that
while aiming a blow at his adversary, he ran the risk of receiving,
through counter-thrusts, a wound from the back stroke of his own
weapon. If to preach doctrines contrary to those which were established
by law deserved chastisement from the magistrate--if such preaching was
seditious preaching, then the Commonwealth Government was justified in
depriving and silencing Episcopalian ministers. Bramhall vindicated
his own party in having done the very same sort of thing which he now
complained of as unrighteous when done by his opponents. It is plain
enough that both parties were in the wrong, and that each furnished the
other with a miserable pretext for revengeful injustice. And when the
same writer, comparing Nonconformist with Episcopal sufferers, quietly
says: the former suffered for faction, and the latter for faith,[329]
and so concludes the subject,--everybody must smile to see how he
assumes as settled the very point which was in dispute. His opponents
could just as easily say that they were faithful, and that he and his
brethren were factious. It is the old story--as old as human nature,
and as modern as this morning's newspaper.
The Episcopalians were exposed to a cross fire from the Puritans,
who charged them with Popery, and from the Papists, who charged them
with schism. The story of the Nag's Head consecration was revived.
Laud had treated Presbyterians and Independents as schismatics. M. de
la Milletiere, counsellor in ordinary to the King of France, in an
epistle, written in the year 1653, with a view of inviting Charles
II. to embrace the Catholic faith, maintained, that everybody knew
the Archbishop, who had been nourished in the English schism, had no
other thought than to reunite in one body the people who were divided
into sects amongst themselves, and to make himself chief head of one
schismatical Church. "And we see," he adds, "God hath permitted that
his own people, divided against itself, hath caused his head to be cut
off." This passage illustrates the view which was entertained of Laud
and his followers by foreign Roman Catholics, and also of the sort of
controversy the refugees had to maintain in their travels through Roman
Catholic countries. Bramhall published at the Hague, in 1653, a reply
to this performance, repelling the charge of schism, and vindicating
the memory of his friend. He calls Laud a most glorious martyr, a man
of profound learning, exemplary life, clean hands, a most sincere
heart, a patron of learning, and a friend of order and uniformity,
but not for sinister ends.[330] The defence was honestly written, and
indicated what many honest exiles thought of Laud--how they dwelt on
his virtues, and were totally blind to the folly, mischief, and sin
of his intolerance; but by holding up to admiration such a Prelate,
without a word of condemnation for his faults, Bramhall and others
gave bad omen of what they would do themselves if they should ever be
restored to power.
[Sidenote: _Bramhall._]
An elaborate confutation of the Nag's Head fable engaged the pen
of the same writer, and issued from a press at the Hague in the
year 1658.[331] In connection with his zeal and diligence in this
controversy it is worth while to notice the suspicions which
Bramhall entertained of Romanist intrigues in England throughout the
Commonwealth era. These suspicions on the part of Presbyterians and
Baptists have been already described. There must have been immense
exaggeration in such reports; yet their extensive circulation amongst
people of different opinions--all of them, however, agreeing in a
hatred of Rome--is somewhat remarkable. Impossible as it now is to
ascertain the amount of truth which these rumours might contain, they
are curious as signs of what was a prevalent belief in those days. That
the reader may see for himself what such a man as Bramhall heard and
credited on this subject, we subjoin the greater part of a letter to
Ussher, which he wrote in the year 1654:--
[Sidenote: _Bramhall on Romanists._]
"It plainly appears that in the year 1646, by order from Rome, above
one hundred of the Romish clergy were sent into England, consisting of
English, Scotch, and Irish, who had been educated in France, Italy,
Germany, and Spain; part of these within the several schools there
appointed for their instructions. In each of these Romish nurseries,
these scholars were taught several handicraft-trades and callings,
as their ingenuities were most bending, besides their orders or
functions of that Church. They have many yet at Paris a fitting to be
sent over, who twice in the week oppose one the other; one pretending
Presbytery, the other Independency; some Anabaptism, and the others
contrary tenets--dangerous and prejudicial to the Church of England,
and to all the Reformed here abroad. But they are wisely preparing
to prevent their designs, which I heartily wish were considered in
England among the wise there. When the Romish orders do thus argue pro
and con, there is appointed one of the learned of those convents to
take notes and to judge: and as he finds their fancies, whether for
Presbytery, Independency, Anabaptism, Atheism, or for any new tenets,
so, accordingly, they be to act, and to exercise their wits. Upon
their permission, when they be sent abroad, they enter their names
in the convent registry, also their licences; if a Franciscan, if a
Dominician, or Jesuit, or any other order, having several names there
entered in their licence; in case of a discovery in one place, then
to fly to another, and there to change their names or habit. For an
assurance of their constancy to their several orders, they are to give
monthly intelligence to their fraternities of all affairs wherever
they be dispersed; so that the English abroad know news better than ye
at home. When they return into England, they are taught their lesson:
to say, (if any enquire from whence they come,) that they are poor
Christians formerly that fled beyond sea for their religion sake, and
are now returned, with glad news, to enjoy their liberty of conscience.
The one hundred men that went over in 1646, were most of them soldiers
in the Parliament's army, and were daily to correspond with those
Romanists in our late King's army that were lately at Oxford, and
pretended to fight for his sacred Majesty; for, at that time, there
were some Roman Catholics who did not know the design a contriving
against our Church and State of England. But the year following, 1647,
many of those Romish Orders who came over the year before were in
consultation together, knowing each other. And those of the King's
party, asking some why they took with the Parliament's side, and asking
others whether they were bewitched to turn Puritans, not knowing the
design; but at last, secret bulls and licences being produced by those
of the Parliament's side, it was declared between them, there was no
better design to confound the Church of England than by pretending
liberty of conscience. It was argued then that England would be a
second Holland, a Commonwealth; and if so, what would become of the
King? It was answered, 'Would to God it were come to that point.' It
was again replied, 'Yourselves have preached so much against Rome and
his Holiness, that Rome and her Romanists will be little the better
for that change:' but it was answered, 'You shall have mass sufficient
for a hundred thousand in a short space, and the governors never the
wiser.' Then some of the mercifullest of the Romanists said, 'This
cannot be done unless the King die;' upon which argument, the Romish
Orders thus licensed, and in the Parliament army, wrote unto their
several convents, but especially to the Sorbonists, whether it may be
scrupled to make away our late godly King and his Majesty his son, our
King and master, who, blessed be God, hath escaped their Romish snares
laid for him? It was returned from the Sorbonists, that it was lawful
for Roman Catholics to work changes in Governments for the Mother
Church's advancement, and chiefly in an heretical kingdom; and so
lawfully make away the King."[332]
[Sidenote: _Cosin--Morley._]
Concluding this imperfect story respecting the Bishops, we now relate
what happened to the other clergy. Several of them went abroad.
Cosin, the High Church Dean of Peterborough, was of this number. At
Charenton, near Paris, according to Walker, he kept up the English
Church discipline and worship by the Common Prayer, recovered some
who were inclined to Popery, and had encounters with several Jesuits
and Romish priests; but his tendencies in another direction appear in
"Evelyn's Diary," where it is related that, "The Dean of Peterborough
preached on the Feast of Pentecost; perstringing those of Geneva for
their irreverence of the blessed Virgin."[333] The same diarist gives
a glimpse of the ceremonies in the chapel of the exiles: "The King and
Duke received the sacrament first by themselves, the Lords Byron and
Wilmot holding the long towel all along the altar."[334] To shew the
sincerity of the Dean, who had raised--and we do not wonder at it,
when we think of his childish ritualism--such a storm of Puritan
indignation against himself; and as an indication of his courage and
his constancy--a trait of character, no doubt common in that age, as
it is wont to be amongst all but the basest of mankind, when storms of
persecution try their attachment to the Church of their childhood and
their convictions--we venture to quote a few lines from one of Cosin's
letters to his friend Sancroft, who was destined to occupy the chair of
the Primacy, but was at the time of the Restoration a wanderer abroad:
"I am right glad to hear still, (as I have been told by divers persons
heretofore,) how firm and unmoved you continue your own standing in the
midst of these great and violent storms that are now raised against
the Church of England; which, for my part, notwithstanding the outward
glory and dress that she had, be in these evil times taken from her,
yet I honour and reverence above all the other churches of the world;
for she bears upon her, more signally than any other that I know does,
the marks of Christ, which, when all is done, will be our greatest
glory."[335]
Dr. Morley, in company with Cosin, attended the English Court in the
city of Paris in the year 1651.[336] After being engaged in the
education of Hyde's family during part of their exile, at a period when
they were "in great want already, and likely to be in more and more,
even to a very great extremity, if God in mercy did not provide for
it by some extraordinary means, beyond all visible probability,"--he
became chaplain at Heidelberg to Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, at a
salary of £50 per annum, with permission "to officiate to the Queen's
family according to the liturgy of the Church of England, without
any subordination to the classis." He had been a friend of Falkland,
of Chillingworth, and of Waller, and before the wars was thought to
favour the Puritans. Burnet says he was doctrinally a Calvinist, and
was pious and charitable, but he also speaks of him as extremely
passionate, and full of obstinacy--a statement which Baxter confirms
in his account of the Savoy disputations.[337] He had in early days
been "one of Ben Jonson's sons," a circumstance which accords with his
life-long reputation for brilliant wit. That gift, always dangerous,
is particularly so to a clergyman; and Morley, who is said to have
been "keen, but inoffensive," though admired by his friends for his
companionable qualities, was condemned by many for social habits and
a tone of conversation unbecoming a Christian minister.
[Sidenote: _Basire._]
Isaac Basire, who had been chaplain to King Charles and to the Bishop
of Lichfield, and who had held a Prebendal stall and a Rectory,
being deprived of all his preferments, found refuge in Rouen, his
native city, whilst his wife and children were encompassed by pecuniary
difficulties at home. After travelling with pupils in Italy and
elsewhere, he visited the islands of the Mediterranean, and also the
shores of Greece--where he preached, by invitation of the Metropolitan,
before his bishops and the clergy. He visited Naples and Sicily, where
he officiated for some weeks on board ship. He went also to Aleppo
and Jerusalem, had conferences with the Greek and Latin clergy, and
interested himself in the Coptic Churches: at the same time he aimed
at reforming the Eastern Christians, and endeavoured to promulgate
the doctrines and formularies of English Episcopalians.[338] We are
perfectly ready to honour a man who, in the hour of his spiritual
mother's humiliation, and when driven from her altars, vindicated her
priesthood, maintained her ritual, and diffused her principles;
but we must add, that Basire attached most unjustifiable importance
to certain ecclesiastical matters, and went beyond bounds in his
episcopalian zeal, betraying, at the same time, a strong hatred to
those who in England held the reins of government.
[Sidenote: _Jeremy Taylor._]
Let us return to our own country, to trace other and more illustrious
Episcopal confessors in their various retreats. Jeremy Taylor, after
submitting to the drudgery of school-keeping in a Welsh village, found
for a while a congenial and charming home at Golden Grove. There--to
use some of his own richly-coloured words--as the highest branches of
the wood stooped, and made a smooth path for the winds on the top of
all its glories--and as the sun so gloriously opened the little eye of
heaven and sent away the spirits of darkness, and called up the lark to
matins, and gilded the fringes of a cloud, and wept great and little
showers; and as the images of the trees hung over the water, and were
reflected from the bottom, and as the lark rose from his bed of grass,
and climbed above the clouds, and was beaten back with the loud sighing
of an eastern wind--the great poet-preacher gathered images for his
discourses. And again, as he heard the faint echo of a distant valley,
and watched the little bee that feeds on dew, and pried into the ivy
creeping at the foot of the oak, he found lessons of instructive
piety to delight mankind. Looking at what Taylor there worked up into
his marvellous imagination, it may be truly said, "the gold of that
land was good;" but his temporary sojourn in a paradise-like retreat
was followed by imprisonment in Chepstow Castle, and afterwards in
the Tower of London, in consequence of incautious language which
he used in reference to his Puritan oppressors, and because of a
"superstitious" engraving of our Saviour at prayer, prefixed by his
publisher to the "Collection of Offices." Taylor's theology, which
was surpassed by his eloquence, brought him into trouble with the
calmer and more careful Divines of his own Church, as well as with the
Presbyterians; his "Treatise on Repentance" drawing tears from the
eyes of Sanderson, who complained that his friend was pulling down
the ancient landmarks of the Christian faith. His controversy with
Jeanes, the Presbyterian, proved that Taylor had a quick temper--that
instead of "receiving furies and indiscretions like a stone into a bed
of moss and soft compliances," he could send out angry words like fire
when the flint and steel come into collision. With ruffled temper,
when the controversy was over, he remarked: "I have been so pushed at
by herds and flocks of people that follow anybody that whistles to
them, or drives them to pasture, that I am grown afraid of any truth
that seems chargeable with singularity;" and thus it appears that
he had to pay the penalty of unpopularity and opposition, which all
men must pay who, whether right or wrong, venture to differ from the
theological opinions of their brethren. In a nobler and sweeter tone he
confessed, when the wings of his spirit were smoothed once more: "For
my part I have learned to humble myself, and to adore the inscrutable
paths of the Most High. God and truth are still the same, though the
foundations of the world be shaken." And again: "We are reduced to
that religion which no man can forbid--which we can keep in the midst
of a persecution--by which the martyrs in the days of our fathers
went to heaven--that by which we can be servants of God, and receive
the Spirit of Christ, and make use of His comforts, and live in His
love, and in charity with all men, and they that do so cannot perish."
With exquisite delicacy and pathos, Taylor alludes to his poverty in
a letter to Evelyn (1656): "Sir, I know not when I shall be able to
come to London, for our being stripped of the little reliques of our
fortune remaining after the shipwreck leaves us not cordage nor sails
sufficient to bear me thither." Taylor is supposed, but not with any
sufficient foundation, to have at one period held a pastoral charge in
London; certainly he obtained induction to a Lectureship at Lisburn,
in Ireland. Residing at Portmore, in the enjoyment of Lord Conway's
hospitality, he found repeated there some of the charming scenes and
also some of the associations and advantages of Golden Grove. Yet,
again, the great preacher's repose was interrupted by a fanatical
Presbyterian, who informed against him as a dangerous man who used the
sign of the cross in baptism. Writing in 1659-60, Taylor remarks: "I
had been in the worst of our winter weather sent for to Dublin by our
late Anabaptist Commissioners, and found the evil of it so great that
in my going I began to be ill, but in my return had my ill redoubled."
The Restoration found him bringing through the press the _Ductor
Dubitantium_.[339]
[Sidenote: _Sanderson and Hammond._]
Of those who were ejected from the University of Oxford, Sanderson and
Hammond were the most distinguished. Their story is amongst the most
beautiful legends of the age, and their loving intercourse reminds us
of the friendship of Basil and Gregory in far earlier times. As their
lives were entwined round each other, so are their memories. Sanderson
retired to Boothby parish, where he continued to minister according
to Episcopalian rites, only disturbed occasionally by soldiers while
he was reading prayers. They told him how God could be served more
acceptably, and then they enforced their advice by tearing the liturgy
to pieces. A prudent and affectionate Parliamentary friend recommended
him not to be strict in reading all the prayers, "especially if the
soldiers came to watch him," "for which reasons he did vary somewhat
from the strict rules of the rubric." His admiring biographer sets
down the form of confession which, perhaps in consequence of such
advice, was used by this Divine, and it shews what minute variations
were adopted by clergymen in order to evade the ordinance against the
use of the Common Prayer Book.[340] Sanderson preached every Sunday,
solicitously enquiring "what he might do to speak more plainly or more
movingly: whether his extemporary wording might not be a defect, and
the like." He daily read prayers, and the time between doing this and
the hour of dinner he employed in instructing the children of the
family with whom he lived; "observing diligently the little deviations
of their manners, and applying remedies unto them."
After an abortive attempt had been made by some Royalists in the
neighbourhood of Tunbridge to help the King, Hammond, then living
there, felt obliged to remove; and, upon visiting his old tutor, Dr.
Buckner, "in such a habit as that exigence made necessary," he, under
his friend's hospitable roof, though "no valuer of trifles," had so
extraordinary a dream that he could not then despise or ever afterwards
forget it. "He thought himself and a multitude of others to have been
abroad in a bright and cheerful day, when on a sudden there seemed a
separation to be made, and he, with the far less number, to be placed
at a distance from the rest; and then, the clouds gathering, a most
tempestuous storm arose, with thundering and lightnings, with spouts
of impetuous rain, and violent gusts of wind, and whatever else might
add unto a scene of horror, particularly balls of fire, that shot
themselves amongst the ranks of those that stood in the lesser party;
when a gentle whisper seemed to interrupt those other louder noises,
saying: _Be still, and ye shall receive no harm_. Amidst these terrors,
the doctor falling to his prayers, soon after the tempest ceased, and
that well-known cathedral anthem begun, _Come, Lord Jesus, come away_,
with which he awoke. The correspondent event of all which he found
verified signally in the preservation both of himself and his friends
in doing of their duties; the which with much content he was used to
mention. Beside, being himself taken to the choir of angels at the
close of that land-hurricane of ours, whereof that dismal apparition
was only a faint emblem, he gave thereby too literal a completion to
his dream, and the unhappy credit of bordering upon prophecy."[341]
[Sidenote: _Sanderson._]
Hammond went to see Sanderson at Boothby, when Hammond persuaded him
to attempt the practice of _memoriter_ preaching. Early on a Sunday
morning, they walked to a neighbouring church, where the minister
requested the favour of a sermon. Sanderson entered the pulpit, having
previously put the MS. of the discourse, which he had committed to
memory, into his friend's hands. The effort to preach in this way
turned out a humiliating failure. The preacher, before he had delivered
the third part of what he meant to say, became very confused, and "so
lost as to the matter," that his learned auditor was frightened, and
many of the village congregation discovered that there was something
wrong. "Good doctor," said Sanderson, as they were returning home,
"give me my sermon, and know that neither you nor any man living, shall
ever persuade me to preach again without my books." "Good doctor,"
returned the other, "be not angry; for if I persuade you to preach
again without book, I will give you leave to burn all those that I am
master of."[342]
Another interesting glimpse of Sanderson is caught in "Walton's Lives."
When he came up to London in 1655, the worthy angler met him near
Little Britain, "in sad-coloured clothes--far from being costly." One
can see the noble countenance of the man--with his lofty forehead, fine
regular features, full round eyes, white moustache, and trimly-peaked
beard;--only he was now dressed in lay attire, and that of a very
humble kind, instead of appearing, as in his portrait, with surplice,
scarf, and college cap. It was raining at the time, and he and Walton
turned aside to gossip under a pent-house; when, the wind driving in
their faces, they adjourned to "a cleanly house," where they had bread,
cheese, ale, and a fire for their money. Their conversation naturally
turned upon the Church; and Sanderson bewailed the abolishing of the
Prayer Book and the use of extempore prayer, pronouncing the Collects
"the most passionate, proper, and most elegant expressions that any
language ever afforded." The Liturgy, the Psalms, and the language
of devotion, he complained, had been exchanged for needless debates
about free-will, election, and reprobation. Such lamentations no doubt
formed the staple of much table-talk amongst the class to which the
ejected Oxonian belonged; and in the contempt poured upon extempore
prayer he manifested the onesidedness of Episcopalian prejudices. He
and his opponents were not in a position to regard fairly each other's
methods of devotion. Mutual war had exasperated the passions, so as to
produce in both a stone-blindness to that which was good beyond their
own narrow enclosures. The same tone of prejudice also led Sanderson to
point at Puritanism another shaft--which larger acquaintance with human
nature, and a deeper sense of justice, will lead the moral censor,
with a slight modification of phraseology, to apply to hypocrites of
all sects. They thought, said the Anglican Churchman, that "they might
be religious first, and then just and merciful; that they might sell
their consciences, and yet have something left that was worth keeping;
that they might be sure they were elected, though their lives were
visibly scandalous; that to be cunning was to be wise; that to be rich
was to be happy, though their wealth was got without justice or mercy;
that to be busy in things they understood not, was no sin." The writer
and other clear-headed men besides him did not see, that after all,
the charge of hypocrisy applies, not to the thoroughly honest, though
fanatical Puritan of the Commonwealth, but to all such persons as
for awhile assumed the livery of a sect for their own selfish ends:
amongst whom were many who a few years afterwards declared, that
they had been Episcopalian in heart throughout the whole period, and
had only "submitted to the times." Curious, too, is it to find this
distinguished man, at the end of his interesting conversation with
Walton, starting the idea, that the way to restore the country to a
more meek and Christian temper was to prepare a body of Church divinity
in fifty-two homilies, each to be of such length as not to exceed a
quarter of an hour or twenty minutes' reading.[343] Melancholy it is to
learn that this scholar and Divine, in the year 1658, was in so low a
condition as to be glad to receive £50 as a present from Dr. Barlow.
[Sidenote: _Hammond's Letters._]
Sanderson's friend, Dr. Hammond, wins our heart at once, as we hear him
say: "He delighted to be loved, not reverenced," and he excites our
veneration, too, as he exclaims, with vehemence: "Oh! what a glorious
thing, how rich a prize for the expense of a man's whole life, were
it to be the instrument of rescuing one soul!" He lived with a family
in which he acted as chaplain, when Cromwell's intolerant decree of
1655 disturbed his peace. Roused to righteous indignation, he wrote
his "Parænesis," in which "he resented with the highest passion" the
Protector's edict; at the same time he looked, as he says, upon this
dispensation of Providence as if God pronounced him unworthy to do
any service, and as if He reproached him of former unprofitableness,
by casting him out now like straw upon a dunghill. Hammond being
one who made the best of circumstances--saying, with Epictetus,
"that everything has two handles: if the one prove hot, and not to
be touched, we may take the other that is more temperate"--always
advocated quiet submission to Providence during what he considered to
be afflictive times.[344]
[Sidenote: _Hammond's Letters._]
Several of his letters are preserved in the British Museum. In one of
these, addressed to Sheldon, afterwards Bishop of London, so early as
October the 14th, 1649, he remarks, respecting his friend: "I think,
when I saw Dr. S[anderson] last, certainly he told me he used the
Common Prayer, otherwise I wonder not that he that disuses it, should
think fit to go to their churches that do omit it. When you meet with
him, endeavour to infuse some courage into him, the want of which
may betray his reason. His opinion expressed will betray many."[345]
The method pursued by Sanderson, of using the Liturgy with verbal
alterations, so as to give the appearance of not adopting it, when
he employed it in substance, displeased and perplexed some of his
episcopal acquaintance; but beyond this--as it appears from another
letter by Hammond--his companion once thought of becoming associated
in public religious ministrations "with the Grantham Lecturers." To do
such a thing, Hammond, altogether a stiffer Churchman than Sanderson,
regarded as illegal--as not allowed by the authority of the Bishop, who
was still alive, and might be consulted--as countenancing schismatics,
and therefore an act of schism--and as not right, even if the end were
good. The rest of the letter is so indicative of the temper of the best
High Churchmen in those days, that it deserves to be quoted at length.
"I cannot believe that the end, by your letter mentioned, is good for
to sweeten them by complying with them in schismatical acts; and making
them believe themselves pardonable, whilst they continue and remain
unreformed in their schism, is to confirm them in their course and so
to scandalize them as well as others, to put a stumbling-block in their
way to reformation. Certainly the greater charity to those moderate
reformable Presbyters were to assist, and hasten the perfecting of
their repentance, and renouncing of their erroneous practices, and
then if the Bishop give leave to Dr. Sa[nderson] to erect some other
lecture, they will sure come and combine with him. And for those that
mean not this, 'tis certain that they are not to be persuaded, that
if the laws regain their power, they shall be tolerated (their way
being so unreconcilable with Prelacy), and as certain that instead of
serving Dr. Sanderson's end they desire to serve themselves of him,
and by his presence and joining with them, to have him thought such
as they--and so hath Mr. Baxter already divided the Prelatical Clergy
into two parts, one exemplified by Dr. Ussher and Dr. Sanderson; the
other styled, in gross, Cassandrian, Grotian Papists; and several of
his friends marked out by some circumstances to be of that number.
Lastly, he may do well to consider whether, if from writing for the
Engagement first and then the laying aside the Liturgy, he proceed
farther to this, it will not be after more easy to superstruct on these
beginnings more suitable practices than it hath been to reconcile these
to his former writings [and?] persuasions. And whether, on the other
side, this be not a season much better for him to appear in upholding
the truth by answering the London Presbyters' vindication (in sixty
sheets shortly coming out) of their government ordination, &c., than
to seem (a person of such authority) to consent to it by practising
with them."[346] From this communication it appears how strongly
such men as Hammond opposed the idea of any scheme of ecclesiastical
comprehension--how determined they were to maintain the exclusive
system of the Episcopal Church, and how honestly they did so, when by
relaxing a little the bonds so strictly drawn, they might have gained
some freedom for themselves. Their integrity in that respect deserves
credit, but it also shews how hopeless was any idea of union between
Episcopalians and Presbyterians after the Restoration, when men who
were really so good were also so narrow-minded.
Another epistle from the same pen presents the writer under another
aspect. Zealous for the preservation of Episcopacy, he proposed to
contribute munificently to a fund for the support of learned persons
who might advance its interests. The proposal was addressed to Sheldon,
who had been ejected from All Souls, when Hammond had suffered
expulsion from his Professorship. "Let me mention to you an hasty
undigested fancy of mine suggested to me by reading the conclusion
of Bishop Bramhall's excellent book of schism, pages 276, 277. It is
this: What if you and Dr. Henchman and I should endeavour to raise
£600 per annum (each of us gaining subscriptions for £200) for seven
years, to maintain a society of twenty exiled scholars; and, when we
discern the thing feasible, communicate it to Bishop Bramhall, and
require of him a catalogue of twenty such, whose wants and desires of
such a recess, in some convenient place (by him to be thought of also)
might make it a fit charity to recommend to pious persons? Next, if
this be not unreasonable to be endeavoured, then, tell me whether it
must be privately carried or may be publicly avowed, and what else you
can think of to perfect and form this sudden rude conceit? which, when
I have also communicated to Dr. Henchman, I shall be content to be
laughed at by either of you."[347]
[Sidenote: _Hammond's Death._]
Dr. Hammond died before the Restoration. His patience during his last
sufferings, which were extremely great, his reliance upon Jesus Christ
as the Saviour of sinners, his humility and thankfulness, and his dying
words, "Lord make haste," are duly recorded by his biographer Fell.
But, as some additional information respecting his disease, and the
temper in which he bore it, is supplied by a letter of his widow, we
venture to introduce it here:--"It is my great misfortune I neither can
send to you as I would, nor hear from you as I desire, for sometimes my
friend is not here when your letters come, then they are delivered to
him, wheresoever he is, which many times makes it very long before I
can return an answer; but now my long silence was occasioned by my dear
husband's sickness and death, which, though my loss was very great,
yet, when I consider God's mercy was so infinitely shewed both to him
and me, giving us, first, many years of comfort together and life to
a very great age, and then a gentle correction to bring him home to
Him, and gave him the comfort of his children about him, and be a great
comfort and example to them of patience and humility, submitting to
God's will in all. Indeed, I cannot say he had better health at any
time, since we came into these parts, than he had the last very hard
winter; overcoming it with so much life and spirit, I believed he
might have lived some years more, till this accident happened upon
him, which proved an ulcer under his tongue. At first I thought little
of it, neither did he much complain, I used such means as I had, and
thought good for that purpose, but he still continued ill; then we had
a surgeon at least two months in hand, making no difficulty at all of
healing of it; but I, seeing it continue so long and no change to the
better, I desired him to deal plainly with me, and what his opinion
was. He told me, he [could] see now he must use sharper medicines to
it, and cornise, (_sic_, cauterize?) which I would not suffer without
better advice. My son sent us a very excellent surgeon, and a very
honest man. As soon as he looked on it, gave me little comfort by
reason of my husband's age, but approved of what I had done and gave
me further directions what to do; and said no violence must he use to
it, for he feared, as the summer came on, it would grow worse, which,
indeed, it did, and eat till all his teeth came out on that side, which
was a great disheartening to him; but I comforted him as well as I
could, though I much feared his tongue would have been eaten out if
he had continued long, which would have made his life unpleasant to
him, and a great grief to all his friends about him; but my gracious
God was very merciful to both him and me, for having prepared him with
great patience and humility to submit either to life or death, and
with St. Paul to say, that death was gain. Our great God kept us from
want, and gave us the comfort of our children about us, and that good
man, as you say, which indeed hath been a great comfort to me in all
my afflictions. My many years tell me I shall not be long after him;
I pray God I may follow his good example, and then we shall meet in
perfect joy together. My good friend would not give me the discomfort
of your sickness till he heard you were past danger, though I had
many times enquired of him, when he heard from you, but told me he
did not use to hear from you. I do give God most hearty thanks for
your recovery, and do daily pray that He, in His infinite mercy, will
continue good people amongst us for our example, that we may be fit for
His mercy. Within this three weeks I have received your bounty, but no
letter which would give me great satisfaction of your health, which I
daily pray for. Excuse this long scribbled letter, and make me happy
with a line from you."[348]
[Sidenote: _Thorndike._]
Another learned Anglo-Catholic Divine requires attention on his own
account, and in consequence of his disapproval of such conciliatory
methods as were favoured by the more truly Catholic Episcopalian
Sanderson. Herbert Thorndike, whose erudition did honour to Cambridge,
was ejected first from Barley, in Hertfordshire, and then from his
Fellowship at Trinity College. His name occurs in the list of those who
were relieved by the beneficence of Lord Scudamore, and also amongst
the friends of Walton engaged upon the great polyglott.[349] With a
logical mind, which was eminently fitted for systematizing opinions,
he had worked out Anglo-Catholic principles into a complete scheme of
theology. His central point was that "the title of our salvation is
the covenant of baptism, whereby we undertake to profess Christianity
and to live according to it, in despite of the devil and all his
works;"[350] and this view he urges incessantly in his writings
against the Puritan doctrine of justification by faith. Episcopal
order, and the use of the Prayer Book, without even the slightest
alteration, found in Thorndike a most zealous defender; and, it may
be inferred from such a circumstance, that the Puritans had not a
more steady and determined opponent than this able man. He could not
understand them. Their doctrinal views, as seen through his prejudices,
seemed to be of an antinomian nature, whilst their ecclesiastical
proceedings, judged of with the same unfairness, were denounced as
schismatical and as utterly subversive of all Church order. Hence
he condemned Sanderson's practice of altering the prayers; arguing
that though force might make him omit what he was ecclesiastically
commanded, it could not make him do what he was ecclesiastically
forbidden.[351] Thorndike was made of such stern, tough stuff, that
he revolted from all mere politic measures, and from all attempts at
compromise. He never asked what was expedient, but only what was right;
yet also he deemed trimming to be as unwise as it was wrong, and he
maintained that not to omit a word of the service would be as safe as
the method adopted by Sanderson. He advised that when the whole Liturgy
could not be read, as much of it should be used as possible without
any alteration.[352] One of his papers, dated 1656, preserved in the
Westminster Chapter Library, contains an argument against communicating
with the Presbyterian or other sects: most uncharitably and unjustly
he inferred--from their doctrine of justification by faith, which
he quite misunderstood--that they could not "think themselves tied
to live as Christians," or, as he added, to repent and return to
that Christianity which they had forfeited. And beside this--fearing
that the sects would swallow up the Church, which they had broken
in pieces--he warned Churchmen against in any way owning Puritan
teachers or frequenting Puritan sermons, whatever danger there might
be of temporal penalties in pursuing a different path, or whatever
"difficulty of finding what course to take."[353]
[Sidenote: _Evelyn's Diary._]
As to the inner life of persecuted Episcopalianism, "Evelyn's Diary"
affords information beyond, perhaps, any other contemporary production.
A sequestered and learned minister preached in Evelyn's parlour and
administered the blessed sacrament, when, according to Episcopal usage,
it was "wholly out of use in the parish churches." He heard once the
Common Prayer read[354] ("a rare thing in those days") in St. Peter's,
at Paul's Wharf, London; and in the morning of the same day he listened
to the preaching of "the Archbishop of Armagh--that pious person and
learned man, Ussher--in Lincoln's Inn Chapel." On a Christmas day there
was no sermon anywhere, no church being permitted to be open, so the
diarist observed it at home. The next day he went to Lewisham, where
"an honest Divine delivered a discourse."[355]
Now and then an "honest orthodox man" ascended the pulpit of Evelyn's
parish church, and although the Incumbent was "somewhat of the
Independent," yet "he ordinarily preached sound doctrine and was a
peaceable man, which was an extraordinary felicity in that age." Once
Evelyn heard a person who "had been both chaplain and lieutenant to
Admiral Penn, and who thus, as he says, used "both swords."[356]
Repeatedly notices occur in the "Diary" of neglected festivals, and
of private preachings and communions; and he indicates his caution
no less than his zeal, by stating that his only reason for going to
church whilst these "usurpers" possessed the pulpits was, that he
might not be suspected of being a Papist. He felt the wholesome uses
of adversity, and states--after alluding to Dr. Wild as preaching
in a private house in Fleet Street--that the zealous Christians who
gathered together there were much more religious and devout than they
had ever been in times of prosperity. He notes down the circumstance,
that on Christmas day, 1657, at the conclusion of a sermon by Mr.
Gunning, in Exeter Chapel, the building was surrounded by soldiers,
and the communicants were kept inside as prisoners. Evelyn himself had
his place of confinement in the mansion to which the chapel belonged;
but was allowed to dine with the noble master of it, the Countess of
Dorset, Lady Hatton, and others. Some of Oliver's colonels came in
the afternoon to enquire into the matter, and they asked the Royalist
churchman why he durst offend against the ordinances of Parliament.
It appears from his answer that the name of "King Charles" had been
omitted from the service, and that supplications of a general kind
were offered on behalf of kings and princes. At the conclusion of the
account, however, the diarist acknowledges that the soldiers after all,
did not really interrupt the worship, but only held up their muskets
"_as if_" he says, "_they_ would have shot us at the altar, but yet
suffering _us to finish_ the office of communion."[357]
Such was the case in London. In the country an instance
occurred--perhaps only representing several of the same kind--of a
public defiance of the law. In the year 1658, as John Wilson, a cloth
merchant of Leeds, kinsman of Bishop Wilson's father, was walking
through the streets he met the Vicar and said to him: "When shall we
have Divine service again in Leeds Old Church?" The Vicar replied:
"Whenever Mr. Wilson will protect me in the discharge of my duty."
"Then," he rejoined, "by the grace of God it shall be next Sunday."
Accordingly, on that day the bells rang as in the days before the wars,
for morning prayers, and a large congregation was gathered together.
In the centre aisle stood Mr. Wilson, with a great number of persons
drawn up as if to protect the Vicar. News of this occurrence soon
reached London, and an order came down for the imprisonment of the bold
violator of Parliamentary ordinances; but before his trial could take
place Oliver Cromwell died.[358]
[Sidenote: _Episcopalians._]
Mention has been already made of a practice, adopted by some Anglicans,
of using parts of the Prayer Book with less or more of alteration.
But besides this method another appears to have been proposed, if
not actually adopted. There lies before us, at the moment of writing
these lines, a little volume in manuscript,[359] evidently intended
to be read by Episcopalian Churchmen in their worship during the
Commonwealth. It neither exactly follows the order, nor does it, except
in a very few instances, adopt the phraseology of the Common Prayer. "A
Prayer preparatory to the holy Sacrament" appears upon the first page,
followed by "A Meditation when we come to the holy table"--meant no
doubt for private use; and next to it there follows that which appears
to be the opening of a service of social worship. It commences with
a long series of confessions, including this remarkable one:--"Not
observing the times of festivity or fasting appointed by just authority
according to the example of Thy people in all ages." After each article
of confession there occur the words: "O Lord! righteousness belongs
unto Thee, but unto us confusion of face, as at this day." "The form
of absolution, to be pronounced by the priest only," is expressed in
the following terms:--"Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, who of His
great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them that with
hearty repentance and true faith turn unto Him, have mercy upon you,
pardon and deliver you from all your sins, confirm and strengthen you
in all goodness, and bring you to everlasting salvation, both of body
and soul, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Next to the absolution is
the Lord's Prayer; and next to the Lord's Prayer are brief petitions
associated with it--the same as are found in the like portion of the
"Order for Morning and Evening Prayer" in the Church of England
service at the present day. Lamentations respecting the Church and the
nation are inserted; after which the first lesson is directed to be
read;[360] then comes "A Form collected out of the Psalms," in which
the people respond to the priest. There succeed three prayers; the
first two confessing sins, and imploring mercy, the third interceding
for the son of Charles I. There are also prayers for the clergy, for
the enemies of the Church, and for the removal of the anger of God
from His afflicted people. The service ends with the benediction.
"A Prayer to be said during these troubles;" "A Confession of God's
justice in His punishments, and A Deprecation of His judgments;" and "A
Prayer for the 30th of January," conclude the volume. From the second
of these forms we extract the following passage:--"Arise, O arm of
the Lord, and put on strength, let not man have the upper hand, let
not the mischievous imaginations of our enemies prosper, lest they
be too proud. But now Thou hast frustrated all our worldly hopes and
affiances, take the matter we beseech Thee into Thine own hands, and
by what means it pleaseth Thee, put a period to our wasting miseries,
that these lands may no longer be rent and torn asunder by their own
children, and thus made drunk with the blood of their own inhabitants.
Bring into Thy way of truth all such as offend through ignorance,
mollify the hard-hearted, be merciful to all that offend not of
malicious wickedness, but let Thy exemplary judgments be upon such as
will not turn nor fear God, and be a means for the speedier conversion
of the rest. O God of all order and peace, and yet makest men to be
of one mind in an house, turn the hearts of the people of these lands
to their God, to Thy servant our King, one to another, make up our
breaches, heal our wounds, compose our divisions, bring all things
again into a right frame among us, both in Church and State, and knit
us again together in the unity of the Spirit and in the bond of peace.
Arise and help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of Thy name;
help us in these our great extremities in this most needful time of
trouble, for Thy promise' sake, for Thy mercies' sake, for Thy Son
Christ Jesus' sake, to whom with Thee and the Holy Ghost be all glory
and praise now and for ever."
[Sidenote: _Episcopalians._]
Thus the proscribed and suffering children of the Episcopal Church,
forbidden to use the ancient prayers so dear to their affections,
prepared for themselves new ones, in which they expressed their
patriotism and their loyalty. The latter sentiment is conspicuous in
these original offices--indeed it had become a perfect passion in the
breasts of the Episcopalians. Whatever doubts some might have formerly
felt as to the wisdom of the proceedings of Charles the First, they now
almost all regarded him as a martyr for Episcopacy; so that, as they
engaged in their devotions, the crimson-stained shadow of the departed
monarch rose before their eyes with a touching solemnity and religious
reverence for his memory blended with their remembered allegiance to
his crown. Thorough legitimists, they now esteemed that crown the
property of his eldest son. All Republicans, all Commonwealth men, all
who dared to uphold the rights of Parliament or of a Protector against
the rights of kings, were to them no better than rebels. Whereas the
loyalty of some persons rested on their religion, the religion of many
more rested on their loyalty. They cared very little, if at all, about
ecclesiastical and spiritual questions. They simply believed that King
Charles had died for the Church of England, and that, as loyal men,
they ought to love it for King Charles' sake. The religion of many
of them was merely a feeling of that description. Sufferings in the
cause--as is always the case--endeared the cause to the sufferers. They
had lost their relatives in battle; they felt twinges in their old
wounds when the weather changed; Naseby and Marston Moor were names to
them full of anguish. They had endured confiscation, imprisonment, and
bonds. One could tell how he had carried packets to the Queen at the
risk of his life; a second how he had lost his eyes and his arms in
the King's service; a third how he had been tossed and tumbled up and
down, and was tried eleven times for his life, and how he was brought
to the foot of the gallows, and yet after all escaped with his life;
and a fourth, how he had lost £2,000, had been turned out of doors,
had been burnt with matches, and carried to Worcester, and kept there
under guard, whence he had fled, had been obliged to take to trees for
a hiding place in the day time, and then to travel all night, had been
caught and sent to the gatehouse, and sentenced to be shot, and had
then got out of prison during sermon time, and lived three weeks in
an enemy's haymow, and limped on crutches to Bristol, and so escaped.
The widows of soldiers, too, talked of being plundered, stripped, and
whipped, of their banished children, and of their own poverty and
hardships; in all which stories, though there might be not a little
exaggeration, there was also not a little truth.[361]
[Sidenote: _Episcopalian Loyalty._]
The loyalty of these persons, as we have said, is prominently exhibited
in the little Prayer Book before us; and from its pages we quote the
following remarkable petitions for Prince Charles:--
"O blessed Lord God, who hast in Thy fatherly care and goodness taken
our late gracious Sovereign into Thy peace, and left the inheritance
of his throne and sceptre to his firstborn, we beseech Thee to
prepare and instruct him for so high and so weighty a calling. Be
Thou pleased, out of the riches of Thy treasure, to pour Thy wisdom
into his heart, to command that double portion of his father's spirit
to rest upon him--the head of Solomon and the heart of David--and
withal the meekness and true Christian charity, the inward calmness,
and placability of spirit, that may arm him thoroughly against all
the provocations of an unthankful people; that he may come and reign
amongst us, as a tender compassionate father of all his kingdoms,
carry them, as Moses did Thy people, in his arms, from a desert to
Canaan, and go in and out before them with that conduct which Thy
pillar of fire and cloud afforded them. Lord, be Thou his light and
his guide, his counsellor and protector, his shield and his exceeding
great reward; keep him from all the designs of the enemies of his and
our peace; preserve him as the apple of thine own eyes; and because
of the great strait and difficulties which are now before him, the
obstructions which none but Thine especial interposition can remove,
Lord, fasten his heart, and the eyes and hearts of all his counsellors
steadfastly and unanimously upon Thee, to keep close to Thy ways and
rule, and be Thou continually assistant to them, that without the
effusion of any more blood, if it be Thy sacred will, he may attain to
a peaceable possession and establishment in his inheritance; erect his
throne in the hearts and loyal affections of his people; give them all
a thorough sight of the great errors of their former ways, and sincere
endeavour to approve their fidelity to him whom Thou hast set over
us. Unite us all at length in the Christian bond of peace and love,
in the practice and power of all godliness, that being by this last
astonishing cup, added to so many former punishments, made inwardly
sensible of Thine anger for this unnatural division, we may all at
length be reduced to our bounden obedience, to the glory of Thy sacred
name, the vindication of our defamed religion, the comfort of our King,
and the happiness and restoration of these languishing kingdoms; and
confirm all this to us, O Lord, in the bowels of Thine own mercy, to a
sinful people, through the mediation of Thine own dear Son Jesus Christ
our Lord. Amen."
[Sidenote: _Episcopalian Loyalty._]
There is no doubt a great deal to admire in these expressions of
attachment to the old regal rule of England, and in these supplications
for him whom the Episcopalians could not fail to regard as heir to the
throne; but then, on the other hand, no one can shut his eyes to the
fact that these persons, precisely to the same degree in which they
evinced their devotion to monarchy now abolished, and their love for
the Stuart dynasty now exiled, shewed themselves to be disaffected
subjects of the existing Government--rebels, in short, against the
Republic and the Protectorate. Unquestionably they formed a very
dangerous class. Their religion, and their holiest services, were
identified with the strongest desires for a revolution. They believed
that the overthrow of the powers of the State was essential to the
restored prosperity of their Church. No doubt the righteous course
of the supreme authority in England at that time would have been to
separate what had become entangled; and whilst consistently forbidding
such worship as was instinct with the spirit of treason, justly to
concede full toleration for such worship as was simply Episcopalian.
But, looking at human nature, and at the exasperation of men's feelings
in those days, such clear discrimination and such calm equity are much
more than could be expected; and therefore whilst we decidedly condemn
the intolerance of forbidding the use of the Prayer Book altogether,
we are bound to recognize--as some excuse for the Commonwealth Rulers,
or, at least, as a fact claiming some mitigation of our censures of
their conduct--the political position of the Episcopalians, assumed
either by their continued use of the old royalistic formularies, or
by their adoption of new ones even stronger and more revolutionary in
their place. It is also only fair to recollect what large provocations
the Puritans had received only a few years earlier from persons of this
very class when they were in the ascendant; as well as to remember what
provocation the rulers of the country still met with from persons of
the same class who were known to be actually engaged in plots for their
overthrow. And after all, the pressure put upon the Episcopal party
in the darkest hour of their history under the Commonwealth is not to
be compared, as it respects violence on the one side and suffering on
the other, with what was inflicted by Churchmen, and experienced by
Nonconformists, under Charles the First and Charles the Second.[362]
Nor is there any resemblance between the amount of persecution
endured by the disciples of Prelacy at the period under review, and
the amount of sorrow and pain which was then borne by another class of
Christians whose history will be unfolded in the following chapter.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XIII.
There is in humanity an element of mysticism presenting manifold
developments. It characterizes both individual minds and schools of
thought: mediæval theologians, and men and women of Romish Christendom,
altogether ignorant of scientific divinity, and only burning with pious
fervour, have been mystics without knowing that they were so. Since the
Reformation particular members of all sects have been tinged with this
peculiarity; and a whole body of religionists in England have from the
very beginning of their remarkable history avowed the love and walked
in the light of a mystical spiritualism. Though the Anglo-Saxon race
are believed generally to have less sympathy with transcendental views
than Spaniards, Germans, or Frenchmen, yet it is a fact that nowhere
as in this country has mysticism produced a distinct and permanent
ecclesiastical organization. And what is further remarkable, whilst
it claims a purely spiritual basis--there is no other sect which has
an equal distinctness of form and an equal prominence in external
singularity; for not only in worship and discipline does it stand out
in marked visibility before the world, but so obvious are or were its
outward signs that, until very lately, a member of the Society might be
as easily recognized as a Roman Catholic priest or a Capuchin friar.
[Sidenote: _Rise of Quakerism._]
The origin of the Quakers, as they were first derisively called,[363]
of the Friends, as they prefer to be designated, was under the
Commonwealth. Then the freedom granted to enquiry within Evangelical
limits, the violent reaction which had set in against the forms
and ceremonies of Anglo-Catholicism, the generally unsettled state
of religious thought, the activity of tendencies towards a sort of
ultra-spirituality, and a natural craving--amidst the revolutions of
an age which tore up old conventionalities of belief--to get at the
pure substance of truth, and at the heart of things, combined to draw
out and to nourish whatever of the mystical element there might be in
English souls. Sympathies of that order were vaguely working and were
indefinitely expressed in many quarters.
Quakerism, as a congenial centre, speedily attracted them to itself.
The true Friend, travelling in modern days on religious service,
finds in churches the most remote, persons whose inner life presents
strange affinities to his own. Discoursing in his peculiar way upon
the mysteries of religious experience, he evokes recognitions of
brotherhood from the Spanish Catholic and the Russian Greek;[364] no
wonder, therefore, when mysticism in England found for itself such
a voice in the middle of the seventeenth century, that it soon drew
within the circle of its fellowship thousands who were waiting for its
call.
[Sidenote: _George Fox._]
The rise of Quakerism must be sought in the life of its founder. If
ever the child was father to the man, it certainly was so in the case
of George Fox. Born of humble but virtuous parents--his father,
Christopher, an honest weaver, winning amongst his companions the name
of "righteous Christer;" his mother, Mary Lago, a pure-minded woman,
sprung from a family stock which had borne fruits of martyrdom--he
was not likely in his early days to see much of immorality, nor
were the folks who crossed his parents' threshold, and whom the
boy heard talking round the hearth-stone, likely to be otherwise
than of the better sort in morals; yet their cheerfulness and mirth
shocked little George so much, that he would say within himself,
"If ever I come to be a man surely I will not be so wanton." He was
too precocious to like childish games, and shewed his activity of
intellect and depth of feeling in strange questions about religion,
and in ways of worship unlike his mother's. When only eleven, he had
inward monitions, inclining him to an ascetic life, and impulses
which two hundred years earlier would have made a youth of his stamp
an exemplary monk. Apprenticed to a dealer in leather and wool,
who bred sheep for the sake of the fleece, George was set to watch
the flocks, and in his shepherd life he found "a just emblem of
his after ministry and service." As he grew older, men admired the
justness of his dealings, and in his "verily" found what was more
than equivalent to another man's oath, so that it became a proverb,
"If George says verily there is no altering him." When business or
persuasion took him to the market or the fair, his righteous soul was
vexed with what he saw and heard--for even drinking healths appeared
offensive--and he would return from the gaiety of the gathering to
mourn in secret, through sleepless nights, over the world's vanity and
sin. He resolved to separate from his acquaintances and to spend a
life of retirement and devotion. None of the professions of religion
in those days met his views. The Episcopal Church seemed little
better than the world--Baptists and Independents were not sufficiently
spiritual--current forms of theology did not supply the necessities
of the young enquirer--and therefore in solitude and fasting, in the
Scriptures, and in communion with his own deep thoughts, George Fox
sought to satisfy the hunger of his soul.[365]
The intellectual character of this remarkable person is not easily
measured. Possessing little of the logical faculty, eschewing
argumentative forms of thought, and altogether ignorant of Baconian
methods of induction, he had nevertheless a keen, lightning-like power
of penetrating hidden truths and of laying open secret things. By
intuitive perception he reached spiritual truths. He felt a great deal
to be right which he could not prove to be so; and much which to men of
another mould seemed occult and shadowy, to him appeared firmer than
the earth on which he trod. He cared not for the coverings of truth,
the nakeder it was to him the better. He could boast of no poetical
imagination, yet he possessed a prodigious power of realizing what he
believed, and had he been a school-man, he would have been as decided a
Realist as Thomas Aquinas.
George Fox had strong sympathies with what is spiritual everywhere
and in all things, but especially with what is so in religion. As in
striving after truth he was ever breaking shells to get at kernels,
so in his pantings for fellowship with God, which constituted the
most pressing need of his nature, he was intolerant of forms. He had
no patience with any ceremonial avenues by which to walk up to the
temple of the Eternal, but rather longed for an eagle's wing to fly at
once to the mount of God; forgetful, in his sincere raptures, of the
conditions of humanity, and not considering that in the pursuit of the
noblest as of the humblest ends, mortals cannot dispense with means,
and that we are all of us two-sided beings, needing helps from without
to strengthen and preserve what is most Divine within.
In morals his character was more than unimpeachable. Rarely has a man
been found so just and true, so virtuous and temperate, so benevolent
and pacific; although, withal, so bold, and even severe in rebuking
falsehood, hypocrisy, and every kind of sin. His moral indignation,
which was sometimes misplaced, made him forgetful of the courtesies of
life, and the rudeness which he thus displayed served to increase both
the animosity and the number of his enemies.[366]
[Sidenote: _George Fox._]
Mysticism formed his whole character. It penetrated his intellect.
It pervaded his spirit. It was the soul of his religion, and the
mainspring of his morality. It inspired him with the love of solitude
and the love of nature. To get away from his fellow-creatures to
commune with himself, and with God, amidst the solitudes of creation,
became his chief delight. Not that when he speaks of wandering in
fields and orchards, and of getting into the depths of forests, and
the hollows of trees, it was with a poet's perception of nature's
mysteries. He rather wished, whilst away from the noisy world, in
the deep silence of a summer's noon or a winter's night, to open his
inmost self to the Spirit of God, to uncover the hidden harp that an
invisible finger might touch the strings; to walk in an inward light,
to enjoy the indwelling Christ, and to receive revelations of truth
and love from those pure realms where they everlastingly reign. George
Fox often deluded himself, and mistook for the Divine what was merely
human: but that the Holy Ghost wrought within his heart in a powerful
manner, who can doubt? His errors were often the shadows of everlasting
verities; some of his aberrations came from noble self-denying
impulses; and with respect to him it might be aptly said, "And e'en the
light that led astray was light from heaven."
The solitary became ascetic, as was natural. He denied himself the
common comforts of life, he would not eat and drink like other people,
and for a while he belied the name of "friend," and walked about
like a hermit or a ghost. "And when he came into a town, he took a
chamber to himself there, and tarried sometimes a month, sometimes
more, sometimes less, in a place; for he was afraid of staying long
in any place, lest, being a tender young man, he should be hurt by
too familiar a conversation with men."[367] He had deep spiritual
exercises of soul. No one could be more conscious of the existence of
evil powers--of Satanic agencies in the invisible world to which the
inner nature of man belongs even in the present life. But applying to
himself the holy words, "in returning and in rest shall ye be saved,
in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength," he sought
refuge from his mysterious troubles by abiding "under the shadow of
the Almighty." Describing his experience when he was pressed by the
greatest of mystical problems, he says:--"One morning, as I was sitting
by the fire, a great cloud came over me, and a temptation beset me;
but I sat still. And it was said, 'All things come by nature,' and
the elements and stars came over me, so that I was in a manner quite
clouded with it. But as I sat still, and said nothing, the people of
the house perceived nothing. And as I sat still under it, and let it
alone, a living hope arose in me, and a true voice which said:--'There
_is_ a living God, who made all things,' and immediately the cloud and
temptation vanished away, and life rose over it all; my heart was glad,
and I praised the living God."[368]
[Sidenote: _George Fox._]
Fox was mighty in prayer. So great an effect he produced on one
occasion, that the persons present felt as if the house were shaken by
a mighty wind and the day of Pentecost had once more fully come; and
Penn declared: "The most awful living reverent frame I ever felt or
beheld, I must say, was his in prayer."[369] By Fox's public teaching
he became more widely known, and exerted an influence which has lasted
from that day to this. Believing in the fundamental doctrines of
Christianity,[370] and regarding them in an anti-Calvinistic light,
strong in a simple Evangelical faith, but without any theological
discipline of thought, preferring the language of Scripture to the
words of men--he added to all this, as the first-fruit of his mystical
tendencies, a belief in the "inward light," even the revelation of
Christ in the soul, not as superseding holy Scripture, but as its
necessary witness and its gracious supplement. He dwelt very largely
upon redemption through Christ, as consisting in deliverance from sin,
not simply from its guilt, but from its power;--a view of salvation of
the very last importance, and one which had been, at least partially,
obscured through the prominence given by some theologians of the
day to the doctrine of pardon, and the change effected in our legal
relationship by the work of Christ, without a due exhibition of
the moral change in the heart and life which forms so important an
aspect of the one salvation of the Gospel of God. He dwelt much on
the subject of man's deliverance from sin itself--from its power and
practice--which the Divine Redeemer had accomplished. Ideas of human
perfectibility through Christ[371] blended with Fox's conceptions of
holiness and of the work of the Spirit; and his notion of Christianity
as a purely spiritual system[372] led to further peculiarities
which, in fact, chiefly distinguished this remarkable teacher in
the estimation of contemporaries. Hence sprang his opposition to
sacraments, to ceremonies, and to forms of prayer, and also his delight
in the exercises of silent worship. Hence, too, his dislike to all
compulsory support of the ministry, whether by tithes or taxation;
together with a horror of human priesthoods, and even of any order
of Christian teachers educated and exclusively set apart for the
service. His condemnation of the use of oaths and of the practice of
war resulted from his reverence for the Supreme Being, and from the
deep sympathies of his benevolent nature with the pacific spirit of the
Gospel.
[Sidenote: _George Fox._]
But his oddities attracted still more notice than his preaching. He
wore very long hair, and clothed himself in a suit of leather; things,
however, of which too much has been made by his biographers, seeing
that this sort of dress was worn only for a time, and was adapted
for rough use, while it was not so very strange in an age of leather
doublets. Nor was his numbering the days of the week, instead of
calling them by their usual names, so peculiar as is supposed, since
it appears to have been the practice of Independents and Baptists to do
the same. Nor did "thee" and "thou" sound so strange as in the present
day. But the stern refusal to take off his hat before anybody, even
before magistrates; the violence with which he assailed "priests,"
and all ministers; the terms he applied to parish churches, calling
them "steeple-houses;" the encouragement he gave to the preaching of
women; and the manner in which he publicly testified against evil,
made this spiritual reformer appear a most eccentric personage, and
brought down upon him ridicule and abuse, and a great deal of what
was very much worse.[373] His testimonies were delivered at wakes, at
fairs, at inns, in courts of justice, and in places of worship. When
the bell rang for church, it smote his soul as a sign that the Gospel
was going to be sold, not given without money and without price; and
off the honest enthusiast went to the steeple-house, to interrupt the
minister, and protest against his ministry. This, of course, could not
be tolerated, and presently he found himself shut up in filthy cells,
or set in the public stocks. The punishment was severe, monstrously
and beyond all proportion to the offence, but the offender clearly put
himself in a false position. With no taste for Gothic architecture,
looking upon cathedrals as popish mass-houses, he could not endure the
sight of the beautiful spires of Lichfield; so, pulling off his shoes,
he walked through the streets, and thinking of pagan persecutions
there in old times, cried "Woe, woe to the bloody city."[374] The
magistrates of Derby most unjustly convicted him of blasphemy, under
the late Act against atheistical opinions, and sentenced him to six
months' confinement in the House of Correction. He subsequently
moderated some of his excesses, but this did not secure him against
outrageous persecutions and intolerable sufferings. The Quaker reveals
his character as he tells his story. "When the Lord first sent me forth
in the year 1643, I was sent as an innocent lamb (and young in years)
amongst (men in the nature of) wolves, dogs, bears, lions and tigers
into the world, which the devil had made like a wilderness, no right
way then found out of it. And I was sent to turn people from darkness
to the light, which Christ, the Second Adam, did enlighten them withal;
that so they might see Christ, their way to God, with the Spirit of
God, which He doth pour upon all flesh, that with it they might have an
understanding to know the things of God, and to know Him, and His Son,
Jesus Christ, which is eternal life; and so might worship and serve
the living God, their maker and creator, who takes care for all, who
is Lord of all; and with the light and Spirit of God they might know
the Scriptures, which were given forth from the Spirit of God in the
saints, and holy men and women of God.
"And when they began to be turned to the light (which is the life in
Christ) and the Spirit of God, which gave them an understanding, and
had found the path of the just, the shining light, then did the wolves,
dogs, dragons, bears, lions, tigers, wild beasts and birds of prey make
a roaring and a screeching noise against the lambs, sheep, doves, and
children of Christ, and were ready to devour them and me, and to tear
us in pieces. But the Lord's arm and power did preserve me; though many
times I was in danger of my life, and very often cast into dungeons and
prisons, and haled before magistrates. But all things did work together
for good, and the more I was cast into outward prisons, the more people
came out of their spiritual and inward prisons (through the preaching
of the Gospel). But the priests and professors were in such a great
rage, and made the rude and profane people in such a fury, that I could
hardly walk in the streets, or go in the highways, but they were ready
oft-times to do me a mischief. But Christ, who hath all power in heaven
and in the earth, did so restrain and limit them with His power, that
my life was preserved; though many times I was near killed.
"Oh! the burdens and travels that I went under! Often my life pressed
down under the spirits of professors and teachers without life, and
the profane! And besides, the troubles afterwards with backsliders,
apostates, and false brethren, which were like so many Judases in
betraying the truth, and God's faithful and chosen seed, and causing
the way of truth to be evil spoken of! But the Lord blasted, wasted,
and confounded them, so that none did stand long; for the Lord did
either destroy them or bring them to nought, and His truth did
flourish, and His people in it, to the praise of God, who is the
revenger of His chosen."[375]
Fox appeared before the Lord Protector. The meeting of the two at
Whitehall must have been a remarkable scene. Both mystical, but in
different degrees--both enthusiastic in religion, and perhaps equally
sincere in the most erratic forms of their respective faiths--the man
in power excelled in that practical shrewdness and common sense, which
were not altogether wanting in his persecuted brother; and, while the
latter was throwing the religious world into disturbance, the former
aimed at restoring it to order. Cromwell reproached Fox for opposing
the regular clergy. Fox told Cromwell that all Christendom had the
Scriptures; but that those who preached were destitute of the Spirit
by which the Scriptures were written. Thus two strong wills came into
collision. But when the Quaker went on lovingly to talk upon the
mysteries of spiritual experience, it touched the heart of the Lord
Protector at once; and pressing his friend's hand, whom he allowed to
wear his hat in his presence, he said: "Come again to my house; if thou
and I were together but one hour in every day we should be nearer to
each other. I wish you no more ill than I do to my own soul."
[Sidenote: _Fox's Disciples._]
Fox had many followers,[376] and the character of the master reproduced
itself in his disciples. Organization in so large a body soon became
a necessity; and, in spite of the extreme spiritualism of the system,
the Quakers were consolidated into a sect, having a gradation of
ecclesiastical courts, under the name of "meetings," as elaborate
as those of completed Presbyterianism, yet vesting all power in the
people, and combining liberty with subordination. Some early Quaker
preachers vied with Fox in simplicity, earnestness, and courage. Edward
Burroughs, a man of great spirituality and power, would step into the
wrestlers' ring--as lusty peasants on a summer's evening kept up the
ancient sports on the village green--and speak to the rustic spectators
with "a heart-piercing power." He thundered against sin--to use the
Scripture-coloured language of his admirers, and broke stony hearts;
his bow never turned back, and his sword returned not empty from the
slaughter of the mighty. "And, although coals of fire, as it were,
came forth of his mouth, to the consuming of briars and thorns; and
he, passing through unbeaten paths, trampled upon wild thistles and
luxuriant tares, yet his wholesome doctrine dropped as the oil of joy
upon the spirits of the mourners in Zion."[377] But there were people
numbered amongst the Quakers--for the term was widely and vaguely
applied--who had not the wisdom and gentleness of Edward Burroughs.
One at least of these persons--in imitation of the Oriental method
of teaching by signs, as seen in the Hebrew prophets; and also after
the manner of the Russian anchorites--went forth in public stripped
and naked, making a wailing like the dragons, and a mourning as the
owls. George Fox himself says: "the Lord made one to go naked among
you, a figure of thy nakedness, and as a sign amongst you, before your
destruction cometh, that you might see that you were naked and not
covered with the truth."[378] But, notwithstanding he speaks of this
singular manifestation in such terms, he is not to be held responsible
for the manifestation itself. Nothing of the kind occurred in his own
history, nor, as far as we can discover, in that of any distinguished,
or of even any recognized member of the Society of Friends in this
country.[379]
[Sidenote: _Fox and Cromwell._]
In the "Broadmead Records" strange suspicions about Quakerism are
expressed, and tales are told to shew how "the Papists, by their
emissaries and agents, did promote this error and delusion." A
public declaration of the magistrates of Bristol testified to the
same effect.[380] But nothing appears beyond surmises. Some people
in those days, like some people still, were wild upon the subject of
Romanism, and fancied that they saw the print of the Papacy all over
the country.[381] The source of this terror has been already explained;
and, looking at what was then attributed to the Roman Catholics, we see
that the feeling, under the circumstances, is not wonderful. Impartial
historians of the present day, however, will require more than vague
rumours, and unsupported accusations, to convince them of the existence
of a scheme so subtle and so unreasonable. That Rome could promote
its interests through the spread of Quakerism seems an idea even
more absurd than the current story of the Queen's Jesuit confessor,
plotting the death of Charles, and riding up and down the street
before Whitehall upon the day of the monarch's execution with a drawn
sword in his hand. How could Franciscans, in the garb of Quakers, fail
to be detected by Quakers themselves, who of all sectaries perhaps,
most hated Popery? How can the activity of well-known preachers
amongst them--who loathed the ritual and the polity of Rome, and who
were sincere in following the inward light in opposition to all human
authority whatever--be reasonably believed to have received support
from Catholic intriguers?[382]
The amount of persecution inflicted upon Quakers by magistrates and
by mobs during the Commonwealth is almost incredible. "Fox's Journal"
and "Sewel's History" abound in examples of the cruelties which they
endured. Cromwell's latter Parliaments disliked Quakers as much as
other people did; but Cromwell himself, although disapproving of their
disorderly conduct, shewed mercy to the offenders. Treatment such
as they generally received reflects, beyond anything else, upon the
character of the times for toleration and Christian justice. England
at large could not have learned the doctrines of religious liberty,
and must have been sadly out of sympathy with Cromwell and others, to
have inflicted such wanton barbarities upon people who were harmless
as a rule, and mischievous only in a few exceptions. As they quietly
worshipped God, parish ministers would rush into their places of
meeting--accompanied by people armed with staves, cudgels, pitchforks,
"and such like armour"--and interrupt the Quaker preacher more than
any Quaker preacher at the very worst had ever interrupted them. Yet,
under these circumstances, the poor Quakers disturbed--not the people
disturbing--were hustled off to gaol. Katherine Evans, who publicly
exhorted the citizens in Salisbury market-place, was whipped for the
first offence, and for the second was thrown into the "blind-house,"
the worst part of the bridewell.[383]
The justices of Exeter, in the month of June, 1656, made an order of
sessions to apprehend as vagrants all Quakers travelling without a
pass:[384] and the year afterwards a Bill came before Parliament to the
same effect, supported by Major-General Desborough, Mr. Bampfield, an
Independent, and Sir Christopher Pack, a Presbyterian.[385]
[Sidenote: _James Nayler._]
James Nayler brought much dishonour on the whole sect. The nineteenth
century, with all its rationalism, has seen Joanna Southcote, and
her numerous disciples. The seventeenth, with all its fanaticism,
witnessed, in the greatest enthusiast of the age, less absurdity, and
with him a smaller following than we have witnessed even in our own
time. Though Nayler was a convert of George Fox, George Fox regarded
Nayler with some suspicion, "struck with a fear," as he said, "and
being, as it were, under a sense of some great disaster that was like
to befal him."[386] Nayler's fall grieved the hearts of his own
people, and filled the whole country with exaggerated reports of his
shame. While a sufferer in Exeter gaol, his deluded followers addressed
him as "the Everlasting Son, the Prince of Peace, the fairest among ten
thousand." He fancied himself possessed of the Divine nature in some
inexplicable way. Reports were circulated that he pretended to raise
to life one Dorcas Erbery two days after her death. Liberated from
gaol, he marched through Glastonbury and Wells, men and women walking
before him, bareheaded, and strewing the ground with their clothes,
in imitation of what was done at Christ's entrance into Jerusalem.
At Bristol people shouted as he passed along, "Holy, Holy, Holy,
Lord God of Israel, Hosanna in the highest." In prison he received
greetings from fanatics who sung hymns to him, and cried, in Scripture
words: "Rise up, my love, my dove, my fair one, and come away: why
sittest thou among the pots?" This national scandal, as the Parliament
deemed it, could, in their judgment, be washed out only by pains and
penalties; a fact which has received attention in our account of the
second Protectorate Parliament. Although a fanatic, James Nayler
demands justice. It has been rarely meted out to him. His fanaticism
was mystical. He had a notion of some extraordinary indwelling of
the Spirit within his soul, which he enjoyed, as he supposed, not in
consequence of his own superiority, but entirely from abounding grace.
Not himself, but the indwelling Lord, he deemed the object of the
honours paid--honours, it would appear, volunteered by enthusiasts
who were madder than himself. This point is largely noticed in his
trial.[387] Things were laid to his charge which he denied, and he
distinctly repudiated the pretence of raising the dead. Most important
of all is the fact that he repented of his folly, and published a
recantation of his errors in several forms.[388]
The Quakers lamented Nayler's madness and backsliding, and they must
not be held responsible for his aberrations, although they humanely
sympathized with him in his sufferings, which were both unrighteously
inflicted, and patiently endured. Nobody now will vindicate the
treatment he received; yet few besides members of his own sect
condemned it then. To the honour of Lord Fairfax's Presbyterian
chaplain, Joshua Sprigg, it should be mentioned that he, with thirty
other petitioners, personally sought, at the hands of Parliament, some
mitigation of the culprit's doom.[389]
[Sidenote: _Number of Sects._]
Certain parties under the Commonwealth had the habit--and the fashion
still exists--of exaggerating the number of religious denominations.
Ephraim Pagitt--in his "Heresiography," published in 1654--gives a
list of between forty and fifty sects: the historical worth of which
enumeration we may estimate, when we observe that he distinguishes
between Anabaptists and plunged Anabaptists--between Separatists and
semi-Separatists--between Brownists and Barrowists--and then proceeds
to specify three orders of Familists. Edwards, in his "Gangræna,"
with the strongest wish to make the most of his subject, cannot
advance beyond the enumeration of sixteen kinds of schismatics:
but immediately impeaches his own distinctions, by informing us that
one and the same society of persons were Anabaptistical, Antinomian,
Manifestarian, Libertine, Socinian, Millenary, Independent, and
enthusiastical.[390] Our distrust is increased by a subjoined catalogue
of one hundred and seventy-six errors, swollen by statements of
substantially the same thing in varied forms of words, and by the
inclusion of all sorts of trivial opinions and absurd vagaries. Edwards
also gives another catalogue of "particular practices," twenty-eight
in number; besides an array of "blasphemies" culled from sectarian
prayers. Adopting such methods, there is no religious denomination
which we might not subdivide at pleasure. A dozen different names may,
with a little ingenuity, be given to almost every Church upon earth;
and thus twelve different Churches may be made out of one.
Baxter mentions only five, in addition to the larger religious parties.
He describes the minor sects as Vanists, Seekers, Ranters, Quakers,
and Behmenists. With all his power of analysis, however, he very
unsatisfactorily performs his task; for it is idle to represent Vane
as the founder of a sect, and the chief reason why the Kidderminster
polemic placed him in this category seems to be, that he honestly
disliked the man, and that he had been "a means to lessen his
reputation."[391] The account of the Seekers, many of whom, according
to his statement, were "Papists and Infidels," runs into that of the
Ranters. The Quakers he describes as Ranters, turned from profaneness
and blasphemy to asceticism. With the writings of Jacob Behmen it
appears that Baxter had little acquaintance. But he mentions, as chief
of the English Behmenists, one Pordage, who had "sensible communion
with angels," who was acquainted with spirits "by sights and smells,"
who fought fiery dragons, and who saw an impression upon the wall
of his house representing a coach drawn by lions and tigers, which
could not be removed without pickaxes.[392] The record of such idle
rumours, whilst it does not raise our opinion of Baxter as a historian
of religious sects--for the man he describes seems to have been a
lunatic--gives some little insight into the psychological curiosities
of the times, and brings us into acquaintance with "spiritualists" of
the seventeenth century.
[Sidenote: _Number of Sects._]
Besides Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, and
Quakers, there were no sects, properly so called--no groups of
professing Christians distinctly organized. Socinianism, however,
existed. John Biddle--who has been already noticed in connection with
the proceedings of Cromwell's first Parliament--contended, at a public
disputation in St. Paul's with Griffin, a Baptist minister, that Christ
was not the Most High God, and this man never lost an opportunity of
avowing Unitarian sentiments.[393] But he founded no party, nor are
there traces of any separate congregations under the Commonwealth
maintaining similar views. There was also much floating mysticism.
The theology of Jacob Behmen, through an "Account of his Life and
Writings," written in English, produced some effect in this country.
The spiritualism of that extraordinary person--akin to the "Theologia
Germanica"--anticipated in "Tauler's Sermons"--and possessing some
affinity to certain Lutheran principles, fed the devotion of English
transcendentalists. Notwithstanding its errors and visionary fancies,
on its better side it nourished a spirit of self-abnegation, protested
against formality, exposed the dangers of dogmatical dispute, opposed
High Calvinism, and pronounced millenarian speculations as of little
profit. And, independently of all foreign culture, mysticism, deeply
rooted in humanity, grew freely on Anglo-Saxon soil; not always
with quiet grace, as in the Cambridge school under the husbandry of
learning, but with twisted roots, gnarled trunks, and oddly-forked
branches, bent and torn by those political and theological storms
which swept so wildly over the whole country. But mysticism of this
description did not settle down into any sectarian type. It has been
common to pass strong and indiscriminate votes of censure upon all the
Commonwealth theology which was leavened by an element of this kind;
but now that such theology is better understood, because more carefully
studied, the universal application of such censure is seen to be
exceedingly unfair.
[Sidenote: _Floating Mysticism._]
Mysticism, in German and English books of the better class, is
opposed to Antinomianism; but, no doubt, mysticism existed in the
middle of the seventeenth century in close alliance with high
predestinarian opinions, and with very loose views of moral obligation
and responsibility. Dr. Tobias Crisp, a Puritan clergyman, who died
in 1643, was the most distinguished Divine of the Antinomian class;
yet, although unguarded and violent in his theoretical statements
to the very last degree, he is described as having been a man of
undeniable Christian virtue. Habits of thinking like his--not marking
the boundaries of a sect--pervaded, in all probability, many minds
which, by an inconsistency happily for mankind very common, were
preserved, through the force of better impulses, from carrying their
principles into practice. But Antinomianism did, in some cases, become
practical, if heed be given to contemporary reports. Monstrous excesses
were committed by individuals;[394] and communities arose, called
_Families of Love_, amidst which, according to contemporary pamphlets,
a shameless immorality prevailed.[395] These monstrous outgrowths of
fanaticism, however, as we might expect from their very nature, were
but short-lived; and they mostly belonged to the soldiery during the
continuance of the Civil Wars. In short, things of this sort formed the
filthy surf thrown up by lashed waters, and disappeared when the storm
had subsided.
We may name, in addition, four eccentric, if not crazy, individuals,
called founders of sects, who in their strangeness really represented
only themselves. The first was John Robins, who pretended to work
miracles, to ride on the winds, and to exhibit angels and other
supernatural sights--proclaiming himself to be an incarnation of the
Deity; the second was John Tawney, the high priest of this Robins, and
who joined with him in a commission to lead a company of followers
to Jerusalem; and the third and fourth, men equally hare-brained,
were named Reeve and Muggleton, who called themselves the witnesses
predicted in Revelation, and who said they were able by fire to devour
their adversaries. These fanatics cursed everybody who did not agree
with them. It is useless to pursue the subject further. Enough has
been said to prove that the number of sects under the Commonwealth has
been enormously exaggerated; that various opinions were held then,
as now, without forming distinct ecclesiastical communions; and that
the greatest absurdities were little more than the hallucinations of
individual minds.[396]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XIV.
As in the histories of the English nation, so in histories of the
English Church, the individual, domestic, and social condition of the
people has been too much overlooked; public ecclesiastical affairs
have been allowed almost completely to overshadow private religious
customs and habits. Yet if we would fully understand what our ancestors
were, and truly estimate their character under its moral aspect, and
in its spiritual relations, we must enter as far as we can within
the circle of their inner Church life and their home retirements.
Happily, materials exist for the illustration of this important part
of the ecclesiastical history of England during the Civil Wars and the
Commonwealth.
[Sidenote: _Baptism._]
I. Episcopalians were deprived of the privilege of baptism according
to their own cherished formularies. Had the law only prohibited the
open celebration of that service, the hardship would have been less
than it was; inasmuch as christenings in the house had become common
in the Stuart period, and the display made on such occasions had been
often made the subject of complaint and rebuke. The ordinance of 1645
prohibited the use of Episcopal Church services in private as well as
in public. But notwithstanding this circumstance, many a clergyman ran
the risk of still wearing a surplice, of still making the sign of the
cross, and of still repeating those words which had become dearer to
him than ever, from the very fact of the peril which was now connected
with their employment.
The Directory described the legalized mode of celebrating the
initiatory rite of the Gospel. Private members of the Church were
by that authority forbidden to perform it; its administration being
lodged, it was said, in "the hands of the Stewards of the mysteries of
God." Great importance was attached to the publicity of the ceremony;
the law requiring it to be conducted in a place where the whole act
of worship could be seen and heard, and not in a dark corner of the
church, where--to use the words of the Directory--"fonts in the time
of Popery were unfitly and superstitiously placed." The Presbyterians
explained baptism as the seal of ingrafting into Christ--the right
to which formed the inheritance of the seed of believers, who were
pronounced to be "holy before baptism, and therefore are they to be
baptized." The inward virtue was not tied in its communication to the
time of administering the ordinance. Its fruit and power, it was said,
"reacheth to the whole course of our life; and that outward baptism
is not so necessary, that through the want thereof the infant is in
danger of damnation, or the parents guilty, if they do not contemn
or neglect the ordinance of Christ, when and where it may be had."
Instruction to that effect was to be given when the service took
place; then prayer was to be offered for "sanctifying the water to
this spiritual use"--the element being applied by means of pouring
or sprinkling.[397] The service was concluded with thanksgiving
and supplication, for which suitable topics were suggested by the
Directory. The staid Puritan matron, in raiment simple as it was pure,
came to church accompanied by her husband--also dressed in Puritan
garb--who presented the child to the minister and announced its name.
Names savouring of Paganism and Popery were decidedly forbidden, and
sometimes, no doubt, peculiar ones taken from Scripture were chosen;
yet, in this respect, the Puritans of the Commonwealth only followed
a custom which had been common in the reigns of James I. and Charles
I. Any strange Christian names which might be borne by men and women
under the Protectorate must have been given by a parent at that
earlier period, and can therefore be no just reason for ridiculing the
persons to whom they belonged. Care was taken in the ordinance which
established the Directory to require that there should be a book of
vellum provided for the registration of baptisms; but the unsettled
condition of the times in some cases rendered the provision nugatory.
For example, the Vicar of Lowestoft states that, in 1645, he and many
others were taken prisoners by Colonel Cromwell, so that, for some
time, there existed neither minister nor clerk in the town, and "the
inhabitants were obliged to procure one another to baptize their
children"--consequently baptisms could not be properly registered.[398]
That baptisms should be in public was required by the Independents
no less than by the Presbyterians; nor would the former, in general,
object to what the Directory prescribed, except that they disliked set
forms, and preferred "the administration of the seals," as they termed
them, by the minister in his own way, "according to the occasion."
It is mentioned as a practice amongst the Independents, that one
minister preached and another performed the rite of baptism after the
sermon.[399]
[Sidenote: _Education._]
II. The education of the young received much attention in Puritan
times. Devout parents were anxious that their children should be
well instructed in the truths of Christianity, and for this purpose
they used certain approved catechisms. That which was prepared by
the Assembly of Divines soon superseded all others. Schools, whether
conducted by an Anglican priest or by a Puritan presbyter, were
remarkable both for the thorough drilling which the younger pupils
received in the rudiments of the dead languages, and for the use of
the higher classics by elder boys in the upper forms. Such boys were
required to talk during school hours in Latin, "under a penalty if they
either spoke English or broke Priscian's head;" but if their Latinity
was barbarous and not ungrammatical, they were subject simply to the
derision of their juvenile critics. The study of Greek authors was
also cultivated, and school exercises in that department took a shape
bearing upon the illustration of Scripture, and sometimes presented
very amusing examples. A "great anti-Puritan" schoolmaster is mentioned
as being particularly careful to observe in profane authors all
allusions to the contents of the Bible; and so quick were his eyes in
detecting these that he would gravely tell his boys that the words,
"_ubi nuper arârat_," in Ovid's story of Deucalion's flood, had in them
a strange allusion, (he would not say whether intended or accidental,)
to the Mountain of Ararat on which rested Noah's ark.[400] The tutors
of the upper classes were ambitious of improving upon earlier methods,
avoiding "the miseducation of the gentry," over which Bishop Hall, in
one of his letters, pours out very characteristic lamentations.[401]
William Greenhill--the Independent minister of Stepney--in the
Dedication prefixed to one of his works, compliments the Princess
Elizabeth upon her resolution to write out with her own princely hand
the Holy Oracles in the original, thus breeding hopes that she would
excel her sex throughout Europe, as Drusius said of his son, who,
when five years old, learned Hebrew, and at twelve could write it
_extempore_, both in prose and verse.[402] Discipline seems to have
been equally strict at home and at school; and the young Puritan was
taught in his earliest days to regard life as a very grave and serious
business. He had to pass through long seasons of fasting and prayer,
and to listen to sermons of three hours' duration, from which he was
required to carry home "the minister's method," duly drawn out in heads
and particulars.[403]
[Sidenote: _Marriage._]
III. When Puritan young ladies and gentlemen had reached a fitting
age, and began to think of a union for life--after courtship had been
commenced in earnest, and the lovers' knot had been tied--there came
what was called the _handfasting_, which was a sort of solemn espousal,
and upon this event a day was spent in praying and hearing a sermon,
and in forming a contract, which bound the parties to wed each other.
When the Presbyterian minister had received a certificate of the banns
having been published, he might solemnize the marriage on any day
excepting one of public humiliation; although the Directory advised
that it should not be on a Lord's Day.[404] After an address had been
delivered, and the usual charge had been given, as to whether the
parties were aware of any impediment to their union, the man and woman,
taking each other by the hand, promised to be loving and faithful to
each other until God should separate them by death. Then, without any
further ceremony, the minister pronounced them to be husband and wife,
and "concluded the action with prayer." When several persons were
present, it was not an uncommon thing for a sermon to be preached.[405]
Old English wedding customs had been rather wild and rude. Amidst
plenty of music and dancing, with perhaps a masque and other sports,
the bride had appeared adorned with garlands, when her head was touched
with the sole of a shoe, in token of subjection to her future lord.
Stockings were flung at the fair one; and on the sideboard, in addition
to the bride-cake, bays and rosemary (the latter dipped in scented
water) played an important part in the marriage feast. Sheffield
knives were presented, to be worn, one each in the girdle of bride and
bridegroom; gloves, scarfs, points, and laces, were also fashionable
offerings on the happy occasion. But Puritans, shocked at the
superstition which animated some ancient usages, and at the indelicacy
and grossness of others, became sparing in the use of symbols, and
contracted the entertainments of the most joyous day of human life so
as to bring them within very narrow dimensions. It might indeed be
said, in the words of an old play, "We see no ensigns of a wedding
here--no character of a bridal; where be our scarfs and gloves?"[406]
John Howe speaks of "Emanuel, God with us," as the motto of a married
pair, and as "the posy on their wedding ring;" but with some persons,
even the use of that simple and beautiful sign now stood in jeopardy,
from the supposed paganism of its remote origin. Whatever might be the
speeches made at wedding feasts, no healths would be drunk, for such
a practice was distinctly forbidden. Yet innocent mirth, according to
the taste of the persons assembled, would not be wanting; nor did they
need any commiseration for the absence of what they did not relish, and
what it would have been really a sacrifice for them to adopt. Presents
of substantial worth sometimes graced these festivals; and a silver
bowl, given at Oliver Heywood's nuptials, continued for many years an
heirloom in the family.
[Sidenote: _Puritan Women._]
IV. The ideal of the Puritan woman is one of the fairest types of
womanhood--face full of the beautifulness of modesty; eyes lustrous
with the calm light of devotion; countenance expressive of firmness
and gentleness, meekness and love; dress of subdued colour--of silk,
or stuff, according to the wearer's rank; kerchief white as snow; no
"plaiting of hair," but locks tucked back, smooth and glossy as a
raven's wing. The bashful maiden sat in her garden bower, with lute
and psalm-book; the matron, with her waiting women, in the fair oak
parlour after morning prayer, her character formed on King Lemuel's
model, "seeking wool and flax, and working willingly with her hands;"
laying her hands to the spindle, and her hands holding the distaff;
stretching forth her hand to the poor, reaching forth her hands to the
needy; opening her mouth with wisdom, while on her tongue is the law
of kindness; looking well to the ways of her household, and not eating
the bread of idleness. This is a lovelier type of female humanity than
can be found in any of Lily's pictures of Charles II.'s beauties, with
luscious lips and dainty lovelocks--with their outward adorning, and
wearing of gold, and putting on of apparel. Modern painters, with the
instinctive insight of genius, see and appreciate the fact, and hence
depict, not the Puritan in love with the Cavalier's daughter, but the
Cavalier in love with the Puritan girl.
Puritan houses exhibited Scripture texts upon the doors and over the
fire-places; also upon the baby's cot, and even upon a wooden skillet
or a copper kettle. Godly verses hung on the walls, forming decorations
destitute of all beauty, save such as might exist in the meaning of
the words printed in rude type and upon coarse paper. The ladies, in
fair white stomachers and silken skirts, plied their needles or read
their books. A few conned the Greek Testament or spelt out the Hebrew
Bible. Lips and the lute yielded fair music; but in some cases a
large induction from the study of natural history seems to have been
considered necessary to vindicate the recreation, for it was sagely
observed: "Of all beasts, saith Ælian, there is not that delighteth not
in harmony only the ass; strange would it be for man to love it not."
It ought in this connection, however, to be remembered that the songs
of the seventeenth century were not generally of a kind to commend
themselves to minds distinguished by purity; and therefore, amongst
religious and virtuous persons, a prejudice extensively obtained
against all music except such as was sacred.
[Sidenote: _Domestic Religion._]
V. Family worship was maintained with conscientious regularity, but
was sometimes carried to a most wearisome length. In earlier days,
Presbyterians had been cautious in their prolonged devotions, lest they
should be interrupted by their neighbours, and had even adopted the
very strange expedient of posting a boy by the gate, to sing and shout,
for the purpose of deadening the voice of the individual who might
be engaged in domestic supplication. When alarming events occurred,
persons of this description would spend whole nights in the exercises
of devotion; and Oliver Heywood, referring to one of these seasons,
remarks: "Such a night of prayers, tears, and groans, I was never
present at in all my life."[407] Whilst in the days of the Civil Wars
and the Protectorate the Puritans had full liberty of worship, their
Episcopalian neighbours were obliged to take the place of those whom
they had previously persecuted; and the reader of "Woodstock" will,
perhaps, call to mind Sir Henry Lee, in his wicker chair, listening
to an old man, in a dilapidated clerical habit, reading prayers, as
Alice knelt at her father's feet, uttering "responses with a voice
that might have suited a choir of angels." The picture is no doubt
over-coloured, and may express a deceptive kind of sentimentalism; yet
the circumstances of domestic worship in the dwelling of a High Church
family would not be unlike the graphic sketch supplied by the great
novelist.
Puritanical servants were ill at ease in houses where young gentlewomen
learned to play, and dance, and sing; but they breathed a congenial
atmosphere in places where the means of grace were amply enjoyed, and
a rigid discipline was firmly maintained. An individual of this class
has minutely detailed his own history; and in it he describes himself
as receiving hat-bands, doublet, coat, breeches, stockings, shoes, a
cloak, and half-a-dozen pairs of cuffs, from his mistress, in the shape
of a gratuity, besides some £5 a year wages. He waited--he says--upon
her at table, brought the table-cloth and spread it out, laid upon
the trenchers salt and bread, set her a chair, brought her the first
dish, begged her to sit down, and supplied whatever she asked for. This
footman used to write down the sermons which he heard, and repeated
them noon and night on Sabbath and other "special days," thanking God,
who provided him with "rich and fat ordinances" in the ministry of the
Word.[408]
Where some members of a family remained faithful to the Episcopal
Church--loving her liturgy, and frequenting the private meetings of her
clergy--divisions might naturally be expected to arise; but sometimes
also, even where all were under the power of a Puritan spirit,
religious discord, contrary to all expectation, might be introduced.
For instance, we are informed by Lucy Hutchinson that the home of Sir
Thomas Fairfax suffered much disquiet from collisions of sentiment
between his lady, a staunch Covenanter and Royalist, and certain
Independent ministers holding republican views, who attended upon the
General in the capacity of his chaplains.
VI. Scarcely anything more obviously marked out the Puritans as objects
for the notice of the world than the manner in which they regarded
the Lord's Day. They could not agree with Anglicans even as to its
appellation; the word _Sabbath_, commonly used by the former class,
being much disliked by the latter. The Puritans claimed sanctity for
all the hours of the day from morning until night; their neighbours
accounted the hours spent in Divine service alone as holy.[409] The one
party founded the whole observance entirely upon words of Scripture,
the other mainly upon ecclesiastical tradition. The difference as
to the mode of keeping the first day of the week was still more
striking. High Churchmen approved of rural amusements after the
celebration of public worship, and vindicated the "Book of Sports"
as a wise regulation; an extravagance of opinion which drove their
fellow-countrymen to an opposite extreme. Whether it were right even
to take a walk on the Sunday became with them a serious question; and
Baxter, whose health required that he should do so, remarks that he did
it privately, lest he should lead other people into sin.[410] The lower
orders would sometimes burst through the trammels of law, and would
riotously attempt the revival of ancient sports; and it happened once,
that upon Easter Sunday, a number of noisy apprentices met in Finsbury
Fields to play at their favourite games, and, when the train bands had
been sent to disperse them, the young men said that, since all other
holydays had been abolished by law, no time of recreation remained but
the Sabbath.
[Sidenote: _Belief in Witchcraft._]
VII. Superstitious beliefs deeply tinged the religious and social life
of the seventeenth century. There is in human nature an ineradicable
conviction of the presence throughout the universe of invisible
and mysterious influences; and this conviction, in certain wild
imaginary forms, is found in a number of instances to be a pitiable
substitute for religion, and, in a still greater number, to be its
unworthy companion, and the corrupter of its purity. One of the worst
superstitions of this kind is that belief in witchcraft which, after
being widely and fondly cherished in mediæval Christendom, was brought
over into Protestant churches at the period of the Reformation.[411]
An Act of Parliament in the reign of Queen Elizabeth--the Book
on Dæmonology by King James--other works on the subject by less
conspicuous authors[412]--articles of visitation issued by
Bishops[413]--and even the writings of Lord Bacon and John Selden, bear
witness to the existence of this delusion on an extensive scale in the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Indeed, it hung at that time like
a black cloud over all Europe, terrifying people of all countries, of
all ranks, of all degrees of culture, and of all varieties of religious
opinion.
[Sidenote: _Belief in Witchcraft._]
The most terrible form of this superstition within the shores of Great
Britain was to be found in Scotland. The enormous number of witches
executed there proves the intense and general persuasion as to the
reality of witchcraft which must at the time have existed in that
country; and the vigorous and active faith in such diabolical agency
manifested by the northern inhabitants of our island could not fail
to influence their southern brethren, with whom they were connected
by so many bonds of religious association.[414] The common idea was,
that witches possessed all sorts of mischievous power. Diseases,
especially such as lay beyond the reach of medical art, mysterious
pains and convulsions, even accidents and injuries from lightning, and
also murrain amongst cattle, were by all classes of people laid at the
doors of unfortunate old women who had wrinkled faces, or furrowed
brows, or hairy lips, or a squinting eye, or a squeaking voice, or a
hump back. It was, moreover, said, that the bewitched fell into fits
when they tried to pronounce the name of "Lord," or Jesus, or Christ;
but that they could glibly utter the words "Satan," or "Devil."[415]
To check the demoniacal craft, witchfinders were employed, who drove a
thriving trade at the expense of an inconceivable amount of suffering.
Detectives of this order were busy in England, imported from beyond
the Tweed,[416] and there were others of southern origin, possessing
a wonderful skill for witch-catching altogether of indigenous growth.
A genius of this description, the notorious Hopkins,[417] boasted of
having hanged no less than sixty of the infernal sisterhood in the
county of Essex alone; and trials for these mysterious offences excited
a curiosity, possessed a fascination, and inspired a terror such as, in
our time, it is extremely difficult to imagine. The effect of all this
upon private life amongst religious people, who had a strong faith in
the spiritual world and in the agency of Satan, would be exceedingly
great; and mainly for the illustration of this point our cursory notice
of the subject has been introduced. Stories of dealers in the black
art, and of the spells with which they bound men, women, and children,
and how pins were extracted from those suffering under enchantment,
would be related by the firesides of religious families throughout
England during the Commonwealth; these miserable hallucinations making
people tremble who were far too brave to shrink with fear from some
other things which were really terrific. Tales of apparitions, dreams,
and other mysterious occurrences, were not only mingled largely in the
staple of such conversations, but they also formed topics of discussion
in the correspondence of Divines.[418]
The belief in witchcraft, although so common in Puritan times, and
even culminating in England under the Commonwealth,[419] was not, as
already indicated, of Puritan origin; nor was it confined to Puritan
religionists. Richard Baxter, indeed, dwelt much upon the subject, and
derived from it arguments against the doctrines of materialism and
the denial of revelation; but men of another theological school,
such as More and Cudworth, were equally believers in this form of
the marvellous; and the same faith was held by the scientific Robert
Boyle, and by Sir Thomas Brown, notwithstanding his exposure of "Vulgar
Errors." Nor did this credulity, after all, produce in England an
amount of mischief and suffering, great as it was, to be compared with
what it did on the Continent before the Reformation, when as many as
500 people are said to have been executed at Geneva in one year, and
the Inquisitor Remigius boasted that he had put 900 to death in the
province of Lorraine.[420] Neither were there wanting in this country
some who, when the rage for witch-burning was most rampant, protested
against the whole system as an impious absurdity. In a curious tract,
written by Thomas Adey, in the year 1656, entitled, "A Candle in the
Dark; or, a Treatise concerning the Nature of Witches and Witchcraft,"
we meet with the following passage:--"It is reported by travellers
that some people in America do worship for a day the first living
creature they see in the morning, be it but a bird or a worm. This
idolatry is like the idolatry of this part of the world, who, when
they are afflicted in body or goods by God's hand, they have an eye
to some mouse, or bug, or frog, or other living creature, saying it
is some witch's imp that is sent to afflict them; ascribing the work
of God to a witch, or any mean creature, rather than God." The writer
also alludes to Reginald Scott, who had published a book, called "The
Discovery of Witchcraft," in the beginning of the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, and describes it as composed for the instruction of all
Judges and Justices of that day; which book, he observes, did for a
while make great impression on the magistracy, and also on the clergy,
"but, since that time, England has shamefully fallen from the truth
which they began to receive."
[Sidenote: _Clerical Costume._]
VIII. Clerical costume is worth at least one word. The Seventy-fourth
Canon of the Church of England--and this Canon has never been
repealed--prescribes very minutely that persons in holy orders shall,
in ordinary, wear gowns with standing collars and hoods; and shall,
when they are on a journey, be dressed in cloaks with sleeves, without
welts, but with long buttons; and shall, when they are taking a
walk, appear in doublet and hose, with coat or cassock, but not in
light-coloured stockings. This law affords some idea of the garb of
ministers in the days of Queen Elizabeth; and, with some little change,
their garments would be similar in the days of the Stuarts. Ejected
Episcopalians, in places where prejudice against them did not exist,
would dress in this fashion. Some teachers belonging to the sects
would clothe themselves just like other people; and leathern doublets,
nay, even uniforms of buff or scarlet, might be seen in pulpits. But
such Puritan instructors of the people as had received a University
education retained their academic costume for general use; and, of
course eschewing in acts of worship the surplice prescribed in the
Fifty-eighth Canon, wore gowns of Genevan form, with bands; which
latter appendages--judging from old portraits--varied in dimensions
from their present cut to such ample breadths as to fall like a collar
across the shoulders. Square caps were signs of Anglicanism; and the
advocates of the opposite system rigidly refused to wear any which
were not round. The wigs so conspicuous in the portraits of early
Nonconformists were the luxurious innovations of the period after the
Restoration.[421]
[Sidenote: _Public Worship._]
IX. Churches were divested of Catholic adornments, except in the case
of certain large and elegant edifices, which, as already remarked, shew
in their present state how little injury was done to their sculpture,
their carvings, or even their painted windows. Commonly, however,
images were torn from their niches, screens were taken down in the
Chancel, and plain glass substituted in windows for coloured panes.
Walls became whitewashed, and exhibited a framed copy of the Covenant
hung up in some conspicuous position. No rails enclosed the uncovered
table of plain wood standing in the chancel, then altarless. No organ
helped the service of song. Pews in continually-increasing number[422]
covered the floor of the nave; galleries in the side aisles also
afforded accommodation for the multitudes who, in greater crowds than
ever, flocked to hear the sermons of popular Divines. Reading-desks
went out of fashion; and a precentor, instead of a clerk, occupied a
seat under the pulpit--a heavy sounding-board aiding the preacher's
voice, and the sands of the hour-glass measuring out the length of
his discourses.[423] The general appearance of Gothic fabrics under
Presbyterian rule resembled that of ancient parish churches and
cathedrals in Holland, Switzerland, and Scotland. Indeed, St. Lawrence
at Rotterdam, the Gross Minster of Zurich, and the Grey Friars in
Edinburgh, may be regarded as specimens of the appearance which some of
our large religious edifices wore before the Restoration.
X. Presbyterians conducted worship according to the terms of the
Directory. The service commenced with prayer; then followed the
reading of the Holy Scriptures, with more or less of exposition.
The congregation afterwards sung a psalm; subsequently to which the
minister offered a long prayer, which embraced a number of prescribed
topics. The sermons introduced by these devotional exercises
were--according to the admirable advice given in the Directory--to be
prepared and delivered _painfully_, _plainly_, _faithfully_, _wisely_,
_gravely_, _lovingly_, and _as taught of God_. Some preachers, it would
appear, read their discourses; but it was by far the most general
practice amongst Puritan Divines to deliver them without the aid
of notes.[424] In the Westminster Assembly there had been a debate
respecting a curious practice adopted by the Scotch clergy, of bowing
in the pulpit to certain distinguished persons in the audience. Baillie
attempted to introduce the custom into England, but the Independents
opposed it; and the Presbyterians on this side the Tweed never imitated
this peculiar usage of their brethren on the other. Devout behaviour
at worship was carefully enjoined in the Directory, which, very
properly, interdicted all whispering, sleeping, and looking about.
Yet the taking of notes--as observed already in the case of persons
in Calamy's congregation--seems to have continued as a common habit.
"Almost all people," Baillie remarks, "men, women, and children, write
at preaching."
Wearing hats during Divine service had been usual in the reign of
Queen Elizabeth. At the funeral of Bishop Cox, in Ely Cathedral, the
congregation sat in the choir to hear the sermon, "all covered, and
having their bonnets on." Archbishop Laud noticed that it was a new
thing, and he approved of it, for the Oxford Masters to sit at St.
Mary's Church bareheaded. To do so became a sign of Cavaliership;
and a Royalist colonel, hanged for burglary, told the crowd what a
consolation it was to him to remember "that he had always taken his
hat off when he went to church." The Puritans continued the older
practice, and a forest of steeple-crowned hats covered the pews as long
as the sermon lasted; but they were all doffed again as soon as they
began to pray.[425]
During the Civil Wars, very unseemly conduct was witnessed occasionally
in places of worship. The inhabitants of a parish in the Isle of Wight
being divided into two parties as to the great religious questions of
the day, the Puritans went one Sunday to church to hear a minister
sent down by Parliament. But the previous Anglican incumbent stood
upon his rights, and would not allow the new comer to enter within the
sacred edifice. Sending for his surplice, he preached in the porch,
whereupon the other party adjourned to the school-room, leaving him
where he was, surrounded by a small auditory. The correspondent who
communicated to the newspaper this piece of intelligence added to it
this congratulatory remark: that the discomfiture of the parson was
the more remarkable, because in that rude place, the godly folks had
before been scorned and derided--as was the case when a certain Lady
Norton, living in that neighbourhood, "had repetitions of sermons in
her house."[426]
There was little or no difference between the Presbyterian and
Independent methods of worship, except that the latter would not
employ any prescribed method of service; insisting very much upon the
advantages of free prayer, and upon the doctrine that in such kind of
prayer "the Spirit helpeth our infirmities."
[Sidenote: _The Lord's Supper._]
XI. Anglicans still knelt in secret, and received the consecrated
bread and cup from the hands of one of their own priests; but the
Presbyterian incumbent administered the Lord's Supper in the parish
church to all parishioners, excepting the ignorant and scandalous.
The table, decently covered, was conveniently placed so that the
communicants might sit around it. After a short warning against
improper communion--called in Scotland _fencing the tables_--the
minister began "the action" by sanctifying the elements; then he read
the words of institution, and proceeded to pray; after which the bread
and wine were distributed, with solemn words, including those used by
our blessed Saviour when He instituted the holy feast. Thanksgiving,
with a collection, closed the celebration of the Eucharist.
The Independents sat in their pews during the commemoration, instead of
sitting close around the tables, as the Presbyterians did; also, they
disapproved of the unfrequency of the service amongst their brethren,
and were themselves wont to celebrate it week by week. Generally, they
partook of the sacred emblems in silence. Philip Nye, according to the
report of Robert Baillie, thought that the minister, in preaching,
should "be covered, and the people discovered;" but that, "in the
sacrament, the minister should be discovered, as a servant, and the
guests all covered."[427] How far this strange practice prevailed we
cannot say; but the wearing of hats at the Lord's table was a reproach
which we find cast upon the Independents by Edwards, the Presbyterian;
and that he did not bring the charge without good reason appears from
the reply which was made to him by one Catherine Chidley, who thus
attempts to vindicate the practice: "It may be as lawful for one man to
sit covered, and another uncovered, as it may be lawful for one man to
receive it sitting, and another lying in bed."[428]
[Sidenote: _Psalmody._]
XII. A prejudice existed amongst some of the earlier Baptists against
the use of psalmody in the worship of the Almighty, but the practice
met with decided approval from Ainsworth and Robinson, who were
patriarchs of Congregationalism.[429] Also, in "The Apologetical
Narration of the Five Brethren," the singing of psalms is mentioned as
a part of their worship, from which it follows that any objection to it
amongst the Congregationalists must have been quite exceptional. The
many versions of the Psalms (forty-three at least) at the commencement
of the Civil Wars, bear witness to the extensive delight felt at that
time in the exercise of praise. Of the primitive Protestant version
of Sternhold and Hopkins, there were then several Genevan editions;
and certain other versions--altogether distinct from it--present clear
indications of a Puritan, and even of a Nonconformist origin.[430]
Rivalry between the two Presbyterian hymnologists, Rouse and Barton,
as to the use of their new books, published respectively in 1641 and
1644, has been already noticed. The metrical psalms of King Edward
the Sixth's time--which had been enjoined under Queen Elizabeth, and in
the reigns of the early Stuarts had been liked by the Puritans--were
pronounced by some, after the commencement of the Civil Wars, as
"uncouth, and unsuited to the times." But the venerable psalter of the
Reformers still, to some extent, held its ground; and Baxter complains
that those who laid it by used, "some one, and some another" of the
existing versions, so that there could be no uniformity at that time in
"the service of song."[431]
XIII. Lenten and other Church fasts savoured of superstition in the
esteem of the Puritans; but, by the latter, seasons of national
humiliation were as solemnly observed as they were frequently enjoined.
The Directory defined a fast as requiring total abstinence, not only
from food, but also from worldly labour, discourses, and thoughts,
and from all bodily delights and rich apparel; still much more from
what is scandalous and offensive, such as "gaudish attire, lascivious
habits and gestures, and other vanities of either sex;" but abstinence
in the last particulars certainly was not meant to be represented as
peculiar to days of public repentance. Much time on these occasions
was ordered to be spent in reading, hearing, and singing in such
manner so "as to quicken suitable affections, especially in prayer;"
for which latter exercise the Assembly of Divines had been careful--as
in reference to all other kinds of worship--to provide appropriate
subjects. Nor were themes proper for the pulpit at such seasons, left
unmentioned by those spiritual counsellors. Similar directions, the
difference of the object being taken into account, were also given for
public thanksgivings. And, not only when governments ordered fasts for
the sins of the people, or festivals for victories and deliverances,
but at other times, on account both of private sorrows and private
joys, did Puritan households devote whole days to the worship of God.
Scattered up and down the quaint biographies of that era are instances
of hours spent in solitary devotion; of lengthened preparations for
the sacrament; of family groups gathered upon their knees, bewailing
lukewarmness, declension and backsliding; of services at home akin to
those at church, bewailing the low estate of Christendom; of sorrowful
commemorations of public and domestic calamities, and of intense
spiritual enjoyments experienced alone in the closet, or shared by all
the inmates of a dwelling; whilst texts and psalms, religious anecdotes
and pious meditations, set their mark on the anniversaries of births,
marriages, and special interventions of providence.
[Sidenote: _Recreations._]
XIV. Certain recreations were rigorously forbidden. No wonder the
theatre incurred denunciation, after the character given of it by Ben
Jonson. Parliament prohibited stage exhibitions; but, in despite of the
law, they were covertly continued in certain private mansions, much to
the annoyance of the Puritan class. A company of actors in Golding Lane
were frequently complained of, who, notwithstanding all complaints,
still persevered in their forbidden art; but they were at length seized
in the middle of a performance, when, as it was remarked, comedy was
turned into tragedy. They were put under a strong guard of pikes and
muskets, "plundered of all the richest of their clothes," and left
"nothing but necessaries, now"--adds the newspaper which reports the
occurrence--"to act and to learn a better life."[432]
The festivities of New Year and of Shrovetide, of May and Michaelmas,
also shared in receiving reprehension;[433] the picturesqueness
of ancient customs being overlooked amidst the cruelties and the
immoralities, with which they had become associated. Wakes were
dropped; maypoles were pulled down; cock-fights and bear-baitings
came to an end.[434] No doubt actual wickedness and temptations
to vice thus met with a decided check, and a surface morality for
a while appeared; but certain other prohibitions of a different
nature--for which, however, occasion had been given in part, by the
circumstance of such amusements as we have just mentioned having become
connected with the observance of the seasons prohibited--shocked the
sensibilities of many truly pious people. The Christmas, Easter,
and Whitsuntide festivals, with other holydays, were abolished by
the ordinance of 1647.[435] This touched the conscience of devout
Episcopalians, who loved to commemorate at special seasons the great
events of Christianity, and cut deep into the heart of certain social
enjoyments, which had come to depend very much upon the associations
formed between them and the festivals of the Church. Such unreasonable
interferences produced popular tumults. For example, the Mayor of
Canterbury would have a market held on Christmas day; and people who
at that season desired to attend divine worship in the Cathedral were
roughly handled. The discontent which was thus produced burst out
into open revolt, and the military were called in to put an end to
the uproar,--in consequence of which several people were committed to
prison. Puritans, however, had their periods of rest and amusement.
The Ordinance for abolishing holidays provided that there should be
allotted to scholars, apprentices, and other servants, for recreation,
on every second Tuesday of the month, such time as the masters could
conveniently spare. The determination of its length would be a matter
of difficulty when servant and master were of different minds; to meet
which circumstance, this awkward piece of legislation provided, that
the next Justice of the Peace should "have power to order and reconcile
the same." "_Public_ holidays," therefore, must be considered as having
been entirely suspended during the Commonwealth,--a most injudicious
proceeding, which led to the worst results at the Restoration.
[Sidenote: _Recreations._]
Ladies had their sober and stinted diversions in the parlour and the
garden; and gentlemen had theirs at home and in the field--all measured
out sparingly, and by scripture line and rule. The Word of God, said
the Puritan licensers, permitted shooting, (2 Samuel i. 18), musical
consort, (Nehemiah vii. 67), putting forth riddles, (Judges xiv. 12),
hunting of wild beasts (Canticles ii. 15), searching out, or the
contemplation of the works of God, (I Kings iv. 33). This enumeration
of amusements allowed by Scripture seemed to sanction certain old
English field sports, to concede the pleasures of the chase, and to
permit ladies from the manor-house and the castle to ride out a-hawking
over hill and dale.[436]
XV. It is a mistake to suppose that the Independents of the
Commonwealth were very ascetic. Even the habits of the Presbyterians
in this respect have been considerably exaggerated. They were by no
means so rigid and demure as prejudiced writers are wont to represent.
They did not look so melancholy, nor dress in such ridiculous garbs,
nor act in such absurd ways, as believers in Hudibras imagine. Many
were gentlemen of graceful bearing, polite demeanour, and genial
sympathies. They had amongst them some of the noblest blood of England,
and they included large numbers of genteel descent. Such persons, with
multitudes of yeomen of ruddy countenances, would crack a joke, and
ring an honest laugh, as they walked through trim flower gardens or
rode out to their field sports. But the Independents, perhaps, advanced
still further in conformity to the outward world.[437]
[Sidenote: _Social Life of the Independents._]
Country life in the old mansions and manor houses, with the exception
of certain "superstitions," remained much the same as in the days
before the wars. And city life in the main ran on as it did before the
fall of monarchy; merchants and tradesmen lived as of yore; and mayors
and corporations feasted as they had ever done in guildhalls. Wives
were handed by wealthy husbands, and maidens by ambitious lovers, up
staircases of polished oak, to drawing rooms, profusely carved, and
full of furniture curiously fashioned. The dining-room wore an air of
enticing comfort, and the hearth blazed, as family and friends sat down
to a well-spread table after a long grace. Probably the feast did not
break up until a godly minister had expounded a chapter and offered a
prayer. And if the guests did not quaff as much sack as some of their
royalist friends, and although they did abstain from drinking healths,
they were not more addicted to asceticism than excess; all this it
would be idle to mention, but for the preposterous notions so widely
prevalent, that the Independents and other "sects" of the Commonwealth
were an exceptional order of beings, living somewhere quite beyond the
outskirts of civilized life. If their connexion with Cromwell's Court
somewhat affected the social habits of Independents, and spread amongst
them rather more of indulgence in luxury than might be witnessed
in other Puritan dwellings, it should be stated, that before any
such influence existed, even amidst the early controversies between
Presbyterians and Independents, the latter were charged with worldly
conformity. They were reproached for riding about in coaches and four
on the lord's Day, and so acting the gallant, that they might have
been taken "for roarers and ruffians, rather than saints." They wore
cuffs and silver spurs, and gold upon their clothes. Their houses were
furnished like those of noblemen and peers. More plate was in their
cupboards than in the palaces of grandees. Their fare was delicious,
set out with "such curiosity of cookery," and all sorts of wines and
delicacies.[438] This picture is connected with accusations of unkind
conduct towards those of "the presbyter way," which clearly prove
the animus of the writer, and justify us in toning down considerably
the colours in which he has painted the Independents. But, after due
abatement, enough remains to shew that they were less precise in
their habits, and more conformed to the fashion of the age in dress,
equipage, and entertainments, than some of their Puritan contemporaries.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Court._]
XVI. The Independent Protector's Court, whilst eminently virtuous and
religious, exhibited also a degree of magnificence, little inferior
to that of any court in Christendom. Louis the Fourteenth would not
have found in the apartments at Whitehall splendour equal to that
which blazed at Versailles; but the envoy of Sweden, when he visited
England in the summer of 1655, beheld a scene of pomp and magnificence
which filled him with perfect surprise. Soldiers were drawn up at the
entrance; guards in livery lined the stairs; the banqueting house was
hung with arras; and multitudes of ladies waited in the galleries, to
receive the Ambassador and his attendants, consisting of "two hundred
persons, generally proper handsome men, and fair-haired; they were all
in mourning, very genteel." At the upper end of the room stood his
Highness, with a chair of state behind him, and divers of his council
and servants, the master of the ceremonies regulating the interview.
His Highness did not put off his hat till the Swede had put off his,
and whenever the latter named the king his master, or Sweden, or the
Protector, or England, he moved his hat. And, if he used the Divine
name, or spoke of the good of Christendom, he put off his hat very low,
the Protector assuming "like postures of civility."[439]
As an illustration of the social life of Whitehall, an amusing incident
may be related respecting one of the clergy in attendance upon Oliver,
indicative of those flirtations which neither clerical office nor the
strictest forms of religious profession can banish either from royal
courts or from the scenes of humble life. Jeremiah White, of Trinity
College, Cambridge, a handsome young man, noted for "facetiousness,"
and at the time enjoying a court chaplainship, became an admirer of
the lively Lady Frances Cromwell. He was one day found by his Highness
on his knees, kissing the lady's hand. "What is the meaning of that
posture," the grave soldier sternly enquired. "May it please your
Highness," replied the chaplain, "I have a long time courted that
young gentlewoman there, my lady's woman, and cannot prevail. I
was therefore humbly praying her ladyship to intercede for me." The
Protector demanded of the girl what she meant, by refusing the honour
which Mr. White proposed. She, too glad of the opportunity, curtsied
and said, "If the reverend gentleman had any such wish, she could not
refuse." "Sayst thou so, my lass," answered Cromwell, "call Goodwin,
this business shall be done presently before I go out of the room." The
couple were married, and the bride received from the Protector five
hundred pounds dowry.[440]
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Court._]
Besides Jeremiah White, Cromwell had other chaplains, Hugh Peters,
William Hook, Nicholas Lockier, and Peter Sterry. John Howe, as already
noticed, was also of the number; and in his letters there are found
allusions to the moral and religious character of the Protector's
Court, of so much importance that we cannot pass them over. Howe asked
Baxter, what he conceived a chaplain ought to do in the way of urging
upon the Government a redress of spiritual evils; how far it became him
by public preaching, as well as by private exhortation, to bear witness
against the neglect of such redress--supposing that those persons
who were in power did not conceive that any interference of this
description came within the range of their duty, or excused themselves
because they had to attend to other affairs of still greater moment.
What the writer exactly meant by these expressions is not very clear,
whether by "interference" he intended merely _moral_ interference,
respecting which there ought to have been no hesitation; or beyond
this, some sort of _legislative_ interference, touching which, there
might be doubts in the minds of Cromwell and his State Counsellors. The
following passages had better be given literally:--
"My time will not serve me long; for I think I shall be constrained in
conscience (all things considered) to return, ere long, to my former
station. I left it, I think, upon very fair terms. For, first, when I
settled there, I expressly reserved to myself a liberty of removing,
if the providence of God should invite me to a condition of more
serviceableness anywhere else--which liberty I reckon I could not have
parted with if I would, unless I could have exempted myself from God's
dominion. My call hither was a work I thought very considerable--the
setting-up of the worship and discipline of Christ in this family,
wherein I was to have joined with another, called upon the same
account. I had made, as I supposed, a competent provision for the place
I left. But now at once I see the designed work here hopelessly laid
aside. We affect here to live in so loose a way, that a man cannot fix
upon any certain charge to carry towards them as a minister of Christ
should; so that it were as hopeful a course to preach in a market, or
in any assembly met by chance, as here."
"Here my influence is not like to be much (as it is not to be expected
a raw young man should be much considerable among grandees); my work
little; my success hitherto little; my hopes, considering the temper
of this place, very small; especially coupling it with the temper of
my spirit, which, did you know it, alone would, I think, greatly alter
your judgment of this case. I am naturally bashful, pusillanimous,
easily brow-beaten, solicitous about the fitness or unfitness of speech
or silence in most cases, afraid (especially having to do with those
who are constant in the '_arcana imperii_') of being accounted uncivil,
etc.; and the distemper being natural (most intrinsically) is less
curable. You can easily guess how little considerations are like to do
in such a case. I did not, I confess, know myself so well as, since my
coming up, occasion and reflection have taught me to do. I find now my
hopes of doing good will be among people where I shall not be so liable
to be overawed. I might have known this sooner and have prevented
the trouble I am now in. Though the case of my coming up hither, and
continuance, differ much, so as that I can't condemn the former, yet I
more incline to do that than justify the latter."[441]
The word "_loose_," used by John Howe, must not be strictly
interpreted. If licentiousness had prevailed at Whitehall, he certainly
would have used stronger language, and would not have remained in the
place a single hour after making such a discovery. The reputation
for virtue of Cromwell's family and Court has never been impeached.
Malignant slanders reflecting on their morals, and circulated by
enemies after Cromwell's death, have never received any support
from ascertained facts, or received any credence from unprejudiced
historians; but luxury, extravagance, practical jokes, and escapades
of the kind indicated in the case of Jeremiah White, there undoubtedly
were; and it is to these things, probably, that the strongest
expression in Howe's letter refers; whilst the rest of his complaints
relate to irregularity in worship, and to habits unfriendly to vital
religion. At the same time it must be remembered, that the character of
Baxter's correspondent was one of saintly holiness; and that, beheld
from the level of his eminently spiritual life, many things would
appear deplorable, which common persons are wont to pass by without the
utterance of any, even the slightest, reprehension.
[Sidenote: _The End of Life._]
XVII. Before terminating the review of the private and social life of
the period, as it existed amongst religious people, we must touch upon
those observances of a sacred kind which were connected with the close
of human existence.
One section in the Directory is "Concerning visitation of the sick."
It is observed that times of affliction are special opportunities put
into the minister's hands to communicate a word in season to weary
souls, and topics of spiritual address and advice are largely suggested
for his guidance in conducting conversation in the chamber of disease
and death. The minister is directed to admonish the patient to set
his house in order, to make provision for the payment of his debts,
to render satisfaction for any wrong he has done, to be reconciled to
his enemies, and to forgive all men their trespasses. The minister
also would, in addition to this, according to the instructions given
in the Directory, improve the occasion for the spiritual benefit of
relatives, friends, or servants present; but no mention is made, in
any way, of the administration of the Lord's supper, which, being then
regarded exclusively as a Church ordinance, both by Presbyterians
and Independents, would not be deemed a proper solemnity for a few
persons around a sick bed. But in numerous cases, beyond all doubt,
the sacrament would be administered secretly by Anglican clergymen to
persons of their own communion in the last hours of life.
[Sidenote: _The End of Life._]
The Episcopal burial service could not be used--a hardship which
can be appreciated by those, who, in the present day, occasionally
find enactments and prejudices interfering with their sentiments of
natural piety.[442] The custom of kneeling down by the side of the
corpse was pronounced by the Presbyterians to be superstitious; and all
praying, reading, and singing at funerals was forbidden. The minister
was directed simply to put people in mind of their duty of applying
"themselves to meditation and conferences suitable to the occasion."
Funeral sermons incurred from certain Divines strong objections. The
Puritans, Cartwright and Hildersam, had scrupled to allow them, and
some Reformed Churches abroad had abandoned their use. The Westminster
Assembly debated the question, and Baillie reports, that the difference
upon this point between the Scotch and some of the English brethren
appeared irreconcilable. Funeral sermons, he adds, were an abuse of
preaching, intended to humour the rich for reward, and employed in
order to augment the minister's livelihood; and, on these accounts, he
says, that they could not easily be got rid of. Yet, notwithstanding
this strong feeling against religious ceremonies at funerals, many
public ones are recorded in those times as having been conducted on a
scale of splendour surpassing anything we are familiar with now-a-days.
Pym's was very imposing; but in magnificence it was eclipsed by the
processions and formalities at the interment of the Earl of Essex,
Ireton, Blake, and Oliver Cromwell. Indeed, sometimes there seems
to have been an unusual love of display manifested at the tomb of a
Puritan grandee. In the British Museum is a curious deposition by a
herald, relative to the funeral of John St. John; that functionary
declares it to have been in violation of all heraldic laws, insomuch
that the escutcheons went beyond those pertaining to a duke, and that
he never saw so many pennons, except at the funeral of one of the blood
royal.[443]
Far different, and far more touching, were the obsequies of the Master
of St. Paul's School: as he died a single man, the boys walked before
the corpse with white gloves, verses being hung upon the pall instead
of escutcheons.[444]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XV.
Sometimes, by the shore of a lake, the eye catches prismatic effects
upon the ripples, as if chains and rings of gold, and green, and
crimson, were thickly scattered in fragments over the surface,
whilst weeds lie plain enough beneath, covering the bottom of
the mountain-girdled waters. Little creations and images of the
glorious light above are those ripples; and no unapt illustration
do they afford of the varieties of spiritual life in this lower
world; for all these varieties are really reflections of the Sun of
Righteousness--reflections manifold, always imperfect and sometimes
confused, and ever found with the weeds of fallen humanity growing
underneath them.
The religious history of the Commonwealth abounds in specimens of such
varieties: we proceed to furnish further instances of these, not only
from Anglo-Catholic and Puritan biographies, but from others in which
there is the absence of either peculiarity, or a blending of the two.
[Sidenote: _George Herbert._]
Amidst the Civil Wars, and under the ascendancy of Presbyterianism,
there could no longer be the same kind of pastoral care as that which
threw such an air of saintliness over Bemerton rectory. The "country
parson" could no more use the Prayer Book and keep Church festivals.
Daily worship had ceased, such as George Herbert loved to attend,
at the canonical hours of ten and four, when "he lifted up pure and
charitable hands to God in the midst of the congregation." There could
no longer assemble in public twice a day, an Anglican congregation,
composed of parishioners and gentlemen of the neighbourhood. An end
had also come to the usage described by Isaac Walton: "Some of the
meaner sort of his parish did so love and reverence Mr. Herbert, that
they would let their plough rest, when Mr. Herbert's saint's-bell rung
to prayers, that they might also offer their devotions to God with
him, and would then return back to their plough." Yet throughout the
Commonwealth era the lofty devotion of the poet-priest--albeit touched
with asceticism and other weaknesses--continued to beat in many hearts,
and to inspire the concealed use of ancient formularies.
Never was anything more beautiful than Herbert's dying confession: "I
now look back upon the pleasures of my life past, and see the content
I have taken in beauty, in wit, in music, and pleasant conversation,
are now all past by me like a dream, or as a shadow that returns not,
and are now all become dead to me, or I to them; and I see, that as
my father and generation hath done before me, so I also shall now
suddenly (with Job) make my bed also in the dark; and I praise God I am
prepared for it; and I praise Him that I am not to learn patience now
I stand in such need of it; and that I have practised mortification,
and endeavoured to die daily, that I might not die eternally! and my
hope is that I shall shortly leave this valley of tears, and be free
from all fevers and pain; and, which will be a more happy condition,
I shall be free from sin, and all the temptations and anxieties that
attend it; and this being past, I shall dwell in the New Jerusalem;
dwell there with men made perfect; dwell where these eyes shall see my
Master and Saviour Jesus; and with Him see my dear mother and all my
relations and friends. But I must die, or not come to that happy place.
And this is my content, that I am going daily towards it; and that
every day which I have lived hath taken a part of my appointed time
from me, and that I shall live the less time for having lived this and
the day past."
Such words were not theatrically uttered; they simply expressed the
life which the good man had really lived--a life which was in truth a
continued Sunday, answering to what he played and sung in those last
hours.
"The Sundays of man's life
Threaded together on time's string,
Make bracelets to adorn the wife
Of the eternal, glorious King.
On Sundays, heaven's door stands ope,
Blessings are plentiful and rife--
More plentiful than hope."
Punctilious about forms, yet no formalist--thinking much of Lent,
Ember weeks, and Church rites, yet not to the neglect of spiritual
religion--and loving his parish as he loved his relatives, Herbert of
course deemed Nonconformists to be interlopers. Yet, what Nonconformist
will not forgive him the harshness of his judgment, considering the
purity of his spirit, and the elevation of his soul, and how he did
all things for the Master's honour? This cast of sentiment repeated
itself in many devout Anglicans, who in a measure conformed to
ecclesiastical changes, or resolutely suffered loss for conscience'
sake. Nor was sympathy with the tone of Herbert's hymns wanting even
amongst contemporary Puritans. Baxter said: "I must confess after all,
that next to the Scripture poems, there are none so savoury to me as
Mr. George Herbert's. I know that Cowley and others far excel Herbert
in wit and accurate composure; but, as Seneca takes with me above all
his contemporaries, because he speaketh things by words, feelingly and
seriously, like a man that is past jest, so Herbert speaks to God, like
a man that really believeth in God, and whose business in the world is
most with God--heart-work and heaven-work make up his books."[445] Thus
it was that under diverse forms of polity and worship holy chords in
those two hearts vibrated in unison with each other.
[Sidenote: _Hammond._]
Dr. Hammond's piety, elsewhere illustrated in this work, is largely
extolled by his biographer.[446] His devotional habits, which were
characteristic of the age, are particularly recorded. "As soon as he
was ready (which was usually early), he prayed in his chamber with his
servant, in a peculiar form composed for that purpose; after this he
retired to his own more secret devotions in his closet. Betwixt ten and
eleven in the morning, he had a solemn intercession in reference to
the national calamities; to this, after a little distance, succeeded
the morning office of the Church, which he particularly desired to
perform in his own person, and would by no means accept the ease of
having it read by any other. In the afternoon he had another hour
of private prayer, which on Sundays he enlarged, and so religiously
observed, that if any necessary business or charity had diverted him
at the usual time, he repaired his soul at the cost of his body; and,
notwithstanding the injunctions of his physicians, which in other cases
he was careful to obey, spent the suppertime therein. About five
o'clock the solemn private prayers for the nation, and the evening
service of the Church returned. At bed-time his private prayers closed
the day; and, after all, even the night was not without its office, the
51st Psalm being his designed midnight entertainment."
Thomas Fuller, already so often noticed, had nothing of the poetical
pensiveness of Herbert, nothing of that unearthly tone of thought
which was so real in the Salisbury canon, nothing either of the High
Churchmanship of Dr. Hammond, yet he cordially loved the Church of
England. Moderate, orthodox, and Catholic, he allowed to others the
liberty which he claimed for himself, whilst he bewailed the divisions
of the times in which he lived, not as many did, because he wanted all
to think like him, but because he saw that men would not peaceably
allow one another to exercise the right of private judgment. The piety
of Fuller was that of thorough conscientiousness, so well expressed
by himself when he told the Triers "he could appeal to the Searcher
of Hearts that he made a conscience of his very thoughts." With his
conscientiousness--which really seemed to cover the whole field of
evangelical and practical religion--there was associated the faculty of
_wit_, which gave even to his religion a character of humour. In his
book on the Holy State, he says of the "Faithful minister," "he will
not use a light comparison to make thereof a grave application, for
fear lest his poison go further than his antidote"; but, he himself
adds, "that fork must have strong tines wherewith one would thrust
out nature." In that very chapter, animadverting on affected gravity,
he remarks: "when one shall use the preface of a mile to bring in a
furlong of matter, set his face and speech in a frame--and to make
men believe it is some precious liquor, their words come out drop by
drop--such men's vizards do sometimes fall from them not without the
laughter of the beholders. One was called '_gravity_,' for his affected
solemnness, who, afterwards, being catched in a light prank, was ever
after, to the day of his death, called 'gravity-levity.'" Fuller
could not help being humorous. He could not tell the most mournful
story without enlivening it with some sort of sally; but religion so
influenced him that he never indulged in ill-natured satire--never
raised a blister on the skin by the touch of a scorching sarcasm. With
such a temperament, added to unfeigned piety and unfeigned benevolence,
"it was as natural that he should be full of good-tempered mirth as
it is for the grasshopper to chirp, or the bee to hum, or the birds
to warble in the spring breeze and the bright sunshine. His very
physiognomy was an index to his natural character. As described by his
contemporaries, he had light flaxen hair, bright blue and laughing
eyes, a frank and open visage."[447] And if any one will take the
trouble to compare the portraits of Herbert and Fuller, he must confess
that Herbert's gravity would look as foolish in the face of Fuller,
as Fuller's archness would be most unseemly, if it could be forced on
Herbert's sedate countenance.
[Sidenote: _Dalston._]
The character of Sir George Dalston, as given by Jeremy Taylor in
richly coloured words, deserves to be included in any portrait gallery
of his contemporaries. "He was indeed a great lover of, and had a great
regard for, God's ministers, ever remembering the words of God: 'Keep
my rest, and reverence my priests'; he honoured the calling in all,
but he loved and revered the persons of such who were conscientious
keepers of their 'depositum--that trust' which was committed to them;
such which did not for interest quit their conscience, and did not,
to preserve some parts of their revenue, quit some portions of their
religion. He knew that what was true in 1639 was also true in 1644,
and so to '57, and shall continue true to eternal ages; and they that
change their persuasions, by force or interest, did neither behave well
nor ill, upon competent and just grounds; they are not just, though
they happen on the right side. Hope of gain did by chance teach them
well, and fear of loss abuses them directly. He pitied the persecuted;
and never would take part with persecutors; he prayed for his prince,
and served him in what he could; he loved God, and loved the Church; he
was a lover of his country's liberties, and yet an observer of the laws
of his king....
"And now, having divested himself of all objections, and his
conversation with the world, quitting his affections to it, he wholly
gave himself to religion and devotion; he awakened early, and would
presently be entertained with reading; when he rose, still he would
be read to, and hear some of the Psalms of David; and, excepting only
what time he took for the necessities of his life and health, all the
rest he gave to prayer, reading, and meditation, save only that he
did not neglect, nor rudely entertain, the visits and kind offices of
his neighbours. But in this great vacation from the world he espied
his advantages; he knew well, according to that saying of the Emperor
Charles V.--'_Oportet inter vitæ negotia et diem mortis spatium aliquod
intercedere_;' there ought to be a valley between two such mountains,
the businesses of our life and the troubles of our death; and he stayed
not till the noise of the bridegroom's coming did awaken and affright
him; but, by daily prayers twice a day, constantly with his family,
besides the piety and devotion of his own retirements, by a monthly
communion, by weekly sermons, and by the religion of every day, he
stood in precincts, ready with oil in his lamp, watching till his Lord
should call."[448]
[Sidenote: _Quarles._]
The poet Quarles--whose quaint emblems symbolize not only the
quaintness of his piety, but the quaintness of much besides belonging
to his age--suffered as a Royalist and an Episcopalian; and indeed
his death appears to have been hastened by the persecution which he
suffered. The hues of his religious experience are best conveyed by
preserving the phraseology of his devoted widow.[449] "He expressed
great sorrow for his sins, and when it was told him that his friends
conceived he did thereby much harm to himself, he answered: '_They were
not his friends that would not give him leave to be penitent_.' His
exhortations to his friends that came to visit him were most divine;
wishing them _to have a care of the expense of their time, and every
day to call themselves to an account, that so when they came to their
bed of sickness, they might lie upon it with a rejoicing heart_. And,
doubtless, such an one was his, insomuch that he thanked God that
whereas he might justly have expected that his _conscience should look
him in the face like a lion_, it rather looked upon him _like a lamb_;
and that God had forgiven him his sins, and that night sealed him
his pardon; and many other heavenly expressions to the like effect.
I might here add what blessed advice he gave to me in particular,
still to trust in God, whose promise is to provide for the widow and
the fatherless, &c. But this is already imprinted on my heart, and
therefore I shall not need here again to insert it."
Lord Montague may be cited as a specimen of old English piety, apart
from strong ecclesiastical opinions on either side. "Many 'characters'
have been drawn of this stout cavalier. The sum of them all amounts
to this, namely that he was an honest, truthful, and pious man, an
example to his fellow-parishioners by constant attendance at sermons
on Sundays, and at lectures on week days. So long as the truth was
preached old Montague cared not who preached it; and his own chaplain
had no sinecure of it in his house, where that reverend official, on
Sunday afternoons, assembled the servants, and put them through their
catechism. The household was a godly one, though a certain depictor of
it says, rather equivocally, that 'the rudest of his servants feared to
be known to him to be a drunkard, a swearer, or any such lewd liver,
for he cast such out of his service.' This would imply that there was
an assumption of virtue, by which the good lord may have been deceived;
but his serving men and maids are emphatically chronicled as being a
credit and a comfort to him."[450]
[Sidenote: _Sir B. Grenville._]
In the heart of the Royalist camp, and amidst bloodshed on the battle
field, there had been--notwithstanding the prevalent profanity and
licentiousness of the Cavaliers--some strong stirrings of spiritual
life in the hearts of English gentlemen, worthy of that name, of which
a memorial exists in a letter written by John Trelawne, to the Lady
Grace, announcing the death of her honoured lord, Sir Bevill Grenville.
"Honourable Lady,--How can I contain myself or longer conceal my
sorrow for the death of that excellent man, your most dear husband
and my noble friend. Be pleased with your wisdom to consider of the
events of the war, which is seldom or never constant, but as full of
mutability as hazard. And seeing it hath pleased God to take him from
your ladyship, yet this may something appease your great flux of tears,
that he died an honourable death, which all his enemies will envy,
fighting with invincible valour and loyalty the battle of his God, his
King, and country. A greater honour than this no man living can enjoy.
But God hath called him unto Himself to crown him (I doubt not) with
immortal glory for his noble constancy in this blessed cause. It is
too true (most noble lady) that God hath made you drink of a bitter
cup, yet, if you please to submit unto his Divine will and pleasure by
kissing His rod patiently, God (no doubt) hath a staff of consolation
for to comfort you in this great affliction and trial. He will wipe
your eyes, dry up the flowing spring of your tears, and make your bed
easy, and by your patience overcome God's justice by His returning
mercy. Madam, he is gone his journey but a little before us. We must
march after when it shall please God, for your ladyship knows that none
fall without His providence, which is as great in the thickest shower
of bullets as in the bed. I beseech you (dear lady) to pardon this my
trouble and boldness, and the God of heaven bless you and comfort you,
and all my noble cousins in this your great visitation, which shall be
the unfeigned prayers of him that is, most noble Lady,
"Your Ladyship's hon. and humble servant,
"JOHN TRELAWNE.[451]
"Trelawne, 20th July, 1643."
And when the wars were over, and peace had been established, and the
usurper whom they feared was sitting upon the throne, many a Royalist
lady and gentleman would think of their past sorrow and cherish their
hopes of a celestial future in the tone and spirit of this beautiful
epistle.
[Sidenote: _John Evelyn's Son._]
A touching instance of early piety occurred in the family of John
Evelyn, described by the bereaved father in the following terms:
"Illuminations, far exceeding his age and experience, considering the
prettiness of his address and behaviour, cannot but leave impressions
in me at the memory of him. When one told him how many days a Quaker
had fasted, he replied that was no wonder, for Christ had said that
man should not live by bread alone, but by the Word of God. He would
of himself select the most pathetic psalms, and chapters out of Job
to read to his maid during his sickness, telling her, when she pitied
him, that all God's children must suffer affliction. He declaimed
against the vanities of the world before he had seen any. Often he
would desire those who came to see him to pray by him, and a year
before he fell sick, to kneel and pray with him alone in some corner.
How thankfully would he receive admonition! how soon be reconciled!
how indifferent, yet continually cheerful! He would give grave advice
to his brother John, bear with his impertinences, and say he was but
a child. If he heard of or saw any new thing he was unquiet till he
was told how it was made; he brought to us all such difficulties as
he found in books, to be expounded. He had learned by heart divers
sentences in Latin and Greek, which, on occasion, he would produce even
to wonder. He was all life, all prettiness, far from morose, sullen,
or childish, in anything he said or did. The last time he had been at
church (which was at Greenwich), I asked him, according to custom,
what he remembered of the sermon; 'Two good things, father,' said he,
'_bonum gratiæ_, and _bonum gloriæ_!' with a just account of what the
preacher said. The day before he died he called to me, and in a more
serious manner than usual told me that for all I loved him so dearly,
I should give my house, land, and all my fine things to his brother
Jack, he should have none of them; and, the next morning, when he found
himself ill, and that I persuaded him to keep his hands in bed, he
demanded whether he might pray to God with his hands unjoined; and a
little after, whilst in great agony, whether he should not offend God
by using His holy name so often calling for ease. What shall I say of
his frequent pathetical ejaculations uttered of himself: 'Sweet Jesus,
save me, deliver me, pardon my sins, let Thine angels receive me!' So
early knowledge, so much piety and perfection! But thus God, having
dressed up a saint fit for Himself, would not longer permit him with
us, unworthy of the future fruits of this incomparable hopeful blossom.
Such a child I never saw; for such a child I bless God, in whose bosom
he is! May I and mine become as this little child, who now follows the
child Jesus, that Lamb of God, in a white robe, whithersoever He goes;
even so, Lord Jesus, _fiat voluntas tua_! Thou gavest him to us, Thou
hast taken him from us, blessed be the name of the Lord! That I had
anything acceptable to Thee was from Thy grace alone, seeing from me he
had nothing but sin, but that Thou hast pardoned! Blessed be my God for
ever. Amen."[452]
We have already presented several examples of eminent piety in the
lives of Puritan clergymen. To these may be added one more in a passage
from a sermon preached by John Howe on the death of "that faithful and
laborious servant of Christ, Mr. Richard Fairclough."[453]
"The bent of his soul was towards God; I never knew any man under the
more constant governing power of religion, which made it to be his
business both to exercise and diffuse it to his uttermost; he was a
mighty lover of God and men, and being of a lively, active spirit, that
love was his facile, potent mover to the doing even of all the good
that could be thought in an ordinary way, possible to him, and more
than was possible to most other men. To give a true succinct account of
the complexion of his soul--he was even made up of life and love. Such
was the clearness and sincerity of his spirit, his constant uprightness
and integrity, so little darkened by an evil conscience--and indeed
little ever clouded with melancholy fumes--that he seemed to live in
the constant sense of God's favour and acceptance, and had nothing to
do but to serve Him with his might; when his spirit was formed to an
habitual cheerfulness and seemed to feel within itself a continual
calm. So undisturbed a serenity hath, to my observation, rarely been
discernible in any man; nor was his a dull sluggish peace, but vital
and joyous; seldom hath that been more exemplified in any man. 'To
be spiritually minded is life and peace.' Seldom have any lived more
under the government of that kingdom, which stands in 'righteousness,
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.' His reverence of the Divine Majesty
was most profound, his thoughts of God high and great, that seemed
totally to have composed him to adoration and even made him live a
worshipping life; he was not wont to speak to God, or of Him, at
a vulgar rate; he was most absolutely resigned and given up to Him;
devotedness to His interest, acquiescence in His wisdom and will,
were not mere precepts with him, but habits. No man could be more
deeply concerned about the affairs of religion and God's interest in
the world; yet his solicitude was tempered with that steadfast trust,
that it might be seen the acknowledged verities of God's governing
the world, superintending and ordering all human affairs by wise and
steady counsel and almighty power--which in most others are but faint
notions--were with him turned into, living sense and vital principles
which governed his soul! Whereupon his great reverence of the Majesty
of God, falling into a conjunction with an assured trust and sense of
His love and goodness, made that rare and happy temperament with him,
which I cannot better express than by a pleasant seriousness. What
friend of his did ever, at the first congress, see his face but with
a grave smile? When unexpectedly and by surprise he came in among his
familiar friends, it seemed as if he had blessed the room; as if a new
soul or some good genius were come among them."
[Sidenote: _Lamot._]
Puritan gentlemen manifested in their own way virtues of a kind similar
to those which adorned their Anglican neighbours. The biographer of
Alderman John Lamot, who died in 1655, eulogizes the "holy carriage
of his youth," his industry, thanksgiving, prudence, integrity, zeal,
charity, sympathy, bounty, and patience. Mention is made especially of
his religious duties--he was a member and elder of the Dutch Church--of
his devoutly attending public lectures, and of his reading the Holy
Scriptures in private. Every year, upon the 17th of November, he made
a feast to commemorate the end of Queen Mary's persecution, and the
commencement of Queen Elizabeth's reign. Upon these occasions he would
deliver a hearty Protestant speech, and bless God for the quenching
of the Smithfield fires. At other times he invited friends "to eat
bread with him before the Lord, as Jethro and Moses did," when, with
singular fulness--for his memory is called a living library--he traced
those Divine deliverances which had been wrought out for the Church in
England and in the Netherlands, ending his conversation, as it regards
the latter, with the words: "Their case might have been ours, and who
knows but it may yet be?"[454]
Sir Nathaniel Barnardston may be mentioned as a person of the same
order. The time of his conversion is specified, and the foundation of
his faith is recorded by his biographer; who also draws a full length
portrait of him as a man and a magistrate--and as belonging both to
his own family and to God's Church. He rarely met his pastor but they
prayed together. "His tongue dropped honey, and his breath was as sweet
and fragrant as the roses in spring." He sanctified the Sabbath, and
diligently attended the preaching of the word. He prepared for the
sacrament, and loved the Christian ministry--and fasted and prayed
before exercising his right as a patron of Church livings, and sought
to draw his neighbours to a religious life. He also celebrated, like
the London alderman we have just mentioned, "The thrice happy day of
Elizabeth's inauguration," and forgot not the Fifth of November, and
the gunpowder treason, which last plot he was wont to pronounce "black
as hell."
He welcomed "the messenger of death, when it drew near. He did not
then, according to the usual method of most, seem shy and averse to be
gone, as if so be he were not ready, but was heartily ready; for as
soon as ever there appeared on his side a small swelling in which none
but himself conceived any danger, he being then at Hackney, did send
fifty miles for Mr. Fairclough, his minister, to discourse with him;
and taking him to walk with him, presently fell into conference of the
worth and immortality of the soul, of the manner of its subsistence and
actings when it was separated, of the joys of the other world, and the
vanity and emptiness of all things in this, as being most suitable to
his present condition, and herewith he was so deeply and spiritually
affected, that at their parting he expressed himself in the following
manner to Mr. Fairclough:[455]--'Sir, I now much wonder that any man
that fully believes these things to be realities, and not mere notions
(being in my condition) should be unwilling to die. For my own part,
I will not be so flattered with any carnal content as to be desirous
to live longer in this world, where there is little hope left that the
Lord hath any more work or service for me to do, except it be to suffer
for keeping a good conscience, in witnessing against the apostasies
and impieties of the times; and now it is a great favour of God to be
sent for speedily.' After this, he being removed to London for greater
conveniency of physicians, he there made the same profession of his
desire to be dissolved and be with Christ, unto several friends and
visitors."[456]
Choice examples of Christian character abound in the lives of the women
of that day.
[Sidenote: _Lady Carbary._]
Again we refer to the pages of Jeremy Taylor, and extract the following
passage from his sketch of the character of Lady Carbary:[457]--"In
all her religion, and in all her actions of relations towards God,
she had a strange evenness and untroubled passage, sliding toward her
ocean of God and of infinity, with a certain and silent motion. So
have I seen a river, deep and smooth, passing with a still foot and a
sober face, and paying to the 'fiscus,' the great 'exchequer' of the
sea, and prince of all the watery bodies, a tribute large and full; and
hard by it, a little brook skipping and making a noise upon its unequal
and neighbour bottom; and after all its talking and bragged motion, it
paid to its common audit no more than the revenues of a little cloud,
or a contemptible vessel; so have I sometimes compared the issues of
her religion to the solemnities and famed outsides of another's piety.
It dwelt upon her spirit, and was incorporated with the periodical
work of every day. She did not believe that religion was intended to
minister to fame and reputation, but to pardon of sins, to the pleasure
of God, and the salvation of souls. For religion is like the breath of
heaven; if it goes abroad into the open air, it scatters and dissolves
like camphire; but if it enters into a secret hollowness, into a close
conveyance, it is strong and mighty, and comes forth with vigour and
great effect at the other end, at the other side of this life, in the
days of death and judgment."
[Sidenote: _Lady Harley._]
The Countess of Suffolk, a friend of Richard Baxter, and an admirer
of George Herbert, affords another example of deep devotion, not
strongly marked by any "denominational" peculiarities--although she
one day locked herself up in her closet to write down from memory a
sermon she heard from a "grave prelate." On the other hand, Lady Harley
must have been a Puritan to the backbone; for in the memoir of her,
she appears rejoicing greatly at the meeting of the Long Parliament,
approving of the execution of Lord Strafford, and saying, in a letter
to her son Edward--who accompanied his father to town, when he took
his seat in the House of Commons--"I believe that the hierarchy must
go down, and I hope now." "I am glad that the Bishops begin to fall,
and I hope it will be with them as it was with Haman--when he began to
fall, he fell indeed." The order of the two Houses for removing the
relics of idolatry delighted her ladyship exceedingly, and with deep
joy she communicated to her son, that the table in Hereford Cathedral
had been turned, and that the copes and basins, and all such vestiges
of Popery, had been put away. When the war broke out, she evinced no
little zeal in the business of raising money for the Parliament, and
sent her family plate to the military chest. When battle raged around
the walls of her own castle, this Puritan Amazon manifested a masculine
courage, and in her letters gave thanks to her son "for the hamper with
powder and match"--whilst she waited for "the muskets"--and stated
that she had sent to Worcester for fifty weight of shot. She met with
opposition in all sorts of ways. The Royalists would not pay their
rents; they would not let the fowler bring her any fowls; they arrested
her servants; they drove away her horses; and they threatened to burn
down her barns. The Marquis of Hertford came to besiege her fortress.
Stories were told of 600 men marching up to her gates. Under these
threatening circumstances she declared: "If I had money to buy corn and
meal and malt, I should hope to hold out, but then I have three shires
against me." When the assault came at last, and she heard that her cook
was shot with a poisoned bullet, and that the waters of the village
brook were poisoned also, this English Deborah, this Puritan mother
in Israel, trusting entirely in Divine help, retained the confidence
she had before expressed, "I thank God I am not afraid. It is the
Lord's cause that we have stood for, and I trust, though our iniquities
testify against us, yet the Lord will work for His own name's sake, and
that He will now shew the men of the world that it is hard fighting
against heaven."[458]
She died before the close of the siege, and the Puritan minister of
Clun, in Shropshire--who preached her funeral sermon--observed: "When
the naked sword, that messenger of death, walked the land, did God set
His seal of safety upon her. Though surrounded with drums and noise of
war, yet she took her leave in peace."
We read, also, of Mrs. Margaret Andrews, who was constant in prayers
three times a day, spending two hours in her closet in the coldest
winter, and who rarely passed an hour without retiring from company,
stealing away that she might look towards heaven: of Lady Alice Lucy,
of Charlcot--one of the Shakespeare Lucys--who made it her first
employment every morning to address Almighty God in secret, and to
read some portions of the Divine Word, and who also delighted in
sacred literature, storing her memory with passages from favourite
English authors: and of Lady Mary Houghton, who spent the earlier
and later hours of the day in communion with God, and had books for
contemplation, and books for conversation, and books for devotion, and
who spent the rest of her time in needle-work, with her maidens sitting
round about her, or in visiting the cottages of the neighbouring poor.
[Sidenote: _Lady Courten._]
Lady Catherine Courten is another celebrity, who, having lost her
fortune--a calamity she bore with Christian fortitude--spent the last
and the retired season of her life with her noble sister, Lady Francis
Hobart, at Chapel Field House, in the city of Norwich. She never
neglected sermons; and when, on account of illness, she was unable to
walk down stairs, she would be carried by her servants to the place of
worship. Her habit of reading is also particularly noticed, and the few
hours which she spent out of her closet were usually filled up with
discourses tending to edification. Nor was she ever more in her element
than when by debate with others, she was investigating some truth for
the information of her judgment, or for the guidance of her practice.
With her may be coupled Lady Francis Hobart, the wife of Sir John
Hobart, of Blickling, in Norfolk; like the former lady, a particular
friend of Dr. Collinge's, who observes:--"It was in September, 1646,
that I was invited by Sir John Hobart (at that time alive) to take
my chamber in his house whilst I discharged my ministerial office in
the county (Norwich), and to take some oversight of his family in the
things of God." The family had been without any spiritual guide, and
in a state of religious disorder, and the chaplain's design was to
bring it into a course of prayer, in conformity, as he said, to David's
pattern. He held services morning, evening, and at noon, reading some
portion of Scripture every day, and expounding it as the time would
allow. He catechised once a week, and accustomed the members of the
household to repeat the sermons which they had heard on the Lord's Day,
and at other public ordinances. The servants were required to attend
these duties every morning at seven o'clock. The catechising was made
easy by the parents prevailing upon their pious daughter to set an
example by first herself answering the questions which were proposed by
the minister. A chapel was fitted up in the house, and a lecture was
preached every lord's Day.[459]
The religious convictions of the reader must create a preference for
some above others of the characters which we have described; yet, if we
would be loyal to Christian charity and righteousness, we must judge
all these individuals in no narrow spirit, but bring to bear upon our
conclusions respecting them a careful study of the differences which
exist in the ages, in the sects, in the minds, and in the morals of
ancient and of modern Christendom.
[Sidenote: _Ages of Christendom._]
The ages of the Church, down to the era of the Commonwealth, exhibit
a series of ecclesiastical and theological revolutions running
along through an extended line of generations which, under altering
circumstances, still exhibit ever the same spiritual life. Primitive
simplicity--when uninspired men accepted the authoritative teaching of
apostles as a religion rather than a theology, and had but an imperfect
apprehension of the profound truths of the New Testament, was succeeded
by sundry innovations of doctrine and practice, drawn from sources
which were open and active all around them in the Jewish and Pagan
world, or from others which were hidden in the very depths of human
nature. The true and the false soon became blended together, sometimes
in very unequal proportions; and hence sprung Nicene developments,
of doctrine touching certain vital points, associated, however, with
certain metaphysical refinements and with certain forms of polity and
of worship, which prepared for subsequent manifestations of despotism
and of superstition. Traditionalism for a time stereotyped both that
which was bad and that which was good in the sixth and the seventh
centuries, and then afterwards came limited but violent reactions
against authority in several different quarters, opening up paths which
ultimately led to the Protestant Reformation. That Reformation followed
as the result of applying the New Testament to human creeds, and
canons, and formularies. In their sifting of opinions and practices,
the Reformers sought to separate the wheat from the chaff; but when
the first excitement of the Ecclesiastical Revolution had passed
away, some persons thought that a measure of wheat had been cast away
along with the chaff; and others again believed that the process had
terminated too soon--that the sieve had been laid aside before all the
requisite sifting work had been done, and that a good deal of chaff
remained mixed with wheat. Such ideas, on the one hand and on the
other, constituted the groundwork of Anglo-Catholic and of Puritan
piety. Anglo-Catholicism, under James, arose as a reaction against
Puritan Protestantism under Elizabeth. That Anglo-Catholicism led to
a more violent Puritan reaction under Charles I. Hence followed the
antagonism of parties, at that time of immense excitement, in connexion
with the influences of early training, of associations in life, of
different kinds of pulpit teaching, and of varied idiosyncracies of
mental character. Not only did parties widely differ, but each regarded
the other as an enemy. They fought as for life--and certainly the
subjects of contention were not trifles. Scarcely could it be expected
that on either side there would be an unprejudiced estimate of what was
thought, said, and done on the other.
Moreover, as in every age some peculiar type of piety is found to
prevail, whether it be Primitive, or Nicene, or Mediæval, or Reformed;
so, during the English Commonwealth, influence flowing from the past
and mingling with the present, washed thoughts and habits into form
and hue so as to give to all religious parties a somewhat similar
appearance not to be overlooked. Much time was spent by all pious
persons in retirement, in reading, in meditation, and in prayer. Piety
was active as well as contemplative, but the contemplative side was
most apparent: the mind dwelt much upon memories of the past, the
Nicene age being the background of thought in the one case, and the
age of the Reformation in the other; whilst over the whole religion of
the day there rested the solemn shadows of an ascetic spirituality.
Moreover, there pertained to Anglicans and Puritans in common a
singularly strong conviction of the absolute reality of spiritual
and eternal things. They could truly say "we walk by faith, not by
sight"--in contrast with so many religionists in our own time whose
views are entirely walled in by objects of sense, and who walk by
sight, not by faith. Our fathers of the seventeenth century "tasted
the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come." They lived
"on the sides of eternity," and their souls breathed a bracing air
which came from the goodly land and the "Lebanon afar off." Visiting
the sick and the poor, and managing some hospital for boys, or for old
men and women, constituted the usual methods of beneficence in those
times, inasmuch as Bible Societies, Missions, and Sunday-schools, were
institutions then unknown.
Together with the difference between one age of Christendom and
another, we must consider the differences between sect and sect.
It is only fair for the historian to apply the term sect to any
party exhibiting avowed symbols; whether found existing within the
same Episcopal Church, as were all Anglo-Catholics and some of the
Puritans--or existing outside, as was the case with Presbyterians,
Independents, and Baptists. Each division appears marked by the
strength and the weakness of all such bodies. Each had a concentrated
power of attack and of defence. Each was strong in its polemical
attitude and action: each was powerful against the other. The weakness
lay--as is ever the case--in defective self-culture, and in an
imperfect extent of teaching within its own borders. Sectarianism is
always one-sided. It seizes on certain points and magnifies them beyond
all rules of proportion. Other parts of Divine truth and other portions
of human nature suffer from neglect.
[Sidenote: _Idiosyncrasies._]
And again, the idiosyncrasies of individuals must be taken into
account, since they always powerfully contribute to produce varieties
of spiritual life. John Milton and John Owen were both Christians,
both devout, both unceremonial, both advocating a wide liberty of
conscience, both averse to Prelacy, and to all Presbyterian domination,
both entertaining in general the same views of government, political
and ecclesiastical; yet how unlike in many other respects! The one
exhibiting in his religion the genius of a poet, the other the genius
of a systematic theologian; the one soaring with outstretched wings
into the loftiest regions of Divine contemplation, the other measuring
every opinion by the standard of a remorseless logic, based upon
Scripture; the one inspired with classic taste, chiselling the products
of his intellect into forms of beauty, comparable to those of Phidias
in the art of sculpture; the other careless respecting artistic style,
and flinging out the treasures of his affluent mind after a fashion
which is most excruciating to the æsthetical of this generation; the
one a man of imagination, the other a man of reason; the one a Homer,
the other an Aristotle amongst Puritans. And as they differed in their
manner of thinking, so also they differed in their modes of feeling and
in their habits of life; the religious sentiments of Milton being calm
and pure, with something in their tone almost approaching to angelic
elevation, bearing scarcely any marks of such struggles as beset most
other Christians, and suggesting the idea that his chief conflicts of
soul must have been with "spiritual wickedness in high places;" Owen,
on the other hand, dwelling much upon "the mortification of sin in
believers," "the doctrine of justification," "the work of the Holy
Spirit in prayer," and "the Glory of Christ," and ever indicating the
strongest faith and the intensest feeling upon those evangelical points
respecting which some defect may be traced in the religion of Milton;
and whilst Milton was solitary in his devotion, at least during the
latter part of his life, and in this respect, as in others, was "like a
star and dwelt apart," Owen delighted in social worship.
No reader who has any fixed theological opinions can examine the Church
systems of that age without feeling sympathy with some one of them,
mingled with disapprobation in reference to the rest. The theologian
is constrained to take a side as he studies this deeply-exciting
history. A passionless neutrality is absolutely impossible. At the same
time, a student is chargeable with injustice who does not carefully
strive to ascertain the defects of his own party; and he also is
wanting in charity if he be not ever ready to acknowledge the moral
and spiritual excellencies of persons, whose opinions were different
from those which he himself entertains. When all modifying influences
have been conscientiously analyzed by the catholic-hearted reader of
ecclesiastical history, he will rejoice in believing that the centre
of Christian life is not in creeds, polities, and forms, but in One
Divine Redeemer; and that Herbert and Fuller, Hammond and Baxter,
Taylor and Howe, and the whole company of faithful souls, a few of
whose names have occurred in these volumes, were looking to one and the
same Christ for holiness and peace.
Pictures are drawn of the religion and morals of the Commonwealth
mostly of two kinds; rose-coloured, glowing with brightest tints; or
dark and gloomy, crossed with still deeper shades. Spiritual prosperity
and little else is to be seen in the first; hypocrisy and vice alone
are visible in the second. Party spirit is betrayed in each of these
styles of historical, or rather fictitious art; yet neither serves
its object. For, if there was so much prosperity as is sometimes
represented, how superficial, how slightly-rooted it must have been,
seeing the Restoration of Charles II. swept it almost all away; and
if there was so much of hypocrisy and vice as some declare, it is but
just to ask them, who were the chief hypocrites but the people who
afterwards threw off the mask? Who must have been the most vicious in
secret but those who sinned so very openly when restraint was gone? The
fact is, that neither extreme receives support from a calm review of
facts.
[Sidenote: _State of Religion._]
The materials for forming a judgment of the actual state of religion
during the Civil Wars and the Commonwealth are manifold. Attention
should be directed first to the general accounts of the times which
have been handed down to us by contemporaries. Isaak Walton, in his
"Life of Dr. Robert Sanderson," declares that "the common people were
amazed and grown giddy by the many falsehoods and misapplications of
truth frequently vented in sermons, when they wrested the Scripture,
by challenging God to be of their party, and called upon Him in their
prayers to patronize their sacrilege and zealous frenzies." He also
complains of honesty and plain dealing being exchanged for cruelty and
cunning, and of the encouragement given to perjury by the violation of
one oath through the taking of another. He says that Sanderson lamented
much that "in many parishes where the maintenance was not great there
was no minister to officiate; and that many of the best sequestered
livings were possessed with such rigid Covenanters as denied the
sacrament to their parishioners unless upon such conditions, and in
such a manner, as they could not take it."[460]
Baxter, however, remarks: "If any shall demand whether the increase
of godliness was answerable in all places to what I have mentioned
(and none deny that it was with us) I answer, that however men that
measure godliness by their gain, and interest, and domination, do go
about to persuade the world that godliness then went down, and was
almost extinguished, I must bear this faithful witness to those times,
that as far as I was acquainted, where before there was one godly
profitable preacher, there was then six or ten; and, taking one place
with another, I conjecture there is a proportionable increase of truly
godly people, not counting heretics, or perfidious rebels, or Church
disturbers, as such. But this increase of godliness was not in all
places alike; for in some places, where the ministers were formal,
or ignorant, or weak and imprudent, contentious or negligent, the
parishes were as bad as heretofore. And in some places, where the
ministers had excellent parts and holy lives, and thirsted after the
good of souls, and wholly devoted themselves, their time, and strength,
and estates thereunto, and thought no pains or cost too much, there
abundance were converted to serious godliness. And with those of a
middle state, usually they had a hidden measure of success. And I
must add this to the true information of posterity, that God did so
wonderfully bless the labours of His unanimous faithful ministers, that
had it not been for the faction of the Prelatists on one side, that
drew men off, and the factions of the giddy and turbulent sectaries
on the other side (who pulled down all government, cried down the
ministers, and broke all into confusion, and made the people at their
wits' end, not knowing what religion to be of), together with some
laziness and selfishness in many of the ministry, I say, had it not
been for these impediments, England had been like, in a quarter of an
age, to have become a land of saints, and a pattern of holiness to all
the world, and the unmatchable paradise of the earth. Never were such
fair opportunities to sanctify a nation lost and trodden under foot as
have been in this land of late! Woe be to them that were the causes of
it."[461]
[Sidenote: _Testimonies._]
The honesty of Isaak Walton is undoubted; yet no one who has read his
charming biographies will regard him as free from prejudice in his
opinion of the Puritans. But Baxter--though strongly opposed to the
course of things after the Restoration, and one who may be regarded as
a party man--yet kept himself singularly free from party ties during
the Commonwealth; for, whilst he was an enemy to the sectaries, he also
exercised the privilege of criticising the Presbyterians. On that
account, considerable impartiality must be admitted as characterizing
his report; and indeed the discriminating tone of his remarks indicates
how carefully he strove to avoid exaggeration and to do justice on all
sides.[462]
Next to general statements, we ought to consider the particular results
of the Puritan ministry as recorded at the time. Turning to Baxter's
account of Kidderminster, and to the life of Wilson at Maidstone
(specimens of both have been largely copied in former pages), we
discover ample proofs of religious prosperity according to the Puritan
type, and much which all Christians, whatever be their opinions, must
admire. In Lancashire the Presbyterian system was rather fully carried
out, with what success has been described. Certainly, the failure of
Presbyterian discipline in London is manifest.
Proceeding to consult biographies, we find that the lives of Hammond,
Sanderson, and Bull, bear witness to Episcopalian devotion and
constancy under oppression; and on referring to "Clarke's Lives," and
other memoirs of the same class, we are made acquainted with a large
number of godly Puritans who were living in the days of Oliver Cromwell.
[Sidenote: _Complaints._]
Over against these records of individual excellence, however, must be
placed appeals in contemporary sermons, and also treatises, which teem
with rebukes and reproof, such as imply very unfavourable impressions
of the general religious character of the times. Farindon, in one of
his discourses, exclaims: "The Church mourneth, her very face is
disfigured. Religion mourneth, being trod underfoot, and only her
name held up to keep her down." "Have ye no regard, all ye that pass
by the way, to see a troubled State, a disordered Church moulded into
sects, and crumbled into conventicles, religion enslaved and dragged
to vile offices, true devotion spit at, and hypocrisy crowned, common
honesty almost become a reproach, and the upright moral man condemned
to hell."[463] Farindon, however, it must be remembered, was a son of
the Episcopal Church of England, stung with grief for his mother's
sad humiliation; and although he owed something to those who allowed
him to preach, and who restored him to his pastoral charge, still he
could scarcely avoid regarding with some prejudice what was going on
around him. Not only do Episcopal authors speak unfavourably of the
times, but Presbyterian and Independents do the same. Dr. Annesley,
in a sermon preached at St. Paul's, in the year 1655, thus addressed
his congregation:--"When you stood upon lower ground did you not think
magistrates might do more than they did? Do you now do what you then
thought? If you say you have performed the commandment of the Lord,
a bystander will perhaps reply: What mean, then, the blasphemous
swearing, the roaring drunkenness, the common whoredoms, the rambling
Sabbath breakings, &c.? may these sons of Belial plead liberty of
conscience? If you cannot reach those that pull the crown from the head
of Christ in way of spirital wickedness, pray hold their hands that
would stab the heart of Christ by moral wickedness."[464]
The language of Dr. Owen is very strong. "Whilst all the issues of
providential dispensations in reference to the public concernments of
these nations are perplexed and entangled, the footsteps of God lying
in the deep, where His paths are not known; whilst in particular,
unparalleled distresses, and strange prosperities are measured out
to men, yea to professors; whilst a spirit of error, giddiness, and
delusion goes forth with such strength and efficacy, as it seems to
have received a commission to go and prosper; whilst there are such
divisions, strifes, emulations, attended with such evil surmises,
wrath, and revenge, found amongst brethren; whilst the desperate
issues and products of men's temptations are seen daily in partial
and total apostasy, in the decay of love, the overthrow of faith, our
days being filled with fearful examples of backsliding, such as former
ages never knew; whilst there is a visible declension from reformation
seizing upon the professing party of these nations, both as to personal
holiness, and zeal for the interest of Christ."[465]
In all honesty, we feel bound to give these extracts; but we would
remind the reader that passages of this order require qualification. No
one can accept literally, and as a whole, what Cyprian wrote about the
moral condition of the Church at Carthage; or what Chrysostom declared,
or implied, respecting the people of Constantinople; or what Salvian
testified relative to Roman society; or what Luther said of Germany; or
what Melancthon wrote of the dissensions of the Reformers;[466] or what
Becon reported of English morality in Edward the Sixth's reign;[467]
or what preachers uttered relative to the state of religion in the
times of Queen Elizabeth.[468] We instinctively make some allowance for
the impetuosity of indignation betrayed by honest men as they warned
their contemporaries. Their strong language, and the respectful manner
in which it was listened to, indicated that amidst the existence of
the worst evils there also existed what was infinitely different. The
words of English authors at the Puritan epoch must be dealt with in a
discriminating spirit, such as guides us in the interpretation of Greek
and Latin teachers in patristic times, and German and English preachers
at the epoch of the Reformation.
[Sidenote: _Theology._]
Further, the theology of the period should be carefully studied.
None of its varieties; none of its excellencies; none of its defects
should be overlooked. We ought impartially to aim at finding out
exactly what High Churchmen taught, and as a just result, give them
credit for catholic orthodoxy, for calm devotion, and for ethical
appeals in their writings; and not merely condemn them for what was
legal and ritualistic, and for what was ascetic and superstitious
in their views and ways. With equal impartiality, also, ought we to
survey the doctrinal literature of the Puritan school in its different
departments, as found in the works of Presbyterians, Independents,
Baptists, and Quakers; marking well the prominence generally assigned
in them to the redemption which was wrought by the Lord Jesus Christ,
to the work of the Holy Spirit, and to the enforcement of moral duties
by motives which had been drawn from the Gospel. And with corresponding
fidelity it becomes us to note the narrow conceptions of the atonement,
and the high views of predestination which appear in some cases; and
also the too minute and metaphysical distinctions common in a large
number of Puritan productions; together with the want of sympathy
which they indicate with forms of sentiment differing from their own.
Habits of theological thinking both expressed and shaped the religious
character and experience of the times.
Putting together all these materials for forming an opinion of the
spiritual condition of the people during the period embraced in this
work, we should say, that what was true of one place might not be
true of another; that in cities and larger towns many of the middle
classes became sincere Presbyterians and Independents, whilst in
small towns and villages Royalism lingered, associated with a strong
attachment to Episcopacy; that in both Puritan and Anglican instances,
eminent piety existed by the side of hypocrisy and immorality; and
that amidst a great deal of formalism, superficial religion, and mere
external morality, there flourished a large amount of vital godliness;
that spirituality of feeling might be often found apart from wisdom,
and coupled with unhealthy excitement; that Puritans were intensely
anti-ritualistic, hating "pontifician fooleries," and joining to
"hiss them out of the Church"[469]--their English common sense, as
well as the spiritual perception of the genius of the Gospel, causing
them to revolt from the absurdities of "Catholic" ceremonials; that
Anglicans themselves, by the time the Civil Wars were over, had learned
a salutary lesson, and were weaned somewhat from the follies of
Archbishop Laud, and under the Protectorate passed through a discipline
which made them somewhat wiser at the Restoration, in reference to
the pomp of worship than they had been twenty years before; that a
large proportion of true Christians were then, as ever, of the common
mediocre type, described as neither white, nor red, but "good brown
ochre;" that the furnace of affliction purified the Episcopal part
of the Church from some of the dross which had largely alloyed it
at a previous period, and brought out the piety and patience of its
confessors in beautiful colours whilst the temporal prosperity of
Puritanism proved rather unfavourable to its spiritual character; and
that, on the whole, there was a broader surface, and a richer depth of
genuine piety during the period we have reviewed, than was the case
just before or just afterwards.
[Sidenote: _Theology._]
Nor can it be doubted that England then could bear comparison with
other countries at the same time. For on the Continent, in Roman
Catholic lands, though some of the worst ecclesiastical abuses had
been reformed, and the morals of the clergy had improved, and the
Inquisition had been checked, yet the chief activities of religious
thought, and the main business of education, had fallen almost entirely
into the hands of Jesuits. From the orthodoxy of Protestant kingdoms
and states there had been brushed off very much of the dew of its
youth. The Lutheran and Reformed Churches of Germany had lost their
"first love," and had become much more the conservators of a cold,
dogmatic Christianity than the warm-hearted disciples of the Living
Word. They kept their eyes open for the detection of heterodoxy,
and they assailed one another sharply for slight deviations from
certain standards which had been handed down by their fathers, but
they had declined in spirituality and devotion.[470] They guarded
the stones of the altar, but they let the fire die down to a few
red ashes. Theological learning abounded, pastoral diligence of a
certain description extensively obtained, but Evangelical fervour had
declined, and the revival of piety under Spener did not commence until
after the Restoration in England had taken place. The religion of the
Commonwealth found scarcely a parallel at that time in Europe.[471]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XVI.
The Religious State of our Colonial Empire forms an essential part of
our Ecclesiastical History.
Early English colonization was, doubtless, stained with avarice and
cruelty, but it is a thorough mistake to suppose that all who engaged
in that great enterprise were reckless adventurers. Men of just and
generous dispositions took part in the wonderful work; and the corner
stones of our dependent empire were laid with the forms, and to some
extent, in the very spirit of religion. Ecclesiastical ties were from
the beginning entwined with those which were political around these
daughters of England; and the double relation plainly appears in our
national records during the period of the Long Parliament, and under
the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell. Some reference to the preceding
state of the Colonies, with regard to religion, is requisite as an
introduction to what we have to relate of the Colonial policy of the
Commonwealth in this respect.
When Sir Hugh Willoughby, in the last year of King Edward the Sixth's
reign, started on his unfortunate expedition for the discovery of
unknown regions, he received from John Cabot--the great pioneer of
Colonial enterprise--a code of instructions which were strongly
stamped with the marks of a practical piety. The fleet--as we learn
from an old narrative--sailed down the Thames, the greater ships
towed with boats and oars, the mariners being "apparelled in watchet
or sky-coloured cloth;" and, as it passed Greenwich--where the Court
resided, and where the young monarch was lying at the point of
death--the people stood thick upon the shore, the privy councillors
of his Majesty looking out at the windows; pieces of ordnance were
fired, "insomuch that the tops of the hills sounded therewith," and the
sky rang with the sailors' shouts; one man stood on the poop of the
ship, and another walked on the hatches, whilst others were climbing
up the shores and the mainyard--the good King, "only by reason of his
sickness, was absent from this show." As Willoughby and his men started
on their voyage--thus picturesquely described by an eye-witness--the
directions which they carried with them, after strictly prohibiting all
profane and immoral conduct, contained this very important rule:--"That
the morning and evening prayer, with other common services appointed by
the King's majesty and laws of this realm, to be read and said in every
ship daily by the minister in the admiral, and the merchant, or some
other person learned in other ships, and the Bible or paraphrases to
be read devoutly, and Christianly, to God's honour, and for His grace
to be obtained, and had by humble and hearty prayer of the navigants
accordingly." "This," observes Thomas Fuller, "may be termed the first
reformed fleet which had English prayers and preaching therein."[472]
[Sidenote: _Early Adventurers._]
In Queen Elizabeth's letters patent to Sir Humfrey Gilbert, "for the
inhabiting and planting of our people in America," there is--together
with a characteristic assertion of the royal prerogative--a provision
that the laws of the Colonies "be not against the true Christian
faith or religion now professed in the Church of England." A rough,
ungovernable set composed the expedition, including "morris-dancers,
hobby-horses, and May-like conceits to delight the savage people;" yet
the captain of one of the vessels, named Haies, must have been a man
of religious purpose, for after the melancholy misadventures which had
befallen him and his companions in Newfoundland, he observes generally
with respect to such enterprises: "we cannot precisely judge (which
only belongeth to God) what have been the humours of men stirred up to
great attempts of discovering and planting in those remote countries,
yet the events do shew that either God's cause hath not been chiefly
preferred by them, or else God hath not permitted so abundant grace
as the light of His Word and knowledge of Him to be yet revealed unto
those infidels before the appointed time."[473] The errors and sins of
the first English adventurers and colonists have been exposed with an
unsparing justice, if not with something more; but the religiousness of
certain noble-minded men, amongst them, such as is illustrated by the
facts just indicated, and by others of a similar kind, has been often
most unfairly overlooked.
I. Charters which were granted by the English Crown before the Civil
Wars for settlements in foreign lands, prove how extensive were our
Colonial dominions even at that period. We have space to touch only
upon those which were most important.
[Sidenote: _Virginia._]
The charter for the plantation of Virginia, in the year 1606, bears
witness to the arbitrary power of James I.; but it also distinctly
recognizes as part of the proposed "noble work," the propagating of
the Christian religion to such people as yet lived in darkness and in
miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God. Robert
Hunt, "an honest, religious, and courageous Divine," stands out amongst
his companions as most conspicuous for his piety and goodness; and one
of the first acts, performed under his influence by the whole company
as they landed upon the new domains, was to receive together the Holy
Communion. Captain John Smith--a young man at the time of his embarking
for Virginia, possessed of great genius, and bearing a high character,
whose heroism and romantic deliverance by the lovely and noble native
girl, named Pocahuntas, is well known--has left the following relation
of the first religious services which were conducted in the new-found
home of the brave voyagers. "I have been often demanded by so many
how we began to preach the Gospel in Virginia, and by what authority,
what churches we had, our order of service, and maintenance for our
ministers, therefore I think it not amiss to satisfy their demands,
it being the mother of all our plantations, intreating pride to spare
laughter, to understand her simple beginning and proceedings. When I
first went to Virginia, I well remember, we did hang an awning (which
is an old sail), to three or four trees, to shadow us from the sun,
our walls were rails of wood, our seats unhewed trees, till we cut
planks; our pulpit a bar of wood nailed to two neighbouring trees. In
foul weather we shifted into an old rotten tent, for we had few better,
and this came by way of adventure for new. This was our church, till
we built a homely thing like a barn, set upon cratchets, covered with
rafts, sedge, and earth, so was also the walls; the best of our houses
of the like curiosity, but the most part far much worse workmanship,
that could neither well defend wind nor rain, yet we had daily common
prayer morning and evening, every Sunday two sermons, and every three
months the Holy Communion, till our minister died. But our prayers
daily, with an homily on Sundays, we continued two or three years
after, till more preachers came. And surely God did most mercifully
hear us, till the continued inundations of mistaken directions,
factions, and numbers of unprovided libertines near consumed us all, as
the Israelites in the wilderness."[474]
This passage shews the attachment of the Virginian colonists to the
Established Church of the mother country; and as they were chiefly
persons of the higher class--being noblemen, gentlemen, and merchants
of London--they were in sympathy with the ruling powers; and, as
might be expected, were zealous for the forms and orders of the
English Episcopal communion. The pious Governor, Lord De la Warr,
who, in 1610, revived the drooping colony, carefully procured "true
preachers;" and his secretary reports, how he placed the church under
the care of a sexton, causing it to be kept passing sweet, "and trimmed
up with divers flowers;" how, as the chimes rang at ten o'clock in
the morning, each man addressed himself to prayers, and how, every
Sunday, the Governor--accompanied by all the gentlemen, and by a
guard of halberdiers, dressed in his lordship's livery of "fair red
cloaks"--sat in the quire, in a green velvet chair, with a velvet
cushion spread on the table before him, at which he knelt. The type
of piety cherished by the Virginian settlers may be inferred from the
secretary's picture; and unhappily the governor was entrusted with
a code called "Laws Martial," which were to be exercised whenever
it should be necessary. These laws provided, that speaking against
the Articles of the Christian faith should be capitally punished;
that irreverent behaviour to a Christian minister should subject the
offender to three public whippings; that absence from Divine service
on week days and on the Sabbath should be accounted a State crime,
deserving, if thrice repeated, of labour in the galleys for six months.
Every one coming to the colony who refused to give an account of his
faith to some minister of religion was to be whipt.[475] The absurdity
of these laws soon appeared, from the impossibility of executing
them. The articles of instruction given by the Home Government to Sir
Francis Wyatt, who was appointed Governor in the year 1621, were of a
different character. Nothing was said of penalties, and factions; but
needless novelties tending to the disturbance of peace and unity were
discouraged. These expressions, however, must have been intended solely
for the purpose of conciliating such members of the Episcopal Church
as might be jealous of Popish innovations; for to suppose they meant
a liberal policy towards Nonconformists in general, would be an idea
utterly inconsistent with all we know of the Stuart rule.[476] Puritans
could not go to Virginia except by royal licence, and when they had
reached their new home, the letter of the law--valid there, as well
as in England--left them still liable to the scourge of persecution.
Prudence for a while might induce the Virginian authorities to wink at
Puritanism within their borders; but their history affords no signs of
their righteously legislating upon that important subject. Indeed, on
reaching the year 1629, we discover the sternest intolerance in the
acts and orders of the Colonial Assembly. People who did not go to
church were fined a pound of tobacco for every instance of neglect,
and fifty pounds for every month's absence; and, in 1632, uniformity
to the Church of England was vigorously enforced, a shilling fine
being imposed in every case of non-attendance at worship.[477] Upon
the outbreak of the Civil Wars, the loyal Virginians identified
Nonconformists with Republicans, and forthwith banished all Dissenters
outside their borders.
[Sidenote: _Bermudas._]
The Bermudas were intimately connected with Virginia. By an extension
of the charter granted to the latter Colony in the year 1612, these
islands came into its possession. The Company again sold them to
members of its own body, who were established as a new corporation,
under the name of the Somers Islands' Company. The daughter Colony went
beyond its parent state in the assertion of ecclesiastical uniformity,
and angrily stood up in support of the Church of England "against all
Atheists, Papists, Anabaptists, Brownists, and all other heretics and
sectaries whatsoever."[478] Yet, when religious animosities arose, and
the only two clergymen who were in the islands refused subscription to
the Prayer Book as it was--the Governor, forced by circumstances into
some sort of compromise, "bethought himself of the Liturgy of Guernsey
and Jersey, wherein all the particulars they so much stumbled at were
omitted."[479]
The original charter for Maryland bears date 1632, and was granted
to Lord Baltimore, a Roman Catholic nobleman of high character and
honourable renown. Upon condition of yielding two Indian arrows at
Windsor Castle every Easter Tuesday, he received with the ownership of
the lands the Governorship of the Colony. He also became invested with
all advowsons, and with the power of licensing churches and chapels--to
be consecrated according to the ecclesiastical laws of this kingdom. To
the same Governor were further granted such royal rights "as any Bishop
of Durham ever had." The inconsistency of granting such a charter to
any individual who was a Roman Catholic, however excellent a man he
might be, is obvious to every one. An establishment, according to
Protestant law, thus came under the complete control of an individual
of a perfectly different communion. Yet, though the procedure appears
so inconsistent, it, in fact, happily proved the means of securing to
the Maryland people the blessing of religious liberty to a greater
extent than that in which it was enjoyed in any other Colony. An oath,
which was required to be taken by the Governor and Council, in these
words:--"I will not, by myself or any other, directly or indirectly,
trouble, molest, or discountenance any person professing to believe
in Jesus Christ, for or in respect of religion"[480]--was perhaps
framed especially with the view of affording refuge for persecuted
Roman Catholics on the shores of Chesapeake Bay; but it is pleasant
to recollect that under its shadow and in harmony with its design
Protestants also found shelter from Protestant intolerance.[481]
A Colony of a very different nature commenced in 1620. That year
certain adventurers were incorporated as "the Council established at
Plymouth, in the county Devon, for the planting, ruling, ordering, and
governing New England, in America."[482] Yet not from them has New
England obtained its illustrious name in American history, but from
the men who fled across the Atlantic without the knowledge or the aid
of either company or king. A band of persons holding Congregational
views of Church government, and driven from their native shores by
persecution, had settled in Holland some years earlier, and now
their numbers having increased, some of them determined to emigrate.
Their thoughts at first turned towards Virginia, and they procured a
patent under the Virginia Company's seal. But it ran in the name of a
gentleman who did not proceed thither,[483] and consequently it became
of no service to the emigrants. These, at last, trusting alone in God,
resolved to direct their course to the shores of New England. On the
6th September, 1620--fourteen years after the first colonization of
Virginia, and two months before the incorporation of the Company at
Plymouth--the Pilgrim Fathers set sail on their memorable voyage. This
is not the place to tell the story of their adventures--of the parting
of the "May Flower" from the "Speedwell"--of the solitary course of
the former vessel, of its battle with the elements of the landing of
the voyagers at Cape Cod, and the dreary coasting expedition of the
afflicted party until their feet touched the Plymouth Rock. The story
may well inspire American historians with an enthusiasm, deeper as it
is more pure, than that of the poet who sang the fortunes of Æneas:--
"_Trojæ qui primus ab oris
Italiam, fato profugus, Lavinia venit
Littora._"
Before landing, the Pilgrims covenanted, as the loyal subjects of King
James--having undertaken, for the glory of God and the advancement
of the Christian faith, a voyage to plant the first Colony in the
northern parts of Virginia--that they would combine together as a body
politic for the furtherance of those ends, and enact equal laws meet
for the general good of the Colony.[484] These Christian-minded men,
wearied with the injustice which they had endured, and distressed at
the irreligion which they had witnessed at home, constituted themselves
at once, in the simplicity of their hearts and the fervour of their
zeal, a Christian Church and a political State--not perceiving the
inconsistency of the act, and not foreseeing the difficulties into
which such an identification of the civil and the ecclesiastical would
very speedily plunge them.
[Sidenote: _Massachusetts._]
The Council for New England--just mentioned as established at Plymouth
in the year 1620--granted a patent for the establishment of a Colony in
the country of Massachusetts. The Puritans in England took an interest
in its progress; and, by means of influence which they exerted on
its behalf, a Charter for the Company of Massachusetts Bay, in the
course of twelve months, passed the Royal Seal.[485] That Charter
constituted it a trading corporation, and conveyed power to make all
necessary ordinances for Government, so as that such ordinances were
not repugnant to the laws and statutes of this our realm of England.
It conceded no rights of self-government, and, according to strict
interpretation, it allowed the people no liberty of worship. Yet in the
covenant which the emigrants subscribed, at the moment of landing on
the shores of their new home, they bound themselves to walk together
according as God revealed Himself unto them--in matters of worship
resolving to cleave unto Him alone--and to reject all contrary ways,
canons, and constitutions. At the same time, they promised to act
with all watchfulness and tenderness toward their brethren, avoiding
jealousies, suspicions, backbitings, and secret risings of spirit.[486]
Winthrop, the Governor of the new colonists, spoke, at the same time,
in their name, of the Church of England in terms of the strongest
filial love, calling her a dear mother, from whom the pilgrim emigrants
had parted in tears, having in her bosom received their share in
the common salvation, and having sucked it, as it were, from her
breasts.[487] It was not, however, as Ecclesiastical Puritans that
Winthrop and his companions made these professions. Their well-known
opinions, in relation to the Church of England, sufficed to indicate
that they could not intend their words to be applied to her formularies
and her government; but as doctrinal Puritans these men could employ
such language with the most perfect sincerity. They spoke, as some can
speak still, who, on grounds of polity and of worship alone, dissent
from her communion.
Whatever may be thought of the interpretation practically given by
Winthrop and his brethren to the terms of the Royal Charter, everybody
must acknowledge the affectionate spirit towards the Church of England
which was breathed in his memorable letter;--but it must be confessed
that equally inconsistent with the Charter, and with the Epistle, was
the conduct of the Council of Massachusetts before the end of the year
1629, when they sent into banishment two of their number, who, whilst
they were described as "sincere in their affection for the good of
the plantation," were charged with upholding worship according to the
Book of Common Prayer. "You are Separatists," said the Episcopalians
to their Puritan brethren, "and you will shortly be Anabaptists." "We
separate," it was replied, "not from the Church of England, but from
its corruptions. We came away from the Common Prayer and ceremonies
in our native land, where we suffered much for Nonconformity; in this
place of liberty we cannot, we will not use them. Their imposition
would be a sinful violation of the worship of God."[488] It is easy
to imitate the special pleading so often heard on the High Church
side of the great controversy of which this was but a small part, and
to suggest certain excuses for the Massachusetts rulers; and to say
that this was a measure of self-defence, and that it was intended to
crush in the germ what might have grown into formidable mischief. But
we attempt nothing of that kind. We will not soften the fact that
the adherents of Episcopacy were treated by these Puritans as if they
had been guilty of sedition, their worship being forbidden, and they
themselves being sent back to the mother country in the character of
transported convicts. The men who acted in this way must ever bear
the blame and odium of intolerance. Nor can we omit to point out the
sophistry of objecting to the _use_ of the Prayer Book on the ground of
the iniquity of _imposing_ it.
[Sidenote: _Laud's Colonial Policy._]
It has been noticed in our introduction, in the first volume, that
the severities of Archbishop Laud drove many Puritans into exile; and
in this way he largely contributed to the growth of the New England
States. That growth alarmed him. He thought it perilous to suffer a
receptacle for schismatics to be filled so fast, "from whence, as from
the bowels of the Trojan horse, so many incendiaries might break out to
inflame the nation." To prevent such mischief--as Heylyn, the Primate's
admiring biographer, informs us--it came "under consultation of the
chief physicians," who were entrusted with the care of the Church's
health, to send a Bishop over to the Colonies "for their better
government, and back him with some forces to compel, if he were not
otherwise able to persuade obedience."[489] Happily for the Colonies
and for England, the Archbishop never did carry out his purpose,
having more than enough to do with other troublesome affairs; but
when occupying the see of London, he had claimed control over English
congregations abroad--that claim being the origin of the extensive
jurisdiction of the metropolitan see, which has been maintained ever
since--and had striven hard to stretch his all-meddling hands round
both the Colonial companies in the New World, and the commercial
factories in the Old one. Indeed, over the whole earth, his spiritual
ambition essayed to travel. He aimed at bringing under his rule,
settlers in Turkey, in the Mogul's dominions, in the Indian Islands,
in the Virginian plantations, and in Barbadoes; in short, wherever
Englishmen had any residence in the way of trade.[490] In the year
1634--soon after his translation to Canterbury--the Archbishop procured
a commission, addressed to himself and others, and couched in general
terms, forming an intended basis for subsequent special instructions
in reference to the affairs of the North American settlements.[491]
Aiming at what he could not reach, and when circumstances denied him
any effectual interference, still collecting information, weaving
nets, and spreading toils in hope of a more propitious season, he
diligently persevered in his colonial policy. Nothing escaped him. A
letter written by Dr. Stoughton, a New England Puritan, fell into his
hands. The writer rejoiced that God had made him acquainted with the
manner in which He would be worshipped, and that he had seen that which
his forefathers desired to witness, even the liberty which Christ had
purchased for His people; and then this correspondent related, with
grief, a strange thing, as he calls it, which had been done by members
of the Church of Salem, who, from a pious horror of superstition, had
cut out the cross in the State flag. This harmless letter is folded
up, and endorsed "Dr. Stoughton, shewing his great correspondence with
the irregular, inconformable fugitive ministers beyond the seas in New
England."[492] Then comes the copy of "a form of project for settling
the profession of the Gospel of Christ in New England, to be signed
by benefactors to that plantation." This, too, bears an endorsement,
"Found amongst Dr. Stoughton's papers. This letter containeth an
undue way of gathering monies without authority, for the plantation
in New England." There is also a sheet containing "Three Propositions
concerning Justification by Works; faith, active or passive, in
justification; and saving preparation before union with Christ;" which
propositions are described as having "divided Mr. Hooker and Mr. Cotton
in New England." A farther memorandum, on the same subject, bears a
careful endorsement by the Archbishop of the precise date when he
received these communications. In addition to all these, we find in
another paper, "a relation of the manner in which persons are received
into the congregations of New England. They make confession of their
faith, and they give glory to God. Their conscience and conversation
must be approved. In case of notorious scandal past, confession is to
be made penitently. They covenant to obey the whole truth of the Gospel
of Christ."[493] In the same collection there is also a letter written
to the prelate by a person, named Thomas Lane, who was chief of the
learned Commissioners appointed by the King to examine and rectify
all complaints from the plantations, and who was also a minister of
religion. This person sent home to the indefatigable prelate an account
of the clergy in the island of Barbadoes. He reported that, within
the previous five or six years, the people had built six churches,
besides some chapels; and that parish affairs had been committed to
vestrymen, having power to place and displace pastors and to regulate
their stipends. The Governor, he went on to say, chose the ministers
and agreed with them as he pleased, whereby they were "made and
esteemed no better than mercenaries." Taxes, such as had never before
been imposed by Christians on the clergy, they were compelled to pay;
taxes even for the very heads upon their shoulders; taxes for their
wives as well, and for their children who might be above seven years
old. Parish clerks were maintained out of these revenues. "What," asks
Mr. Lane, "can be expected where ignorance both of the laws of God and
men doth domineer?" Hoping his Grace would provide a remedy--since
it was time for authority to set to her helping hand--the writer
concluded with the reflection that, "they live in the declining age
of the world, wherein there is not to be found that youthful zeal of
God's house which was wont to eat up men."[494] From a document, dated
September the 4th, 1639, relating to Somers Islands, it appears that
the Governor, Council, and many of the Company were Nonconformists.
They were now required to carry out the directions received two years
before, for reading the homilies and the Book of Common Prayer; and it
was urged that at the Holy Sacrament, the reverend posture of kneeling
should be adopted, and in baptism the signing of the cross should be
used.[495] Archbishop Laud's immense activity and universal supervision
of ecclesiastical affairs throughout the empire receive additional
illustrations from these letters; the policy which he pursued towards
those abroad as well as towards those who remained at home is also
apparent from the same documents; nor can any impartial reader fail
to see that this policy was of a nature to make the Puritans, wherever
they might be, welcome the wonderful change which, after being long and
patiently waited for, came at last in the year 1641.
[Sidenote: _Virginia._]
II. Such was the religious condition of the Colonies. What were the
changes which followed the altered state of ecclesiastical affairs
at home? During the storm of the Civil Wars, the English Government
had so much to do at home that it found little space, and felt little
power to do much, if anything, abroad. The Colonies, therefore,
pursued their own course. Virginia remained loyal to the King and
faithful to Episcopacy. When Charles perished on the scaffold, the
legislature of the Colony declared that whoever defended the deed, or
doubted the right of the King's son, should be judged guilty of high
treason. At the same time, when fields in England were stained with
blood, and defeat followed the Royal arms, the Colonists observed days
of humiliation; and whilst exasperated by the sufferings of Royalist
brethren, and by the depression of the Episcopal Church, they became
increasingly earnest in enforcing ecclesiastical conformity--in
their zeal banishing alike Popish recusants and Protestant
Nonconformists.[496]
English possessions in Barbadoes may be dated from the year 1605, when
an English crew landed on its shores.[497] We have nothing to do with
the history of that island--remarkable, it may be observed, for its
early difficulties, its subsequent rapid increase of population, and
the wealth and luxury of its cavalier proprietors--beyond noticing
the spirit and temper which were displayed in the Acts passed in
the Colony relating to public worship. During the period of the
Civil Wars the government of Barbadoes--under its lieutenant, Philip
Bell--branded Nonconformists as "opinionated and self-conceited
persons." The misdemeanours of such persons, it was said, begot
distractions--and were both a reproach to the Church, and a disturbance
to the government; and, therefore, for the suppression of disorderly
courses, all who dwelt in the Colony were required to conform to
the Church of England as established by Parliament--all offenders
being threatened with the common penalties inflicted in England upon
Nonconformists. Justices of the peace, ministers, and churchwardens,
received commission to execute these Acts, as they regarded their
duty to God, and their allegiance to the King. Family worship every
morning and evening was enforced, the punishment for neglect being the
forfeiture of forty pounds of sugar. Everybody had to attend church,
or suffer according to law. In case of the absence of servants from
public worship, if it were the master's fault, he was required to
pay ten pounds of cotton--if the servant's, then the case was left
to be disposed of by the next Justice of the Peace. With a command
to ministers that they should preach and catechise, was another
addressed to churchwardens for erecting near to the Church of every
parish a strong pair of stocks for the drunkard, the swearer, and the
gamester.[498]
[Sidenote: _Maryland._]
Maryland pursued its tolerant career, only denying toleration to
those who denied the Holy Trinity. It is curious to find in that
State, not punishments for heresy and schism, but this unique piece
of legislation; people calling one another Heretic, Schismatic,
Idolater, Puritan, Independent, Presbyterian, Popish Priest, Jesuit,
Jesuited Papist, Lutheran, Calvinist, Anabaptist, Brownist, Antinomian,
Barrowist, Roundhead, Separatist, or any other bad name, incurred
the forfeiture of ten shillings for each offence, and, in default of
payment, a sentence of whipping and imprisonment. Thus, not only was
magisterial persecution altogether absent, but the Colony possessed as
well, the noble distinction of having all social persecution forbidden
within its precincts. No person professing to believe in Jesus Christ
could be troubled on account of his religion; and any one daring
to molest a Christian worshipper became liable to a fine of twenty
shillings, or to the penalty of imprisonment or the lash.[499] All
sorts of religionists there must have been in the colony of Maryland
under its Roman Catholic governor; and although, no doubt, his eyes
were chiefly fixed on his fellow-religionists, and he wished to secure
liberty and comfort for them, it is to the unspeakable honour of his
government, that, in an age of intolerance, he should have adopted
such a singularly wise and noble policy.
In the year 1643, the distinct States of Massachusetts, of Plymouth,
of Connecticut, and of New Haven, constituted themselves the United
Colonies of New England; each of them reserving to itself local
jurisdiction as a State right. The affairs of the Confederacy were
entrusted to Commissioners, two from each Colony, and it is important
to observe that, in the Articles of the Union, Church membership
is specified as a qualification, and the only qualification for
that office.[500] Massachusetts had for some time been growing in
importance, and had enjoyed an extension of territory by the annexation
of New Hampshire, in the year 1641; followed by Maine, in 1652. The
Government began to relax its severity of religious rule in the year
1644; and, in 1646, it endeavoured to excuse what was contained in
its Statute Book, by saying, that such persons as differed from
their neighbours only in theological opinion, but continued to live
peaceably, had no cause of complaint; for the law had never been put in
execution against any such persons, although many of that description
were known to be residing in the State. The affair of the year 1629
they attempted to explain as an act of righteous discipline upon
citizens who were unpeaceable. It was affirmed that quiet spirits
received different treatment, and that two of the presidents of Harvard
College were Anabaptists.[501] But soon afterwards this question of
religious liberty, to its great detriment, became associated with
local strifes; and a movement which had been commenced in the State of
New Plymouth under promising circumstances--with the view of securing
a full and universal toleration for all persons, even Turks, Jews,
Papists, Arians, Socinians, and Familists--found no favour with the
leading men of the colony of Massachusetts; in consequence of which,
those who would have been as "the eyes of God's people in England,"
damaged their reputation in the mother country, and Sir Harry Vane
urged that "the oppugness of the Congregational way should not from
its own principles and practice be taught to root it out."[502] At
the same time, the New England States were determined to maintain
their independence, and, although remaining as staunchly as ever the
enemies of Episcopacy, they were shy in their correspondence with
a Presbyterian Parliament. Orders from England, in their judgment,
prejudiced their chartered liberties. Times might change, and other
Princes and Parliaments might arise. They had themselves outridden the
storm, and should they now perish within the port? No doubt the English
rulers could better enact laws and adjudicate causes than could the
poor rustics who had been bred up in a rude wilderness; but the vast
distance between Old and New England abated the virtue of the strongest
influences. So they argued; and then they proceeded to request a
parent's benediction upon the infant plantations, that they might be
blessed under the shadow of the mother country, and be nourished with
the warmth and the dews of heaven.[503]
[Sidenote: _New England._]
III. We have brought our sketch of the Ecclesiastical affairs of the
Colonies down to the close of the Civil Wars, and the abolition of
Royalty: the subsequent relation of those affairs to the Government at
home now demands our attention. New England, although it had throughout
the struggle maintained all possible independence, had never explicitly
submitted to Parliament; but as both its political and religious views
were well known to be in sympathy with the successful party, when
the reins fell into the hands of the Independents, they had no need,
as in the case of certain other Colonies, to force into allegiance
this particular plantation. The only legislative enactment adopted in
reference to it had for its purpose the meeting of religious wants.
John Eliot, a Puritan minister, from the county of Essex, who emigrated
to New England in the year 1631, and who, from his zeal for the
conversion of the aborigines of the State, has obtained the honourable
appellation of "Apostle of the Indians," asked his fellow-Christians
on this side of the Atlantic to help him in his noble undertaking. His
appeals were backed by efforts in his favour both abroad and at home;
in consequence of which, the Long Parliament established a Society for
"the Propagation of the Gospel in New England."[504] The Act recites
the particulars of a wonderful work which was going on amongst the
natives, how barbarians were being civilized; how, forsaking their
charms and sorceries, they were calling upon the name of the Lord,
and with tears lamenting their misspent lives; how they had put their
children to English schools, and now betook themselves to having but
one wife; and how they conducted morning and evening prayer in their
families. After this recital the Statute created a Corporation, to
consist of a president, a treasurer, and fourteen assistants; it
authorized them to make a common seal; it invested them with certain
powers; and it also commanded that collections for the object should
be made publicly in all congregations throughout England and Wales,
and also privately from house to house. Eliot, to whom the credit of
the enterprise belongs, with a rare force of character, and with that
pure and intense earnestness which only love to Christ can inspire,
made amongst the North American Indians full proof of his ministry in
the character and habits of these children of the forest, and wrought
moral marvels amongst them, which have become the admiration of all
succeeding times.[505] As he was gathering the red hunters into the
fold of the "Great Spirit"--whose name he spent his life in explaining
to their untutored minds--many of his countrymen at home sympathized
with him in his holy toils. After the Restoration, Baxter and Boyle
distinguished themselves by their helpful services in reference to
Eliot's mission; and during the period of the Commonwealth, before his
work had acquired renown, Puritan feeling in some quarters might have
been seen brightly enkindled on his side.
[Sidenote: _New England._]
It is painful to record, that at this time the New England Colonies
tightened rather than relaxed the reins of their intolerance, under
cover of alarm at irreligion and sectarianism. It may be pleaded that
some religionists who then bore the name of Baptists and Quakers
were very troublesome people, and that they held opinions which were
calculated to disturb civil society; but it should be remembered that
a similar plea has never been wanting when the cause of persecution
has required to be bolstered up; and it is a policy as mischievous as
it is unrighteous for the friends of religious freedom to employ in
their own cause the despicable weapons of their antagonists. Why not
let the rulers of Massachusetts bear the deserved discredit of their
inconsistencies? And why conceal the fact that those inconsistencies
arose out of the pursuance of a perfectly self-chosen course? Neither
the Government just before, nor the Government after the establishment
of the Protectorate, had anything whatever to do with the matter. Not
at the door of Whitehall, but on the threshold of Boston lies the
responsibilty of the atrocious deed of hanging Mary Dyar, Marmaduke
Stephenson, and William Robinson.
Speaking generally as to religious and secular interests, we may safely
say that the New England Colonies confided in Cromwell, and Cromwell
confided in them. When the Lord General had been fighting at the head
of his soldiers, "the spirits of the brethren" on the other side of
the Atlantic "were carried forth in faithful and affectionate prayers
in his behalf;" and when sitting peacefully in his cabinet, he poured
out his heart freely to his friends who were busy on the opposite side
of the world, he candidly confessed that the battle of Dunbar, "'where
some who were godly' were fought into their graves, was of all the
acts of his life, that on which his mind had the least quiet, and he
declared himself 'truly ready to serve the brethren and churches in
America.'"[506] About two years before the death of Oliver Cromwell,
Captain Gookin, a home official in New England, wrote to Thurloe,
telling him that "the generality of the godly in all the country did
cordially resent his Highness's goodwill, favour, and love," and did
"unfeignedly bear upon their hearts before the Lord, him, his work, and
helpers." The zealous officer added that he had ground for thinking
so. "All the English Colonies"--these are his words--"will see cause,
in particular letters of thanks, to manifest their duty and special
respects to his Highness."[507]
[Sidenote: _Rhode Island._]
The Colony of Rhode Island chose a path of its own, not having been
admitted to the New England Confederation, because of its refusal
to acknowledge the jurisdiction of New Plymouth. The eccentric but
noble-minded founder of the Colony was Roger Williams, who had been
banished from Massachusetts for his very broad ecclesiastical and
political opinions. He proceeded in a canoe with five other persons
down the Seekonk River, in quest of a spot where he could carry out his
independent and democratical principles; and tradition reports, that,
as he approached a point now called _Whatcheer_ Cove, he met with a
party of Indians, who greeted him with a friendly salutation in the
very words which gave the cove its well-known name, "_What cheer?_"
Rather Utopian in his ideas, and impracticable in his disposition--not
fitted to work well in a colony already established, and not promising
much stability, even in one which he established himself--Roger
Williams nevertheless commands very great respect for his intellectual
ability, his literary attainments, his spirit of self-sacrifice,
and his intense abhorrence of all persecution. There were numerous
religious differences, and, consequently, plenty of confusion in
the island home of this remarkable individual and his sympathetic
companions; but within its shores no penalties whatever were inflicted
upon any class of religious professors. And notwithstanding his
enthusiasm in the cause of freedom, he did not become blind to the
necessities of government in the maintenance of social order. He
ingeniously argued, that a ship at sea, carrying on board several
hundred souls who were bound together by the interests of a common weal
and woe, presented a just illustration of a commonwealth; and that as
Papists and Protestants, Jews and Turks, sailing in a vessel, ought not
to be forced to join in the captain's prayers, so people ought not to
be coerced into national forms of religion; but, at the same time, as
the captain ought to command the ship's course, and maintain justice,
peace, and sobriety amongst the crew, so ought the magistrate to judge
and punish such people as injured their neighbours by resisting the
civil government of the State.[508]
Williams came to London, in the year 1643, to seek the favour and
protection of Parliament. Conscious weakness induced him then to do
that which his old companions in New England afterwards declined in
consequence of conscious strength. The "printed Indian labours" of this
indefatigable person,--the like whereof respecting anyone in America,
it is said, was not extant--and his singular merits as a Christian
missionary, induced "both Houses of Parliament to grant unto him and
friends with him a free and absolute charter of Civil Government
for those parts of his abode;" and hence they became a legalized
corporation on the shores of Narragansett Bay, invested with full
authority to rule themselves.[509] Williams visited England, a second
time, upon Colonial business, and then, as before, received special
assistance from Vane--assistance acknowledged in a Colonial address,
(1654), which summed up the history of this free little Republic. "From
the first beginning of the Providence Colony," it was said, "you have
been a noble and true friend to an outcast and despised people; we
have ever reaped the sweet fruits of your constant loving-kindness and
favour. We have long been free from the iron yoke of wolfish bishops;
we have sitten dry from the streams of blood spilt by the wars in our
native country. We have not felt the new chains of the Presbyterian
tyrants, nor in this Colony have we been consumed by the over zealous
fire of the so-called godly Christian magistrates. We have not known
what an excise means, we have almost forgotten what tithes are. We have
long drunk of the cup of as great liberties as any people, that we can
hear of under the whole heaven. When we are gone, our posterity and
children after us shall read, in our town records, your loving-kindness
to us, and our real endeavour after peace and righteousness."[510]
[Sidenote: _Barbadoes._]
Upon the abolition of Royalty in England, certain of the Colonies
became refractory. Parliament heard, on the 5th of October, 1650,
that, inasmuch as many well-affected persons had been driven
away from Barbadoes, the Council of State was of opinion that
the island should be reduced, and a fleet sent thither for that
purpose.[511] Whereupon an Act was passed prohibiting trade with
the plantation there, and with the sister States, who were sharers
in the disaffection--including Virginia, Bermudas, and Antigua--and
empowering the Council to bring them all into speedy subjection to
the authority of the Commonwealth.[512] Sir George Ayscue, commander
of a ship called the _Rainbow_, conducted a fleet into the Western
seas, taking with him as brother Commissioners, Daniel Searle and
Captain Michael Pack, whose instructions were, to insist upon the
submission of the inhabitants of Barbadoes, to enforce there the Acts
of Parliament against Kingship, the House of Lords, and the use of the
Book of Common Prayer, and to require every person in the Colonies to
take the Engagement.[513] A summons to surrender to the Commonwealth
reached Lord Willoughby, the Governor of Barbadoes, accompanied by an
assurance that the Commissioners wished by "amicable ways" to bring
the Colony to obedience, without bloodshed, or the destruction of
"their long laboured for estates."[514] But the representative body
in the State expressed indignation at this endeavour to persuade the
ignorant, that the Government now set up in England by miseries,
bloodsheds, rapines, and other oppressions, was any better than that
under which their ancestors had lived for hundreds of years; and
further they declared how they despised all "menaces to drive them
from their loyalty," to which their souls were as firmly united as
they were to their bodies.[515] Abundance of parleying succeeded, and
once, when Ayscue's men were invited on shore, "with a white flag,"
they were fired upon; in revenge for which act of treachery they burnt
the houses of their assailants--a proceeding in positive opposition
to Sir George's explicit orders.[516] At last, in midwinter, after
three months had been spent in fruitless negotiation, proposals of
peace from Lord Willoughby reached Ayscue on board the _Rainbow_,
which was now anchored in Carlisle Bay. Articles specifying the terms
of an acceptable surrender were returned to Willoughby, conceding
to the Colonists indemnity for their past resistance, and, for
the future, the right of taxation, and other important political
privileges. With respect to higher interests, the articles distinctly
stated that no oaths, covenants, or engagements, should be imposed
upon the inhabitants against their convictions, and that liberty of
conscience should be allowed to all--"excepting to such whose tenets
are inconsistent to a civil government."[517] But, strange to say,
in another and corrected paper, sent a few days afterwards, the
articles relating to oaths and to liberty of conscience are altogether
omitted; yet, still more strange, after this, Willoughby replied to
Ayscue, that the articles in this latter were the same in effect as
had been previously received. At last the latter agreed to the first
propositions made by the former--namely, that the Government should
remain as already established--that all Acts passed in the Colony
previously to the year 1638, and not being repugnant to the present
laws of England, should continue in force, and that those concerning
present differences should be repealed. In the final arrangement
between the Governor and the Commissioner no stipulation appears to
have been made touching matters of religion. Such matters were left
to shape themselves according to circumstances. The use of the Prayer
Book was neither expressly forbidden nor expressly allowed. Liberty of
conscience was neither secured nor denied in distinct terms. Nothing
was agreed upon which could interfere with the subsequent legislation
of the Colony in relation to ecclesiastical matters, except a general
implication that all enactments in the future, as well as those in the
past, would be utterly invalid if they were found at all repugnant to
the laws of the mother empire.[518] We find eighteen months afterwards,
the next Governor, Colonel Daniel Searle, complaining of "unsatisfied"
and "restless spirits" who, not content with the Constitution of
England, would model "this little limb of the Commonwealth into a free
state." He further informed the Council that in consequence of "some
lately brought under the ordinance of baptism in a Church society"--by
which expression, doubtless, Baptists are intended--having forwarded to
England a remonstrance concerning the Colonial Assembly, that Assembly
had desired that these remonstrants might be dismissed from public
employment in the island; but Governor Searle gave reasons in detail
why he could not comply with any such desire.[519]
[Sidenote: _Virginia._]
As Ayscue steered towards Barbadoes, Captain Robert Dennis sailed to
Virginia, for the reduction of the plantations in Chesapeake Bay.[520]
No sooner did his ship, the _Guinea_ frigate, heave in sight, than
the Virginians abandoned all thoughts of resistance, and instantly
came to terms. Like the Commissioners to the royalist colony of
Barbadoes, Captain Dennis and his colleagues were charged by written
instructions--amongst other things, to publish in Virginia the Acts
of Parliament against Kingship, the House of Lords, and the Book
of Common Prayer. But it would appear that, upon submission by the
Colonists to the powers at St. Stephen's and Whitehall, the execution
of the Act in reference to religion came to be waived in America, as
it had been waived in the West Indies. Indeed, in this case, Episcopal
worship was expressly allowed for one year, on condition of all public
allusions to monarchy being omitted in prayer. The clergy remained
undisturbed, and were entitled to their accustomed dues for that space
of time. Nor was there to be any censure for loyal supplications and
speeches which might be uttered in private houses. Indeed, during the
whole term of the Protectorate, Episcopal rites seem to have been
continued in Virginia;[521] and the Home Government does not appear to
have stained its character by any acts of persecution in that Colony,
or in Barbadoes. It is curious to add that, as tobacco was the chief
produce and the main staple of Virginia, it became used in the payment
of taxes, of penalties, and of privileges. All titheable parishioners,
"in the vacancy of their minister," were notwithstanding, to pay, per
head, fifteen pounds of tobacco towards a church-building "and glebe"
fund; Sabbath breakers and drunkards incurred a fine of one hundred
pounds of tobacco; persons introducing ministers into the Colony at
their own charge, were to receive, for so doing, the sum of twenty
pounds sterling by bill of exchange, or two thousand pounds weight of
tobacco.[522]
The Bermudas became an asylum for Royalists at the end of the Civil
Wars. A patent had been granted by King James for a Company there,
so early as the year 1615; and, until 1653, this Company and the
Colonial Council appointed by it were permitted to continue. But in
the midst of the troubles at home, the Company neglected to consult
the Council; the Colony suffered great distress; and "turbulent
spirits," by their reports to the Home Authorities, prejudiced them
against the Local Administration. Report reached head quarters that
the Governor of Bermudas wished to "invite Charles Stuart to take
possession" of the territory; and, therefore, in the year 1653,
certain trustworthy Commonwealth's men received a commission to govern
affairs in the islands with the same powers and privileges as the
Old Company had enjoyed. But, in the year 1656, Colonel Owen Rowe
wrote home, complaining that the former Government, standing upon the
foundation of James the First's patent, had refused to acknowledge the
New Commission. It had gone so far as to declare Charles' execution
"bloody, traitorous, and rebellious;" to proclaim his son as Charles
II.; and to avow a determination to be ruled only by laws which were
sanctioned by the Crown. These bold Royalists enforced the oath of
supremacy, imprisoned such as refused it, and banished Independents
who sympathized with the regicides. The Council of State, however,
persevered in efforts to secure subjugation, feeling the importance of
the islands to the Commonwealth, and fearing lest the Spaniards might
endeavour to get a footing in them. Captain Wilkinson, commander of
the chief castle in the Colony, was strongly urged to attend to his
duties, and to keep a watchful eye upon the malignant party. Petitions
from the inhabitants to the Lord Protector arrived a few months before
his decease, stating that "the people were naked for want of clothing,
naked to their enemies for want of ammunition, and further destitute
for want of godly teachers"--ministers having received no salary
for years past. Only a few days after Cromwell had expired another
petition appeared, complaining of the disaffection of Deputy-Governor
Sayle, and describing him as a Royalist, as one who condemned the late
King's execution, and as an intimate friend of Colonial rebels, and of
scandalous ministers.[523]
[Sidenote: _West Indies._]
Cromwell, in his ill-fated expedition against the Spanish West Indies,
was influenced by religious, perhaps, even more than by political and
commercial considerations. He remembered the Protestant martyrs whom
the Spaniards had put to death, and the poor innocent Indians whom they
had barbarously murdered, and he thought that infinite good would arise
to the honour of God by maiming the Colonial power of these enemies
to the welfare of reformed Christendom. Spain, losing America, would
have the sword wrested from her right hand, and then Europe would
be relieved from cruel wars, and from the disquietude and misery
produced by perpetual attempts to extirpate true religion and to set
up the idolatries and abominations of Popery. So Cromwell reasoned, in
a State Paper delivered to the Dutch ambassador in the year 1653; in
which also he proposed that England and Holland should send teachers
gifted with Christian knowledge "unto all people and nations, to
inform and enlarge the Gospel and the ways of Jesus Christ."[524]
This design on Hispaniola proved altogether a very bad business, and
was grievously laid to heart by the brave man, who, as a Protestant
prince, wished to stand in the shoes of Gustavus Adolphus. Jamaica,
however, fell into Cromwell's hands as soon as his soldiers approached
the island. In the capital--St. Jago de la Vega--there stood an abbey
and two Roman Catholic churches called the Red and the White Cross,
which the Puritan soldiers immediately stripped of their superstitious
ornaments. The country abounded in waste land, and lacked population.
Cromwell aimed at making it a centre of Protestant influence, as much
as of British dominion; and this being known, it was suggested to
him by a French Protestant that he should gather there a number of
foreigners professing the Reformed religion, who might constitute a
sort of evangelical propaganda to "negative the designs of the Jesuits
in those parts."[525] Plenty of room for work might be found in the
uncultivated acres of that wild region for young Irish people, both
men and women, and for "Scotch vagabonds," male and female.[526] The
Council of State consequently resolved that such people should be sent
over; but Cromwell desired above all to see godly New Englanders
settling upon the island. It was, he said, a chief end of his design,
to enlighten those parts by means of such as knew and feared the Lord;
and he thought that some who had been driven for conscience' sake into
a barren wilderness, might now remove to a land of plenty.[527] He had
confidence in the pilgrims of New Plymouth, and in the Puritans of
Massachusetts, and he fondly hoped that many of them would emigrate
to his new West Indian dominions, and there sow the fields with the
"good seed of the kingdom." But disappointment followed his hopes. The
American Colonists would not remove. Some of the best agents sent over
to superintend the plantation died, chief amongst whom were Governors
Fortescue, Sedgwick, and Brayne.
Earnest piety, dashed with eccentricities of Puritan expression,
conspicuously appears in the letters and in the conduct of these
Colonial Governors under the Commonwealth.[528] They were men of
religious zeal, and of political sagacity, and they certainly
deserve honourable remembrance, although their enterprise proved
unsuccessful; a circumstance, indeed, which arose not from any fault
of theirs, but entirely from the unconquerable difficulties connected
with their position. The letters of D'Oyley, who succeeded these
earlier governors--himself a highly respectable officer with Royalist
tendencies--bear witness to their discouragements and to his own also.
Brayne followed D'Oyley in office, and died a victim to the fatal
climate.[529]
[Sidenote: _Maryland._]
The history of Maryland, under the Commonwealth, is full of the
records of strife for lordship. The Commission of 1651 for reducing
disaffected Colonial dependencies did not specify that maritime
State; but the Commissioners managed to include it within the range
of their instructions, by unwarrantably stretching the expression,
"all the plantations within the Bay of Chesapeake." The agents and
friends of Lord Baltimore at first resisted this intrusion, but they
were at last obliged to submit to a compromise. Afterwards, rallying
their strength, they re-asserted their earlier rights, and displaced
the new authorities; but these again, in their turn, overcame the
old government, and reinstated themselves in their former position.
Religious animosities were at the bottom of this quarrel; the Puritans
not being able to endure having a Roman Catholic at the head of the
community, and the Roman Catholics trembling at the idea of being left
to the mercy of Puritans.[530] After the Colony, under Lord Baltimore,
had enjoyed an amount of toleration unparalleled in those days of
intense party feeling, it becomes a question of great interest, what
was the course pursued by his opponents, when for a while they held
the reins of government which they had snatched out of his hands? The
answer is, that they made a law denying to such as exercised the Popish
form of worship all civil protection, they also proscribed all Prelacy
and Antinomianism, and resolved that, besides such as professed the
Presbyterian religion, which had been established in England, none
should be protected except those who avowed faith in God by Jesus
Christ, and did not abuse their freedom by injuring others. Such a
law can be rightly understood only when it is studied in the light of
previous history. Enough has been said in former pages of this work
to shew how deeply the Puritans feared lest they should be deprived of
their civil rights by the restoration of Roman despotism--a fear which
if not justified may be excused by the old maxim, "that a burnt child
dreads the fire." The toleration, indeed, vouchsafed in Maryland ought
to have taught another lesson, but the idea remained unconquerable that
such toleration as had been there conceded only served the purpose of
protecting Popery for a time, in order that it might in the end throw
off its cunning mask, and devour those very liberties to which it had
been indebted for existence.[531]
[Sidenote: _Maryland._]
Uncertainty was felt or pretended as to the wishes of the Protector
in reference to the subject so keenly agitated in the State of
Maryland. But upon his hearing a report to that effect, and upon
his being informed that it was said he wished a stop to be put to
the proceedings of the Commissioners who were authorized to settle
the _civil_ government, he distinctly stated that such was not his
intention. Of their interference with the secular business of the
colony he fully approved, but of their interference with spiritual
matters, it would appear that he had formed a different judgment; for
in an earlier communication to the same Commissioners he had commanded
them to confine their attention to temporal affairs, and "not to busy
themselves about religion."[532] In this instance, as in others,
Cromwell shewed a disposition to leave people to themselves in what
concerned their consciences, provided only that they remained loyal
to his political rule. We have said that the Prayer Book continued to
be used in Virginia; and so long as Maryland remained quiet under the
Protectorate, his Highness was not anxious to disturb either Prelatist
or Papist. Whilst careful not to displease his own political partizans,
he at the same time indicated no sympathy with the opposition which
was made to Lord Baltimore; and, although he was strongly urged to
annul altogether the patent and privileges of that excellent nobleman,
he still allowed him to persevere in pressing his claims, and even
permitted him to appoint his own Lieutenant.[533]
[Sidenote: _The East._]
Beyond these particulars relative to religion in the Western Colonies,
space remains only for a word respecting the other hemisphere. The
first East Indian charter had been granted by Queen Elizabeth, and
soon after the date of that charter the first English factory had been
established at Surat. In the year 1649, Edward Terry--who had attended
Sir Thomas Roe, as chaplain, on his embassy to the Mogul--preached
what might be called a missionary sermon in the church of St. Andrew
Undershaft, before the Governor and Company of the Merchant Traders
to India; and in that sermon he strongly urged them to commend
Christianity by a holy life; and he took care also faithfully to rebuke
the gross inconsistencies of English Christians in Oriental countries,
which, as he observed, often provoked natives to exclaim, "Christian
religion, devil religion--Christian much drunk--much rogue--much
naught." Dr. Edward Reynolds also preached in the same church, before
the same company, in the year 1657, taking for his text Nehemiah xiii.
31; shewing, as Evelyn notices in his "Diary,"[534] "by the example of
Nehemiah, all the perfections of a trusty person in public affairs,
with many good precepts, apposite to the occasion, ending with a prayer
for God's blessing on the Company and the undertaking."
Another body of traders, called the Levant Company, were certainly
left free to pursue their own course with respect to religion.[535]
Through the endeavours of Pocock, and other Episcopalian clergymen,
the Company had aimed to extend Christianity in the countries where
they trafficked; and in the year 1654 they sent Robert Frampton--a
distinguished Episcopal minister--to Aleppo, who remained for
sixteen years in charge of the spiritual welfare of the factory in
that place. On his return to England he became first Dean, and then
Bishop of Gloucester, and he is found amongst the non-jurors at the
period of the Revolution. On the other hand a Presbyterian minister,
who had been appointed chaplain at Smyrna, found no favour with the
merchants of that ancient port; in vain he produced his bale of
Westminster catechisms, and he fruitlessly endeavoured to establish
amongst the English residents the Westminster Confession Directory and
Discipline.[536]
This review of ecclesiastical affairs proves very clearly the large
measure of independence which in that respect was conceded to the
Colonies, under the government of Cromwell. The prohibition of the
use of the Book of Common Prayer emanated from the home authorities
before he became seated in the Protectoral chair, and there is no
evidence of any zeal on his part in enforcing the ordinance, or of
any disposition to adopt a persecuting policy towards his Colonial
subjects. On the contrary, his connivance at Episcopalian worship
in Virginia, and his conduct with reference to Maryland and Lord
Baltimore, indicate a spirit of toleration and a breadth of view with
regard to religious liberty,--where the stability and civil order of
society were not placed in jeopardy--such as are in harmony with his
habitual professions and his well-known character, and such also as
probably would have been more fully exemplified in England, had not
the exemplification been prevented by the political disaffection of
religious parties.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XVII.
Leaving the Colonies, the reader's attention will now be directed
to other relations of a religious nature--relations which the Lord
Protector entered into with some of the Churches on the Continent, and
which, in reference to those Churches, he sustained towards different
European powers.
In approaching the subject we meet with a singular individual, whose
activity prepared for negotiations respecting spiritual matters
which were carried on with foreign States through the Commonwealth
ambassadors. A few notices of his early history are necessary for a
clear understanding of what he did in connection with the events about
to be described.
[Sidenote: _Durie and Laud._]
John Durie was a Scotch Presbyterian, whose father--banished for
opposing King James the Sixth of Scotland and his Bishops--went over
to the city of Leyden, and there laboured as pastor of a Church
consisting of British refugees. The son, who had been educated at
Oxford, settled for a while at Elbing, in Prussia, just after Gustavus
Adolphus had won that city from the Poles; and it happened that
whilst he was residing there, he received from Casper Godeman, the
Swedish Jurist, suggestions respecting a scheme of Protestant union,
to which he devoted the greatest part of his life. As early as the
month of April, 1633, we find him writing from Frankfort to Sir Thomas
Roe--a distinguished person who was sent as ambassador to several
Courts--informing him that the Swedish Chancellor, Oxenstiern, was
strongly in favour of a close union between the Lutheran and Reformed
Churches; and, at the same period, we discover Roe, who was then in
London, corresponding with Oxenstiern, and commending such an union as
of the highest importance to the interests of Germany. Hope, however,
soon began to waver in the breast of the Scotch minister with regard
to the Chancellor's steady pursuit of the object; on account, as he
said, of "political ends and respects." Yet, in the winter of 1633,
the former rejoiced in the favourable impression which his great
project had produced upon the mind of Secretary Coke, and in the
expectation which had been awakened of his obtaining assistance even
from so influential a personage as Archbishop Laud, through Secretary
Windebank. Durie succeeded in gaining access to the Prelate, and had
also correspondence with him upon the subject of a Protestant union.
Although it appeared that political interests came in the way of
the full success which this warm advocate so much desired, yet he
expressed it as his decided opinion, that his Grace of Canterbury was
well affected towards the cause.[537] Like other penniless men, John
Durie laboured in his self-chosen vocation at a great disadvantage,
and was constrained to mix up petitions for personal assistance with
appeals on behalf of his cause; but it ought to be remembered that his
whole life proved the latter to be dearer to him far than any pecuniary
interest whatever. The young Ambassador Oxenstiern, son of the great
Chancellor, on his reaching London in March, 1634, encouraged Durie
to return to Germany, where he would find that the state of affairs
promised more than ever a favourable issue; at the same time assuring
him also, that his father had no greater desire than to see this work
of Christian charity and brotherhood perfectly accomplished. There can
be no doubt that Durie's own desires were more sincere and earnest
than the Chancellor's; of this he gave proof in the honest enthusiasm
with which he declared to Sir Thomas Roe, that if not prohibited he
would persevere; and, to use his own words, where he could not ride he
would go afoot, and when he could not walk he would creep on all fours
rather than not proceed. It was so grievous, he added, to see such an
enterprise as his so little cherished, and he was led to suspect that
a main hindrance to a prosperous result would be the complication of
spiritual with political affairs.[538]
Strange as it may appear to some readers, Laud himself wrote to Roe
upon the subject, and told him that he had prepared letters to both
Lutherans and Calvinists, so far as it was in "any ways fit;" and that
he wished Durie's labours might be crowned with a happy success. If a
public act, he proceeded to observe, could be gained at the Frankfort
meeting, for a reconciliation between the Churches, he thought that a
footing might be thereby secured for further proceedings; but until
that preliminary was accomplished he could not discern much hope.
He also informed him, that although the King highly approved of the
object, his Majesty could not publicly take part in the negotiations;
that, as to himself, he could assure him that though he was at Court,
yet he was almost as far from being able to render assistance, as was
Sir Thomas Roe--inasmuch as business of this description was handled by
a foreign committee, of which he did not happen to be a member.[539]
Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, took an interest in this "treaty of the
ecclesiastical peace," as Sir Thomas Roe termed it; and, in a letter
to that illustrious lady, he spoke of Durie as an excellent man, whom
God had "raised up to be an instrument of the greatest treaty of the
age." Roe felt persuaded he should see the purpose accomplished, if, as
he remarks, "it fall not by us who should most affect both the benefit
and honour." Whilst Roe was writing to the Queen, Durie was writing
to Roe, full of anxiety as to whether he could start equipped with
such authority as he sought from princes and prelates, or "proceed in
a private way;" also as to the manner in which the Hollanders, "the
stiffest of all," were likely to behave; and further as to the mode in
which he should proceed with the Churches of the Low Countries, because
the business trenched upon their domestic controversies. The French
and Swiss, he believed, were well disposed, and if he himself could
but subsist in ever so mean a way, but for a year or two, his heart
told him that the seed which he was sowing would spring up, although
no sunshine should fall, nor any shower from England should rain upon
it.[540]
Episcopal patronage and the diplomacy of statesmen effected nothing
for this sanguine Apostle of union. He was left single-handed to plead
the cause, as best he could, at the Evangelical Congress of Frankfort,
in the year 1634, having been allowed by Sir Robert Anstruther to
travel thither with him in his coach--Durie's man being "shifted
sometimes in the baggage waggons, and sometimes afoot, and sometimes
in the second coach." As lodgings were dear during the Diet, the good
man's chamber cost him nine shillings a week, and he had "to put
himself in some fashion for clothes."[541]
In the same year, Durie published his "_Aliquot Theologorum Galliæ, et
trium ecclesiæ Anglicanæ Episcoporum, sententia de pacis rationibus
inter Evangelicos usurpandis_." Davenant, Morton, and Hale, were the
three Bishops referred to in the book. Other Latin treatises, on the
same absorbing theme, from the same pen, followed, but without effect.
The Churches of Transylvania, indeed, sent their advice and counsel;
and the Divines of Sweden and Denmark listened to what the Scotchman
had to say; but after all this correspondence, and after a consultation
with Universities to boot, this indefatigable minister, was as far
from realizing his dreams of union when Oliver Cromwell became Lord
Protector, as when he waited at the doors of Lambeth Palace upon
Archbishop Laud.
[Sidenote: _Protestant Alliance._]
A sweeping method of promoting the Protestant Alliance was recommended
by a correspondent of John Milton--which there can be no doubt would
have been found quite as inoperative for the accomplishment of the
end in view as the official position and influence at which it
ill-naturedly sneers. "Mr. Durie," said the writer, "has bestowed about
thirty years' time in travel, conference, and writings, to reconcile
Calvinists and Lutherans, and that with little or no success. But
the shortest way were--take away ecclesiastical dignities, honours,
and preferments on both sides, and all would soon be hushed; the
ecclesiastics would be quiet, and then the people would come forth into
truth and liberty."[542]
[Sidenote: _Protestant Alliance._]
Civil establishments of Christianity have doubtless greatly complicated
such difficulties as exist in the way both of international and
domestic religious union; but the deepest and most lasting source
of difficulty is to be found lower down than any ecclesiastical
organizations, even in human nature itself, in its blended good and
evil--on the one hand, in its mistaken but honest conscientiousness,
and on the other, in its selfishness, prejudice, and pride. When much
ecclesiastical wealth had been confiscated, and all ecclesiastical
dignities had disappeared in England, the great Protestant Alliance,
floating before Durie's imagination, approached no nearer its
realization than it had done before. Real Christian union can never
be reached through any diplomacy of that kind, nor even through
persistent endeavours such as those of the zealous individual whom we
have described. It must come as the unforced result amongst sects and
parties of a divine temper, such as we have never yet seen, and which
we find it not in human power to command. We can but intercede that God
would inspire it through His own good Spirit.
Cromwell was, perhaps, as desirous of active fellowship between
Protestant Churches as was Durie; and the latter, with such a powerful
person to countenance his mission, might well imagine himself within
sight of the port towards which he had been steering for so many
years. Thurloe, Secretary of State, and Dr. John Pell, who was the
Protector's minister abroad, entered largely into the plans of this
enthusiastic individual, the latter of the two being engaged in
performing important missions to foreign Protestants, especially the
Swiss.[543]
After repeated discouragements the ecclesiastical diplomatist returned
to England, and found, to his great joy, the Protector most gracious,
and the Parliament most friendly. He forwarded to Pell a resolution of
the House, that his Highness "would be pleased to encourage Christian
endeavours for assisting the Protestant Churches abroad"--a few kind
words which Durie fondly hoped would "open a door for action." His
hands might appear to be strengthened by this vote; yet he still went
on spending his strength for naught. It is needless to follow him any
further through his fruitless negotiations, except to state, that
without "bating one jot of heart or hope," he still pressed onward;
and when Cromwell's death, and the Restoration of Charles had left him
without any aid from the English Government, this man of unquenchable
ardour published another book on his favourite theme. Fourteen more
years of Sisyphus-like labour did, indeed, dishearten him in the
attempt to draw together the Lutheran and the Reformed Churches,
only however, to inspire him with the resolve to attempt union upon
a still larger scale; and at the same time he sought, amidst his
disappointments, consolation in the study of the Apocalypse, a part
of Scripture which, in his view, satisfactorily explained his want of
success, its cause and its remedy. This singular person, so generous
in purpose, and so persistent in toil, ended his days in Germany.[544]
[Sidenote: _Persecution of the Vaudios._]
John Durie's name is further connected with the earliest intelligence
conveyed to England, respecting the persecutions of the Piedmontese
Protestants by the Duke of Savoy. On the 24th of February, 1655, he
wrote from the pleasantly-situated town of Aarau, in Switzerland, to
Mr. Pell, informing him that the Lords of Zurich had been entreating
help on behalf of their brethren in Piedmont, who were now commanded
either to go to mass, or to leave their native hills.[545] Just one
month before this letter was written, an edict had been issued to that
effect, in consequence of tumults which had disturbed the peaceful
valleys, and which had arisen out of the propagandist labours of
certain Capuchin friars. The zeal of the proselyting Roman Catholic
had come into collision with the zeal of the primitive Vaudois.
Assassinations and abductions had been added to arguments on the one
side; natural indignation against such violence had arisen on the
other. Savoyard troops troubled and oppressed the peasantry; the
peasantry resisted the Savoyard troops; war was blazing in the green
glens under the snowy hills. Then came the edict of expatriation,
terrible as death to those mountaineers, who clung to the land of their
fathers' sepulchres as fondly and closely as the pine trees cling
to the rocks on which they grow. Totally unprepared for travelling,
the peasantry received orders to depart from their native country
within the space of twenty days. They were now obliged to desert
their village homesteads, and make rude encampments upon heights in
the neighbourhood. On the 21st of April, the sufferers wrote to the
French ambassador, declaring that they were, at last, forced to take up
arms in self-defence, against enemies who came to burn their houses;
that never had they entertained an idea of rebelling against their
royal master, the Duke of Savoy; nay, that they were ready to change
their weapons "into mattocks" if he would but place them in their
former condition. They referred to Roman Catholics in the vicinity
as witnesses of their wrongs. They challenged investigation. They
begged for mediators. They would leave all in their hands.[546] On the
very day these brave and pious people thus appealed to France, Pell,
in the city of Geneva, was watching the movements of Savoy, and he
intimated to Secretary Thurloe that a massacre was in the wind--that
the Duke took counsel from those who, under the pretence of propagating
Christian faith, minded nothing so much as the advancement of the
Pope's interest. Before he sealed his letter, the diplomatist added,
that the Canton of Berne had sent to the Lords of Zurich, to signify
that the Duke with his army was certainly descending upon the poor
Protestants, so that it would be a wonder if they were not utterly
destroyed before any one could come to their help. Direct intelligence
of the horrid cruelties perpetrated upon the Vaudois was dispatched
by Pell to Thurloe the last day of April; and upon the 8th of May
following, Thurloe thus wrote to Pell:--"I do assure you it is a matter
which his Highness lays very much to heart, and will rejoice to hear
that other Protestants do think themselves concerned in it also. And
I do not doubt but you and Mr. Durie will also contribute your utmost
endeavours to make the Protestants in those parts sensible of this
horrid action, and to get a true measure of their intentions about it,
and to certify them hither by the first opportunity."[547]
The lion was roused; and from Cromwell's Council Chamber there went
forth in that month of May such letters to foreign powers as have
been rarely read--being filled with Cromwell's decision and Milton's
eloquence, and with the Protestant anger which was fiercely burning
in the hearts of both. Religion, and hatred of the hellish wrongs
committed in its name, then stirred the government of England,
and lifted her foreign diplomacy into a region far loftier than
that which comes within the range of vulgar and selfish politics.
Despatches--which, for their spirit, argument, and language an
Englishman may be proud to read--were sent to Louis XIV., to the Duke
of Savoy, to the Prince of Transylvania, to Gustavus Adolphus, to the
United States of Holland, to the evangelic cities of Switzerland,
to the King of Denmark, and to the Consul and Senators of Geneva.
All these letters may be found in Milton's prose works; and let not
the unmistakeable threat of something beyond words of indignation be
overlooked in these missives. The threat did more than anything else to
stop the bloodshed, and prevent its recurrence; only the wily power of
France played its part of mediatorship so quickly and so cunningly, as
to settle the business upon terms far less just than the Lord Protector
would have exacted, had the winding up of the affair fallen into his
vigorous hands.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Interference._]
Cromwell dispatched Sir Samuel Morland as ambassador to the Duke of
Savoy, and put in his possession the following speech, prepared by
the same pen as that which wrote those magnificent letters:--"My
most serene master, Oliver, Protector of the Commonwealth of England,
Scotland, and Ireland, has sent me to your Royal Highness, to whom
he bids all health, life, and a long and prosperous reign, which he
trusts you may enjoy, amid the greetings and good wishes of a hearty
and well-affected people. He is encouraged to hope this by merits of
your own--regarding the noble disposition of your Royal Highness--your
birth, the high expectation formed of you, no less than the old
historical amity existing between the old Kings of this realm and the
House of Savoy, which he calls to mind. My most serene and good master
it has pleased, to send me on a mission of importance, though I am but
a youth, unripe and unpractised, yet devoted to your Royal Highness,
and a hearty friend to the interests of Italy. King Crœsus,
according to the old story, had a son who was born dumb, yet he, the
moment he saw a soldier aiming a wound at his father, recovered his
tongue. Even so it is with me. My tongue this day is unloosed by those
cruel wounds dealt at our mother, the Church--unloosed to plead a cause
on which the safety and all the hopes of many turn, trusting, as they
do, by loyalty, obedience, and lowliest prayers, to pacify the heart
of your Royal Highness, now turned against them. In the cause of these
distressed people--if even pity may improve their plight--his Highness,
the Protector of England, comes forward as a suitor, and earnestly
prays and beseeches your Royal Highness to vouchsafe to grant mercy to
these poor and exiled subjects, who, dwelling at the roots of the Alps,
in certain vales under your rule, have given their name to the religion
of Protestants. He has heard a fact--no one will dare to say it was
done by consent of your Royal Highness--that these wretched people
have been, some of them, cruelly slaughtered by your troops--some
of them driven out by force, thrust out from their dwelling-place
and country, homeless, houseless, penniless, utterly destitute, have
gone over rough and inhospitable tracts, over hills heaped high with
snow--gone as vagrants with their wives and children. If there be any
truth in the report everywhere heard--would, indeed, it were a false
report!--what deed of horror was not done, or unattempted in those
days. Everywhere was the sight of smoking houses, mutilated limbs, and
the earth reeking with blood, nay, maidens expired in wretched agony,
after being atrociously violated--even the aged and the sick were burnt
with fire, infants were dashed on the rocks, and the brains of others
cooked and eaten,--horrible wickedness, and unheard of before cruelty.
O good God! such as the heroes of all times and ages, if they were to
come to life this very day, would have been ashamed of, seeing that
they had never invented aught so inhuman. Nay, even angels shudder,
mortals are amazed, the very heaven itself seems astonished at these
outcries, and the earth blushes at the blood of so many innocent
persons overspreading it. Do not thou, O God, Most High!--do not thou
require the vengeance due to this deed! Wash out, O Christ! with Thy
blood this stain. Nay, I will not tell them in order, nor dwell longer
on these details; and what my serene master asks, you will better learn
from his letters."[548]
Several ministers of the City of London waited upon the Protector to
solicit his sympathy and assistance on behalf of the sufferers, for
which request he thanked them, and declared that he was extremely
shocked at the tidings which he had received. He afterwards assured
the Dutch ambassador that he was moved to his very soul by all he had
heard--that he was ready to venture his all for the protection of
Protestantism--that in this cause he would swim or perish--and that the
example of Ireland was fresh in his memory, where he said 200,000 souls
had been inhumanly massacred.[549]
[Sidenote: _Collections for the Sufferers._]
By the end of June, 1655, collections were on foot throughout England;
and even the French ambassador was not exempted from contributing
to the fund, although, he says, he had as much need of charity as
the Piedmontese. A few days later, the same gentleman wrote home
declaring, that the gatherings amounted to a vast sum, for everybody
gave something, to seem charitable, and the ministers "played their
parts to some purpose to stir the people up to assist their persecuted
brethren."[550] How the clergy in Genevan cloaks, with hour-glasses by
their side, thundered forth anathemas against Rome, and appealed to the
hearts and purses of their crowded congregations in those summer weeks,
can be readily imagined; and that the appeals were followed by great
success the Dutch ambassador indicates when, writing to the States
General on the 16th of July, he says: "Several persons have assured me
that the collection doth amount to above £100,000."[551]
[Sidenote: _Proceedings of the Committee._]
A committee was formed by order of his Highness and the Council, to
superintend the business involved in this enterprise of beneficence,
and the members of that committee appear to have diligently discharged
their duties; for they collected information respecting the whole
subject, they corresponded with the sufferers, they consulted as to the
best methods of relief, and they bestowed much time and thought upon
the appropriation of the money, minute accounts of it being kept, and
carefully audited from time to time.[552] In the month of June we find
them resolving to prepare a narrative of events, to be accompanied by
letters patent for making collections through the medium of ministers
and churchwardens, both publicly and from house to house,--each
contributor being requested to write down his name with the amount
of his donation, and each parish to return an accurate schedule of
subscriptions. When some of the money had been distributed to meet
immediate necessities, the committee further resolved in the following
January to request his Highness to take into consideration how the poor
Piedmontese Protestants were to be provided for in the future--because
the residue of the money raised would be in time exhausted, and then
they would be left in a lingering condition, if their security and
their subsistence were not provided for in some other way. A paper,
laid before them by Morland the same month, suggested--forasmuch as
letters from Geneva and other places recently received, had informed
them of the roads to the valleys being stopped up by an abundance
of snow, and as, in all probability, the inhabitants were in great
extremities, and the remittances last sent were exhausted--that his
Highness and the Council would be graciously pleased to consider what
sum should be forwarded for their relief. In a letter from Geneva,
dated the 14th of February, 1657, it is related--"our poor people
are in extreme necessity, the greatest part of our families being
destitute of houses, movables, cattle, or anything else whereby to
subsist. For although there was lately a considerable distribution
made, yet the greatest part of our people were more indebted than their
portion amounted to, for bread and other sustenance, which they had
been forced to take upon trust before, to preserve themselves from
perishing with hunger. If you did but know, sirs, the greatness of our
miseries, you would certainly have compassion on us, and pity our sad
condition. God is now in good earnest chastising us for our sins and
iniquities, to which we most willingly submit, kissing the rod, and
confessing that He is still just and righteous."
Under date June the 5th, 1657, there exists a document signed by the
Protector (with a trembling hand) recommending that the widow of one
of the Vaudois, who had been put to death in the massacre, should
receive an exhibition of £100, and such further sum as "will release
her son out of prison and be a little help to her present support."
Probably to the same year belongs another paper, in which war is
anticipated between the Protestant cantons and their Popish enemies. It
contains proposals to aid the belligerents by means of the remainder
of the funds which had been collected two years before. "This just and
seasonable way of the disposal of these moneys will yet more fully
appear if it be considered, that a good part thereof hath been already
sent for the relief of the present necessities of the Waldenses, and
that the portion intended for the succour of the Protestant cantons
is only to be lent to them upon very good security, to be repaid, for
the use of those to whom it was given--there being likewise a very
considerable sum still remaining in readiness for them, as their urgent
pressures shall require, and they be able to receive it. To all which
we may add the necessity of this proceeding in regard to that sum, the
late collection--such great alterations have happened both by the wars
amongst the cantons, and that unhappy compliance of the Waldenses with
the Duke of Savoy (formerly related), as that a great part of the money
collected will otherwise be as a dead stock in Guildhall; the loan of
which for a little time may, by God's blessing, be a means to preserve
both the Protestant cantons and also the distressed Waldenses for whom
the collection was made."[553]
The pacification which had taken place in the month of August, 1655,
putting a stop to the outrages upon the Protestants, was, as to its
terms, considered by Morland, the envoy, very unsatisfactory; for
which terms he greatly blamed the Swiss ambassadors. He looked on
such a peace as worse than the continuance of war, and mourned over
the scandal that the sufferers should have been forced to confess
themselves guilty of rebellion. Thurloe, representing the Government
at home, sent out instructions to the minister to complain to the
Bernese of the unfair conditions which they had sanctioned; to let
them know it was everywhere amongst Protestants "laid to heart;" to
attempt arresting the ratification of the treaty; and to "prosecute its
amendment." Allusion occurs to "the sixty thousand pounds voluntarily
gathered in England for the relief of these people;" and then the
instructions end with the clause--"that the treaty between his Highness
and the King of France is agreed, but that his Highness will not sign
it until he have satisfaction in this business of Piedmont--and that as
he hath caused a large contribution to be made for them, so that he
cannot nor will not desert them."[554] To write thus, however, was at
that time too late, the Swiss States, through fear of France, having
already agreed to the ratification.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell and Louis XIV._]
Three years afterwards, Cromwell, upon learning that the treaty had
been violated, and apprehending the occurrence of fresh massacres,
wrote once more to Louis XIV. In a letter dated May, 1658:--"New
Levies," he said, "are privately preparing against 'em, and all that
embrace the _Protestant Religion_ are commanded to depart by a prefix'd
day; so that all things seem to threaten the utter extermination of
those deplorable wretches whom the former massacre spar'd. Which I
most earnestly beseech and conjure ye, _most Christian King_, by
_that_ RIGHT HAND _which sign'd the League_ and Friendship
between us, by _that same goodly ornament of your Title_ of MOST
CHRISTIAN, by no means to suffer, nor to permit such liberty
of Rage and Fury, uncontroul'd we will not say, in any Prince (for
certainly such barbarous severity could never enter the breast of any
Prince, much less so tender in years, nor into the female Thoughts of
his mother), but in those sanctify'd cut-throats who, professing
themselves to be the Servants and Disciples of our Saviour Christ,
who came into this World to save Sinners, abuse His meek and peaceful
name and precepts to the most cruel slaughter of the Innocent. Rescue,
you that are able in your tow'ring Station, worthy to be able, rescue
so many Suppliants prostrate at your feet, from the hands of Ruffians
who, lately drunk with Blood, again thirst after it, and think it
their safest way to throw the Odium of their Cruelty upon Princes. But
as for you, great Prince, suffer not, while you reign, your Titles,
nor the Confines of your Kingdom, to be contaminated with this same
Heaven-offering Scandal, nor the peaceful Gospel of Christ to be
defil'd with such abominable Cruelty."[555]
[Sidenote: 1658.]
Whether prevented by Cromwell's remonstrance or not, the horrors
anticipated did not occur; although, after the Protector's death, and
the restoration of Charles II., the unhappy Vaudois were again plunged
into the miseries of war. The letter just quoted ends Milton's immortal
correspondence on the subject--a correspondence which moves with
admiration the depth of one's soul: whenever since that time has the
Protestantism of England burnt with such a vivid and steady light in
the midst of her foreign diplomacy?
[Sidenote: _Other Persecuted Protestants._]
Nor were the Piedmontese the only foreign Protestants who excited
sympathy in the breast of the Protector, and amongst the reformed
Churches of England. Brethren in Poland and Silesia had suffered exile
for their faith; and, on their behalf, as in the case of the Vaudois,
collections were promptly ordered to be made. The same thing was
effected in the case of the persecuted Bohemians. A committee was
appointed in this instance, as in the former one, and a declaration was
drawn up touching the condition of the Polish Protestants. "If a cup
of cold water," says that document, "given to one disciple as such,
shall not lose its reward, how much more when a bountiful relief is
given to more than five thousand disciples; which we should be the more
forward to advance, because they acknowledge they have received much
confirmation in the religion for which they suffer by light received
from our countryman, John Wicklif, that famous witness of Christ
against Antichrist, even in the darkest times of Popery." A letter,
by John Durie, begged an extension of charity to other suffering
Protestants in Germany; and another letter, by Morland, stated:--"There
are above five thousand left whom God hath snatched out of their cruel
rage, wandering miserable, naked, and, indeed, reduced unto plain
beggary. There remains no refuge for them but in God, and those who in
God's stead do watch for the good of the Church."
Upon its being represented that the Papists had burned Bibles printed
in the Bohemian and Polonese languages, and that the exiled Protestants
were in great want of the Scriptures, it was ordered that out of the
fund collected for the relief of the sufferers, the sum of £1,000
should be paid to procure for them copies of the Word of God. In
another document amongst the papers of the Committee, it is said:--"The
poor exiled Churches are in great want of this spiritual food, as of
their daily bread, and desire rather to take something from their
mouths to supply the necessity of their souls." The Committee was
resolved that the cause of these sufferers should be commended to the
King of Sweden, to be remembered in any treaty of peace between him
and the King of Poland.[556]
[Sidenote: 1658.]
The French Protestants were indebted to Cromwell for effectual
protection when they were exposed to imminent danger. Some of them, who
were citizens of Nismes in Languedoc, had, amidst the excitement of a
municipal election, been betrayed into acts of very great violence,
and had even assailed their opponents with a volley of musket shot,
upon which the French Government despatched a party of troops to take
vengeance upon the offenders. The successors of the Huguenots in that
ancient city, justly fearing, that as chastisement had been entrusted
to the hands of the soldiers, the innocent would be liable to suffer
with the guilty, despatched a representative to Cromwell to request
his intercession on their behalf. The Protector gave him an audience
immediately upon his arrival, and invited him to "refresh himself after
so long a journey, and he would take such care of his business that
by the time he came to Paris he should find it despatched." That very
night he sent a messenger to his ambassador Lockhart, with a despatch
commanding him to secure mercy on behalf of the Protestant citizens of
Nismes, or take his departure from the French Court. Mazarin complained
of this as being too imperious, but confessed that he could not help
himself in the matter; and orders were forthwith sent to arrest the
march of the troops. "So that nobody," remarks Clarendon who relates
this incident, can wonder that Cromwell's "memory remains still in
those parts, and with those people, in great veneration." In other ways
also the Protector made the Cardinal feel and acknowledge his great
power. For, as his Eminence told Madame Turenne, "he knew not how to
behave himself; if he advised the King to punish and suppress" the
insolence of the Protestants, Cromwell "threatened him to join with the
Spaniards, and if he shewed any favour to them, at Rome they accounted
him a heretic."[557]
[Sidenote: _Cromwell's Foreign Policy._]
Nothing could surpass the zeal of Cromwell in the support of the
Protestant interest at home and abroad. Burnet, on the authority
of Stoupe,[558] informs us that he contemplated a sort of
anti-propagandist society, to be conducted by seven councillors and
four secretaries for four provinces. France, Switzerland, and the
Valleys were to be the first; the Palatinate and other Calvinistic
countries the second; Germany, the North, and Turkey, the third; and
the East and West Indies the fourth. The secretaries were to maintain
a correspondence throughout the world so as to watch and promote the
spread of Protestantism everywhere. They were to be paid salaries of
£500 a year each, and to have at their disposal a fund of £10,000 for
ordinary contingencies. Chelsea College, then an old and decayed
building, was constituted the head quarters of this mission; and thus,
as it was said, those premises were restored to something like the very
purpose in reference to which Laud had nicknamed the place "Controversy
College"--whilst "the Papists, in derision, gave it the name of an
alehouse."[559]
[Sidenote: _Treatment of the Jews._]
The condition of the Jews received attention from the Protector
principally with regard to their social status in England. Cromwell
wished to concede to them liberty of trade and of worship, and to
grant them both synagogues and cemeteries; but prejudice against the
people of Israel, which had been nursed throughout the middle ages,
and had not yet expired, proved too strong even for the iron will of
England's ruler to overcome. The inveterate intolerance which down
to our day excluded them from a full share in political rights, then
resisted even their moderate claims to a home, a house of prayer,
and a grave on British soil. Not only the narrow-minded Mr. Prynne,
but even Durie--with all his zeal for union amongst Protestants, as
fellow-religionists--contended earnestly against the participation of
the Jews in the social rights which were enjoyed by Christians. Men of
that class contended that to tolerate Israelites was a sin; that they
would seduce the English people; that their possession of religious
freedom would be a scandal to Christian Churches; that their customs
were unlawful; and that association with them would prove injurious to
morals and mischievous to trade. It was all in vain to answer, as did
certain Divines--who were themselves by no means free from popular
prejudice--that no civil or ecclesiastical authority was intended to be
conferred upon the Jews; that they would not be allowed to defame the
Christian religion, or work on the Christian Sabbath, or have Christian
servants; that they would not be allowed to discourage efforts for
their conversion; and that penalties would be inflicted on any
person who might apostatize from Christianity to Judaism. The ground
of defence thus laid for the scanty toleration which was proposed
indicates what erroneous ideas existed, even under the Commonwealth,
as to the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty.[560]
But Cromwell, though not perceiving all which the subsequent teaching
of Divine Providence has made known to us, saw much further than many
of his contemporaries who in theological matters were more learned than
himself. Guided by the instinct of genius, and moved by the impulse of
charity, he was prepared to allow, even to the hated sons of Jacob,
the rights of industry and worship; and doing so, this great man
aroused unfair suspicions on the part of people who ought to have known
better.[561] A feeling of interest respecting the children of Israel
appeared in other quarters, and certain individuals, with no mere
proselyting zeal, watched the movements of God's ancient nation, and
longed to witness its conversion to the faith of Jesus Christ.[562]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER XVIII.
The History which we are tracing in these pages resolves itself into
a grand epic without any literary skill on the part of the historian.
Commencing, as it does, with the opening of the Long Parliament, and
ending with the death of Oliver Cromwell--it exhibits the Episcopal
Church of England in the midst of its ancient grandeur on the very
eve of its downfall; it indicates the causes of that catastrophe; it
describes a new ecclesiastical system, which was immediately contrived
to occupy the place of its predecessor; and it then unfolds another and
a very simple scheme of religious instruction which was established,
and superseded, in fact, the elaborate theory of the Westminster
Divines. Soon after the opening of our story one character appeared,
destined before long to be the commanding figure on the stage of
events. Although Cromwell had only taken part with many others in
effecting the overthrow of the Anglican Establishment, he, perhaps, of
all the actors in those stirring times, most effectually contributed to
prevent the full practical development of the Presbyterian polity in
England; and most certainly to his genius and determination we must
attribute the origin and defence of that unique ecclesiastical system
which, during the Protectorate, constituted the Church of England.[563]
Really the moral offspring of a revolution which overthrew despotic
power, and asserted the right of man to freedom, Oliver was the most
absolute ruler which this country ever saw; and in this respect it is
obvious and easy to run a parallel between him and the first, if not
the second, Napoleon. The cause of such a political phenomenon has been
indicated. It is no strange thing. The world has witnessed it over and
over again. But, in Cromwell's case, there was what in the case of
the first Napoleon there was not;--what alas! amongst the masters of
mankind has ever been too rare--a deep, strong, invincible faith in the
Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not from policy, not as a piece of statecraft,
but from a spiritual insight, and as a Christian duty--from love to
the souls of men, and with a desire to advance the glory of God--did
the Protector watch and foster, protect and promote, the interests of
religion. As he was really the temporal head of that new Church, if
such it may be termed; as he was the Defender of its Faith, as its
existence was bound up with his authority, and as when he died its
fate was sealed--the circumstances connected with the close of his
eventful life, and the religious character of his last days, require to
be related, in order that something approaching to completeness may be
given to this imperfect work. With the death of Cromwell we wind up
our history for the present.
[Sidenote: _Cromwell at Hampton Court._]
Hampton Court--which, with its manifold memories, has within the
last few years become more familiar than ever to the people of this
country--was the residence of his Highness in the month of July, 1658.
In one of the chambers of Wolsey's Palace--of which palace three
of the noblest courts were afterwards pulled down to make room for
the buildings erected by William III.--the Lady Elizabeth Claypole,
Cromwell's daughter, lay on her death-bed. As the rays of the summer
sun, and the fragrance of the summer flowers, and the music of the
summer birds entered the open window, Oliver watched with tender
assiduity the declining health of his beloved child. For a fortnight
he scarcely attended to public business; but day after day he sat
bending over her dying pillow, engaged in earnest conversation with the
sufferer, "though nobody was near enough to hear the particulars."[564]
She expired on the 6th of August. Her father had himself been unwell
for some days: although he enjoyed a strong constitution, the wear and
tear of war and toil had left their impression, and amidst the suspense
and anxiety of parental love--and only those who have actually, like
Cromwell, passed through such circumstances, can fully understand their
effect upon mind and body--some seeds of disease, already sown, began
to appear. He had an attack of gout, and, being impatient of restraint,
he requested his physicians to subdue the local affection. Disease
soon appeared in other parts of the system, and for some days the
Protector's illness assumed an alarming appearance.[565]
[Sidenote: _Cromwell at Hampton Court._]
Whilst remaining at Hampton Court, and only a few days after his
daughter's death, "he called for his Bible,[566] and desired an
honourable and godly person there (with others) present to read to
him Philippians iv. 11-13:--'Not that I speak in respect of want, for
I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.
I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere
and in all things I am instructed, both to be full and to be hungry,
both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things, through
Christ which strengtheneth me.' Which read, said he, to use his own
words:[567]--'This Scripture did once save my life; when my eldest son
died, which went as a dagger to my heart, indeed it did.' And then,
repeating the words of the text himself, declared his then thoughts
to this purpose, reading the tenth and eleventh verses of Paul's
contentation, and submission to the will of God in all conditions
(said he), 'Tis true, Paul, _you_ have learned this, and attained to
this measure of grace; but what shall _I_ do? Ah, poor creature, it
is a hard lesson for me to take out! I find it so!' But reading on to
the thirteenth verse, where Paul saith, 'I can do all things through
Christ that strengtheneth me'--then faith began to work, and his heart
to find support and comfort, and he said thus to himself: 'He that was
Paul's Christ is my Christ too,' and so drew waters out of the wells of
salvation, Christ in the Covenant of Grace."
[Sidenote: 1658.]
It was about this time that the famous interview between Oliver
Cromwell and George Fox took place. The Quaker had shortly before
sent a letter to Lady Claypole, written in a very characteristic
manner, and beautifully exhorting her to "stillness, staidness, and
quietness,"--that she might "know the shadow of the Almighty, and sit
under it, in all tempests and storms and heats," and that she might
feel the power of an endless life, which brings the immortal soul up to
the immortal God.[568] And now one day, Fox, taking boat on the Thames
at Westminster, was rowed up to Kingston, and from thence he went to
Hampton Court, to speak with the Protector touching the sufferings
of Friends. "I met him," says the journalist, "riding into Hampton
Court Park, and before I came to him, as he rode at the head of his
Life Guard, I saw and felt a waft (or apparition) of death go forth
against him, and when I came to him, he looked like a dead man. After
I had laid the sufferings of Friends before him, and had warned him,
according as I was moved to speak to him, he bid me come to his house.
So I returned to Kingston, and the next day went up to Hampton Court
to speak further with him. But when I came he was sick, and Harvey,
who was one that waited on him, told me the doctors were not willing I
should speak with him. So I passed away, and never saw him more."[569]
[Sidenote: _Last Days in Whitehall._]
Cromwell was unwilling to leave the old country palace, with its
pleasant park and gardens, but on the day of Lady Claypole's funeral
at Westminster Abbey--the 10th of August--he came to Whitehall, only,
however, to return speedily to his favourite retreat. On the 21st he
was seized with a severe fit of ague, after which, as Hampton Court
Palace was, in the judgment of the physicians, too near the river for
the recovery of their patient; he, following their advice, returned to
the palace at Whitehall, intending to take up his abode at St. James's,
that regal residence of the Stuarts being at a greater distance from
the water.
No dangerous symptoms appeared for a week, but Secretary Thurloe
felt much apprehension respecting the condition of his Highness, and
observed, in a letter to the Lord Deputy of Ireland: "It cannot but
greatly affect us all towards God, and make us deeply sensible how much
our dependence is upon Him, in whose hands is the life and breath of
this His old servant; and if He should take him away from amongst us,
how terrible a blow it would be to all the good people of the land; and
that, therefore, we should be careful how we walk towards God, lest we
provoke Him to depart from us, and bring upon us this great evil. The
people of God here pray much for his recovery, and I hope those in
Ireland will do the same, and to have his life spared and his strength
restored by prayer, is a great addition to the mercy."[570]
[Sidenote: 1658.]
Cromwell did not believe himself in danger; and even after he took to
his bed, he said to his wife: "I shall not die this bout, I am sure
of it." "Do not think," addressing the physicians, "I am mad, I speak
the words of truth upon surer grounds than Galen or Hippocrates. God
Almighty has given me that answer, not only to my prayers but to those
who have closer intimacy with Him than I. Proceed cheerfully, banishing
all sadness, and dealing with me as you would with a serving man. You
may have skill in the things of nature, but nature can do more than
physicians can, and God is above even nature itself."[571]
The Protector's hopes of recovery were unfounded. His enthusiastic
idea of particular faith in prayer misled him; but a better faith,
happily, mingled itself with his characteristic infirmity. He had no
fear of death;[572] and there is no reason to believe that his mind had
undergone any change respecting spiritual confidence in Christ, since
he wrote the following lines, in the year 1652, to his son-in-law,
General Fleetwood:--
"Salute your dear wife from me. Bid her beware of a bondage spirit.
Fear is the natural issue of such a spirit--the antidote is love. The
voice of fear is: If I had done this, if I had avoided that, how well
it had been with me! I know this hath been her vain reasoning; 'poor
Biddy!'
"Love argueth in this wise: What a Christ have I; what a Father in
and through Him! What a name hath my Father: _Merciful, gracious,
long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth; forgiving iniquity,
transgression, and sin_. What a nature hath my Father: _He is love_;
free in it, unchangeable, infinite! What a covenant between Him and
Christ--for all the seed, for every one; wherein He undertakes all, and
the poor soul nothing. The new covenant is grace--to or upon the soul;
to which it, 'the soul,' is passive and receptive: _I'll do away their
sins; I'll write my law_, &c.; _I'll put it in their hearts: they shall
never depart from me_, &c.
"This commends the love of God: it's Christ dying for men _without_
strength, for men whilst sinners, whilst enemies. And shall we seek for
the root of our comforts within us--what God hath done, what He is to
us in Christ, 'this' is the root of our comfort: in this is stability;
in us is weakness. Acts of obedience are not perfect, and therefore
yield not perfect grace. Faith, as an act, yields it not; but 'only' as
it carries us into Him, who is our perfect rest and peace; in whom we
are accounted of, and received by, the Father--even as Christ Himself!
This is our high calling. Rest we here, and here only."
[Sidenote: _Habit of Prayer._]
Cromwell's habit of prayer was continued throughout his life; and upon
this subject strong testimony is borne by the person to whom we are
indebted for the only authentic narrative of his last days. "Indeed,
prayer, (as one calls it,) was his daily exercise, which he never
neglected, notwithstanding all his weighty affairs; yea, the more
weighty and urgent they were, the more he buckled to it, and sometimes
with such fervour of spirit that he could not contain himself, but
with great breakings of heart send up strong cries with tears unto
God, heard when he hath not known any to be near him; so that it may
be truly said of him, that, as he was a man (Abraham-like) strong in
faith, so (like Jacob) mighty in prayer, and as a prince prevailing
with God; such as, indeed, in all respects, this nation was never blest
with to sit on the throne; however he was judged, and censured, and
lightly set by, by many who were not sensible of our and their mercy,
and who yet in time may be sensible (if God prevent not) of his remove,
where his prayers are turned into everlasting praises."
[Sidenote: 1658.]
Before Cromwell's illness, arrangements had been made for summoning,
by State authority, an assembly in London of Congregational Elders.
Scobell, clerk of the Council of State, issued a notice, in the month
of June, to such Elders as were resident in the metropolis, to meet
at the Charter House; and both his name and the name of Griffith,
who acted as minister of that charitable foundation, appear in a
correspondence upon the subject of the conference carried on with
ministers of several Churches in England and Wales.[573] A political
sanction was thus given to the assembly; indeed it was convened by the
authority of the Government: and the result appeared in a published
Declaration of Faith and Order by the convention of delegates, who
met in the palace of the Savoy after the death of the Protector. That
convention, and the important document which it produced, come not
within the space of time presented by this volume, but the preparations
for it do: and those preparations, upon which very much obscurity
rests, are connected with the final days and the last cares of Oliver's
life. The desire for the meeting originated with the Independents,
not with the Protector. He had shewn no favour towards a previous
committee for defining theological boundaries of toleration; and he
seems to have regarded with nothing like complacency, this new proposal
for an authorized Synod of Congregational Divines to declare the
principles of their faith and polity. Also there were persons about
the Court who disliked it, from a fear lest it should separate more
broadly than before, the Independents from the Presbyterians. His
Highness, however, conceded the request for the sake of peace; and if
he had lived to witness the issue, he would have found nothing in the
Declaration, published by the ministers at the Savoy, to clash with
those sentiments of catholic charity which were so dear to his heart.
There might, however, be political intrigues in the background of this
movement, for which the pastors of Churches were in no way responsible;
and these might occasion anxiety to the dying ruler of England, who is
reported to have said just before his death, to some who were opposed
to the meeting and wished to prevent it, that its projectors must be
satisfied,--"they must be satisfied, or we shall all run back into
blood again."[574]
[Sidenote: _Chaplains._]
John Howe remained at Whitehall until after Cromwell's death, and his
name appears amongst the chaplains who attended his funeral. No record,
however, appears of his having been called to the bedside of the dying
man--an omission which we lament, because the combined wisdom and
tenderness of that eminent Divine and Pastor, in case of his having
had an opportunity of performing his Christian ministrations in those
solemn moments, would have afforded a guarantee for faithfulness
and affection, in any counsels which he might have offered. Stories
are told to the discredit of the chaplains who were known to be in
attendance. It is said that one of them, when asked by Cromwell, "if
it were possible to fall from grace," replied, "it is not possible."
"Then," said the sufferer, "I am safe, for I know that I was once in
grace." To leave any one in the last hours of life open to such a
delusion, as the bald reply attributed to this spiritual adviser might
seem to encourage, would be without excuse; but the story rests on no
sufficient foundation.[575]
[Sidenote: 1658.]
Whatever common rumour might relate, the domestic letters and the dying
words of Cromwell attest the _sincerity_ of his spiritual experience.
It seems impossible that any human being could so successfully have
worn the mask of hypocrisy in the privacies of life and in the moment
of death. Of all hypotheses for explaining his character, the most
monstrous is to set him down as playing the part of a wilful deceiver
in his professions of religion. As if anticipating the uncharitable
judgments of posterity, he had written to Fleetwood, in the year
1653: "I am in my temptation ready to say, 'Oh, that I had wings like
a dove, then would I flee away and be at rest;' but this I fear is
my 'haste.' I bless the Lord I have somewhat keeps me alive--some
sparks of the light of His countenance; _and some sincerity above
man's judgment_."[576] Nobody who has studied human nature can believe
this passage to be a piece of clever affectation; he will rather
pronounce it the unfeigned utterance of a thoughtful soul. And if ever
an experience of the real Puritan type was luminously and honestly
uttered, it was in the words which Oliver employed on his death-bed,
according to a testimony on which we can rely.[577]
[Sidenote: _Last Words._]
"The Covenants," said the dying man, "they were two--two, but put into
one before the foundation of the world." "It is holy and true, it is
holy and true, it is holy and true! Who made it holy and true? Who
kept it holy and true? The Mediator of the Covenant." "The Covenant is
but one. Faith in the Covenant is my only support, yet if I believe
not, He abides faithful." Enquiries and ejaculations were caught up at
intervals, "Is there none that will come and praise God." "Whatsoever
sins thou hast, doest, or shalt commit, if you lay hold upon free
grace, you are safe, but if you put yourself under a Covenant of works,
you bring yourself under the law, and so under the curse--then you
are gone."[578] "Is there none that says, Who will deliver me from
the peril?" "Man can do nothing, but God can do what He will." "Lord,
Thou knowest, if I desire to live, it is to shew forth Thy praise,
and declare Thy works. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands
of the living God." This was spoken three times, his repetitions
usually being very weighty, and with great vehemency of spirit. "All
the promises of God are in Him yea, and in Him, Amen; to the glory of
God by us, by _us_ in Jesus Christ." "The Lord hath filled me with as
much assurance of His pardon, and His love, as my soul can hold." "I
think I am the poorest wretch that lives; but I love God, or rather,
am beloved of God." "Herein is love, not that we love God, but that
he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins."
"I am a conqueror, and more than a conqueror, through Christ that
strengthened me." "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors
through him that loved us." "My little children, these things write
I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate
with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." "Love not the world,
neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world,
the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the
lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is
not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away,
and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for
ever." "And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall
appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at
his coming. If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one
that doeth righteousness is born of him." "Little children, let no man
deceive you, he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is
righteous." "My little children, let us not love in word, neither in
tongue; but in deed and in truth." "Little children, keep yourselves
from idols." "Love not the world, I say unto you it is not good that
you should love the world."[579] "Children, live like Christians, and
I leave you the Covenant to feed upon." "Truly God is good; indeed He
is, He will not--" There his speech failed him, but as I apprehended
it was: "He will not leave me." This saying that God was good, he
frequently used all along, and would speak it with much cheerfulness
and fervour of spirit in the midst of his pains. Again, he said: "I
would be willing to live to be further serviceable to God and His
people; but my work is done. Yet God will be with His people." He was
very restless most part of the night, speaking often to himself. And
there being something to drink offered him, he was desired to take
the same, and endeavour to sleep, unto which he answered: "It is not
my design to drink or sleep; but my design is, to make what haste I
can to be gone."[580] Afterwards, towards morning using divers holy
expressions, implying much inward consolation and peace; among the rest
he spake some exceeding self-debasing words, annihilating and judging
himself. And truly it was observed, that a public spirit to God's cause
did breathe in him (as in his life time) so now to the very last,
which will further appear by that prayer he put up to God two or three
days before his end, which was as followeth: "Lord, although I am a
miserable and wretched creature, I am in covenant with Thee through
grace, and I may, I will, come to Thee, for Thy people. Thou hast made
me (though very unworthy) a mean instrument to do them some good, and
Thee service; and many of them have set too high a value upon me,
though others wish and would be glad of my death; but, Lord, however
Thou dost dispose of me, continue and go on to do good for them. Give
them consistency of judgment, one heart, and mutual love: and go on
to deliver them, and with the work of reformation; and make the name
of Christ glorious in the world. Teach those who look too much upon
Thy instruments, to depend more upon Thyself. Pardon such as desire to
trample upon the dust of a poor worm, for they are Thy people too. And
pardon the folly of this short prayer. Even for Jesus Christ's sake.
And give us a good night, if it be Thy pleasure. Amen."[581]
[Sidenote: _Death._]
Oliver died on the 3rd of September, "it having been to him," says
the Court Newspaper announcing his death, "a day of triumphs and
thanksgiving for the memorable victories of Dunbar and Worcester;
a day which after so many strange revolutions of Providence, high
contradictions, and wicked conspiracies of unreasonable men, he lived
once again to see, and then to die, with great assurances and
serenity of mind, peaceably in his bed. Thus it hath proved to him to
be a day of triumph indeed, there being much of Providence in it, that
after so glorious crowns of victory placed on his head by God on this
day, having neglected an earthly crown, he should now go to receive the
crown of everlasting life."[582]
The passages we have cited have an interest beyond their bearing upon
the Protector's character. They are specimens of the domestic and
social piety of the age. Letters like his in tone and spirit, varying
in intellectual conception and style of language, passed in those
days by thousands over the rough roads of broad England in the pocket
of some friendly traveller or in the postman's bag. So fathers and
mothers, and parents and children, and brothers and sisters, wrote
to one another, feeling every word they wrote--living under a deep
apprehension of those higher bonds which unite souls to souls, families
to families, Churches to Churches, and all to God and Christ. Hopes and
fears, and joys and sorrows, such as the Protector expressed, although
utterly unreal to multitudes of their neighbours, were experienced by
many a man and woman in those times, and were to them as real as the
everlasting hills or the unchanging stars.
[Sidenote: 1658.]
The ruler, in mortal agony,[583] by his faith and prayers, presents
a luminous contrast to another death-scene at Whitehall, a few years
afterwards, when a different spirit passed away amidst symbols of
popish superstition, the accessories of an abandoned Court, and the
memories of a sensual life. But, beyond that contrast, and apart from
all circumstances of royal splendour; dismissing from our minds images
of the quaint magnificence of the sick chamber in Whitehall, with its,
perhaps, tapestried walls and bed of damask hangings, and the figures
of generals, chaplains, and state servants, clustering round the form
wasted by disease, and the countenance growing pale in death; putting
aside, also, the memory of the marvellous career of the departing
soldier and statesman of the Commonwealth--we meet in Cromwell's
last words with an expression of the inmost soul of many a Puritan
in such dark nights, doing battle with the last enemy. Nor, perhaps
in the sorrows of his beloved family, and the sympathies of brother
generals, and the intercessions of attached chaplains, was there more
of religious affection than gathered about other pilgrims at that era,
whilst at last they were laying down all life's heavy burdens at once
and for ever. Such sentiments were often heard, such consolations were
often imparted, and such prayers, whatever of infirmity there might be
clinging to them, often went up to the throne of grace: but on account
of Oliver's high position, and the vast interests which depended on his
life, there would be in his case additional grounds for earnestness
and the inspiration of a much wider sympathy. Thurloe wrote to the
Protector's son Henry, when all was over, "that never was there any
man so prayed for as he was during sickness; solemn assemblies meeting
every day to beseech the Lord for the continuance of his life, so that
he is gone to heaven embalmed with the tears of his people and upon
the wings of the prayers of the saints."[584] And in these impassioned
supplications we can see even now the reflection of a devout temper
then very common; and in the parish congregations, and the church
gatherings of that day, may be recognized the interest felt in the life
of one who was the pillar of their strength, and the shield of their
freedom.
[Illustration]
APPENDIX.
I.--VOL. I. 137.
_Passages from Letters in the State Paper Office Respecting the Trial
of the Earl of Strafford._
N. TOMKYNS. APRIL 12th, 1641.
"On Saturday morning the Earl of Strafford being come to Westminster
Hall, and both Houses sitting in the presence of the King, the Commons
desired they might enlarge their charge upon the 23rd Article,
whereupon the Earl also desired he might enlarge his answer upon the
2nd, and 21st, and 23rd Articles;[585] the Lords retiring to their own
House returned with this resolution, that they held it equal if the
Commons added anything _de novo_, that the Earl should also have the
like liberty. The Commons, not satisfied therewith, much pressed that
they had formerly had a saving granted them, but the Earl had none.
The Earl said he had humbly besought the Lords, (his judges,) that he
might have the like saving, and he hoped it would be held reasonable,
that if new objections were made, he should have permission to make
new answers to them, being for his life. Hereupon the Lords met
again to consult in their own House with the judges, and after half
an hour's stay returned, and the Earl Marshal delivered their opinion
to be the same that before it was; that if the Commons should enforce
their charge in any point or bring any new matter (though for the King)
the Earl should have the like freedom to plead for himself; which so
soon as the Commons heard a great number of the precise part cried,
'Withdraw, withdraw,' and the Lords immediately thereupon cried,
'Adjourn, adjourn,' and so both Houses went in little better than [a]
tumultuous manner from the Hall to their several houses, where they did
little, but agreed only to meet in the afternoon. The King laughed,
(as my author says) and the Earl of Strafford was so well pleased
therewith, that he could not hide his joy, being now _sine die_ for any
further proceeding.
In the Commons' House after dinner, after much debate what course they
should take for the punishment of so great an incendiary, Sir Arthur
Haselrigge drew out of his pocket a Bill, (supposed to have been
prepared before that day), for the Earl's attainder, and punishment by
death, (hanging, drawing, and quartering,) which Bill was, with much
ado, kept from being read again the same afternoon--now the secret of
their taking this way is conceived to be to prevent the hearing of the
Earl's lawyers, who give out that there is no law yet in force whereby
he can be condemned to die for ought that hath been yet objected
against him, and therefore their intent is by this Bill to supply the
defect of the laws therein. And to make him more odious, a paper was
that afternoon produced and read in the Commons' House, which young Sir
H. Vane is said to have found casually in his father's study (as notes
of passages at the council table) wherein strange speeches of the said
Earl were quoted, touching the curbing of the people, and introducing
an arbitrary government, and also of the Lord Cottington's, and some
others tending to the same end--about which paper both their majesties
are said to be much offended with Mr. Secretary Vane."
N. TOMKYNS, APRIL 26th, 1641.
"There is a difference at present between the two Houses of Parliament,
the Commons desire (now that the Bill against the Earl of Strafford
is presented) to sit at the hearing of his counsel, as co-judges with
the Lords, with their hats on, to which the Lords not assenting,
the Commons are now content to sit as they did in Westminster Hall,
uncovered, so be that the Lords will please to come as a Committee
without their robes, to which the Lords having not yet yielded the
controversy is not yet ended. Besides, Sir H. Vane's deposition
touching the Earl of Strafford is lost by the Clerk of the Higher
House, who cannot give any account how it went out of his hands; and in
a copy thereof, since found, great difference is found in the same by
the altering, or rather by the adding of one letter, (t) for whereas
it was in the original that the Earl should say his Majesty might by
the army reduce the kingdom _here_ it is _there_ in this copy, and so
refers to Ireland only.
Another paper touching Sir H. Vane also is lost by the Select Committee
of the Lower House, it lying upon Mr. Pym's table, whereas five
others were present, viz., Lord Digby, Sir Walter Erle, Sir John
Clotworthy, Mr. Hampden, and Mr. Maynard, which occasioned a variance
and reproaching one another publicly, each one making their personal
protestations of being guiltless therein. The suspicion fell most on
the Lord Digby, who was last in the chamber, and had said to some of
them that Mr. Pym should do well to have more care of his papers,
than to let them lie so loose. The Lord protested his own innocence,
and said it must be some unworthy man, who had his eye upon place and
preferment; wherein he was supposed to allude to Mr. Pym himself, who
hath been with the King twice of late, and since the Lord Cottington
laid his office at the King's feet, is designed by the voice of the
people to be his successor in the Chancellorship of the Exchequer."
It is curious to observe, in the first of these letters, that the
account of the effect produced by the confusion, is different from the
impression conveyed by Nalson, ii. 102, as well as by Baillie, i. 346.
The letter is inconsistent with Rushworth's statement, that the Bill of
Attainder was twice read on the 10th of April.--_Strafford's Trial_, 45.
* * * * *
Verney, in his "Notes of Proceedings in the Long Parliament," p. 37,
reports in detail the account given by Mr. Coggin and Sir H. Vane the
younger, of the way in which the famous paper was "casually" found.
Clarendon charges the father with having given the principal
information for the "whole prosecution," _Hist._ 92; and, perhaps, the
words in Tomkins' first letter about the King's displeasure towards him
points to a suspicion of that kind.
II.--VOL. I. 152.
PLAN OF CHURCH REFORM PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
JUNE 11th, 1641.--The Commons, in a Grand Committee, of whom
Mr. Hyde, Member for Saltash, was chairman, resumed the consideration
of the Bill against Episcopacy; when the following scheme of
Alterations in the government of the Church was proposed to the House:--
I.--"That every several Shire of England and Wales be a
several Circuit or Diocese for the Ecclesiastic Jurisdiction,
excepting Yorkshire, which is to be divided into three.
II.--"A constant Presbytery of twelve choice Divines, to be
selected in every Shire or Diocese.
III.--"A constant President to be established as a Bishop over
this Presbytery.
IV.--"The Bishop in each Diocese to ordain, suspend, deprive,
degrade, and excommunicate, by and with the consent and
assistance of seven Divines of his Presbytery, then present,
and not else.
V.--"The times of Ordination throughout the land to be four
times in the year, viz., the 1st of _May_, 1st of _August_,
1st of _November_, and the 1st of _February_.
VI.--"Every Bishop constantly to reside within his diocese, in
some one chief city or town within his diocese.
VII.--"Every Bishop to have one special particular
congregation, to be chosen out of the most convenient place
for distance from his chief residence, and the richest in
value that may be had; where he shall duly preach, unless he
be lawfully hindered, and then shall take care his cure be
well supplied by another.
VIII.--"No Bishop shall remove or be translated from the
Bishopric which he shall first undertake.
IX.--"Upon every death or other avoidance of a Bishopric, the
King to grant a _congé d'élire_ to all the clergy of the whole
diocese, they to present three of the Presbytery aforesaid,
and the King to choose and nominate whom he pleaseth of them.
X.--"The first Presbytery of every Shire to be named by
Parliament; and afterwards upon the death or other avoidance
of any Presbyter, the remaining Presbyters to choose one other
out of the parish ministers of that Shire, and this to be done
within one month next after such death or avoidance.
XI.--"No Bishop or clergyman to exercise or have any temporal
office, or secular employment; but only for the present, to
hold and keep the Probate of Wills, until the Parliament shall
otherwise resolve.
XII.--"The Bishop once a year, at Midsummer, to summon a
diocesan synod: there to hear, and by general vote, to
determine all such matters of scandal in life and doctrine
amongst clergymen, as shall be presented unto them.
XIII.--"Every three years a national synod to be held,
which shall consist of all the Bishops in the land; of two
Presbyters, to be chosen by the rest out of each Presbytery;
and of two clerks, to be chosen out of every diocese by the
Clergy thereof.
XIV.--"This national synod to make and ordain Canons for the
government of the Church, but they not to bind until they be
confirmed by Parliament.
XV.--"Every Bishop to have over and above the benefice
aforesaid, a certain constant rent allowed to be allotted
proportional to the diocese wherein he is to officiate.
XVI.--"Every Presbyter to have a constant yearly profit above
his benefice. 'As for the revenue of the Bishops, Deans, and
Chapters, &c., a strict survey to be taken of all their rents
and profits; and the same to be represented at the beginning
of the next convention; and in the mean time no lease to be
renewed nor timber to be felled.'"
III.--VOL. I. 280.
THE ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF
ENGLAND. ENGLAND, REVISED AND ALTERED
BY THE ASSEMBLY OF DIVINES
AT WESTMINSTER, IN THE YEAR
1643.
ARTICLE I. ARTICLE I.
_Of Faith in the Holy Trinity._ _Of Faith in the Holy Trinity._
"There is but one living and true "There is but one living and true
God, everlasting, without body, God, everlasting, without body,
parts, or passions; of infinite parts, or passions; of infinite
power, wisdom, and goodness, the power, wisdom, and goodness, the
maker and preserver of all things maker and preserver of all things
both visible and invisible. And both visible and invisible. And
in unity of this Godhead there be in unity of this Godhead there be
three persons of one substance, three persons of one substance,
power, and eternity, the Father, power, and eternity, the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost. the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
II. II.
_Of the Word, or Son of God, _Of the Word, or Son of God,
which was made very Man._ which was made very Man._
The Son, which is the Word of The Son, which is the Word of
the Father, begotten from the Father, begotten from
everlasting of the Father, the everlasting of the Father, the
very and eternal God, of one very and eternal God, of one
substance with the Father, took substance with the Father, took
man's nature in the womb of the man's nature in the womb of the
blessed Virgin, of her substance; blessed so that Virgin, of her
two whole and perfect natures, substance: so that two whole and
that is to say the Godhead and perfect natures, that is to say
manhood, were joined together in the Godhead and the manhood, were
one person, never to be divided, joined together in one person,
whereof is one Christ, very God never to be divided, whereof is
and very man, who truly suffered, one Christ very God and very man,
was crucified, dead and buried, who for our sakes truly suffered
to reconcile His Father to us, most grievous torments in His
and to be a sacrifice not only soul from God, was crucified,
for original guilt but also for dead, and buried, to reconcile
all actual sins of men. His Father to us, and to be a
sacrifice, not only for original
guilt, but also for actual sins
of men.
III. III.
_Of the going down of Christ As Christ died for us, and was
into Hell._ buried, so it is to be believed
that He continued in the state of
As Christ died for us, and was the dead, and under the power and
buried, so also is it to be dominion of death, from the time
believed that He went down into of His death and burial until His
hell. resurrection, which hath been
otherwise expressed thus: He went
down into hell.
IV. IV.
_Of the Resurrection of Christ._ _Of the Resurrection of Christ._
Christ did truly rise again from Christ did truly rise again from
death, and took again His body, death, and took again His body,
with flesh, bones, and all things with flesh, bones, and all things
appertaining to the perfection of appertaining to the perfection of
man's nature, wherewith He man's nature, wherewith He
ascended into heaven and there ascended into heaven, and there
sitteth, until He return to judge sitteth, until He return to judge
all men at the last day. all men at the general
resurrection of the body at the
last day.
V. V.
_Of the Holy Ghost._ _Of the Holy Ghost._
The Holy Ghost, proceeding The Holy Ghost is very and
from the Father and the Son, is eternal God, of one substance,
of one substance, majesty, and majesty, and glory with the
glory with the Father and the Father and the Son, proceeding
Son, very and eternal God. from the Father and the Son.
VI. VI.
_Of the Sufficiency of the Holy _Of the Sufficiency of the Holy
Scriptures for Salvation._ Scriptures for Salvation._
Holy Scripture containeth all Holy Scripture containeth all
things necessary to salvation; so things necessary to salvation, so
that whatsoever is not read that whatsoever is not read
therein, nor may be proved therein, nor may be proved
thereby, is not to be required of thereby, is not to be believed as
any man, that it should be an article of faith, or necessary
believed as an article of the to salvation.
faith, to be thought requisite or
necessary to salvation. In the By the name of holy Scripture
name of the holy Scripture we do we understand all the canonical
understand those canonical Books Books of the Old and New
of the Old and New Testament, of Testament which follow. _Of the
whose authority was never any Old Testament_--Genesis, Exodus,
doubt in the Church. &c. _Of the New Testament_--The
Gospel of St. Matthew, &c. All
Of the names and number of which Books, as they are commonly
the canonical Books, Genesis, received, we do receive, and
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, &c. acknowledge them to be given by
And the other books (as Hierome the inspiration of God, and in
saith) the Church doth read for that regard to be of most certain
example of life and instruction credit, and highest authority.
of manners; but yet doth it not
apply them to establish any
doctrine: Such are these
following:--Third of Esdras,
Fourth of Esdras, Book of Tobias,
Judith, &c. All the Books of the
New Testament, as they are
commonly received, we do receive,
and account them for canonical.
VII. VII.
_Of the Old Testament._ _Of the Old Testament._
The Old Testament is not contrary The Old Testament is not contrary
to the New; for both in the to the New, in the doctrine
Old and New Testament everlasting contained in them, for both in the
life is offered to mankind by Old and New Testament everlasting
Christ, who is the only mediator life is offered to mankind by
between God and man, being both Christ, who is the only mediator
God and man. Wherefore they are between God and man, being both
not to be heard which fain that God and man. Wherefore they are
the old Fathers did look only for not to be heard which feign that
transitory promises. Although the the old Fathers did look only for
law given from God by Moses, as temporary promises. Although the
touching ceremonies and rites, do law given from God by Moses, as
not bind Christian men, nor the touching ceremonies and rites, do
civil precepts thereof ought of not bind Christians; nor the
necessity to be received in any civil precepts given by Moses,
Commonwealth; yet, such as were peculiarly fitted to
notwithstanding, no Christian the Commonwealth of the Jews, are
man whatsoever is free from the of necessity to be received in
obedience of the Commandments any Commonwealth; yet,
which are called moral. notwithstanding, no Christian man
whatsoever is free from the
obedience of the Commandments
which are called moral. By the
moral law we understand all the
Ten Commandments, taken in their
full extent.
VIII.
_Of the Three Creeds._
The Three Creeds, Nice Creed,
Athanasius' Creed, and that which
is commonly called the Apostles'
Creed, ought throughly to be
received and believed; for they
may be proved by most certain
warrants of holy Scripture.
IX. IX.
_Of Original or Birth Sin._ _Of Original or Birth Sin._
Original sin standeth not in the Original sin standeth not in the
following of Adam (as the following of Adam, as the
Pelagians do vainly talk), but it Pelagians do vainly talk; but
is the fault and corruption of together with his first sin
the nature of every man, that imputed, it is the fault and
naturally is engendered of the corruption of the nature of every
offspring of Adam, whereby man is man, that naturally is propagated
very far gone from original from Adam; whereby man is wholly
righteousness, and is of his own deprived of original
nature inclined to evil, so that righteousness, and is of his own
the flesh lusteth always contrary nature inclined only to evil, so
to the Spirit, and therefore in that the lust of the flesh,
every person born into this world, called in Greek Φρόνημα σαρκὸς,
it deserveth God's wrath and which some do expound the wisdom,
damnation. And this infection of some sensuality, some the
nature doth remain, yea in them affection, some the desire of the
that are regenerated, whereby the flesh, is not subject to the law
lust of the flesh, called in of God, and therefore in every
Greek Φρόνημα σαρκὸς, which some person born into this world it
do expound the wisdom, some deserveth God's wrath and
sensuality, some the affection, damnation. And this infection of
some the desire of the flesh, is nature doth remain, yea in them
not subject to the law of God. And that are regenerate, whereby the
although there is no condemnation flesh lusteth always contrary to
for them that believe and are the Spirit. And although there is
baptized, yet the Apostle doth no condemnation for them that are
confess that concupiscence and regenerate, and do believe, yet
lust hath of itself the nature of the apostle doth confess that
sin. concupiscence and lust is truly
and properly sin.
X. X.
_Of Free Will._ _Of Free Will._
The condition of man after the The condition of man after the
fall of Adam is such, that he fall of Adam is such that he
cannot turn and prepare himself by cannot turn or prepare himself,
his own natural strength and good by his own natural strength and
works to faith and calling upon good works, to faith and calling
God. Wherefore we have no power upon God, wherefore we have no
to do good works, pleasant and power to do good works pleasing
acceptable to God, without the and acceptable to God, without
grace of God by Christ preventing the grace of God by Christ, both
us, that we may have a good will, preventing us, that we may have a
and working with us, when we have good will, and working so
that goodwill. effectually in us, as that it
determineth our will to that
which is good, and also working
with us when we have that will
unto good.
XI. XI.
_Of the Justification of Man._ _Of the Justification of Man
before God._
We are accounted righteous
before God, only for the merit of We are justified, that is, we are
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, accounted righteous before God,
by faith, and not for our own and have remission of sins, not
works or deservings. Wherefore, for, nor by our own works or
that we are justified by faith deservings, but freely by His
only is a most wholesome doctrine, grace, only for our Lord and
and very full of comfort, as more Saviour Jesus Christ's sake, His
largely is expressed in the whole obedience and satisfaction
homily of justification. being by God imputed unto us, and
Christ with His righteousness
being apprehended and rested on
by faith only. The doctrine of
justification by faith only is an
wholesome doctrine, and very full
of comfort, notwithstanding God
doth not forgive them that are
impenitent, and go on still in
their trespasses.
XII. XII.
_Of Good Works._ _Of Good Works._
Albeit that good works, which Good works, which are the fruits
are the fruits of faith, and of faith, and follow after
follow after justification, justification, cannot put away
cannot put away our sins, and our sins, and endure the severity
endure the severity of God's of God's judgment; yet are they,
judgment, yet are they pleasing notwithstanding their
and acceptable to God in Christ, imperfections, in the sight of
and do spring out necessarily of God pleasing and acceptable unto
a true and lively faith, insomuch Him in and for Christ, and do
that by them a lively faith may spring out necessarily of a true
be as evidently known as a tree and lively faith, insomuch that
discerned by the fruit. by them a lively faith may be
evidently known, as a tree
discerned by the fruits.
XIII. XIII.
_Of Works before Justification._ _Of Works before Justification._
Works done before the grace of Works done before justification
Christ, and the inspiration of by Christ, and regeneration by
His Spirit, are not pleasant to His Spirit, are not pleasing unto
God, forasmuch as they spring not God, forasmuch as they spring not
of faith in Jesus Christ, neither of faith in Jesus Christ; neither
do they make men meet to receive do they make men meet to receive
grace, or (as the school authors grace, or (as the school authors
say) deserve grace of congruity; say) deserve grace of congruity;
yea, rather, for that they are yea rather, for that they are not
not done as God hath willed and done as God hath willed and
commanded them to be done, we commanded them to be done, they
doubt not but they have the are sinful.
nature of sin.
XIV. XIV.
_Of the Works of Supererogation._ _Of Works of Supererogation._
Voluntary works besides, over Voluntary works, besides, over
and above God's commandments, and above God's commandments,
which they call works of which they call _works of
supererogation, cannot be taught supererogation_, cannot be taught
withoutarrogancy and impiety. For without arrogancy and impiety;
by them men do declare that they for by them men do declare that
do not only render unto God as they do not only render unto God
much as they are bound to do, but as much as they are bound to do,
that they do more for His sake but that they do more for His
than of bounden duty is required; sake than of bounden duty is
whereas Christ saith plainly, required; whereas Christ saith
When ye have done all that are plainly, When you have done all
commanded to you, say, we be those things that are commanded
unprofitable servants. you, say, we are unprofitable
servants, we have done that which
was our duty to do.
XV. XV.
_Of Christ alone without Sin._ _Of Christ alone without Sin._
Christ, in the truth of our Christ in the truth of our
nature, was made like unto us in nature was made like unto us in
all things (sin only except) from all things, sin only excepted,
which He was clearly void, both from which He was clearly void
in His flesh and in His spirit. both in His flesh and in His
He came to be a lamb without spirit. He came to be the lamb
spot, who by sacrifice of Himself without spot, who by sacrifice
once made, should take away the of Himself once made, should take
sins of the world; and sin (as away the sins of the world, and
St. John saith) was not in Him. sin (as St. John saith) was not
But all we the rest (although in Him. But all we the rest,
baptized, and born again in although baptized and regenerate,
Christ) yet offend in many yet offend in many things, and if
things; and if we say we have no we say we have no sin, we deceive
sin we deceive ourselves, and the ourselves, and the truth is not
truth is not in us. in us.
CHARLES HERLE, Prolocutor.
HENRY ROBROUGH, Scriba.
ADONIRAM BYFIELD, Scriba.
N.B.--The Assembly proceeded no further in the revisal."--_Neal_, iii.
555-563.
IV.--VOL. I. 294.
COPY OF THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT.
We Noblemen, Barons, Knights, Gentlemen, Citizens, Burgesses, Ministers
of the Gospel, and Commons of all sorts in the kingdoms of _England_,
_Scotland_, and _Ireland_, by the Providence of God living under one
King, and being of one reformed religion, having before our eyes the
glory of God, and the advancement of the kingdom of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, the honour and happiness of the King's majesty
and his posterity, and the true public liberty, safety, and peace
of the kingdoms, wherein every one's private condition is included,
and calling to mind the treacherous and bloody plots, conspiracies,
attempts, and practices of the enemies of God against the true religion
and professors thereof in all places, especially in these three
kingdoms, ever since the reformation of religion, and how much their
rage, power, and presumption are of late, and at this time increased
and exercised, whereof the deplorable estate of the Church and kingdom
of _Ireland_, the distressed estate of the Church and kingdom of
_England_, and the dangerous estate of the Church and kingdom of
_Scotland_, are present and public testimonies, we have (now at last)
after other means of supplication, remonstrance, protestations, and
sufferings, for the preservation of ourselves and our religion from
utter ruin and destruction, according to the commendable practice of
these kingdoms in former times, and the example of God's people in
other nations, after mature deliberation, resolved and determined to
enter into a mutual and solemn League and Covenant, wherein we all
subscribe, and each one of us for himself, with our hands lifted up to
the most high God, do swear:--
I.--That we shall sincerely, really, and constantly, thro' the
grace of God, endeavour in our several places and callings,
the preservation of the reformed religion in the Church of
Scotland, in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government,
against our common enemies; the reformation of religion in
the kingdoms of England and Ireland, in doctrine, worship,
discipline, and government, according to the Word of God,
and the example of the best reformed churches; and we shall
endeavour to bring the Churches of God in the three kingdoms
to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion,
confessing of faith, form of Church government, Directory for
worship and catechising, that we, and our posterity after us,
may, as brethren, live in faith and love, and the Lord may
delight to dwell in the midst of us.
II.--That we shall in like manner, without respect of persons,
endeavour the extirpation of Popery, Prelacy, (that is,
Church-government by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors
and Commissaries, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Archdeacons,
and all other ecclesiastical officers, depending on that
hierarchy), superstition, heresy, schism, profaneness, and
whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound doctrine and
the power of godliness, lest we partake in other men's sins,
and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues, and that
the Lord may be one, and His Name one in the three kingdoms.
III.--We shall with the same sincerity, reality, and
constancy, in our several vocations, endeavour with our
estates and lives mutually to preserve the rights and
privileges of the Parliaments, and the liberties of the
kingdoms, and to preserve and defend the King's Majesty's
person and authority, in the preservation and defence of the
true religion and liberties of the kingdoms, that the world
may bear witness with our consciences of our loyalty, and that
we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish his Majesty's
just power and greatness.
IV.--We shall also with all faithfulness endeavour the
discovery of all such as have been or shall be incendiaries,
malignants, or evil instruments, by hindering the reformation
of religion, dividing the King from his people, or one of
the kingdoms from another, or making any faction or parties
amongst the people, contrary to the League and Covenant, that
they may be brought to public trial, and receive condign
punishment, as the degree of their offences shall require
or deserve, or the supreme judicatories of both kingdoms
respectively, or others having power from them for that
effect, shall judge convenient.
V.--And whereas the happiness of a blessed peace between these
kingdoms, denied in former times to our progenitors, is by the
good providence of God granted unto us, and hath been lately
concluded and settled by both Parliaments, we shall each
one of us, according to our places and interest, endeavour
that they may remain conjoined in a firm peace and union to
all posterity, and that justice may be done upon the wilful
opposers thereof in manner expressed in the precedent articles.
VI.--We shall also, according to our places and callings,
in this common cause of religion, liberty, and peace of the
kingdom, assist and defend all those that enter into this
League and Covenant, in the maintaining and pursuing thereof,
and shall not suffer ourselves directly or indirectly, by
whatsoever combination, persuasion, or terror, to be divided
and withdrawn from this blessed union and conjunction, whether
to make defection to the contrary part, or give ourselves to
a detestable indifferency or neutrality in this cause, which
so much concerneth the glory of God, the good of the kingdoms,
and the honour of the King; but shall all the days of our
lives zealously and constantly continue therein, against
all opposition, and promote the same according to our power
against all lets and impediments whatsoever; and what we are
not able ourselves to suppress or overcome we shall reveal and
make known, that it may be timely prevented or removed; all
which we shall do as in the sight of God.
And because these kingdoms are guilty of many sins, and
provocations against God, and His Son Jesus Christ, as is too
manifest by our present distresses and dangers, the fruits
thereof, we profess and declare before God and the world our
unfeigned desire to be humbled for our sins, and for the sins
of these kingdoms, especially that we have not, as we ought,
valued the inestimable benefit of the Gospel, that we have
not laboured for the purity and power thereof, and that we
have not endeavoured to receive Christ in our hearts, nor
to walk worthy of Him in our lives, which are the causes of
other sins and transgressions so much abounding amongst us;
and our true and unfeigned purpose, desire, and endeavour for
ourselves, and all others under our power and charge, both in
public and in private, in all duties we owe to God and man,
to amend our lives, and each one to go before another in the
example of a real reformation, that the Lord may turn away His
wrath and heavy indignation, and establish these Churches and
kingdoms in truth and peace; and this covenant we make in the
presence of Almighty God, the searcher of all hearts, with a
true intention to perform the same, as we shall answer at that
great day, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed,
most humbly beseeching the Lord to strengthen us by His Holy
Spirit for this end, and to bless our desires and proceedings
with such success as may be a deliverance and safety to His
people, and encouragement to the Christian Churches groaning
under, or in danger of the yoke of anti-Christian tyranny,
to join in the same or like association and Covenant, to the
glory of God, the enlargement of the kingdom of Jesus Christ,
and the peace and tranquillity of Christian kingdoms and
commonwealths.--_Rushworth_ v. 478.
V.--VOL. I. 329.
RESPECTING THE MINUTES OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY.
The question has often been asked, "What became of the minutes of the
Assembly kept by the scribes?" It has been said by some, they were
burnt in the fire of London; by others, that they were destroyed (1834)
in the fire which burnt down the House of Commons ("Hetherington's
Hist. of the Westminster Assembly," preface v.) Whether it be the
case that some MS. records of the proceedings were so consumed I have
no means of ascertaining. But certainly there exist in Dr. Williams'
library, minutes of the Assembly's business, in the handwriting of
Adoniram Byfield, one of the scribes. As so many incorrect accounts
of these MSS. have been given, I am glad to be able to present the
following description of them, drawn up from the carefully-prepared but
unprinted catalogue of Dr. Williams' MSS. by Mr. Black, and from my own
examination of the papers. They consist of three volumes, and contain
minutes of the sessions of the Assembly of Divines from August the 4th,
1643, to April the 24th, 1652, and what are, apparently, the rough
notes of proceedings, debates, and orders of the Assembly, taken for
the most part by Adoniram Byfield, one of the scribes.
On the fly-leaf of the first volume is a list of members, amongst whom
the sum of £100 had been distributed in sums of £5 each, according to
the decision of a Committee (Sept. 8th, 1643) "appointed to dispose
of the £100, allotted by the order of Parliament, to such persons as
they shall find to have most need thereof, for supply of their present
necessities."--Vol. i. 24.
This volume contains heads and particulars, in many cases very brief,
of speeches delivered in the Assembly, with the names of speakers
appended in the margin, as well as lists of resolutions passed, and
various other memoranda. The proceedings of sessions thus reported
extend from August the 4th, 1643, to April the 11th, 1644.
The second volume embraces similar minutes from the 12th of April to
the 15th of August, 1644, with a list of members prefixed. Some of
the notes are written in shorthand by a different scribe; but however
unintelligible the shorthand may be, it is not much more so than Mr.
Byfield's longhand in some places.
Vol. iii. gives further minutes from November the 18th, 1644, to
March the 25th, 1652. The late ones are briefly, but more distinctly
recorded, in the handwriting of better scribes than Byfield.
"The latest sessions relate almost exclusively to examinations for
ordinations for livings, in relation to which an original paper was
found loose in the book, now inserted in its proper place, where the
name occurs--viz.: testimonial from R. Robinson in favour of Mr.
Gilson, M.A., and fellow of C.C.C., Oxon., 14th March, 1650-51."
Some of the papers in this volume are carelessly arranged, but they
contain only trivial memoranda.
There are bound up in this volume Minutes of Provincial Assemblies
holden at Sion College, and elsewhere in London, from the 27th of
November, 1650, to the 9th of April, 1655.
"It does not appear when these volumes were deposited in this library.
They came most probably with Morrice's MSS."
Mention has often been made of there being in Dr. Williams' library
fourteen or fifteen small volumes of the Assembly's transactions, by
Dr. Thomas Goodwin. No manuscript notes by Goodwin can there be found.
The three volumes just described contain a number of distinct thin
MSS. bound up together. Do not they after all contain the fourteen or
fifteen small (thin?) MSS. incorrectly ascribed to Dr. Goodwin?
In the Advocate's library, Edinburgh, there are two volumes of
manuscript notes, by Gillespie, which--according to Dr. Hetherington,
who inspected them--"corroborate the printed accounts of Lightfoot and
Baillie."
VI.--VOL. I. 434.
NUMBER OF THE EJECTED CLERGY.
The number of clergymen ejected during the Civil Wars and under the
Commonwealth is a question commonly discussed in a party spirit.
The Churchman is anxious to swell the number, and the Nonconformist
labours to reduce it; each thinking his ecclesiastical principles at
stake in the controversy. Yet it is curious that the former should
not see, that the more sequestrations there might be, the more open
to censure must have been the conduct of the clergy; the more likely
must be the charges of immorality brought against them; and the more
completely must they have alienated from themselves the sympathies of
the nation--otherwise how can we account for their being swept out
of the Church in such swarms? For it is incredible that the enormous
number imagined by some could have been expelled on political or
ecclesiastical grounds alone, without any demerit on the score of
irreligion or uselessness. It is equally curious that the Nonconformist
should regard his own cause as helped, and the opposite side as
damaged, by making the sequestrations under Puritan ascendancy appear
to have been few; for, if few, then either the clergy of that age could
not be so bad as they have been represented, or the Puritans allowed
clergymen to remain in the Church notwithstanding their immorality.
The interests of Church or of dissent are really not at all involved
in this enquiry. Even if it were to the interest of the one that the
Puritans should be represented as bad as possible, and to the interest
of the other that they should be represented as good as possible, still
the proper subject of investigation would be found, not in numerical
statistics, but in the rules laid down to regulate the sequestrations,
and in the spirit of equity, or otherwise, in which they were carried
out. Of those rules we have spoken already.
Walker hazards the statement, that if we add "such as _would have_
suffered had not death prevented," it would "in all probability
make the total nothing short of ten thousand."[586] To pass over
the absurdity of including those _who might_ have suffered, but
were prevented by death, it is enough to remark that he entirely
invalidates his own calculations by candidly confessing that he
possessed no satisfactory data on which to proceed. He apologizes for
the defectiveness of his lists, and endeavours to give colour to his
conjectures by quoting broad royalist assertions, in which "thousands"
are dealt with in the loosest way: and a report is cited, that the
party in power "destroyed all the principal ministers throughout the
kingdom, and of ten thousand scarce left one thousand of the old
clergy." If nine thousand were ejected, the question naturally occurs,
what became of them all? Making allowance for mere curates, and for
unusual mortality owing to hardship, and for those who went abroad, and
for those who, having betaken themselves to other means of livelihood,
did not care to seek their old cures, how came it about that so small
a proportion re-entered the Church upon the re-establishment of
Episcopacy?[587] If, on Walker's reckoning, all survivors (with such
exceptions as were just now indicated) had been reinstated, then, to
make room for them all, many more ejectments, between the Restoration
and Bartholomew's-day, must have occurred than can be reconciled with
the facts of history.
Nor do I see my way to the opposite extreme. It has been argued that
although two thousand episcopal clergymen might altogether first and
last suffer ejectment during the period, half were allowed to return
before its expiration. To establish the point that one-half the ejected
Episcopalians were re-admitted by Presbyterians or Independents under
the Commonwealth, requires positive statistical evidence such as I
cannot discover.
General references to the preaching of malignant ministers may be met
with in Commonwealth tracts, but they are not sufficient to decide the
matter.[588] Moreover, it must be remembered that if some individuals,
ejected during the wars, were replaced when the wars were over,
others who had escaped under the Presbyterians were turned out by the
Independents.
Walker mentions White's assertion that 8,000 of the clergy "were
unworthy and scandalous, and deserved to be cast out;" and the
addition made to this by Mr. Stephens, that "he (White) and his
committee have come little short of that number." Sir Henry Yelverton
too is quoted as saying: "If I mistake not there were 8,000 forsook
all for the Covenant." Walker afterwards insists on Dr. Gauden's
calculation of 6,000 or 7,000 persons expelled. With respect to
which Coleridge says: "I presume that no party will regard any
assertion of Gauden's as other than ==O--nay, nay, this is saying too
little. It is==evidence in the same sense as debts are algebraically
designated==capital.--'Southey's Life of Wesley.'" This is too severe,
yet Gauden's testimony in the matter does not prove anything. The
reports quoted by Walker will appear to every impartial reader of his
"Sufferings" quite insufficient to sustain his conclusions. He makes
out a list of 1,339 names of the several persons mentioned in the
cathedrals, collegiate churches, chapels, and the two universities.
He also gives, without numbering, lists of _some_ of the loyal and
Episcopal clergy of London and of the provinces. All these lists he
acknowledges are imperfect, and he admits that some names may be given
more than once, and that many of the cathedral clergy held parochial
benefices. Nothing can be determined on such grounds. It may be further
stated that he and Anthony Wood do not agree. Walker says that about
400 were ejected from Oxford (part ii. 139). Wood states that 334 (see
Neal, iii. 455) did not submit, but they were not immediately expelled.
Walker, p. 138, represents Wood as meaning 334 at one time, besides
more at other times, but I cannot trace his references.
Now let us turn to data supplied from other sources.
Baillie, in his "Letters" (vol. ii. 224), August 28th, 1644, speaks as
if many churches were at the time unsupplied, for he says, that after
all which can be done by a pure ordination, and what more Scotland
"can afford of good youths for the ministry here, are provided; it is
thought _some thousands of churches_ must vaik (be vacant) for fault of
men."
There is a tract in the "Harleian Miscel." (vii. 181), giving a total
list of 115 London clergy expelled. "In the ninety-seven parishes
within the walls, besides St. Paul's, outed eighty-five, and dead,
sixteen." Out of sixteen without the walls, fourteen expelled, two
dead. Out of eleven out parishes, nine expelled, two dead. Adjacent
towns, besides those of the Abbey Church and Islington, seven expelled,
two dead. This list differs somewhat from "Walker's" (p. ii. 164-180).
There is a list of sequestrations in Essex (Add. MSS. Brit. Museum.
15,669, &c.), amounting to 153, out of the 415 parishes in that county.
Withers, of Exeter--a Nonconformist--computed that in Suffolk, Norfolk,
and Cambridge, out of 1,398 parishes, there were 253 sequestrations,
and in his own county of Devon, out of 394 parishes there were 139
ejected, thirty-nine were deducted for pluralities ("Neal," iii. 134).
Pluralists must be allowed for throughout the country, so also must
cathedral dignitaries and members of the universities, not holding
parochial benefices. But what was done in the Eastern counties, where
the Puritan party had great power, is no rule for judging of what was
done in other counties where the Puritan party had little power.
After repeatedly pondering what has been said on all sides, it appears
to me impossible to come to a definite conclusion; but computing the
clergy at about ten thousand, and reckoning from the loose data just
given, I venture to suggest that perhaps about one fifth of the whole
might be ejected. I see no ground for believing that less than 2,000 or
more than 2,500 were expelled from the Establishment.
VII.--VOL. II. 150.
DRAFT OF A BILL FOR REVISING THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE
SCRIPTURES.
Since the account given p. 150 was printed, the following document in
the State Paper Office, (_Domestic Interreg._, Bundle 662, f. 12.,) has
been pointed out to me:--
"Whereas by the reverend, godly, and learned Dr. Hill, it was publicly
declared in his sermon before an honourable assembly,[589] and by
himself since that time published in print, that when the Bible had
been translated by the translators appointed, the New Testament was
looked over by some Prelates (that he could name) to bring it to speak
the prelatical language, and he was informed by one that lived then, a
great observer of those times, fourteen places in the New Testament,
whereof he instanceth these in five or six places by them corrupted.
The like testimony of those Prelates so wronging that new and best
translation being given by some other ancient and godly preachers also,
who lived in those times.
And some appearance hereof may yet be seen in part of that very copy of
those translators.
And whereas in the original text of the Holy Scriptures there is so
great a depth, that only by degrees there is a progress of light
towards the attaining of perfection of the knowledge in the bettering
of the translation thereof; and hence the most learned translators
have found cause again and again of reviving and still rectifying and
amending within a few years of what they themselves had translated and
published. And this hath been the commendable practice even of some
Papists,[590] and of sundry of the reformed religion.[591]
And it being now above forty years since our new translation was
finished,[592] divers of the heads of colleges and many other learned
persons (that coming later have the advantage to stand as on the heads
of the former) in their public sermons (and in print also) have often
held out to their hearers and readers that the Hebrew or Greek may
better be rendered, as they mention, than as it is in our newest and
best translation: some of the places seeming to be very material, and
crying aloud for the rectifying of them, if the truth be as it is so
affirmed, and published by them, and here in some MSS. presented to us.
And forasmuch as the translation by Mr. H. Ainsworth of Moses and
the Psalms, and Song of Solomon, is greatly commended by many of the
learned as far more agreeable to the Hebrew than ours; and it is said
that there are MSS. of his translations of some other Scriptures
both of the Old and New Testament. And also in other parts of the
Holy Scriptures, some have translated verses and some chapters; and
we hear that some have translated the New Testament, if not the Old
also, and would have them printed and published in our nation. Which
if it should be done on their own heads, without due care for the
supervising thereof by learned persons sound in the fundamentals of
the Christian religion, might be a precedent of dangerous consequence,
emboldening other to do the like, and might tend at last to bring in
other Scriptures or another Gospel instead of the oracles of God and
the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the reforming, rectifying, and repairing of the former injury to
the new translation, and for preventing of so great inconveniences of
such dangerous consequence, and for the furtherance (what in us lieth)
and the benefit and edification of many, Be it [enacted,] that no
person or persons whatsoever within the dominions of England, Scotland,
and Ireland, without the approbation of persons hereafter named or
to be named by authority, shall presume to print or publish any such
translation of the Bible or of the New Testament.
And that these persons, viz: Dr. John Owen,[593] Dr. Ralph Cudworth,
Mr. Jenkins, Mr. William Greenhill, Mr. Samuel Slater, Mr. William
Cowper, Mr. Henry Jessey, Mr. Ralph Venninge, and Mr. John Row,
Hebrew professor in Aberdeen, in Scotland, shall be and hereby
are constituted, appointed, and authorized in and about all these
particulars following to be performed by them in the fear of the Lord,
for the good of His people, namely:--
That these or any three or more of them may search and observe wherein
that last translation appears to be wronged by the Prelates, or
printers, or others; that in all such places, as far as in them is, it
may be rectified and amended therein, and the evident and most material
failings that do in a special manner call for reformation, (some
particulars whereof to us have been presented for consideration;) and
that this may be performed with all speed before there be any further
printing of the Bible.
And further, because it is our duty to endeavour to have the Bible
translated in all places as accurately and as perfectly agreeing
with the original Hebrew and Greek as we can attain unto, to remove
(whatever in us lieth) the stumbling-blocks and offence of the weak, or
the cavils of others when they hear in sermons preached or printed, or
in other treatises, that the original bears it better thus and thus.
Be it [enacted] that the persons beforesaid may seriously consider
the translation of Mr. H. Ainsworth, and of any other translations,
annotations, or observations made or that may be made by any of
themselves, or of any others that they know of, or may confer withal
(who are desired to add unto them their best assistance for the
general good of all), and consider of the marginal readings in Bibles,
whether any of them should rather be in the line. And what they, after
serious looking up to the Lord for His gracious assistance in so
weighty a work, and advising together amongst themselves, shall judge
to be nearest to the text, and to the mind of the Lord, they may give
thereunto their approbation, and this with all speed that conveniently
they are able.
And be it further [enacted], that Dr. Thomas Goodwin, Dr. Tuckney, and
Mr. Joseph Caryl, are hereby appointed and authorized to be supervisors
of what is so approved, and that what those persons shall so approve
of, shall accordingly be printed and published for the general
edification and benefit of the whole nation, to be read both privately
and in the public congregations."
VOL. II. 207.
_Anno Domini, 1655._
For the following extract from the Records of the Church at Bury St.
Edmund's, dating from 1646, I am indebted to the Rev. Alfred Tyler, the
present minister.
"Thos. Taylor, sometimes a member of the Church of Christ which is
at Norwich, and, afterwards, by dismission from them, a foundation
member of the Church which is at Godwick and Stanfield, in the county
of Norfolk, being a publick preacher and dispenser of the Gospell,
approved therein by both those Churches, was called by the Church to
preach and dispense the Gospell of Christ unto them in the year 1653,
and after neare two yeares experience and tryall, his dismission
being first obtained from the Church of Godwick and Stanfield, was by
commendation from the said Church and brethren at Godwick, and also by
giving in a relation of the dealings of God with his soul, of the work
of grace upon his heart, received into fellowship as a brother upon the
18th day of the 9th month, 16--." (The other figures are worn off.)
After this follows a somewhat lengthy confession of faith, and then:--
"Upon the 3rd day of the eleventh month, commonly called January, the
Church did, by election and holding up of hands, and by fasting and
prayer, ordain Thomas Taylor, a publick preacher and member of the
Church, after neare two yeares tryall and experience, unto the office
of a pastor, and John Hayward, a member of the same Church, unto the
office of a Deacon, at a very solemn and publick meeting, where were
present the messengers sent from nine generall Churches, viz.: 1,
Coggeshall, in the county of Essex; 2, Sudbury, that whereof Saml.
Crossman is pastor; 3, two Churches in Ipswich, meeting at St. Peters
(?) and Hellens; 4,----ham (?); 5, Weston; 6, Rattlesden; 7, Pulham;
8, H----en, both in the county of Norfolk; in which meeting the Church
did also make a publick profession of their faith according to the
foregoing copy, and had the unanimous, clear, and full concurrence of
the spirits, judgments, and approbation of all the messengers, both
as to their confession of faith, church-state, and order, not one
dissenting; and did, at the same meeting, receive the right hand of
fellowship from the Churches of Rattlesden, Weston, and Coggeshall:
and the messengers from H----en and Pulham declared that the Church
had formerly received the right hand of fellowship from them, at or
soone after their first sitting down together in fellowship; and the
messengers from ----ham, Sudbury, and Hellens, in Ipswich, promised, on
the behalf of those Churches, that they would make report of our faith
and order unto the Churches to whom they did belong, and to give us the
right hand of fellowship at some convenient time, but could not then
doe it because they had received no such power from the Church."
ADDITIONAL NOTE ON RITUALISM.
The whole of this work was prepared and much of it printed before
the present controversy on Ritualism arose. This will account for
the omission in the early part of the first volume of any comparison
between the Ritualism of Anglo-Catholics under the Stuarts, and
the Ritualism of Anglo-Catholics at the present day. Judging from
ceremonial worship now performed in certain quarters, and from the
publications of persons who represent the party, we may say that
Archbishop Laud never attempted to go so far in the adoption of Roman
Catholic rites and vestments as his modern successors have done.
[Illustration]
INDEX.
Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury, i. 359; ii. 234
Act of Uniformity, First of Elizabeth, i. 5
At the Restoration, 47
Akehurst, ii. 271
Alcock, i. 433
Alleine, Joseph, ii. 220
Alphery, i. 433
Alvey, i. 433
Ames, Dr. William, i. 460
Andrewes, Bishop, i. 9, 50, 53, 129
Andrews, Mrs. Margaret, ii. 426
Anglo-Catholics under Elizabeth, i. 4
Under James I. and Charles I., 6, 29
Changes in their Doctrine and Policy, 7
Under Laud, 31
Adhere to Resolutions issued by the Lords concerning
Innovations, 172
Annesley, Dr. Samuel, His Loyalty to the King, ii. 44
His Sermon at St. Paul's, 437
Arminianism in time of Stuarts, i. 17, 45, 52
Arrowsmith, Dr. John, Master of St. John's, ii. 274
Ash, Simeon, Chaplain to Lord Brooke, i. 241
Preaches to the Soldiers, 250
Attended Love on the Scaffold, ii. 48
Died in 1646, 187
Ash, Edward, i. 529
Ashmole, Elias, at Oxford, ii. 257
Assembly of Divines, Ordinance for convening it, i. 271
Members, 272
Appointed by Secular Authority, 273
Controlled by Parliament, 274
Their First Meeting, 275
Assemble again, 278
Present a Petition to the Two Houses, 287
Appoint Deputation to accompany Commissioners to Scotland, 289
Follow Pym to the Grave, 302
Invited to the City Banquet, 308
Advise Destruction of Popish Relics, 313
Their Exhortation respecting the Solemn League and Covenant, 320
They meet in Jerusalem Chamber, 326
Baillie's Description of Assembly, 327
Propose Committee for Ordination, 391
Debate the subject of a Directory, 405
Debates on Ordination, 417
On Presbyterian Discipline, 418
Touching "The Power of the Keys," 439
Toleration, 443
Divine Right of Presbyterianism, 446
On the _Jus Divinum_, 447
Assembly threatened with a _Præmunire_, 448
They submit to Parliament, 448
Conclusion of their History, 448
Their Confession of Faith, 449
Catechisms, 450
Revision of Psalmody, 451
The Assembly not treated with Justice, 452
Talents and Attainments of the Divines, 453
Astley, Sir Jacob, i. 254
Atkins, Robert, ii. 228
Ayscue, Sir George, ii. 469-472
Bacon, Sir Nicholas, i. 351
Bagshawe, i. 85, 103, 113
Baillie, Visits London, i. 107
Present at City Banquet, 311
At the Hague, ii. 23
His Speech to Charles, 24
See also i. 264, 269, 289, 298, 327, 418, 437
Baines, Captain, ii. 147
Baltimore, Lord, Governor of Maryland, ii. 450, 478, 482
Bampfield, ii. 150, 363
Bancroft, i. 6, 17, 42
Baptists, ii. 121
In Elizabeth's Reign, 230
Their Publications, 232
Imprisoned, 234
Arminian and Calvinistic Baptists, 235
Their Controversy with Calamy, 236
Their Polity and Discipline, 238
Ministers, 238
Baptists in Wales, 243
In Ireland and Scotland, 244
Barksdale, ii. 296
Barlow, ii. 258
Barnardston, Sir Nathaniel, ii. 422
Barrow, Isaac, ii. 267
Barrowe, Henry, i. 353
Barrowists, Bill against them, i. 355
Barton, i. 451; ii. 393
Barwick, John, i. 384
Basire, Isaac, ii. 321
Bastwick, i. 26, 79
Bates, William, ii. 185
Battles. Edge Hill, i. 253
Newbury, 296
Long Marston Moor, 425
Naseby, 428
Dunbar, ii. 37
Worcester, 43
Baxter, Richard, at Alcester, i. 254
His Dislike to Covenant, 325
With the Army, 456
Draws up an Agreement, ii. 187
At Kidderminster, 189
Preaches before Oliver Cromwell, 194
His Correspondence with Howe, 223
See also i. 315, 452; ii. 48, 100, 312, 366, 385
Beal, Thomas, i. 221
Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore, i. 216
Bedford, Samuel, ii. 133
Behmen, Jacob, ii. 367
Bere, Sidney, his Letters, i. 149, 167, 183, 198, 229
Berry, Major-General, i. 464; ii. 115, 119
Berry, Daniel, i. 434
Bibles, Misprinted, ii. 150
Biddle, ii. 102, 367
Bishops, i. 76
Attempts to Remove them from the Peerage, 126
Thirteen impeached, 163
Bishops Promoted, 186
Insulted, 199
Protest of Twelve Bishops, 203
Impeached, 205
Unpopularity, 205
Bishops who died before 1650, 209
Irish Bishops, 216
Bishops with the King at Oxford, 378
Those who were Deprived, ii. 302
Those who Survived the Return of Charles II., 308
Blair, i. 107
Blake, Robert, i. 430, 437; ii. 215
Bodurda, ii. 146
Bolton, i. 53
Book of Sports, i. 13, 52, 93
Booth, Sir George, his Insurrection, ii. 168
Boteler, Major-General, ii. 114
Bramhall, Bishop of Derry, his account of Irish Church, i. 216
His flight from Ireland, ii. 309
Extracts from his Works, 311
Brayne, ii. 477
Brent, Sir Nathaniel, i. 68, 121, 386, 484
Bridge, William, i. 332, 371; ii. 219
Briscoe, Colonel, ii. 147, 149
Broghill, Lord, ii. 117, 226
Brooke, Lord, i. 77, 246
Enlists Volunteers, 240
Exhortation to Londoners, 255
His Death, 280
Brooke, Basil, i. 304
Brooks, Thomas, ii. 219
Browne, Robert, i. 349, 351
In Scotland, ii. 225
Brownism, i. 177, 351
Brownists, i. 255, 343, 355, 365; ii. 226
Brownrigg, Bishop of Exeter, i. 186; ii. 277
Member of Assembly, i. 272, 278
Remainder of his days, ii. 307
Bulkeley, i. 409
Bull, George, ii. 294, 436
Bunyan, i. 428; ii. 241
Burdett, i. 50
Burgess, Dr. Cornelius, i. 91, 102, 143, 170, 292, 312, 328; ii. 229
Chaplain to Earl of Essex, i. 241
Appointed Assessor to Assembly, 279
Burleigh, Lord, i. 349, 351
Burnet, ii. 276, 279, 503
Burroughs, Jeremiah, i. 332, 333, 422
Burroughs, Edward, ii. 359
Burton, i. 26, 79, 369
Busby, Richard, ii. 292
Busher, Leonard, i. 346; ii. 231
Butler, ii. 147
Button, Ralph, ii. 254
Byfield, i. 278, 328
Cabot, ii. 443
Calamy, Edmund, Presbyterian Preacher, i. 259
His Popularity, 260
See also i. 329; ii. 48, 139, 175, 182, 236
Calvin, i. 99
Calvinism, i. 17, 46
Cambridge University--Opposition to Parliament, i. 490
Commissioners, 491
Revival of Puritanism, 493
Engagement enforced, ii. 265
Military Visitors, 268
Evelyn's Visit, 273
Studies at Cambridge, 281
Compared with Oxford, 284
Canne, John, ii. 234, 245
Carbery, Lady--Sketch of her Character, ii. 423
Cartwright, i. 43, 100
Cary, Lucius, Viscount Falkland, i. 72, 113, 127, 185, 267
His Character and Policy, 225
Created Secretary of State, 231
Killed at Newbury, 296
Caryl, Joseph, i. 527; ii. 216
Cathedrals, those that suffered from Destruction of Popish
Relics, i. 316
Cawdry, i. 329
Cawton, a Presbyterian Minister, ii. 12
Charles I. opens Long Parliament, i. 1
Attached to Episcopacy, 76
Attempts to Establish it in Scotland, 104
Summons both Houses to Whitehall, 111
Assents to Bill rendering Parliament Indissoluble, 135
His Perplexity when sanctioning the Death of Strafford, 139
Assents to Scotch Treaty, Starts for Scotland, 166
Attempts to conciliate Scotch, 169
His Return and Reception in London, 187
Grand Remonstrance presented to him, 191
His Answer, 192
Attempts to seize the Five Members, 193
His Flight from London, 229
Attempts at Mediation between him and Parliament, 231
Parliamentary Propositions, 236
His Answer, 236
Denied Entrance to Hull, 246
Sets up his Standard, 247
On his way to London, 254
Quarrel between King and City, 256
Scotch Commissioners treat with him, 264
Parliament sends an Embassy, 265
Success of his Army, 283
His Duplicity, 300
Intrigues with Independents, 306
His Mock Parliament, 330
At Oxford, 372
Accused of Popish Tendencies, 374
Agrees to Truce with Ireland, 376
Treaty at Uxbridge, 412
His Double-dealing, 415
His Debate with Henderson, 469
Joins Scotch Camp at Newark, 469
His Letters to the Queen, 470, 474
Parliament Propositions to him, 472
His Dislike of Presbyterianism, 473
His Intrigues with Independents and Papists, 475
In hands of Parliamentary Commissioners, 513
Taken from Holdenby by Independents, 519
Newport Treaty, 526
His Removal from Carisbrook to Hurst Castle, 529
On the Scaffold, 531
His Burial, 535
Regarded as a Martyr, ii. 20
Charles II. in Holland, ii. 21
Scotch Commissioners sent to treat with him, 23
His Policy, 25
Papers disclosing secrets, 25
Signs Covenant and goes to Scotland, 31
Crowned in Scotland, 39
His Life there, 40
Comes to England, 42
His Treachery, 43
Defeated at Worcester, 43
Charnock, ii. 227
Cheynell, Francis, i. 286; ii. 100
His Connection with Chillingworth, i. 381
Chidley, Catherine, ii. 392
Chillingworth, William, i. 286, 335
At Oxford, 380, 381
His Death, 382
Cholmeley, Sir Hugh, i. 489
Christina of Sweden, her Conversation with Whitelocke, i. 466
Clarke, Samuel, ii. 185
Clarkson, David, i. 284
Clotworthy, Sir John, i. 212, 401
Cogan, his Letters, i. 212, 222
Coke, George, Bishop of Hereford, i. 210
Coke, Secretary, ii. 484
Coleman, Thomas, i. 330
Colfe, Abraham, ii. 204
Collinge, Dr., ii. 427
Collins, Dr., i. 495
Colonies, State of Religion before the Commonwealth, ii. 443
Virginia, 446
Bermudas, 449
Maryland, 450
Pilgrim Fathers, 451
Massachusetts, 452
During Civil Wars, 459
Barbadoes, 460
Maryland, 461
United Colonies of New England, 462
During the Commonwealth, 463
Society for Propagation of Gospel in New England, 464
Rhode Island, 467
Barbadoes, 469
Virginia, 472
Bermudas, 474
West Indies, 475
Maryland, 477
East Indies, 480
Commons, Petitions, i. 79
Debates on Religion, 83
Appoint Committee to prepare Remonstrance, 86
Committee to draw up charges against Strafford, 89
Petitions, 108
Debate on Root and Branch Petition, 112
Resolution for Reforming Pluralities, 126
Bill for removal of Star Chamber and High Commission Courts, 127
Solemn Vow and Protestation, 133
Bill rendering Parliament indissoluble, 135
Deans and Chapters, 142
Bill for Restraining Bishops, 144
Bill for Abolition of Bishops, 147
Sabbath Legislation, 151
Abolition of Cathedral Chapters, 154
Petition the King to delay his journey to Scotland, 166
Send Commissioners after him, 166
Press Church Reforms, 170
New Bill for Excluding Bishops, 176
Grand Remonstrance Debated, 179
Arrest of the five Members, 193
Impeach twelve Bishops, 204
Return of the five Members, 229
Bill for Abolition of Episcopacy, 262
Corporation Banquet, 307
Ordinances for Destruction of Popish Relics, 313
Endorse Directory, 406
Fresh Members in the House, 437
Debates on the _Jus Divinum_, 447
Decide that Rouse's Psalms should be sung, 451
Ordinance against Heresies and Blasphemies, 523
Newport Treaty, 526
Pride's Purge, 531
Conant, Dr. John, ii. 256
Convocation, i. 95, 98, 108, 274
Corbet, Edward, i. 386, 529
Cosin, Dr., i. 493, 495; ii. 318
Courten, Lady Catherine, her Christian Character, ii. 426
Crisp, Dr., ii. 368
Cromwell, Oliver, i. 63, 70, 115, 149, 185, 231
Member for Cambridge, 64
His Ironsides, 241
Governor of Ely, 319
Suggests Committee of Accommodation, 421
At Marston Moor, 425
His Letter about Naseby, 429
His Jealousy of Presbyterian Power, 436
Preaches to Soldiers, 464
His desire for Toleration, 520
Aims at Reconciling Presbyterians and Independents, 520
Anecdote of him, 520
His Character and Religion, ii. 3, 5
Goes to Scotland, 35
Victories at Dunbar, 37,
and Worcester, 43
Dissolves Long Parliament, 50
His Speech at opening of Little Parliament, 53
Members resign their powers into his hands, 65
Made Lord Protector, 73
His Portrait, 73
His National Church, 79
His Ecclesiastical Policy, 80
State Recognition, 81
State Control, 83
State Support, 88
State Protection, 89
State Penalties, 90
Originality of his Policy, 92
His Establishment not a Church, 93
His First Protectorate Parliament, 96
His Speech at the Opening, 97
Speech on Dissolving Parliament, 103
His dislike to Episcopal Royalists, 110
Major-Generals, 113
His Second Parliament, 128
His Speech, 131
His Letters, 134
Refusal of the Crown, 139
Accepts Petition and Advice, 141
His Speech, 141
Religious Toleration under him, 144
His Second Installation, 153
His Speech at Re-assembling of Parliament, 157
Last Speeches, 160
His Order Book, 162
His Broad Church, 165
His Interview with Baxter, 194
Makes Howe Court Chaplain, 221
His Liberality to those who Differed from him, 222
Receives Academic Honours at Oxford, 247
Visits Cambridge, 265
His Ordinance for another Collegiate Establishment, 286
His Establishment, 294
Anecdotes of him and Ussher, 304
His Interview with Fox, 358
Character of his Court, 400
His Chaplains, 402
His interference on behalf of the Piedmontese, 492
Writes to Louis XIV., 499
His Foreign Policy, 503
His Treatment of the Jews, 504
At Hampton Court, 508
Death of his Daughter, 508
His last Interview with Fox, 510
His Last Days, 511
Last Words, 517
Death, 520
Cromwell, Henry, ii. 121
Cromwell, Richard, ii. 155
Cudworth, Dr. Ralph, i. 339; ii. 275
Culpeper, i. 85, 97, 148
Curie, Walter, Bishop of Winchester, i. 210
Dalston, Sir George, ii. 413
Davenant, Bishop of Salisbury, i. 163
Deans and Chapters, i. 142
Their History, 155
Surveys of their Possessions, ii. 9
Abolition and sale of Possessions, 9
Dell, William, ii. 269
Denn, ii. 297
Dering, Sir Edward, i. 74, 157, 178, 181, 191, 270; ii. 159
Presents Bill for Abolition of Bishops, i. 146
His Conduct, 149
A Seceder from Popular Party, 224
Desborough, Major-General, ii. 55, 134, 149
Digby, Lord, i. 63, 75, 85, 97, 112
Directory, Established, i. 404
Debated in Assembly, 405
Sent to Scotland, 406
Ordinance for its Establishment, 406
Penalties for Refusing it, 407
Its Fate in Ireland, 409
Donne, Dr., i. 9, 46, 53
Dorset, Earl of, i. 365
Douglas, ii. 39
Downings, William, i. 315
Duncan, Dr., i. 495
Duppa, Bryan, Translated from Chichester to Salisbury, i. 186
With the King at Oxford, 378
Endeavours to Revive Episcopal Church, ii. 309
Durie, John, ii. 490
his Labours for Protestant Union, 484-489
Eaton, i. 360, 364
Edwards, ii. 365
Eliot, Sir John, i. 28, 36, 67
Eliot, John, ii. 464
Elizabeth, i. 6, 41, 45, 214; ii. 4, 230
Episcopacy, i. 99
Rooted out of Scotland, 104
Charles I. Attempts to Restore it, 104
Defended in the House, 114
Its Divine Right, 116
Plans for its Reformation, 124
Controversy Concerning it, 128
Bill for Restraining Bishops, 144
Bills for the Abolition of Episcopacy, 147, 176, 262
Petitions Concerning it, 197
No Bishop Riots, 199
Bill for Exclusion from Upper House, 208
Its Opponents, 227
Sequestration of Property, 385
New Bill Relative to it, 480
Episcopalians--How they regarded Solemn Vow and Protestation, i. 134
Blame Twelve Protesting Bishops, 205
Not excluded from Westminster Assembly, 272
Exasperated by League and Covenant, 325
Their views of the Assembly, 452
At Norwich, 505
Their Dislike to the Scotch, ii. 33
Commissioners for approbation of godly preachers, 104
For ejecting scandalous ones, 107
Persecution of their clergy, 111
Those who continued to use the Common Prayer, 294
Those who held Livings without using it, 298
Those who did not Conform, 301
Their Sufferings, 311
Prayers read by them during Commonwealth, 340
Their Patriotism, Loyalty, and Sufferings, 342
Erastians, i. 330, 439, 447
Theses by Erastus, 331
Erbery, ii. 271
Erle, Sir Walter, i. 135
Essex, Earl of, i. 77
Commander of Parliamentary Army, 241
At Edge Hill, 254
Raises Siege of Gloucester, 287
At Newbury, 296
Capitulates to the King, 426
His Death, 517
Evelyn, John, ii. 258, 273, 337, 418
Ewes D', Sir Symonds, i. 114, 148, 152, 184, 529
Ewins, Thomas, ii. 240
Fairclough, Richard, ii. 420
Fairfax, in Yorkshire, i. 283
At Somerset, 430
Punishes Disorderly Soldiers, 455
Receives Academic Honours, ii. 247
Falkland, (see Cary)
Farindon, ii. 299, 436
Feake, ii. 65, 70, 183
Featley, Dr., i. 25
Fell, Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, i. 498; ii. 249, 253
Ferrendail, Orthro, ii. 225
Fielding, Lady Barbara, i. 12
Fiennes, Nathaniel, i. 62, 70, 75, 112; ii. 156, 159
Fifth Monarchy Men, ii. 61, 63, 65, 70, 91, 120
Finch, Lord Keeper, i. 2
Fitz, Richard, i. 348
Flavel, John, ii. 220
Fleetwood, i. 522; ii. 512
Fortescue, ii. 477
Fox, George, His Early Life, ii. 350
Character, 351
His Mysticism, 352
Mighty in Prayer, 354
His Peculiarities, 355
His Interview with Cromwell, 358
His Followers, 359
His Last Interview with Cromwell, 510
Frampton, Robert, ii. 481
Frewen, Dr., Accepted, i. 209
Fuller, Thomas, i. 48, 277, 326, 376; ii. 202-204
Chaplain to Lord Hopton, i. 380
His Piety, ii. 412
Gale, Theophilus, ii. 255
Garroway, Alderman, i. 257, 409
Gataker, ii. 199
Gauden, Dr. John, ii. 201
Geddes, Jenny, i. 105
Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, ii. 445
Giles, Dr., i. 281
Gillespie, i. 329, 406; ii. 226
Gilpin, Bernard and Richard, ii. 288
Glynne, i. 60, 330
Godeman, Casper, ii. 483
Goffe, Major-General, ii. 116
Goodman, Godfrey, ii. 302
Goodwin, Thomas, i. 332, 343, 418; ii. 97, 100, 255, 284
Gookin, Captain, ii. 466
Gouge, Dr., i. 295
Gourney, Alderman, i. 188
Grand Remonstrance debated by Commons, i. 179, 180
Discussion about Printing, 183
Presented to the King, 191
Greenhill, i. 217, 375
Greenwood, Congregational Pastor, i. 353-355
Greenwood, Dr. Daniel, ii. 256
Grenville, Sir B., ii. 416
Greville, i. 77
Grimston, Sir Harbottle, i. 82, 85, 97, 113, 529
Grindal, i. 21, 41, 42, 319
Grotius, Hugh, i. 401
Gunning, Peter, ii. 297
Hacket, Dr. John, i. 142
Forbidden to use Prayer Book, ii. 296
Hale, Edward, ii. 121
Hales, John, i. 336; ii. 300
Hall, Joseph, i. 322
His Tract on Episcopacy, 128
His Speech, 144
Translated from Exeter to Norwich, 186
His Account of Riots, 203
Remainder of his Life, ii. 305
Hall, Thomas, ii. 197
Hammond, i. 519, 527
His Friendship for Sanderson, ii. 324
His Letters, 330
His Death, 333
His Piety, 411, 436
Hampden, John, i. 63, 66, 68, 72, 75, 82, 152, 184, 221, 241, 455;
ii. 159
Raises Volunteers, i. 240
Wounded, 281
His Last Moments, 281
Burial, 282, 283
Hardy, Dr. Nathaniel, ii. 301
Harley, Sir Robert, i. 152
Harley, Lady, ii. 424
Harrington, Sir James, Attends the King at Holdenby, i. 515
Harris, Dr. Robert, i. 329; ii. 256
Harrison, Major-General, i. 464; ii. 55, 58, 62, 70, 98
Harrison, Dr. Thomas, ii. 226
Hartford, Marquis of, i. 203
Hartlib, ii. 162, 289
Haselrig, Sir Arthur, i. 65, 146, 149, 241, 521; ii. 1, 98, 131,
159, 288
Haynes, Major-General, ii. 114
Helme, ii. 296
Henderson, Alexander, visits London, i. 107, 118
In Scotland, 167
One of the Commissioners sent to treat with the King, 264
Declaration written by Him, 293
His Controversies with the King, 470
Henrietta Maria, Queen of Charles I., i. 136, 187
Henry, Matthew, i. 533
Henry, Philip, i. 533; ii. 255, 260
Herbert, George, i. 10
His Dying Confession, ii. 409
His Hymns, 410
Herle, Charles, i. 329
Herrick, ii. 168
Hide, David, i. 199
Hill, Dr. Thomas, ii. 274
Hill, Joseph, ii. 288
Hitch, i. 319
Hobart, i. 82
Hobart, Lady Frances, her Christian Character, ii. 427
Holland, Lord, i. 76
Holland, Sir John, i. 85
Holles, Denzil, i. 60, 82, 115, 134, 148, 330
A Leader in Parliamentary Army, 240
Declares Petition from Army Seditious, 516
Hollister, Dennis, ii. 52
Hook, William, ii. 402
Hooker, i. 43, 129
Hopton, Sir Ralph, afterwards Lord, i. 191, 192, 380
Hotham, Sir John, i. 246
Houghton, Lady Mary, her Piety, ii. 426
Howe, John, ii. 93, 185, 218, 220
Cromwell's Court Chaplain, 221
His faithful Preaching, 222
His Correspondence with Baxter, 223
His Life at Court, 402
Howell, Francis, ii. 222
Howell, Thomas, i. 209, 210
Hoyle, Dr., ii. 256
Hunt, Robert, ii. 446
Hunton, Philip, ii. 287
Hutchinson, Colonel, i. 315, 437, 534
His Wife, i. 322, 461, 534
Hyde, Lord Clarendon, i. 62, 69, 77, 79, 126, 148, 153, 157, 183,
185, 226, 239, 267, 285, 374, 516, 518; ii. 503
Independents, i. 101
In the Westminster Assembly, 273
Court Party Intrigues with them, 305
How they regarded the Covenant, 323
Their Discussion with Presbyterians, 334
Principles of Toleration, 342
Early Churches, 348
Method of Worship, 364
Term first applied, 365
Two Classes of them, 367
"In-churching," 370
Favour Toleration, 419
Debates in Assembly, 439
Their view of the Assembly, 452
Contention with Presbyterians, 504
The King in their hands, 519
Cromwell aims at their Reconciliation with Presbyterians, 520
As Religious Sect not to Blame for Death of Charles, 534
Political Independents assume Supremacy in State, ii. 1
Spread of Independents, 51
Their Churches, 207
Connection with State, 209
Ministers, 216
In Scotland, 225
In Ireland, 226
Occupy Cathedrals, 228
At Oxford, 275
Manner of Receiving Lord's Supper, 392
Ireson, Sir Bryan, i. 249
Ireton, i. 437, 519; ii. 7
Irish, Insurrection, i. 212
Covenant Imposed on them, 323
The King agrees to a Truce with them, 376
Jackson, i. 38
Jacob, Henry, i. 357
James I., i. 13, 46; ii. 474
Jenkyn, William, ii. 45, 183
Jermyn, Sir Robert, i. 350
Jessy, Henry, ii. 239
Jews, ii. 504
Johnson, i. 353, 357
Joyce, Cornet, i. 519
Juxon, Bishop of London, i. 3, 527
With Charles I. at his Execution, 531
At Burial of the King, 535
Retires to Little Compton till the Restoration, ii. 308
Kiffin, William, ii. 235
Killaloe, Bishop of, i. 409
King, i. 186; ii. 308
Knightley, Sir Richard, i. 75
Knollys, Hanserd, ii. 245
Knox, i. 99, 104
Lambert, Major-General, ii. 55, 134
Lambeth MSS., ii. 9
Lamot, John, ii. 421
Lane, Thomas, ii. 457
Lapthorne, i. 50
Lathrop, i. 258, 364
Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, i. 3, 27, 30, 80, 313
His Dream, 32
His Activity, 33
Impeached, 91
The Et cetera Oath, 97
His Address to the Clergy, 98
Visits Scotland, 104
What he thought of Committee on Innovations, 121
Articles against him, 160
Sent to the Tower, 161
Effects of his Policy, 223
His Trial, 395
His Defence, 397
Bill of Attainder Passed, 399
Question as to Justice of Sentence, 400
Advised to Escape, 401
On the Scaffold, 401
His Character, 402
When Chancellor of Oxford, 496
His Colonial Policy, ii. 455
His Correspondence with Durie and Sir Thomas Roe, 484
Laurence, Dr., his friendship for Walton, i. 499
Laurence, Lord President, ii. 133
Law, William, ii. 285
Leighton, i. 26, 80
Lenthall, i. 2, 59, 505; ii. 11
Leslie, Leader of Scotch Army, i. 243
At Marston Moor, 425
At Dunbar, ii. 37
At Worcester, 43
Levellers, ii. 11
Lightfoot, Dr., An Erastian, i. 331; ii. 275-277
Lilburne, i. 80; ii. 244
Locke, John, ii. 255, 260
Advocates Toleration, i. 346
Lockier, Protector's Chaplain, ii. 73, 154, 292, 402
London, Apprentices, i. 136, 197, 201
Church Politics in London, 257
Citizens Support Presbyterianism, 259
Excitement in London, 288
Corporation Banquet, 307, 311
Bonfire of Papistical Trinkets, 312
Corporation's Remonstrance to Parliament, 509
They Petition for the Covenant, 510
Long, i. 82
Lords, House of, i. 90
Complaints of Puritans, 118
Committee of Innovations, 119
Star Chamber Bill, 127
Solemn Vow and Protestation Taken by them, 133
Object to its Universal Enforcement, 134
Bill Rendering Parliament Indissoluble, 135
Bill for Restraining Bishops, 144
Bill for Abolition of Episcopacy, 148
Conference between the Two Houses, 150
Articles Against Laud, 160
Articles of Impeachment against the Thirteen Bishops, 163
Disagree with Commons concerning Innovations, 171
The Bishops' Protestation, 203
Bishops Summoned, 205
Excluded from the House, 207
Bill for Abolition of Episcopacy Passed, 262
Bill against Pluralities, 263
Debate on Answer to Scotch Petition, 267
Propositions for Peace, 288
Present at City Banquet, 308
Pass Bill of Attainder against Laud, 399
Direct the Assembly to Prepare a Form for Ordination, 417
Loudon, Earl of, i. 264
Louis XIII. offers his services as Mediator, i. 232
Louis XIV., Cromwell's Despatches to him, ii. 492, 499
Love, Christopher, i. 413
Imprisoned, ii. 45
His Trial, 46
His Execution, 48
Lucy, Lady, of Charlcot, ii. 426
Ludlow, i. 62, 437, 520
Lunsford, Colonel, i. 198
Maitland, Lord, i. 311
Mandeville, Viscount, i. 77
Manton, ii. 48, 154
Manwaring, Dr. i. 29; ii. 308
Marshall, Stephen, i. 91, 152, 170, 250, 259, 289, 303, 308, 329,
472, 488, 527
Marten, Henry, i. 68, 71; ii. 1-6, 18, 159
Marten, Sir Henry, i. 361
Martin, i. 495
Martindale, Adam, ii. 171
Massey, i. 330, 437
Mather, Samuel, ii. 226
Maxwell, i. 90
Maydstone, ii. 231
Maynard, i. 60, 262, 330, 395
Mazarin, ii. 135
Mead, Matthew, ii. 218
Milletiere, M. de la, ii. 314
Milton, i. 341
Joins in Controversy on Episcopacy, 128, 129
His Character compared with Owen's, ii. 431
His Letters on behalf of the Piedmontese, 493
Minshall, Dr., ii. 275
Monmouth, Earl of, i. 207
Montague, Bishop, i. 162, 223
Montague, Lord, ii. 416
Montrose, i. 166; ii. 33
More, Dr. Henry, i. 340; ii. 279
Morland, Dr. Samuel, ii. 492, 496, 498, 501
Morley, Dr., i. 449, 519; ii. 319
Morton, Bishop of Durham, ii. 306
Moulin, Lewis de, ii. 256
Muggleton, ii. 369
Murcot, John, ii. 227
Naylor, James, ii. 363, 365
His Trial, 133
Nelson, ii. 295
Newark, Lord, i. 145
Newcastle, Earl of, i. 284
Newcome, Henry, ii. 173
Nicholas, Sir Edward, i. 188, 230, 414
Northumberland, Earl of, i. 264
Nye, Philip, i. 273, 289, 292, 295, 305, 332, 420, 489; ii. 100,
217, 224, 392
Ogle, Sergeant Major, i. 305-307
Omens, Supernatural, i. 238
Orange, Prince of, i. 131; ii. 22, 71
Order of the Garter Disappears, ii. 290
Osbolston, Lambert, i. 488
Owen, John, i. 459, 496, 534; ii. 96, 284
One of Committee for Toleration, 100
Preaches at Opening of Cromwell's Second Parliament, 131
Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, 249
His Interview with Cromwell, 249
His Speeches, 251
His Criticism of Walton's Polyglott, 264
His Character compared with Milton's, 431
His Impression of the Religion of the Times, 438
Owen, John, Bishop of St. Asaph, ii. 308
Owen, Morgan, Bishop of Llandaff, i. 210
Oxenstiern, ii. 485
Oxford University, i. 373, 496
Defiance of Parliament, 497
Military Occupation, 497
Parliamentary Commissioners, 498
Opposition to them, 500
Owen Vice-Chancellor, ii. 249
University Costume, 253
Celebrities, 254
Loyalty to Protector, 260
Compared with Cambridge, 284
Oyley D', ii. 477
Pack, Captain Michael, ii. 470
Pagitt, ii. 365
Palmer, Jeffrey, i. 183
Palmer, Thomas, Army Chaplain, i. 461
Palmer, Thomas, ii. 212
Parker, i. 7, 42
Parliament. Long Parliament Opened, i. 1
Members, 59
Debate on the Canons, 95
Et Cetera Oath, 97
Vow and Protestation, 134
Innovations, 171
The Militia, 232
Reformation of the Church, 235
Parliamentary Declaration, 255
Answer to Scotch Assembly, 261
Ecclesiastical Propositions, 265
Enforcement of Covenant, 320, 516
Bill Against Barrowists and Brownists, 355
Control of Church Property, 385
Establish the Directory and Prohibit Prayer Book, 404
Commissioners at Uxbridge, 412
Their Propositions, 414
Further Propositions for Peace, 471
Committee for Determining Cases of Scandal, 478
Quarrel with the Army, 528
Acts for Spoliation of the Church, ii. 9
For Maintenance of Ministers, 10
Against Licentiousness of the Press, 11
Enforce Engagement, 14
Moral Legislation, 15
Dissolution of Long Parliament, 50
Little Parliament Convened, ii. 51
Marriage Law, 56
Tithes, 57
Members Resign their Power into Cromwell's hands, 65
Character of Little Parliament, 76
First Protectorate Parliament Summoned, ii. 96
Dissolved, 103
Second Protectorate Parliament, ii. 131
Humble Petition and Advice, 138
Approbation of Public Preachers, 146
Ordinance for Ejecting Ministers, 146
Administration of Oaths to Recusants, 147
Tithes, 147
Catechising, 149
Sabbath Observance, 151
Re-assembling of Parliament, 156
Dissolution, 162
Parliamentary Army, its Character, i. 241, 374
Re-modelled, 427, 455
Its Success, 429
Disorderly Soldiers, 455
Chaplains, 456
Petitions Parliament, 516
Quarrels with Parliament, 528
Anxious for Extreme Ecclesiastical Measures, ii. 8
Discontented with New Rulers, 11
Parson, ii. 298
Patrick, Simon, ii. 279
Pell, John, ii. 489, 491
Pennington, i. 93, 103, 109, 114; ii. 511
Penry, i. 356; ii. 225
Peters, Hugh, i. 460, 532; ii. 402
Peterson, Dean of Exeter, ii. 324
Petty, Sir William, ii. 289
Piedmontese, Persecution of the Protestants by the Duke of Savoy,
ii. 490
Cromwell's Interference on their Behalf, 494
Collections for them in England, 495
Pilkington, Bishop of Durham, i. 42
Pleydell, i. 114, 148
Pocock, Dr. Edward, ii. 109, 256, 264, 481
Popery, i. 49, 55, 133, 136, 162, 177, 180, 212, 236, 293, 374
Powell, Vavasour, ii. 68, 70, 115, 243
Prayer Book, i. 124, 197, 258, 404
MS. ii. 340
Presbyterians, Clergy, i. 163
Numerous in London, 228
Majority in Assembly, 273, 329
Attachment to League and Covenant, 321
Controversy with Independents, 334, 505
Their dependence on Scotch Army, 437
Negotiate with the King, 473
Presbyterians at Norwich, 505
Difficulty with the Army, 515
Loyalty to the King, 529
Not to Blame for Execution of Charles, 534
Denounce New Rulers, ii. 12
Intrigue with Prince Charles, 25
In Cromwell's First Parliament, 96
Their Form of Church Government, 165
Presbyterians in Lancashire, 167
In London, 174, 182
Occupy Cathedrals, 228
At Cambridge, 274
Manner of receiving the Lord's Supper, 392
Prideaux, Dr., i. 211, 251, 272
Pride's Purge, i. 531
Prynne, i. 26, 80, 330, 369, 395, 400, 444, 529; ii. 504
Puritanism, its Antiquity, i. 39
Under Elizabeth, 41, 45
Doctrinal and Ecclesiastical, 46
A Reaction against Anglicanism, 52
Its Onesidedness, 56
Puritans, their Conscientious Scruples, i. 48
Imprisoned and Exiled, 50
Petition against Popery, 231
Desire a Free Synod, 270
Sufferings of their Clergy, 431
Their Inner Church life, and Home Retirement, ii. 371, _et seq._
Pury, Alderman, i. 155
Pym, John.i. 65, 75, 78, 87, 113, 115, 132, 152, 257; ii. 159
His Speech against Popery, 83
Accuses Strafford of Treason, 89
Supports Bill against Bishops, 179
A Member of the Assembly, 272
His Death, 301
Funeral, 302
Quakers, Rise of Quakerism, ii. 349
Formed into a Sect, 359
Preachers, 359
Suspicions against Quakerism, 360
Persecuted, 362
Quarles, ii. 415
Quin, i. 235
Radcliffe, ii. 34
Rallingson, Richard, i. 372
Rawlinson, MSS., i. 26, 80, 359
Reeve, ii. 369
Reynolds, Sir John, ii. 146
Reynolds, Dr., i. 449, 496; ii. 249, 481
Rich, Earl of Warwick, i. 77
Rich, Earl of Holland, i. 77
Rippon, Roger, i. 356
Rives, Dr. Thomas, i. 362
Roberts, Lord, i. 133
Robins, John, ii. 369
Roborough, Henry, i. 278
Roe, Sir Thomas, ii. 480, 486
Rogers, John, ii. 227
Roman Catholics, in Ireland, i. 212, 218, 231, 376
In the Army, 242
Charles I. Intrigues with them, 475
Their Intrigues with Prince Charles, ii. 27
Deprived of Religious Freedom, 90, 479
Excluded from Parliament, 98
Lawyers and Priests, 122
Intrigues, 315
Roundhead, Origin of Title, i. 199
Rouse, i. 330
His Version of the Psalms, 451; ii. 393
Speaker of Little Parliament, 54
His Death, 291
Rowe, Colonel Owen, ii. 474
Royalists, their Army, i. 242
Their Lawlessness, 253
At Brentford, 255
At Bradford, 283
At Gloucester, 284
At Bristol, 288
At Oxford, 373
At Leicester, 427
Sufferings of Royalist Clergy, 431
Royalist Plots, ii. 110
Persecution of their Clergy, 111
In Bermudas, 474
Rudyard, i. 60, 85, 113, 155, 272, 330
Rupert, Prince, i. 247
At Harborough, 250
At Chalgrove Field, 281
At Oxford, 373
At Marston Moor, 425
At Naseby, 428
Russel, Sir William, i. 252
Rutherford, i. 329
St. John, Oliver, i. 64, 149, 179, 272, 330; ii. 1
Saltmarsh, John, i. 462
Sancroft, i. 492; ii. 266
Sanderson, i. 519; ii. 436
His Friendship for Hammond, ii. 324
Savoy, Duke of, ii. 490
Say and Sele, Lord, i. 75, 77, 145
Leader in Parliamentary Army, 241
His Exhortation to the Citizens, 254
Proposes Dissolution of Assembly, 444
Sayle, ii. 475
Scotch, i. 166, 400, 406, 408; ii. 32, 225
Their Army, i. 105
Commissioners, 107, 308
Desire for Unity of Religion, 165
Treaty, 166
Promote Presbyterianism in England, 228
Offer to be Mediators between the King and his Subjects, 232
Commissioners at Windsor, 232
Anxiety for Abolition of Episcopacy, 261
Desire for Union between the Two Countries, 263
Send Commissioners to Treat with the King, 264
Their Failure, 268
League and Covenant, 291
Treaty with the English, 297
Army in England, 424
Its Unpopularity, 438
Negotiations, 513
Proclaim Prince Charles King, ii. 21
Send Commissioners to the Hague, 23
Controversy as to whether they should Fight against Cromwell, 38
Crown Prince Charles, 39
Remonstrators and Resolutionists, 41, 117
Army with Charles in England, 42
Seaman, Dr. Lazarus, i. 329, 527; ii. 274
Searle, Colonel Daniel, ii. 470, 472
Sects, i. 190
Their Increase, 188
and Activity, 228
Numbers Exaggerated, ii. 365
Sedgwick, Obadiah, i. 250; ii. 229
Sedgwick, John, i. 250
Selden, John, i. 69, 82, 272, 330
Shelden, i. 519
Sherlock, Dr. Richard, ii. 301
Sherman, ii. 115
Sibbs, i. 53
Sibthorpe, i. 29
Sideserfe, i. 252
Sidney, Algernon, i. 437
Simpson, Sydrach, i. 332, 334; ii. 100, 269, 275
Sindercombe's Plot, ii. 137
Sion College, ii. 175-179
Skinner, i. 186; ii. 308
Skippon, i. 255, 437
Slingsby, His Letters, i. 189, 193, 195, 200, 205
Smith, i. 178
Smith, John, ii. 279
Smith, Captain John, ii. 446
South, Robert, ii. 255, 261
Southampton, Earl of, i. 133
Spang, i. 298; ii. 22
Spinage, William, ii. 287
Sprigg, Joshua, i. 428, 456, 459; ii. 365
Spurstow, Dr., i. 241, 281; ii. 277
Stapleton, i. 330
Staunton, Dr. Edmund, ii. 256
Sterne, i. 495
Sterry, Cromwell's Chaplain, ii. 402, 516, 520
Stoughton, Dr., ii. 456
Stoupe, ii. 503
Strafford, i. 27, 29
His Thorough Policy, 36, 78
Arrives in London, 86
Impeached, 89
Goes to the House, 90
How his Attainder may be Regarded, 137
His Execution, 141
Strange, Lord, i. 243
Strangways, Sir John, i. 115
Strickland, Sir William, ii. 148
Strode, Sir Richard and Sir John, i. 26
Stubbe, Henry, ii. 257
Stukely, Lewis, ii. 228
Suffolk, Countess of, ii. 424
Sutton, Dr., i. 39
Tawney, ii. 369
Taylor, Jeremy, i. 56, 337, 379; ii. 322
Terry, Edward, ii. 480
Thomas, William, i. 154
Thorndike, Herbert, ii. 335
Thurloe, Secretary of State, ii. 117-122, 489, 491, 498, 511, 512
Tillinghurst, ii. 62
Tithes, i. 367, 389
Rights of Tithe Property, 486
Government Refuse to Abolish Tithes, ii. 8
Parliament considers Question of Tithes, 50
Report of Tithe Committee, 59
Toleration--Principles of Independent and Episcopalian Toleration
compared, i. 335
Episcopalian Writers on the Subject, 335-340
Independent Writers on Toleration, 341-345
Limits of Toleration, ii. 100
Toleration in England, under Cromwell, 143
Tombes, John, ii. 238
Tomlinson, ii. 55
Towers, John, i. 210
Travers, i. 43, 100
Trelawne, ii. 416
Tuckney, Dr., ii. 275
Twiss, Dr., i. 275, 292, 311, 328
Ussher, i. 125, 128, 140, 186, 376, 378, 527, 532; ii. 303, 304
Vane, Sir Henry (commonly called Sir Harry), i. 61, 66, 71, 75,
149, 321, 340, 529; ii. 131, 159, 288
Advocates Abolition of Episcopacy, 153
Member of the Westminster Assembly, 272
Member of the New Council of State, ii. 1
His Character, Religion, and Politics, 5
His Power declines, 18
Retires to Raby Castle, 1, 123
Imprisoned, 127
Vane, Sir Henry (the elder), i. 61
Vaudois, _see_ Piedmontese
Venn, Captain, i. 258
Venner, ii. 62
Verney, Sir Edward, i. 226
Vicars, his Chronicle, i. 312
Vines, i. 517, 527; ii. 269
Vink, Peter, ii. 187
Wales, ii. 14, 118, 243
Waller, the Poet, i. 154; ii. 522
Wallis, ii. 256
Walton, Isaak, i. 16, 424, 499
Walton, his Polyglott, ii. 261, 335
Walton, Valentine, i. 499
Ward, Seth, ii. 222, 256
Wariston, Lord, i. 290
Warner, Bishop of Rochester, ii. 308
Warr, Lord de la, ii. 447
Warwick, Sir Philip, i. 63, 70, 184
Webster, ii. 271
Wesleys, i. 159
John Wesley, 490
Educated at Oxford, ii. 285
Westfield, i. 186, 209, 272, 277
Whalley, Major-General, ii. 114, 116, 151
Wharton, Baron, i. 77, 444
Wharton, a Soldier, i. 248-252
Whitchcot, Governor of Windsor Castle, i. 535
White, John, i. 103, 159, 279
White, Jeremiah, ii. 401
Whitefield, Educated at Oxford, ii. 285
Whitelocke, Bulstrode, i. 18, 253, 264, 272, 408, 412; ii. 292
His Conversation with Queen Christina, i. 466
and with the Bishop of Upsala, ii. 144
Whitgift, i. 6, 17, 42
Widdrington, Sir Thomas, i. 161; ii. 288
Wilkins, Dr. John, ii. 256
Wilkinson, Henry, ii. 256
Wilkinson, Captain, ii. 475
Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, i. 3, 140, 145, 170
Presides over Committee for Innovations, 119
Created Archbishop of York, 186
His share in the Westminster Riots, 199
Joins in a Protest, 203
Close of his Life, 211
Effect of his Protest, 223
Williams, Sir Charles, i. 148
Williams, Roger, ii. 467
Willoughby, Sir Hugh, ii. 443, 470
Wills, Registration of, i. 483; ii. 83
Wilson, John, ii. 339
Wilson, Thomas, ii. 196
Windebank, i. 16; ii. 484
Winniffe, Thomas, ii. 307
Winter, Dr. Samuel, ii. 226
Winthrop, ii. 453
Wiseman, Sir Richard, i. 200
Wiseman, Thomas, his Letters, i. 165, 172, 189-191, 212-214
Witchcot, Dr., i. 492; ii. 275
Witchcraft, Belief in, ii. 383-387
Wood, Anthony, i. 272, 462; ii. 253
Worsley, ii. 122
Worthington, ii. 282
Wray, Sir John, i. 95, 132, 136
Wren, i. 131, 161; ii. 308
Wright, i. 351
Wyatt, Sir Francis, ii. 448
Wylde, i. 163, 395
Wyndham, Justice, ii. 212
Yelverton, Sir Christopher, ii. 306
Zanchy, Proctor, ii. 248
Zouch, ii. 260
UNWIN BROTHERS, PRINTERS, BUCKLERSBURY, LONDON, E.C.
WORKS PUBLISHED BY
JACKSON, WALFORD, & HODDER,
_27, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C._
[Illustration]
Micah the Priest Maker. A Hand-Book on Ritualism. By T. BINNEY. In post
8vo., price 5s., cloth.
"In the long course of a brilliant career, the celebrated
minister of the King's Weigh House Chapel has seldom employed
his powers upon a subject intrinsically so unworthy of them
as the new vagaries of sacerdotal folly; but never have his
abilities, or the admirable properties of his judgment, been
more honourably displayed."--_Morning Star._
Ritualism in the English Church, in its relation to Scripture, Piety,
and Law. By ROBERT VAUGHAN, D.D., Author of "Revolutions in English
History," &c., &c. In post 8vo., price 4s. 6d., cloth.
"Dr. Vaughan's publication is well-timed, and will be welcomed
by those who appreciate searching criticism conducted in a
fair, gentlemanly spirit."--_Daily News._
"The book is a model of Christian controversy. It abounds in
wealth of thought."--_Nonconformist._
The Pulpit Analyst. Designed for Preachers, Students, and Teachers.
Edited by JOSEPH PARKER, D.D. The First Volume is now ready, price 7s.
6d., cloth extra.
"A very valuable auxiliary to ministers in their pulpit
preparations. Dr. Parker has done his work as editor with
great ability and success."--_Patriot._
Jesus Christ: his Times, Life, and Work. By E. DE PRESSENSÉ, D.D. In
8vo., price 14s., cloth.
"M. De Pressensé's work is characterised by the learning,
patience, brilliance, and insight which have given him so high
a place among the literary men of Europe."--_British Quarterly
Review._
"A truly admirable book, the plan of which is singularly
philosophical and comprehensive, and the execution most
thorough and effective."--_Journal of Sacred Literature._
Our Hymns: their Authors and Origin, being Biographical Sketches of
nearly Two Hundred of the principal Psalm and Hymn Writers, with Notes
on their Psalms and Hymns. By JOSIAH MILLER, M.A. In crown 8vo., price
6s. 6d., cloth.
"I find it full of interesting information."--_Archbishop
Trench._
"A work of very great research, of skilful composition, of
valuable information, and of exceeding biographical and
religious interest."--_British Quarterly Review._
Discourses delivered on Special Occasions. By R. W. DALE, M.A. In crown
8vo., price 6s., cloth.
"In Mr. Dale's 'Discourses on Special Occasions' we have some
of the finest specimens of modern preaching."--_Contemporary
Review._
"It is long since we read sermons more full of stimulating
thought, of Catholic sympathies, of manly and noble
eloquence."--_British Quarterly Review._
_By the same Author._
The Jewish Temple and the Christian Church. A Series of Discourses on
the Epistle to the Hebrews. In crown 8vo., 7s. 6d., cloth.
"The style is clear, captivating, and popular. It is
impossible for Mr. Dale to write without teaching many things
beside the chief lesson which he has in hand. His mind is most
fertile, and his remarkable faculty for explanation makes him
more than usually interesting."--_Christian Spectator._
Twelve Months with Fredrika Bremer in Sweden. By MARGARET HOWITT. In 2
vols., crown 8vo., with Portraits and Illustrations, price 21s., cloth.
"This is a charming book, charming alike in style, tone, and
subject-matter. Never was a pleasanter picture than that which
Miss Howitt has painted for us."--_Literary Churchman._
"Two volumes which give us, not only a good view of Miss
Bremer in her private life, but, also, a most interesting
description of the Swedes themselves."--_Reader._
The Lacemakers: Sketches of Irish Character. With some account of the
effort to establish Lacemaking in Ireland. By MRS. MEREDITH. In crown
8vo., 7s. 6d., cloth.
"The stories contain much amusing illustration of Irish
character and habits."--_Spectator._
"Mrs. Meredith brings to a labour of love a true Catholic
spirit, which cannot fail to enlist the sympathies of all who
seek to alleviate the condition of the very poor of Ireland by
legitimate means."--_Reader._
_By the same Author._
The Sixth Work. In crown 8vo., 3s. 6d., cloth.
"Mrs. Meredith finds six duties prescribed in the Sermon on
the Mount, and the sixth of them is that of visiting the
prisoner, and making an effort towards bringing about his or
her reformation."--_Spectator._
"A very valuable little book, full of earnest purpose, and
discriminating suggestion."--_British Quarterly Review._
WORKS BY THE REV. CHARLES STANFORD.
"One of the sincerest, manliest, and clearest writers we
have."--_Christian Work._
I.
Symbols of Christ. Crown 8vo., 7s., cloth.
"Cherished and familiar truths are presented in a great
variety of aspects and with much richness of colouring, and
the old words seem to glow with fresh life."--_Evangelical
Christendom._
II.
Central Truths. Second Edition, in small crown 8vo., price 3s. 6d.,
cloth.
"Its pages are replenished with wisely simple and unassumingly
graceful utterances."--_Christian Spectator._
III.
Power in Weakness: Memorials of the Rev. WILLIAM RHODES. Cheap Edition,
in fcap. 8vo., price 2s.
"Mr. Rhodes's life was one of singular trial and affliction,
and the remarkable development of mental power which he
exhibited in the midst of great physical weakness forms the
leading idea of the book."--_Record._
IV.
Joseph Alleine: His Companions and Times. Second Thousand, in crown
8vo., price 4s. 6d.
"A very interesting volume."--_London Review._
V.
Instrumental Strength: Thoughts for Students and Pastors. Crown 8vo.,
price 1s., cloth limp.
"The discourse is one from which every minister and student
will learn something."--_Christian Work._
WORKS BY THE REV. J. BALDWIN BROWN, B.A.
I.
The Divine Life in Man. Fourteen Discourses. Second Edition, crown
8vo., 7s. 6d., cloth.
II.
The Divine Treatment of Sin. Crown 8vo., 5s., cloth.
"This most beautiful book. It abounds in revealing touches,
in sentences which are poems, paragraphs which are speaking
pictures. We scarcely know where to quote, the pages are about
so equal in excellence and beauty."--_Eclectic Review._
III.
The Divine Mystery of Peace. Crown 8vo., 3s., cloth.
"Will gratify alike both the thoughtful and the
devout."--_Patriot._
IV.
The Doctrine of the Divine Fatherhood in Relation to the Atonement.
Cloth limp, 1s. 6d.
* * * * *
Thoughts at Seventy-nine. By the Author of "Thoughts on Devotion," &c.,
&c. In fcap. 8vo., 4s. 6d., cloth extra.
"The reader will find much to stimulate both thought
and devotion in Mr. Sheppard's graceful, instructive
pages."--_London Quarterly Review._
A Book of Public Prayer. Containing Liturgical Services for four
Sundays. In Royal 32mo., cloth extra, 2s.
"To those who think Nonconformist worship might be improved
by some change of this kind, and to those who have doubts on
the subject, we commend a dispassionate consideration of this
judicious compilation."--_British Quarterly Review._
"This little and handsome volume is a cheering sign
of the drawing together of men's hearts, and the
acknowledgment of the kindred wants of Conformists and
Nonconformists."--_Churchman._
Memoirs of the Life and Ministry of Rev. THOMAS RAFFLES, D.D., LL.D.
By THOMAS STAMFORD RAFFLES, Esq., B.A., Stipendiary Magistrate for the
Borough of Liverpool. Cheap Edition, in crown 8vo., with Portrait, 7s.
6d., cloth.
"The volume is excellently written."--_Saturday Review._
John Leifchild, D.D., his Public Labours, Private Usefulness, and
Personal Characteristics. Founded upon an Autobiography. By J. R.
LEIFCHILD, A.M. 8vo., 10s. 6d., cloth, with Portrait.
"Mr. Leifchild's volume is a most interesting record of a
remarkable man."--_Patriot._
Pietas Privata: Prayers and Meditations. With an Introductory Essay on
Prayer, chiefly from the Writings of HANNAH MORE. 39th Thousand, 32mo.,
1s. 6d., cloth; 2s., roan, gilt edges.
Dark Sayings on a Harp; and other Sermons on some of the Dark Questions
of Human Life. Preached in Queen Square Chapel, Brighton, by the Rev.
E. PAXTON HOOD. In crown 8vo., price 6s., cloth.
"There is remarkable originality throughout the volume, and
great freshness and brilliancy of thought."--_Evangelical
Magazine._
Money: a Popular Exposition in Rough Notes. With Remarks on Stewardship
and Systematic Beneficence. By Rev. THOMAS BINNEY. Third Edition, crown
8vo., 5s., cloth.
"Mr. Binney has here dealt with a great practical subject, and
has treated it in his usual clear, masterly, and suggestive
style."--_British Quarterly Review._
Notes on Epidemics: for the Use of the Public. By FRANCIS E. ANSTIE,
M.D., F.R.C.P., Author of "Stimulants and Narcotics." Fcap. 8vo., price
4s., cloth.
"An important work, useful alike to the public and
the practitioner, accurate in its facts, clear in its
descriptions, and logical in its inferences, up to the most
recent advance of medical science."--_Popular Science Review._
The Improvement of Time. An Essay. With other Literary Remains. By JOHN
FOSTER, Author of "Essays on Decision of Character," &c. Edited by J.
E. RYLAND, M.A. Crown 8vo., 6s., cloth.
"A really valuable production--it is fully worthy of
Foster."--_Record._
The Rise and Progress of Religious Life in England. By S. R. PATTISON,
F.G.S. Post 8vo., 7s., cloth.
"Mr. Pattison is the first who has aspired to present to
the world a complete narrative of the spread and growth of
Christianity in England, from the time of its first planting
until the end of the eighteenth century.... He has given us
a book which will be read with unflagging interest by the
members of every denomination."--_Freeman._
"Comprises a rich store of historic information of a very
valuable kind."--_Homilist._
* * * * *
WORKS BY THE LATE ISAAC TAYLOR.
I.
The History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times.
Together with the Process of Historical Proof. Post 8vo., 7s. 6d.,
cloth. New Edition.
II.
The World of Mind. An Elementary Book. Post 8vo., 7s. 6d., cloth.
III.
Considerations on the Pentateuch. Addressed to the Laity. Third
Edition, 8vo., 2s. 6d., sewed.
* * * * *
First Lines of Christian Theology, in the form of a Syllabus, prepared
for the use of the Students in the Old College, Homerton; with
subsequent Additions and Elucidations. By JOHN PYE SMITH, D.D., LL.D.,
&c. Edited by WILLIAM FARRER, LL.B. Second Edition, 8vo., 15s., cloth.
"To ministers of the Gospel, and to students preparing for
the ministry, this volume is the completest and safest guide
in theological study to be found, as far as we know, in any
language."--_Eclectic Review._
* * * * *
London: JACKSON, WALFORD, & HODDER, 27, Paternoster Row.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Sir Henry Vane retired to Raby Castle after Pride's purge, of which
he thoroughly disapproved, and took no part in public affairs until
February, 1649, when the execution of Charles had taken place. Mr.
Forster remarks: "It is a profound proof of Vane's political sagacity,
that he disapproved the policy of that great act. Upon the question
of its abstract justice, he never delivered an opinion."--_British
Statesmen_, iii. 125.
[2] Neither Cromwell nor Elizabeth in this respect must be measured
by the standard of judgment respecting political morality which is
commonly recognized in our day. The fable of Reynard the Fox, the Life
of Louis XI., by Comines, and the writings of Machiavel, are proofs
of the high repute in which dissimulation was held in the middle ages
and after the Reformation, as a quality essential to the government of
mankind. See also _Bacon's Essays_.
[3] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1009, 1010.
[4] On the 9th of March, the Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, and
Lord Capel, were executed on Tower Hill in consequence of the decision
of the preceding year that all who took up arms in the second war were
traitors, and should suffer the penalties of treason.
[5] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1303.
[6] _Parl. Hist._, iii., 1267, 1276.
[7] _The Essex Watchmen to the Inhabitants of the said County._ London,
1649. This publication, referring to the clause in the agreement, "so
it be not compulsory," declared that "this one little parenthesis
was the fly in the box of ointment," which made it "an abhorring in
the nostrils of every one who is knowingly judicious and pious." The
ministers lamented that, in consequence of those five fatal words,
heads of families would be prevented from obliging their children and
servants to attend public worship; and thus, they said, an inlet was
opened for domestic profanity. In their estimation, not to compel
people to be religious was to grant them "liberty to apostatize,
and cast off the profession of Christianity;" and before concluding
their testimony, they denounced toleration as a satanic engine "for
demolishing the beauty, yea, the being of religion."
[8] The Act for the abolition and sale is printed in _Scobell_, p.
16. Date, April 30, 1649. There were surveys and valuations made
accordingly, of which some records are preserved in the Lambeth
Library. As these surveys are often referred to, the following
description of them is given from the _Catalogue of the Lambeth MSS._:--
"Surveys of the possessions of bishops, deans, and chapters, and other
benefices, were made in pursuance of various ordinances of Parliament
during the Commonwealth, by surveyors appointed for that purpose,
acting on oath, under instructions given to them, as may be seen in
_Scobell's Acts and Ordinances_, A.D. 1649, p. 19, &c. The original
surveys were returned to a registrar appointed by the ordinances, and
duplicates or transcripts of them were transferred to the trustees or
commissioners nominated for the sale of the possessions, who held their
meetings in a house in Broad Street, in the City, where these documents
remained until after the Restoration." It was afterwards ordered that
these records should be delivered to Juxon, Archbishop of Canterbury,
to take care of the same, and by him they were deposited in the Lambeth
Library. "Some of them were afterwards sent by his Grace to the bishops
and deans and chapters to which they belonged, so that the collection
in the Lambeth Library is not complete. What remain are bound up in
twenty-one large folio volumes, in alphabetical order, of the different
dioceses or counties to which they relate. A minute index to the
whole, in one folio volume, exhibits the name of every place surveyed.
Besides the above, there are surveys of the possessions of the see of
Canterbury kept separate from the possession of the other sees, deans
and chapters, &c., with indexes in alphabetical order, which are bound
in three volumes; of these the second contains original surveys, as far
as folio 73, from thence to the end are copies."
Several interesting extracts from the survey are contained in _Lyson's
Environs_. Take the following as illustrative of the religious affairs
of the parish of Walthamstow:--
"The commissioners appointed to enquire into the state of
ecclesiastical benefices, in 1650, found by their inquest that the
vicarage of Walthamstow was worth £40 per annum, including the tithes
and glebe. John Wood was then vicar; he had been put in by the
committee of plundered ministers; 'but (says the inquest) he is now
questioned for his abilities; and certain articles have been exhibited
against him to the committee, and he is disliked by the greater part of
the inhabitants, who will not come to church to hear him; whereby there
is great distraction in the parish.' The jurors report that it was not
known in whom the patronage of the vicarage was vested, it having been
long in suit, and then as yet undetermined."--_Lyson_, iv. 221.
[9] See _Bentham's Ely Cathedral_, sect. vi.
[10] In the powers for sale of Deans and Chapter lands (passed
July 31st, 1649), "rectories, parsonages, and vicarages" are
excepted.--_Scobell_, 69. In connexion with this, however, may be
mentioned "an Act" passed, April the 26th, "for settling the rectory
or parsonage-house of Burford, Oxon., and some of the glebe land on W.
Lenthall, Esq., now Speaker, and his heirs."--_Parry_, 504.
[11] _Scobell_, 40. One hundred pounds a year at that time was a large
salary. It must have been as good as five hundred now, seeing that Sir
Henry Slingsby kept an establishment of thirty servants on £500 per
annum.--_Brodie's British Empire_, iv. 245.
[12] _Cromwell's Letters and Speeches_, i. 435. _Whitelocke_, 399.
[13] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1305.
[14] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1323, _et seq._
[15] _Scobell_, 104.
[16] _Ibid._, 111.
[17] April 5, 1650. _Scobell_, 111.
[18] _Ibid._, 119.
[19] _Scobell_, 123. In the Windsor churchwardens' accounts for 1652-3
there are several entries of persons fined for swearing.--_Annals of
Windsor_, ii. 268.
[20] _Scobell_, 124. Milton praises this Act in his Treatise of Civil
Power in Ecclesiastical Causes.--_Political Works_, i. 548.
[21] _Scobell_, 121. May 10, 1650. The _Parliamentary History_, vol.
iii. 1347, states that on the 7th of June a bill was ordered to be read
on the Friday evening ensuing against the vice of painting, the wearing
of black patches, and the immodest dresses of women. But no mention is
made of it in the Journal of that day nor in _Scobell's Acts_.
[22] _Scobell_, 131.
[23] From the same register may be added a few extracts illustrative of
collections made at church in those times:--
"Divers ministers, and other distressed families, driven into the
straitened garrison of Pembroke, and several imprisonments, most of
them under the Earl of Carbery first, and now at last undergone the
loss of all that they had by General Gerrard, only escaping with their
lives, 1645. (Collected 8s. 10d.)
"Poor Protestants driven out of Ireland. 1647. (Collected on the
thanksgiving-day for God's great blessing upon the Parliament's forces
in Munster, under Lord Inchiquin, 5s.)
"John Cheynell, late minister of Beedon, Bucks, who had been
continually plundered by both armies, 'and had lost two sons, gracious
young men, cruelly murdered, himself having been sequestered by false
information,' 1652. (Collected 15s. 8½d.)
"Mr. Philip Dandelo, a Turk by nation, by profession a Mahometan by
God's gracious providence and mercy converted to the Christian faith,
by the endeavours of Dr. Wild, Dr. Warmester, Mr. Christopher, and Dr.
Gunning, 1661. (Collected 5s. 8d.)"--_Lyson's Environs_, iv. 285.
[24] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 66.
[25] _Baillie_, iii. 69, 74, 79.
[26] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 84-88.
"Dr. Bramble, of Derry, has printed the other day, at Delf, a wicked
pamphlet against our Church. We have no time, nor do we think it fit
to print an answer." The pamphlet was written by Bramhall, Bishop
of Derry, entitled "A Fair Warning to take heed of the Scottish
Discipline," and may be seen in his _Works_, iii. 237. Notwithstanding
the remark just quoted, a reply appeared, entitled: "A Review of Doctor
Bramble, late Bishop of Londonderry; his Fair Warning against the
Scotch Discipline," by R. B. G., printed at Delf, 1649.
The following letter preserved amongst the _State Papers_
(Commonwealth, _Dom._) is worth introducing here:--
Most dear brother--We have not any news concerning Rupert the Devil,
unless what comes out in print. No man receives any letter from you.
My brother, the Prince Elector, is now here, and cares no more for
those cursed people in England, for he hath done his duty to the King,
which otherwise he might have avoided by reason of the affairs which
required him at Cleare. Here, also, are the Scotch Commissioners, who
every day bring some new proposal to the King, full of impertinency,
for they would not that the King should keep about him any honest man,
for which they are in great favour with the Princess of Orange, who
declares herself much for the Presbyterians, and says that Percy is
the honestest man the King has about him. But I believe you care not
much to know the intricacies here, for which cause I shall not trouble
you further, besides that you have other business to do than reading
letters, only I entreat you to take notice.--I remain your affectionate
sister and servant,
Sophia.
A Mons. le Prince Rupert, April 13th, 1649.
[27] _State Papers, Dom., Commonwealth._ 5th of March, 1649-50. Certain
names are mentioned in the paper as desirable to be added to the King's
Council.
[28] In the paper it is stated that arms and ammunition were already
forwarded to the Scilly Isles for the purpose proposed.
There is a letter amongst the State Papers connected with this document
and interlined with sympathetic ink, which interlining speaks of
submitting to the engagement as necessary for his Majesty's service. It
contains a request that his pleasure might be privately intimated with
respect to religious parties generally.
[29] Erroneously placed under the month of May. The day is obliterated.
[30] _State Papers Dom. Interreg._ The last portion within brackets has
been added by a later hand.
[31] To Sir E. Nicholas, from Mr. Nicholson, 1650, June 2,
Jersey.--_State Papers Dom., Interreg._
[32] _State Papers_, under date, _Dom., Interreg._
[33] _Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, by Carlyle_, 20, 28.
[34] _Carlyle_, ii. 58, 64.
[35] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 112.
[36] An account of the coronation is given in _Baillie's Letters and
Journals_, iii. 128.
[37] See _Cunningham's History of the Church of Scotland_, ii. 167, 168.
The following passages from Sir J. Turner's _Memoirs_ throw light on
the hypocrisy of this period:--
"Glasgow, being a considerable town, was most refractory to this
Parliament; for Mr. Dick, whom they looked upon as a patriarch, Mr.
Baillie, Mr. Gillespie, and Mr. Durhame, all mighty members of the
Kirk of Scotland, had preached them to a perfect disobedience of all
civil power, except such as was authorized by the General Assembly and
Commission of the Kirk: and so, indeed, was the whole west of Scotland,
who cried up King Christ and the kingdom of Jesus Christ, thereby
meaning the uncontrollable and unlimited dominion of the then Kirk
of Scotland, to whom they thought our Saviour had delivered over His
sceptre, to govern His militant Church as they thought fit." (Page 53.)
"About this time, the monstrous Remonstrance was hatched; and if
Lambert had not, by good fortune to us all, beaten Colonel Ker at
Hamilton, I believe the King had been just as safe at St. Johnston as
his father was at Westminster. The desperate condition of affairs moved
some of the best natured of the Presbyterian clergy to think of some
means to bring as many hands to fight against the public enemy as was
possible; and therefore, notwithstanding all their acts of Assemblies
and Commissions of the Kirk to the contrary, they declared all capable
of charge in state or militia who would satisfy the Church by a public
acknowledgment of their repentance for their accession to that sinful
and unlawful engagement. The King commanded all who had a mind to
serve him to follow the Church's direction in this point. Hereupon,
Duke Hamilton, the Earls of Crawford and Lauderdale, with many others,
were admitted to Court, and numbers of officers re-assured and put
in charge, and entrusted with new levies. My guilt in affronting the
ministry (as they called it), in the person of Mr. Dick, at Glasgow,
and my other command in the west, retarded my admission very long;
but at length I am absolved, and made Adjutant-General of the Foot,
and, after the unfortunate encounter at Inverkeithing, had once more
Lieutenant-General Holburn's regiment given me by his Majesty's
command. Behold a fearful sin! The ministers of the Gospel regard all
our repentances as unfeigned, though they knew well enough they were
but counterfeit; and we, on the other hand, made no scruple to declare
that Engagement to be unlawful and sinful, deceitfully speaking against
the dictates of our own consciences and judgments. If this was not to
mock the all-knowing and all-seeing God to His face, then I declare
myself not to know what a fearful sin hypocrisy is." (Page 94.)
[38] _Clarendon's History of the Rebellion_, 759.
[39] The loyal Lancashire Presbyterians refused to join the Earl
of Derby, because he would not take the Covenant and dismiss all
Papists.--_Hibbert's Manchester_, i. 400.
[40] _State Papers, Dom., Chas. II., Calendar by Mrs. Green_,
1660-1661, Preface, xiii. These are Annesley's own words. It is
difficult, however, to reconcile all he says with his sermon before
the House of Commons in 1648; but then it was very difficult to be
consistent in those days.
[41] The following entries appear in the Council Book:--
"7th May.--That it be referred to the Committee appointed for the
examining of the London ministers to send for Mr. Jenkins according as
they shall have occasion, and to examine him upon such matter as they
shall have before them; the Council being satisfied, upon a certificate
of the physicians, that he may be brought without prejudice to his
health; and they are likewise to send for such other persons as they
shall find concerned in that business, and examine them concerning the
same, and report the state of the whole matter to the Council.
"10th May.--That Mr. W. Jenkins be committed close prisoner to the
Tower, for high treason, &c." (This was William Jenkyn, lecturer at
Blackfriars, and author of _An Exposition on the Epistle of Jude_.)
"That he may speak to Dr. Dwight, Dr. Guarden, or Dr. Pagett, all or
any of them, concerning his health, if he shall think fit.
"That Mr. Massey be committed close prisoner to the Tower of London,
for high treason, in keeping correspondence with the enemies of the
Commonwealth, and endeavouring to subvert the Government thereof, and
in order to his further examination and trial, according to law.
"That Mr. Christopher Love be also committed prisoner to the Tower, in
like manner, for the like crime.
"That Mrs. Jenkins, Mrs. Case, Mrs. Love, and Mrs. Drake, be permitted
to come and abide with their husbands, now prisoners in the Tower,
notwithstanding their close imprisonment.
"12th May.--That they shall have liberty to visit their husbands,
provided they speak not to them but only in the presence and within the
hearing of the Lieutenant of the Tower, or such, by his appointment, as
he will answer for.
"10th June, 1651.--That it be referred to the Committee for
Examinations to send for, in safe custody, and at such time as they
shall think fit, the persons hereafter named, viz.: Mr. Jackson, Mr.
Nolton, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Cawton, Mr. Blackmore, Mr. Herrick, Mr.
Haviland, Mr. Watson, Mr. Crauford, Col. Souton, Lieut.-Col. Jackson,
Mr. Cawdry, and to examine them concerning their having had a hand
in the London conspiracy, and to report to the Council their several
examinations, when they shall be taken."
Baxter, at this time, refused to keep the humiliation and thanksgiving
days appointed by Government, and preached so as plainly to shew he
disapproved of their proceedings. This brought him into suspension.
He says: "My own hearers were all satisfied with my doctrine, but the
Committee-men look sour; but let me alone. And the soldiers said I
was so like to Love that I would not be right till I was shorter by
the head. Yet none of them ever meddled with me further than by the
tongue." He adds that he was never forbidden to preach but once, and
that was an assize sermon.--_Life and Times_, i. 67.
[42] The letter is dated "from the Tower of London, August 22nd, 1651,
the day of my glorification," and is preserved, with others from which
we have quoted, in _Love's Name lives_. London, 1651.
Eachard tells a story of Cromwell having written to the Parliament,
recommending Love's reprieve on security for good behaviour, and of the
letter being stolen by some cavaliers.--_Hist. of England_, ii. 706.
[43] After the dissolution of the Long Parliament, Cromwell was supreme.
The following extract is curious, as indicating that when he had all
power in his own hands, he must have connived at the revival of old
church customs: "Living here, in the churchyard of St. Margaret's, in
Westminster, which was the church proper to the Parliament, for here
they kept their thanksgivings, their humiliations, and all other their
solemnities; whereas in their time the font was pulled down, and so
continued demolished and in ruins, it is now set up again in a most
decent and comely manner; and I hope it will be an example for other
churches to follow; so likewise they had a very solemn perambulation
in Rogation week, according to the old manner, which had been omitted
during the sitting of Parliament; and holidays begin to be kept."--From
the _Dedication to Goodman's Two Great Mysteries_. June 4th, 1653.
[44] Quoted in _Forster's English Statesmen_, v. 139.
Thurloe gives one of the replies, dated 13th May, 1653. The Dutch
deputies say, in a letter of the 12th of August, 1653, that "the
Independent party" are spread through all England under the name of
gathered churches. The word "Independent" was often used in a very wide
and general sense.--_Thurloe's State Papers_, i. 395.
[45] _The Broadmead Records_, 43. A strong feeling against Cromwell
and his policy is manifest throughout. The writer was evidently a
prejudiced sort of person.
[46] Whitelocke observes that "it was much wondered at by some that
these gentlemen, many of them being persons of fortune and knowledge,
would, at this summons, and from these hands, take upon them the
supreme authority of the nation." _Memorials_, 559.
[47] _Carlyle_, 187-217. _Foster_, v. 148-164.
[48] _Exact Relation. Somers' Tracts._
[49] Notices of these persons may be found in _Noble's Lives of the
Regicides_--not, however, a trustworthy book. The account of Tomlinson
is very meagre.
[50] The Act was passed August 24th, 1653.--_Scobell_, 236. Mr.
Forster, in his _Statesmen_, v. 195, informs us on the authority of the
compilers of the _Parliamentary History_, that in the debates on this
marriage law, it was proposed but not passed, "That if any person then
married or to be married according to this Act, should make proof by
one or more credible witness upon oath, that either the husband or wife
had committed the detestable sin of adultery during such marriage, then
the said parties might be divorced by the sentence of three justices of
the peace." In _Cobbett's Parliamentary History_, iii. 1413, however,
no notice is taken of this circumstance.
[51] Baxter mentions that Mr. Tallents, of Shrewsbury, and other
clergymen, married persons in the presence of a magistrate, the
magistrate only declaring that it was a legal union.--_Calamy's Life of
Baxter_, 67.
[52] See _Commons' Journals_, under dates.
There is, under date 26th of August, 1653, in the _Council Order Book_,
the following entry:--"That the draft of the Act for the abolishing of
all rural prebends, which was in the hands of F. Chas. Wolseley to be
reported to the Parliament, be humbly reported to the Parliament by Mr.
Laurence." No such Act appears in _Scobell_.
[53] See _Exact Relation_ and _New Narrative of the Dissolution_, and
_Forster's Statesmen of the Commonwealth_, v. 218.
_Thurloe's State Papers_ furnish illustrations of the difference of
opinion in the Short Parliament, i. 368, 386, 387, 393.
[54] _Commons' Journal_, December 2, 1653.
[55] _Exact Relation._
[56] We have endeavoured impartially to set down such facts as can be
ascertained in reference to these important proceedings. What was done
by the Little Parliament, or any other Parliament, in no wise affects
the question as to the Scriptural mode of supporting religion. Many
readers will have reached their own conclusions on that point. Some may
believe the Bible favours the civil establishment of the Church; others
that an establishment of this kind is inconsistent with the teaching
and spirit of primitive Christianity. The author does not scruple to
say that the latter is his opinion, though he has jealously watched
lest the fact should prejudice any of his statements.
The above narrative points to the difficulties surrounding the
controversy, when lifted out of the sphere of abstract truth, as
studied by divines and philosophers in their closets, into the arena
of political and financial debate; where practical men have to deal
not only with first principles, or even with statute laws and long
established usages; but also with a large amount of property which for
generations the State has held in trust for religious uses.
[57] See Clarendon's statements in his _Hist. of Rebellion_, 795, and
those of Baxter, in his _Life and Times_, i. 70. The question with
regard to a Commission of Triers is thus unfairly represented by the
latter: "It was put to the vote whether all the parish ministers of
England should at once be put down or no. And it was but accidentally
carried in the negative by two voices." Clarendon goes so far as to
say: "They resolved the function itself to be antichristian, and the
persons to be burdensome to the people."
[58] It was mooted at Norwich "whether it be fit to draw a petition to
the Parliament that the cathedral may be given to the city for a stock
for the poor."--_Corporation Records_, date 19th March, 1650.
From an extract of a petition in _Manship's History of Yarmouth_, p.
394, it appears that the townspeople "begged such a part of the lead
and other useful material of that vast and altogether useless cathedral
in Norwich, towards building a workhouse, to employ our starving poor,
and repairing our piers."
[59] See _Thurloe_, i. 519, 523. We must leave the political historian
to describe how far Cromwell influenced the resignation.
[60] Sterry was one of Cromwell's chaplains.
[61] _Thurloe_, i. 621.
[62] _Cunningham's Handbook of London._
[63] _State Papers, Dom., Interreg._, Dec., 1653.
[64] _Thurloe_, i. 641. It is added in a postscript: "I am just now
assured, and from one that you may believe, that Harrison, Vavasour
Powell, and Mr. Feake, have been all this day before his highness and
council; and that Powell and Feake are this evening sent to prison, and
Harrison hath his commission taken from him."
[65] _Thurloe_, i. 442.--Allowance must be made for the prejudices of
the reporter, and consequently some abatement from the violent charge.
From the _Council Order Books_, (State Paper Office) we extract the
following minutes:--
"Dec. 21st. 1653.--That Mr. Feake and Mr. V. Powell be sent for, in
custody, to appear before the Council, at four of the clock, in the
afternoon of this day, to answer such matters as shall be objected
against them, and that warrants be issued and signed by the Lord
President, for authorising Sergeant Dendy to take them into custody
accordingly.
"That it be referred to Mr. Scobell and Scoutmaster General Downing to
peruse the paper now read, of words spoken by Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell,
and to extract and divide into heads the material passages therein; as
also to take in writing the examinations of such witnesses to the same
purport as shall be produced before them.
"23rd.--That Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell be kept severally in custody by
the Serjeant-at-arms, and brought to the Council to-morrow morning.
"22nd of December.--The Lord Protector present.--Mr. Vavasour Powell
and Mr. Feake brought before Council.
"That Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell be continued in the custody of the
Serjeant-at-arms apart, as formerly, until to-morrow morning; that the
Council give further order, and that no person be permitted to come to
them but for their necessary provisions."
We have not noticed any further entries on the subject.
[66] _Lingard's History of England_, xi. 14.
Hugh Peters was an earnest advocate for peace with the Dutch.
"Mr. Peters prays and preacheth for peace, and exhorteth them to
peace. On the last thanksgiving-day he told them, that God Almighty
had punished them long enough for their sins, and especially for
their pride, covetousness, ambition, discord, ingratitude, and
unmercifulness, and hardheartedness to the poor, which are sins that do
reign to some purpose in this nation."--_From an intercepted letter in
Dutch. Thurloe_, i. 330.
Peters had become an important political personage. One of the Dutch
deputies in treaty with England, observes, in a letter, November,
1653: "Mr. Peters hath writ a letter to the Queen (of Sweden) by the
Lord Whitelocke, wherein he relates the reasons why they put the King
to death, and dissolved this last Parliament; and withal sends to her
Majesty a great English dog and a cheese, for a present."--_Thurloe_,
i. 583.
[67] They are printed in the _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1417. They bear this
simple title: "The GOVERNMENT of the COMMONWEALTH of England, Scotland,
and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging."
[68] _Carlyle_, ii. 227.
[69] _Whitelocke_, 571.
[70] The Acts and Resolves of Parliament for taking the Engagement were
repealed the 19th of January, 1653-4, and the repeal was confirmed in
1656.--_Scobell_, 277.
The following letter is an example of the way in which Presbyterian
ministers availed themselves of this change to recover benefices
forfeited by refusing the Engagement:--
"Mr. Sympson,
"If the order (by colour of which you invaded my church) did give you
(which I confess I could never understand) any power to do so, the
late revolution hath made it void and null; and the Lord Protector
having taken to his sword a sceptre, and consented and sworn to govern
according to law, and not otherwise, I conceive it to be my duty
to ... let you hereby know that ... I am legal incumbent of the place;
in pursuance whereof, I am resolved to return on lord's Day afternoon,
at the usual hour of public worship, to my own church, and therefore
desire you to cease your future pains in that place, and signify
so much to your friends, that we may have no disturbance: and if
you conceive you have any right in the place, commence your action;
you shall receive in any court of judicature a plea from him who is
resolved to defend his own just privilege, and give an account of his
reasons to the world.
"Zach. Crofton.
"The next lord's Day, being the 2nd of August, I intend to preach at
my own church between one and two of the clock, afternoon."--_State
Papers._
Amongst petitions and other papers in the Record Office, _Dom.
Interreg._, vol. 677, 371, is the following from the Earl of Worcester,
shewing the style in which the Protector was addressed:--
"May it please your Excellency,
"The obstacle which hindered many your Excellency's just and laudable
intentions for the common welfare being now by God's providence and
your Excellency's unparalleled endeavours removed, I make these my
most humble addresses to your Excellency (to whose ears were my
condition rightly made known), not doubting of redress, and in deed
and effectually to receive what the late Council of State put me in
daily hopes [of], which my humble petition will in part declare. For
I can aver that no subject in England hath been so hardly dealt with;
but having recourse to the fountain head of mercy and nobleness, whose
crystalline waters may now run without interruption, my heart is
elevated with hopes, not only to receive obligations thereunto, but
also an opportunity to make evident how much I am ambitious to appear
your Excellency's most humble and obliged servant,
"Worcester."
There are several other petitions from this Earl and his Countess.
[71] I have honestly endeavoured to understand and describe this
crisis in the Commonwealth affairs, uninfluenced by any ecclesiastical
opinions of my own. But I must add that nothing said in these pages
is to be taken as inconsistent with a firm belief that the voluntary
support of religion is the Divine law of Christianity.
[72] Article xxxv., _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1425.
[73] "The clergy in Scotland refused to observe the fast day ordered by
the Protector, it being their principle, not to receive any directions
for the keeping fasts from the civil magistrates."--_Whitelocke_, 607.
[74] Harris, in his _Life of Cromwell_, 432, on Clarendon's authority,
says that Cromwell, by a declaration, rendered all Cavaliers incapable
of being elected, or of giving a vote.
[75] _Scobell_, 232, 288; _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxviii., 17; ii. 253.
Respecting the administration of wills during the Commonwealth, we
subjoin the following illustrations:--
In relation to a chasm in the Registry of Norwich between 1652 and
1660, the following passage is found in one of the indexes:--"Cætera
ab hoc anno desiderantur testamenta. Cæpit jam Cromwelli usurpatoris
istius ambitio rabide sævire; cujus sub vexillo grassabantur undique
seditio, violentia, rebellio, sacrilegium, et quod (horrendum dictu
est) regicidium. Huic sequuta sunt, confusio in ecclesia, in republica
militum insolentia, in parochiis factio, in familiis atheismus. Et
plebs miserrima cum maximo suo damno et detrimento (apud nescio quæ
tribunalia Londinensia) ad Cromwelli libitum, coacta est se sistere ad
testamenta proband."--_Nicolas's Notitia Hist._, 181.
Extract from Council Books, 14th July, 1653:--
"That it be referred to the Judges for Probate of Wills to appoint such
persons as they shall think fit to be keeper of the records belonging
to that court.
"That all those rooms formerly used for, or called the Star Chamber
rooms, be appointed for the keeping of records belonging to the late
Prerogative Court; and also for the records of the New Court for
Probate of Wills; and for the erecting and establishing of an office
there, and fitting places for the officers and clerks belonging
thereunto, in such manner as the said judges, or any of them, shall
direct."
"_Patent Roll_, 1655, p. 3, No. 46.--Mainby. Salary as a Commissioner
for Probate of Wills."
"_Patent Roll_, 1654, p. 4, No. 46.--Lucy." Similar entry.
Amongst _Petitions and Reports Intereg._, W.Z. No. 246, there is a
paper respecting probates, dated 9th of January, 1655.
[76] _Scobell_, 279.
[77] Yet they were constantly subject to the control of the Protector
and Council of State; these without being formally constituted a court
of appeal, were so in fact. Take the following instance from the
council books:--
"October 5th, 1654.--Whereas, by a late ordinance of his Highness the
Lord Protector and the Council, passed the 2nd of December last, it is
ordained that the Commissioners for Approbation of Public Preachers
shall not give admission to any person formerly sequestered from any
ecclesiastical benefice, or promotion for delinquency, until, by
experience of conformity and submission to the present government, his
Highness and the Council shall receive satisfaction of his fitness
to be admitted to ecclesiastical promotion within the Commonwealth,
and the same shall be signified to the said Commissioners. Now, upon
reading and consideration of a report from Mr. Sterry and Mr. Nicholas
Lockier, made in pursuance of a reference to them from the Council
concerning Mr. Bridge, of Petworth, it is ordered and declared by
his Highness the Lord Protector and the Council, that they are so
far satisfied thereby concerning the said Mr. Bridge, his submission
and obedience to the said authority, that they do hereby refer it to
the said Commissioners, to proceed to the trial of his fitness for
preaching of the Gospel; and upon their satisfaction in that behalf, to
give him their approbation and admittance, the said bar or restraint
contained in the said ordinance notwithstanding."
[78] By the ordinance of January the 19th, 1653-4, (see _Scobell_), the
Act for taking the Engagement was repealed. Some of the sequestered
ecclesiastical clergy took advantage of this, appeared before the
tribunal, secured their approval, and returned to their livings. But
by another ordinance of the 2nd of September, 1654, the Commissioners
were forbidden to admit any delinquents until they submitted to the
existing government, so as to satisfy his Highness and the Council.
The enforcement of subscription to the doctrines of Presbyterianism
by ministers of the Establishment was contemplated by some members of
Parliament in December, 1654. _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxvii.
[79] August the 28th--_Scobell_, 335-347.
[80] _Scobell_, 347, 353.
Besides support from tithes there were proposals that ministers should
be exempted from paying tenths and first-fruits, and one debate went
so far as to suggest the exemption of ministers from all taxation
whatever.--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. ciii.-cxxi.
[81] _Scobell_, 139. This Act has been referred to, vol. i., p. 487.
[82] _Ibid._, 353.
[83] Articles xxxvi., xxxvii.--_Parl. Hist._, iii. 1425.
[84] "Provided this liberty be not extended to Popery nor Prelacy,
nor to such as under the profession of Christ hold forth and practice
licentiousness."--_Art._ xxx. 61.
Short observes in his _Sketch of the Church of England_, ii. 189:
"There was at one time a project for extending liberty of conscience to
the Roman Catholics, and consultations were held among the members of
the Government for the purpose of granting them security of person, and
of the remainder of their property after composition, as well as for
providing a safe living for a prelate who might execute his functions.
But the loyalty of the Roman Catholics was alarmed at the idea of
compounding with the usurper, and they communicated the circumstances
to the exiled court, where a stop was put to the whole." He refers to
_Butler's Roman Catholics_, 418, and _Thurloe's State Papers_, i. 740.
[85] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxiv. Dec. 12th, 1654.
[86] At an earlier period, it is remarked in a letter in the State
Paper Office, dated 10th of May, 1650: "I received notice of a meeting
of my Lord Beauchamp and Sir Arundell, and many others, at Salisbury,
upon pretence of being at a race, but purposely to treat of the King's
business."
[87] The dates of these ordinances are March 31st, July 4th, June 29th,
1654.--See _Scobell_.
[88] In these books there occurs an order for the enforcement of
arrears of rent due to Dr. Wyniffe, Bishop of Lincoln, before the 9th
of November, 1646;--and a reference of the petition of Mrs. Cosin, wife
of the Dean of Peterborough, respecting her claims upon the fifths of
the income of the rectory of Brancepeth, Durham, held by her husband,
to Sir George Vane and others, who, if possible, were to adjust this
dispute with the incumbent, Mr. Leaver. If not, they were to report to
the Council accordingly.
There is an order on the 3rd of July, 1654 for exempting from excise
duty so much paper used in printing the Bible, in the original and
other learned languages, as "shall make up 7,000 pounds."
It is remarkable what an unusual number of orders belong to the 2nd of
September, 1654, the day before Cromwell met his first Protectorate
Parliament.
[89] _Newspaper_ (1654); _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xvii.; _Carlyle_,
ii. 254; _Whitelocke_, 599.
On this second day of meeting the following resolutions were passed:--
"September 4th, 1654.--Resolved, that the governors of the school
and almshouse of Westminster do take care that such of the morning
lecturers as preacheth on the respective days, do attend, each morning
that they preach, to pray in this House.
"Monday, 11th.--The House being met, and opportunity taken about
something that fell from the parson that prayed this morning, it was
moved that something should be done as to matter of religion. And in
order thereunto, it was resolved that the several members of each
county should present the name of one godly and able minister of the
Gospel for each county, to be approved of by the House, who should
meet together, and present their advice to the Parliament, in such
points only as the Parliament should propose to them; the names to be
presented upon Friday next."--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xxvii.
[90] _Godwin's Commonwealth_, iv. 129.
[91] Article xvii.
[92] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xcviii. The drinking of healths,
however, it should be remembered, "seems now to have been chiefly, if
not entirely, confined to the convivial meetings of the Cavaliers, and
employed to express their disaffection" to the Commonwealth government.
[93] November 27th, 1654, _Journals_. This resolution deprived Owen of
his seat.
[94] November 17th, 1654. _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. lxxix.
[95] Baxter's account of this committee betrays his dislike to the
"over-orthodox Doctors Owen and Cheynell." He introduces a rather
triumphant description of his own hair-splitting as "one merry passage
which occasioned laughter."
Some were, he says, for making it "a fundamental that he who alloweth
himself or others in a known sin cannot be saved." Baxter wagered he
would make them strike that out. "I told them that the Parliament took
the Independent way of separation to be a sin; and when this article
came before them, they would say, 'By our brethren's own judgment
we are all damned men, if we allow the Independents or any other
sectaries in their sin.' They gave me no answer, but left out the
fundamental."--_Life and Times_, ii. 197-9.
[96] _Calamy's Abridgment_, 121.
[97] _Neal_, iv. 98. Baxter says twenty propositions were printed, but
in Neal's copy, taken from Scobell, there are but sixteen.
[98] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. cxix.
After a careful consideration of what Baxter says, compared with
Goddard's Journal in _Cromwellian Diary_, vol. i. (Introduction), I
am brought to the conclusion above expressed, notwithstanding the
attempt of Mr. Orme in his _Life of Owen_, p. 115, to give a different
version of the affair. John Goodwin attacked the principle involved
in the measure in his _Thirty Queries modestly propounded in Order to
the Discovery of the Truth and Mind of God in that Question or Case of
Conscience, whether the Civil Magistrate stands bound by Way of Duty to
interpose his Power or Authority in Matters of Religion and Worship of
God_. 1653.
[99] Soon after the rising of the first Protectorate Parliament, Biddle
was released, but getting again into trouble, after much suffering and
imprisonment in Newgate, the poor man became an exile for life. The
Protector allowed him a hundred crowns per annum for his subsistence,
and in 1658 permitted a writ of _habeas corpus_ in his favour.
Notwithstanding his errors, Biddle seems to have been an honest and
devout man, and certainly the treatment which he received was most
unrighteous.
[100] _Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy_, part i. 176.
In vol. xvii. of _Petitions and Reports_ (_State Papers_) are the
following memoranda:--
"Case tried at Worcester Assizes, 1656. Charge of defamation of
character by ejected clergyman, against the person who prosecuted him
before the Commissioners. Sued the person for damages. Judge Windham,
in charging the jury, did urge very much the increase of damages as
aforesaid, declaring that by such conduct as the defendant's honest
men came to be sequestered, to the discouragement of many then present
who had stated this to be the fact. The jury gave a verdict for the
plaintiff--£80 damages."
[101] Some instances will occur in our account of the Episcopalians
under the Commonwealth. Others beside Episcopalians were objected
to before the Commissioners. In illustration of this, I subjoin the
following document amongst the State Papers:--
"To the most reverend the Commissioners for approbation of public
preachers.
"Articles that will be proved and deposed to upon oath against James
Cockaine, of Tredsham, in the county of Chester.
"That Mr. James Cockaine denies the ministry as an office.
"That no Christian in these ages hath the Spirit of God in any measure.
"That the image of God in us doth not consist in knowledge,
righteousness, and true holiness.
"That Mr. Cockaine affirms in public, upon occasion, that the
sacraments were Popery.
"That he disallows of catechising.
"That syllogisms are of the devil. Denies the Sabbath; saith all days
are alike, and that it ought not to be called the lord's Day.
"That several parishioners, eminent for religion and piety, have
withdrawn themselves from his ministry in the said parish. He humbly
prayed that as the witnesses are many who will ascertain these articles
upon oath, there may issue a commission to justices of the peace for
the said county, and ministers to examine the truth of the premises,
and to certify thereon."
[102] So far as the law of the Triers were concerned, this is true; but
it is right to add that the complaints of non-payment in many cases had
a sufficient foundation.
[103] Compare _Twell's Life of Pocock_, 151, 175, with _Thurloe_, iii.
281. Owen says in the letter there printed--"There are in Barkshire
some few men of mean quality and condition, rash, heady, enemies of
tithes, who are the Commissioners for ejecting of ministers." He then
refers to Pocock as a man of great learning and high character, as
liable to be cast out "on slight and trivial pretences."
[104] These Royalists were religious men. Upon receiving sentence,
they exclaimed: "Now, farewell world! welcome heaven! Oh! what a happy
change shall we make from night to day! Oh! blessed Jesus and Saviour
of the world, how wonderful are Thy mercies! Thy love is unspeakable!"
This is reported in one of the newspapers of the day, dated April the
19th, 1655.
In the _Perfect Proceedings_ of the 12th to the 19th of April, it is
reported from Hereford that the governor had secured Colonel Birch, who
affirmed that the plotters were not Cavaliers, but Ranters, Quakers,
and Anabaptists.
[105] Letters from Secretary Thurloe and Mr. Pell in _Vaughan's
Protectorate of Cromwell_, i. 145 and 165.
[106] _Harris's Cromwell_, 429. Cromwell attempted to vindicate himself
on the ground that the Episcopal clergy "meant to entail their quarrel,
and prevent the means to reconcile posterity" (435).
Amongst the State Papers is a petition to the Protector from Dr.
Woolley, a schoolmaster, to be allowed to continue "his painful
employment." There is also a certificate by his friends to the
following effect:--"We, whose names are underwritten, do most humbly
certify that, upon our knowledge, Edward Woolley, of Hammersmith, in
the county of Middlesex, Doctor of Divinity, is a religious, learned,
and sober person, and hath most quietly submitted to this present
authority under his Highness's government, of whom he never speaks but
with great honour and reverence, and so inclineth his scholars under
his tuition. He hath a very excellent faculty in the education of youth
in the Latin, Greek, and French tongues, with many other commendable
exercises, beyond any whom we have seen besides in this nation.--Signed
by Thomas Coxe, Doctor of Physic; John Hexing, Minister at Bride's,
Fleet Street; and other persons."
[107] Derby, November 17th, 1655.--_Thurloe_, iv. 211.
[108] November 10th, 1655.--_Ibid._, 184.
[109] December 1st.--_Thurloe_, iv. 274.
[110] _Ibid._, 216.
[111] _Thurloe_, iv. 228.
[112] _Ibid._, 151.
[113] _Thurloe_, iv. 273.
[114] _Ibid._, 37. There is a curious letter from the same writer (p.
49) from which it appears that the policy of Cromwell's government in
Scotland was not to interfere with religious peculiarities if they did
not threaten any political disturbance.
[115] _Thurloe_, iv. 56.
[116] _Ibid._, 127, 128, 223, 250.
[117] _Ibid._, 700. The following is worth notice:--
"The other day a minister in a country church prayed for all the exiles
and prisoners high, and low; and I being informed of it, caused the man
to be brought before the council here, who not denying the words, we
committed him, and afterwards he acknowledging his fault and promising
never to be guilty of the like again, or using any indirect terms,
which might keep up Charles Stuart in the memory of the people, we
dismissed him from his imprisonment and from ever preaching again in
that church."--Ibid. 558.
[118] _History of Nonconformity in Wales, by T. Rees._ Appendix, 501.
This act is not given in _Scobell_.
[119] _Thurloe_, iv. 334.
[120] _Thurloe_, iv. 565.
[121] _Ibid._, 380, 505.
[122] _Thurloe_, iv. 314, 348.
[123] _Ibid._, 450.
[124] _Ibid._, 447.
[125] _Forster's Statesmen of the Commonwealth_, iii. 365.
[126] _State Papers, Dom. Interregnum_, August the 26th, 1656.
We find the author of the _Christian Armour_ giving advice before the
election.
_The Magistrates' Portraiture_: a Sermon at Stowmarket, in Suffolk,
upon August the 20th, 1656, before the election of Parliament-men for
the same county, on Is. i. 26: "And I will restore thy judges as at
first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning;" by William Gurnall, of
Lavenham. 1656.
The preacher expresses a fear of the letting in of Popery through the
sects, Anabaptists, Seekers, Quakers, &c., and recommends his hearers
to seek out men faithful to the ministers of the Gospel.
[127] _Carlyle's Cromwell_, ii. 416, _et seq._
The following document is in the State Paper Office, 17th of September,
1656:--"We whose names are subscribed, with others, being chosen and
accordingly returned to serve with you in this Parliament, and in
discharge of our trust offering to go into the House, were at the
lobby-door kept back by soldiers, which, lest we should be wanting
in our duty to you and to our country, we have thought expedient to
represent unto you to be communicated to the House, that we may be
admitted therein."--Subscribed by Sir Ralph Hare and 160 others.
September 22.--Resolved, that the persons which have been returned
from the several counties to serve the Parliament, and have not been
approved, be referred to their application to the Council for their
approbation, and that the House do proceed with the great affairs of
the nation.
The Committee's answer is, that they have refused none that to
them have appeared to be men of integrity, and according to the
qualification of the Instrument. And therefore his Highness and the
Council have given orders to the soldiers to keep those persons
out.--_State Papers Dom._
[128] This was Henry Laurence, Lord President of the Council, member
for Westmoreland in the Long Parliament, and for Colchester in the
Parliament of 1656.
[129] Member for Bedfordshire in the Parliaments of 1654 and 1656.
[130] This was Major-General Lambert, called _Lord_ Lambert, from his
being the first president of the Protector's Privy Council. He was
member for Yorkshire in 1654 and again in 1656.
[131] Member for Somersetshire in 1654 and in 1656.
For all these speeches see _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 62, 28, 33, 55.
[132] _Ibid._, 158.
[133] _Carlyle_, ii. 470.
[134] _Carlyle_, ii. 473.
[135] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 359.
Mr. Gillespie is no doubt intended. The editor says:--"Notes were
expressly prohibited by a direction in the Covenant." I do not find
this to have been the case. Nothing is said upon the subject in the
Directory.
[136] The petition and advice was first presented to Cromwell, March
the 31st, 1657. It was accepted by him May the 25th.
[137] It is related by Henry Neville, member for Reading, in Richard's
Parliament, and the author of _Plato Redivivus_--That "Cromwell, upon
this great occasion, sent for some of the chief city Divines, as if he
made it a matter of conscience to be determined by their advice. Among
these was the leading Mr. Calamy, who very boldly opposed the project
of Cromwell's single government, and offered to prove it both unlawful
and impracticable. Cromwell answered readily upon the first head of
unlawful, and appealed to the safety of the nation being the supreme
law. 'But,' says he, 'pray, Mr. Calamy, why impracticable?' Calamy
replied, 'Oh, 'tis against the voice of the nation; there will be nine
in ten against you.' 'Very well,' says Cromwell, 'but what if I should
disarm the nine, and put the sword in the tenth man's hand; would not
that do the business?'"--See _Critical Review of the Life of Oliver
Cromwell_, p. 149, note. _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 321.
[138] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1508 and 1425.
[139] _Carlyle_, ii. 567.
[140] _Carlyle_, ii. 579-581.
[141] _Ibid._, 497.
[142] In 1651 "their High Mightinesses decreed that the sects should
be restrained, and not suffered to spread. _Sectas cohibendas et in
ordinem redigendas, neque permittendum ut in plura loca quam hodie sunt
diffundantur._"--_Bayle's Dict., Art. Anabaptists._
[143] Whitelocke, when Ambassador to the Court of Sweden, had the
following conversation with the Archbishop of Upsala. _Archbishop_:
"No one must vent his private fancies or new opinions contrary to
the doctrine of the Church. If he does, we severely punish it."
_Whitelocke_: "That is somewhat strict, and may be construed to a kind
of assumption of infallibility." _Archbishop_: "We take no such thing
upon us, but desire to preserve peace and unity in the Church and its
members." _Whitelocke_: "Those are good things, but I doubt hardly to
be settled in this world, where offences must come." _Archbishop_:
"But woe to those by whom they come." _Whitelocke_: "They may possibly
come by imposing too much on men's consciences as well as by new
opinions."--_Memoirs of Whitelocke_, 375.
[144] April 28th. _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 55, 58, 60., and _Journals
of the House of Commons_.
[145] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 149-152.
[146] _Faulkner's History of Brentford and Chiswick_.--The minutes of
the Commissioners are cited as authorities.
[147] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 165, 166.
[148] _Neal_, iv. 135.
[149] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 202-206.
[150] _Journals_, 11th of June, 1657.--In the report of the
Committee, it is stated, that in the said Bibles there are already
discovered these omissions and misprintings, _i.e._, "Know ye not
that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God," for "shall
_not_ inherit."--John ix. 21; these words wholly left out: "Or who
hath opened his eyes we know not."--Rom. vi. 13; "Neither yield
ye your members as instruments of righteousness unto sin," for
"unrighteousness."
On the 16th of January this year, 1657, the Grand Committee for
Religion had ordered a sub-committee to advise with Drs. Walton,
Cudworth, and others, respecting translations and impressions of the
Bible. In consequence, there was a meeting at Whitelocke's house, at
Chelsea, upon the 6th of February following. The Committee often met,
"and had the most learned men in the Oriental tongues to consult with
in this great business, and divers excellent and learned observations
of some mistakes in the translations of the Bible in English, which
yet was agreed to be the best of any translation in the world." Great
pains were taken in it, "but it became fruitless by the Parliament's
dissolution."--_Whitelocke's Memorials_, 654.
[151] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 261-269.--The following instance of
Parliamentary interference with the ministers of St. Margaret's church
occurs in the _Journals_ just after the debate on the Sabbath:--
"Tuesday, June 23rd, 1657.--Ordered, that the Lord Strickland and
Major-General Whalley do represent it unto his Highness the Lord
Protector, as the desire of the Parliament, that his Highness will be
pleased to remove from Margaret's, Westminster, the present preacher,
being a prisoner to the Upper Bench; and also one Warmstree, who is
employed as a lecturer there, being a notorious delinquent; and to
appoint some person of eminent godliness and abilities to be public
preacher there; which the Parliament doth apprehend to be a matter of
very great concernment to the good of this place."
This probably was Thomas Warmestry, who, though a Puritan, retired to
Oxford during the Royal residence there. After the Restoration he was
made Dean of Worcester.
[152] _Scobell_, 438. He places it under 1656.
[153] "It was moved that the sword to be delivered by way of
investiture might not be left out.
"Mr. Lister: His Highness has a sword already. I would have him
presented with a robe.
"Some understood it a rope, and it caused _altum risum_. He said he
spoke as plain as he could--a robe.
"You are making his Highness a great prince--a king indeed--so far as
he is Protector.
"Ceremonies signify much of the substance in such cases, as a shell
preserves the kernel, or a casket a jewel. I would have him endowed
with a robe of honour."--_Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 303.
At length it was "Resolved that there be a purple robe lined with
ermine, a Bible, a sceptre, and a sword, provided for the investiture
of the Lord Protector." Thursday, 25th June, 1657.--_Post-meridian
Journals._
[154] Mr. Lockyer, chaplain to his Highness, made an exhortation at the
Banqueting House, Whitehall, after the Westminster Hall solemnity.
[155] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1514-1518.
The following story is told:--"When Cromwell took on him the
Protectorship, in the year 1653, the very morning the ceremony was to
be performed, a messenger came to Dr. Manton to acquaint him that he
must immediately come to Whitehall. The doctor asked him the occasion.
He told him he should know that when he came there. The Protector
himself, without any previous notice, told him what he was to do,
_i.e._, to pray upon that occasion. The doctor laboured all he could to
be excused, and told him it was a work of that nature which required
some time to consider and prepare for it. The Protector replied that
he knew he was not at a loss to perform the service he expected from
him, and opening his study-door, he put him in with his hand, and
bid him consider there--which was not above half an hour. The doctor
employed that time in looking over his books, which he said was a noble
collection."--_Harris's Life of Cromwell_, p. 4.
If the story be true, the date is incorrect; and the ceremonial
of 1653, when Lockyer gave an exhortation at Whitehall Banqueting
House, is confounded with the ceremony of 1657, when Manton prayed
in Westminster Hall. It would look as if the devotional part of the
service had not been contemplated in the original arrangement, but was
afterwards introduced by the express desire of Cromwell.
[156] A report of this speech is given in the _Journals of the
Commons_, under date January the 25th, 1657-8.
[157] In connection with this notice of a godly ministry at the
re-opening of Parliament, it may not be irrelevant to mention that the
daily meetings of Cromwell's Parliament commenced with prayer; and that
whereas in the Little Parliament the members turned the legislative
assembly into a prayer-meeting--and "engaged" one after another in
devotional exercises--in the Parliaments which followed, no such
custom obtained; but some regular minister officiated each morning.
So scrupulous did the Commons become in confining the performance
of Divine worship to the Clergy, that in the last of Oliver's
Parliaments, the House on one occasion waited half an hour for the
minister, and because he did not make his appearance proceeded without
prayer.--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. xxvii., and _Parry_, 522.
[158] The Republicans at first rejected had been now admitted.
[159] "Il Signor Protettore col consenso del suo consilio di stato
ha questa settima banito per una sua proclamatione di Londra tutte
Cattollici e Roalisi alle lor proprie stanze di campagna, o al
luogo della lor nascita, prohibendo li sotto pena di incarceramento
di allontanarsi di detti luoghi più de cinque miglia, e questa
proclamatione commencia a essere in vigore li venti-dui di
Marzo, e dura fin alli otto di Maggio." Di Londra, 14mo. Marzo,
1658.--_Thurloe_, vi. 841.
[160] _Carlyle's Cromwell_, ii. 634.
[161] Carlyle, ii. 651.
[162] The question of augmentations of livings had been brought before
the Council in the month of October, 1656: it was referred to the Lord
Deputy and others to speak with Dr. Owen and Mr. Nye upon the subject,
and to report their opinions to the Council.
Some points respecting ministers in later entries were referred to Nye,
Caryl, and Peters.
[163] The last three minutes belong respectively to May, 1658, June,
1658, and March, 1656.
[164] The authorities for this sketch of Presbyterianism are the
Westminster form of Presbyterian government, Parliamentary ordinances,
and the account of the particular form under which Presbyterianism
appeared in Lancashire, as given by Hibbert, in his _History of the
Foundations of Manchester_.
It should be borne in mind that, while the law, as it regarded
the civil enforcement of Presbyterian discipline, remained a dead
letter, there was nothing to prevent the carrying out of its purely
ecclesiastical arrangements.
[165] In the eighth chapter of the _Second Book of Discipline_, it is
said of Deacons: "To them belongs the collection and distribution of
the ecclesiastical property; and in this they must be subject to the
presbytery, though they are not members of it."
[166] Members liable to be brought before their several Presbyteries
adopted measures of retaliation. Accusations were preferred against
church officers. They were accused, for instance, of being present
at horse-races, or at ale-feasts, where there was fiddling, bowling,
or tippling going on; of neglecting to sing psalms in the family; of
entertaining Cavaliers; of affirming that the Parliament was a body
without a head; of appealing to the authority of Scripture in support
of the royal cause; and of never having publicly manifested any sorrow
for malignancy. These accusations were followed by recriminations on
the opposite side.--_Hist. of the Foundations of Manchester_, i. 276.
[167] The following passage with respect to him occurs in the _Life of
Adam Martindale_, p. 61:--
"Mr. Heyrick was then up at London, and after his coming down, I heard
him, on a fast day, in a great congregation at Manchester, declare
himself (before the ministers of the classis then just setting up)
so perfect a latitudinarian as to affirm that the Episcopalians,
Presbyterians, and Independents, might all practice according to their
own judgments, yet each by Divine right. How his brethren liked this
I know not; but I am sure so he said, his text being: 'The government
shall be upon his shoulder' (Isaiah ix. 6). And Mr. Harrison did little
less than contradict him, following him upon that text (Zechariah iv.
9), making it his great business to reprove the Independents for not
laying a good foundation."
[168] _Hist. of Manchester_, i. 238.
[169] The _Diary_ and _the Autobiography of Newcome_, and the _Life of
Adam Martindale_, have been published by the Cheetham Society.
[170] It may be seen in Sion College Library. I feel much pleasure in
here expressing my thanks to the librarian for the courteous aid he has
afforded me in my researches.
[171] "In regard there was no more ministers present by reason of the
Act at Oxford, the further consideration was deferred."
[172] _16th February, 1656._--"The question of the Fifth Monarchy being
propounded, it was debated whether there shall be a more glorious time
for the Church of Christ before the end of the world. Ordered that this
branch of the question be further debated the next meeting."
[173] The title of Saint is carefully dropped.
[174] Some portions of the minutes of meetings held at Sion College
are preserved in Dr. Williams's Library. From them we extract the
following:--
"_Die Lunæ, Dec. 30, 1650._
"Present, Mr. Bedford. The first proposition.--'The ministers that
undertook this not yet met.'
"The second proposition.--'None met of this company.'
"Present, Mr. Drake, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Watson. The third
proposition.--'Something prepared, but the company have not yet met.'
"Present, Mr. Sheffield, Taylor, Blackwell, Wickens, Blackmer. The
fourth proposition papers delivered upon this question.
"Present, Dr. Seaman, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Tawler, Mr. Poole. Fifth
proposition.--'One paper delivered about this question.'
"Two papers brought in concerning the fourth proposition at this
meeting.
"The paper delivered in about the fourth proposition was read."
These notes seem to refer to heads of debate, prepared at a committee,
December the 4th, 1650.
"1. That there is an office of the ministry instituted by Christ.
"2. That this office is perpetual.
"3. That Christ hath appointed in His word the way of separating men to
the office of the ministry.
"4. That election and ordination is that way of Christ.
"5. That this ordination----"
Here the MS. abruptly breaks off.
References to these propositions in subsequent minutes are of frequent
occurrence.
[175] The county of Essex was formally divided into classes; and the
particular arrangement of them, with the names of the ministers as
approved by the Committee of Lords and Commons, still exists, but
beyond that, I am ignorant of what was done.
The document entitled, _The Division of the County of Essex into
Several Classes, &c._, 1648, is printed at length, with numerous
curious annotations in _David's Annals of Evangelical Nonconformity in
the County of Essex_.
[176] See _Johnson's English Canons_, Oxford Edit., ii. 325.
[177] Coleridge's remark is worth remembering in connection with
the Presbyterian endeavours after discipline: "With regard to the
discipline _attempted_ by the Antiprelatic Episcopalian (?) clergy, let
it not be forgotten that the Church of England has solemnly expressed
and recorded her regret that the evil of the times had prevented its
establishment, and bequeaths the undertaking as a sacred trust to a
more gracious age.--_Notes on Southey's Life of Wesley_, i. 199. But is
discipline a possible thing in a State-established Church.
Keble, in his _Life of Wilson, Bishop of Sodor and Man_, speaks of
the "nation's general hatred of ecclesiastical discipline;" and after
giving an account of the ecclesiastical courts in the Isle of Man,
says: It was a reality there "for years after it had come to be a
shadow in the whole Anglican Church elsewhere," p. 140. He justly
remarks that the Manx code implies faith on the part of the people.
Some of the laws are curious enough, (see i. 204), and present a
chapter in ecclesiastical history worth studying. The sanction and
enforcement of such a scheme by the civil power is utterly opposed to
the principle of toleration.
[178] See accounts of this church in _Strype's Stow_, i. 583. Stow
mentions as hung up in the cloisters a gigantic shank-bone of a man.
[179] _Account of the Ejected_, p. 5.
[180] A copy of this is entered in the MS. volume of minutes of the
London Synod, Sion College Library.
[181] _Strype's Stow_, i. 381.
[182] _Howe's Works_, vi. 298.
[183] _Clarke's Lives_, preface, p. 8.
[184] See _Howe's Funeral Sermon_ (_Works_, vi. 349), in which he
speaks of Vink as endowed with singular parts.
[185] All this and much more is said to his honour by Calamy in his
funeral sermon.
[186] "In Worcestershire," says Baxter, "they attempted and agreed upon
an association, in which Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Independents,
and the disengaged, consented to terms of love and concord in the
practising so much of discipline in the parishes, as all the parties
were agreed in (which was drawn up) and forbearing each other in the
rest. Westmoreland, and Cumberland, and Essex, and Hampshire, and
Wiltshire, and Dorsetshire, quickly imitated them, and made the like
association, and it was going on, and likely to have been commonly
practised, till the return of the bishops after brake it." This is
taken from a paper among the _Baxter MSS._ (_Red Cross-street_), vol.
ii., No. 28.
When Baxter became acquainted with Ussher, he treated with him about
terms of union "between Episcopalians and Presbyterians and other
Nonconformists."
[187] "This magnificent structure, sharing the common calamity of
civil war, the west part thereof was converted into a stable, and the
stately new portico into shops for milliners and others, with rooms
over them for the convenience of lodging: at the erecting of which the
magnificent columns were piteously mangled, being obliged to make way
for the ends of beams which penetrated their centres."--_Maitland's
London_, vol. ii. 1165.
[188] _Vain Religion of the Formal Hypocrite._--_Baxter's Works_, xvii.
80.
The authorities for our account of Baxter are his _Life and Times_, and
the MSS. in Dr. Williams' Library.
[189] _Swinnock's Life of Wilson._
[190] Gataker's remarkable book, _On the Nature and Use of Different
Kinds of Lots_, 1619 (in which he maintains that lots are regulated by
natural laws) abounds in out of the way learning.
[191] _A Discourse Apologetical, wherein Lilies' Lies in his Merlin, or
Pasquil for 1654, are laid open._
[192] _Gataker's Discours Apologetical_, 33-49.--In this amusing
history he tells the following story:
"A gentleman being missed at chapel by some of those that used there to
meet him, and coming late into the hall at dinner, and being thereupon
demanded by one of them where he had been straying abroad, 'I have
been,' quoth he, 'at Paul's Cross.' 'Thou wentest thither sure to hear
some news,' said the other. 'No, truly,' replied he, 'I went upon
another occasion, but I learned that indeed there, which I never heard
of before; how the ass came by his long ears. For the preacher there
told us a story out of a Jewish rabbin, that Adam, after he had named
the creatures, called them one day again before him to try whether they
remembered the names that he had given them; and having by name cited
the lion, the lion drew near to him, and the horse likewise; but then
calling to the ass in like manner, the ass having forgotten his name,
like an ass, stood still; whereupon Adam, having beckoned to him with
his hand, so soon as he came within his reach, caught him with both
hands by the ears, and plucked him by them so shrewdly, that for his
short wit he gave him a long pair of ears. Upon this story being told
them, one of them told him he was well enough served for his gadding
abroad; he might have heard better and more useful matter had he kept
himself at home."
[193] This seems an imitation of the mediæval joke, "Although
Canterbury had the highest rack, yet Winchester had the better
manger."--_Hook's Archbishops of Canterbury_, iv. 198.
[194] _Life and Times_, p. ii. 363.
[195] This sermon contains a touching account of the character and
death of the young nobleman.
Gauden, in 1659, published _The Tears, Sighs, Complaints, and Prayers
of the Church of England, setting forth her former Constitution,
compared with her present Condition; also the Visible Causes and
Probable Cures of her Distempers_.
[196] _Memorials of Fuller, by Russell_, 220, 163.
At the same time Fuller animadverts on the Presbyterians and the
Sectaries, 222.
[197] The authority for this story is Calamy, in his _Life of Howe_.
Fuller had a marvellous memory; and Pepys tells a story of his
dictating, in Latin, to four persons together, faster than they could
write.--_Diary_, 22nd January, 1660-1.
[198] _Lyson's Environs_, iv. 530.
[199] _Whitaker's Hist._, p. 7.
[200] This notice of the appointment of a pastor is founded upon an
entry in the Church Book at Bury St. Edmunds, which, on account of
the rare occurrence of such a record, we shall give at length in the
Appendix. It should be remembered that this was not an ordination to
preach, but simply an ordination to the exercise of pastoral authority
in a particular Church. Ordinations and recognition services amongst
Independents are not conducted in the present day after the manner just
described.
[201] There are letters and resolutions on this subject in the Norwich
and Yarmouth Church Books, but they are too long to be inserted here.
[202] These illustrations are chiefly taken from the _Yarmouth Church
Book_.
[203] In some cases loans were sought to meet expenses connected
with religious worship. In the _Corporation Books_ at Norwich, it is
ordered "that the mayor, sheriffs, and aldermen should every of them
lend forty shillings a man, and every of the common council twenty
shillings a man, for the building of the seats in the Dutch chapel for
the corporation and their wives." It is naïvely added--"If any man will
give half, rather than lend the whole, let it be accepted."
[204] The use in some cases of parochial edifices for church-meetings
could hardly be considered an exception to this rule. In the
_Canterbury Church Book_ this passage occurs:--"The 5th day of the
fifth month, this day the Church did unanimously agree to break
bread in the Sermon-house, and ordered that henceforth it should be
there."--_Timpson's Church Hist. of Kent_, 307.
The Sermon-house was in the crypt where Henry II. did penance after
the assassination of Thomas à Becket. It was granted to the French and
Flemish refugees by Elizabeth, in 1561. It is still used for French
worship. The long table is that at which the worshippers sit to receive
the Sacrament.
[205] He had been minister of St. Laurence, Poultry, London, whence he
removed to Aston. He held religious meetings at Nottingham after the
Restoration, and was imprisoned for it. Mr. McAll, formerly pastor of
Castle Gate, Nottingham, in a sermon he preached on the Bicentenary
Celebration of the Church there, in 1862, distinguishes between this
Thomas Palmer and the Thomas Palmer at Nottingham, who is described as
a military chaplain by Lucy Hutchinson.--_Bicentenary of Castle Gate
Meeting_, p. 73.
[206] His Lordship on another occasion, when on the Western Circuit,
remarked in a charge which he delivered to the jury:--"That in case
any ministers did not do the duties of their office, as particularly
to baptize their children, and to administer the Sacrament to all but
such as were ignorant and scandalous, they might refuse to pay them
their dues, and they should present such ministers, which was agreeable
to the law, and if they were by them presented, they should be dealt
withal."
The same Judge also observed that the payment of tithes was in return
for the performance of religious service by the minister, and if he
did not perform his duty he could not claim his rights. The ministry,
he said, in many places now dealt worse with the people than did the
Popish priests. They gave the laity one element, but these would not
allow them bread or water.
These documents are in the State Paper Office, _Dom. Interreg._,
petitions, &c., vol. xiv., p. 313. Connected with them is a petition to
Oliver Cromwell from several ministers, complaining that they had been
presented at the assizes for not administering the Lord's Supper, and
praying for protection.
[207] The notice which some Congregational societies took of public
affairs under the Commonwealth, particularly on days of special
humiliation, appears from entries in their records. When, for example,
in the year 1652, Admiral Blake met with a defeat in the Downs, and Van
Tromp, with a broom at his topmast, vauntingly threatened to sweep the
seas of the British flag, the Independents at Yarmouth (who probably
had relatives on board Blake's ships, and who had often, on the sands,
watched the flotilla which just then was freighted with the hopes of
England, as it sailed through Yarmouth Roads)--agreed on the 7th of
December, that on the following Thursday, "at ten of the clock, the
Church should meet to seek God for the navy at sea." Again, on the 5th
of December, 1656, "being appointed by the Governors of this land for a
day of fasting and humiliation--to be humbled for the rebuke the Lord
gave this nation at Domingo, and that the Lord would discover the cause
of that stroke, that every one might find out the plague of his own
heart, and that the increase and kingdom of Christ might be promoted,
and that our Governors might be faithful in all that is committed to
them--the Church hereupon agreed to take the opportunity to seek the
Lord upon the forementioned grounds." Threatenings of the plague,
breaches and divisions in Churches, brought these earnest Independents
together for special intercession.
[208] Poor Churches craved help from sister communities in better
circumstances, and did so with signal success. Whilst the spirit of
brotherly affection was seen in the bestowment of liberal contributions
to the necessitous, it was shewn also in the considerate manner of
dismissing members from one neighbourhood to another. We find the
following quaint record in the Yarmouth Church Book.
Upon "Brother Staffe" desiring his dismission through "Brother
Gideney," "the brethren desired rather that he would come down, for
they had something to communicate unto him, and that our parting might
not _be with bare paper_."
[209] _Commentary on Ezekiel_, p. xii.
[210] _Works of Howe_, vi. 340.
Thomas Brooks was a Divine, endowed richly with that quaint and curious
kind of learning which sparkles so brilliantly in the writings of
Jeremy Taylor; and though inferior to his great Church contemporary
in point of diction he surpassed him far in the sympathetic and
loving exhibition of those sentiments which are most distinctive of
the Gospel. After being minister of the parish of St. Thomas the
Apostle, he became Rector of St. Margaret's, Fish Street Hill; where,
according to Calamy, he gathered a Congregational Church, against
which proceeding some of his parishioners presented a petition. But it
appears that this is a mistake, and that he did not form an Independent
Society until after the Restoration.--_Brooks's Complete Works_, vol.
i.--_Memoir by Grosart._
[211] _Roger's Life of Howe_, 18. This interesting book is our
authority for what follows.
[212] Lord Broghill, in a letter to the Protector, Edinburgh, Feb. the
26th, 1655, speaks of "putting no small confidence in Mr. Gillespie and
Mr. Levingstone."--_Thurloe_, iv. 558.
[213] Caldewood, Spalding, Whitelocke, and Sewel.--_Orme's Life of
Owen_, 404-406.
[214] Preface to _Death of Christ_. Dublin Castle, December 20th, 1649.
"How is it that Jesus Christ is in Ireland only as a lion staining
all His garments with the blood of His enemies, and none to hold Him
forth as a Lamb sprinkled with His own blood for His friends?"--_Owen's
Sermon before Parliament_, February 28th, 1650.
[215] Quoted in _Urwick's Independency in Dublin in the Olden Time_, 12.
[216] Dr. Winter speaks of Murcot in strong terms as "an earthly
angel," and "a heavenly mortal," and his funeral shewed the estimation
in which he was held. "Great was the confluence of people who attended
the corpse to the grave. The Lord Deputy Fleetwood followed the body;
after him the Council, then the Lord Mayor, &c. Dr. Winter preached
his funeral sermon on Hebrews xiii. 7. Upon the face of the whole
congregation sat a black cloud of sorrow and disconsolation. The body
being brought unto the place of burial, the saddened spectators and
standers-by sighed him into his grave, and mingling his dust with their
tears, departed and left him in his bed of rest." Quoted from _Moses in
the Mount_.--_Urwick's Independency in Dublin_, 15.
[217] _Orme's Life of Owen_, 403.
[218] "I wish I could as truly tell you that the Independents are not
dissatisfied. It may be some of them thought they should ride, when
they had thrown the Anabaptist out of the saddle."--_Thurloe_, vii.
161, see also 199.
[219] The following items are extracted from a minute book of
Commissioners preserved in Sion College:--
"March 12th, 1650-1. £200 to Mr. Lewis Stewkley, this day approved by
this Committee for his preaching in Exeter Cathedral.
"Hereford Cathedral. £50 granted to three ministers out of the revenues
of the Dean and Chapter for their preaching in the cathedral. Mr. Ralph
London, approved by this committee upon a good testimony, ordered that
the sum be paid him, Mr. Smith, the same.
"£200 was voted to the Divinity Lecturer in Canterbury Cathedral."
July, 1656. There was a dispute about the use of Wells Cathedral.
It had been ordered that the cathedral should be used for public
worship by the inhabitants of the parish of St. Cuthbert, but this was
impeded by Dr. Cornelius Burgess, who had got himself into the actual
possession of the church, locking and barring the doors, so that no
entrance could be obtained; in consequence of which many gentlemen
had refused to pay subscriptions promised for the repair of the
cathedral.--_State Papers Dom. Interreg. Council Book._
[220] Arrangements made with regard to Westminster Abbey at an earlier
period appear in the first volume. There are entries in the minute
book of the Parliamentary Committee preserved in Sion College Library,
relating to the appointment of Obadiah Sedgwick, December, 1649, in the
room of Mr. Marshall; to the payment of arrears of salary to Nye as
Sunday morning Lecturer, Term Lecturer, and Weekly morning Lecturer,
and to Mr. Strong as minister of the abbey. It is to be remembered that
Owen, Goodwin, and Baxter preached on certain occasions in the same
edifice.
[221] _Foxe._
[222] _Strype's Annals_, iii., part ii. 106.
[223] _Ivimey's History of the Baptists_, i. 109.
[224] _Tracts on Liberty of Conscience_, ii. 24, 51.
[225] I have introduced this letter, and other particulars, from the
"Yarmouth Corporation Records," because, so far as I am aware, they
have never before been published.
[226] Mr. Gould, in the introduction to his _Report of St. Mary's
Chapel Case_, supplies an interesting instance in his account of the
Church at Norwich. See p. xv.
[227] Helwisse, (or Helwys), the author of this document, was at the
time living in Holland. Soon afterwards, Crosby tells us he and his
Church left Amsterdam, and removed to London.--_History of English
Baptists_, i. 272. They are believed to have constituted the first
Arminian or general Baptist Church in England.--_Evan's Early English
Baptists_, i. 225. These persons do not appear to have regarded
immersion as the proper and only mode of administering the ordinance.
_Robinson's Works_, iii. 461. Two sorts of Baptists are alluded to in
the _Mercurius Rusticus_, the _Aspersi_ and the _Immersi_.--_Evans_,
ii. 53.
[228] Crosby, vol. i., appendix 7, gives 1646 as the date, but at p. 66
he says it was published in 1644. A second edition appeared in 1646,
from which, probably, Crosby took his copy.
[229] _The Scottish Dove_ (November, 1646), relates the commitment of
an Anabaptist at Coventry, for preaching up and down the country, and
dipping scores of men and women.
[230] "Whereas, at the entreaty of Mr. Calamy and other ministers,
as it was represented unto me by certain citizens, I did lately give
an allowance to them to meet and dispute with certain Anabaptists;
and whence, I understand you, in pursuance of that allowance, there
is a public dispute intended on Wednesday next, December 3rd, in the
church of Aldermanbury, and there is likely to be an extraordinary
concourse of people from all parts of the city, and from other places;
and that in these times of distraction there may be hazard of the
disturbance of the public peace, I have therefore thought fit, upon
serious consideration, for prevention of the inconveniences that may
happen thereby, to forbid the same meeting upon Wednesday next, or at
any other time, in a public way before I shall receive the pleasure of
the honourable House of Parliament touching the same, which, with all
conveniency, I shall endeavour to know.
"THOMAS ADAMS,
"Dec. 1st, 1645. Lord Mayor."
_Placard in the British Museum._
[231] _Bayle's Article on Anabaptists_ is worth reading.
Bossuet remarks that Socinians and Anabaptists were the only persons
who disputed the right of the magistrate to punish men for religious
error.--_Variations Protestantes_, liv. x., c. 56.
Socinus and Zuinglius, besides the Anabaptists, were the principal,
if not the only apostles of religious liberty, at the time of the
Reformation.
[232] So he is described by Crosby and Palmer. We may presume
Allhallows Staining, Fenchurch Street, is meant.
[233] _Crosby's History of the English Baptists_, i. 288, 289.
[234] _Crosby_, i. 312-314.
[235] The following is a list of Baptist ministers who were in
possession of livings at the Restoration of Charles II:--
Henry Jessey, A.M.
Thomas Ewins. Bristol.
Edward Bagshawe, A.M. Ambrosden, Oxfordshire. Died in prison, December
28th, 1671.
John Tombes, B.D. Leominster, Herefordshire.
George Fownes, A.M. High Wycombe, Bucks. Afterwards pastor of the
Church in Broadmead, Bristol. Died in Gloucester jail, November 25th,
1686.
Jeremiah Marsden. Ardesley Chapel, near Wakefield, Yorkshire.
Robert Browne. White-Lady Aston, Worcestershire.
Daniel Dyke, A.M. Hadham Magna, Herts. He was one of the "Triers." In
1668 he became co-pastor, with the celebrated William Kiffin, of the
Church in Devonshire Square, London. He died in 1688.
Richard Adams. Humberstone, Leicestershire. He succeeded Mr. Dyke at
Devonshire Square, and lived to a very great age, being disabled from
preaching for several years before his death, which took place in 1716.
Thomas Quarrel. Some place in Shropshire. Died in 1709.
William Dell, A.M. Yeldon, Bedfordshire, and Master of Gonville and
Caius College, Cambridge.
Paul Hobson. Chaplain of Eton College.
Thomas Jennings. Brimsfield, Gloucestershire.
Paul Frewen. Kempley, Gloucestershire.
Joshua Head. Some place in Gloucestershire.
John Smith. Wanlip, Leicestershire.
Thomas Ellis. Lopham, Norfolk.
Thomas Evans. Maesmynys, Brecknockshire.
Thomas Proud. Cheriton, Glamorganshire.
John Miles. Ilston, Glamorganshire.
Thomas Joseph. Llangyner, Glamorganshire.
Morgan Jones. Llanmodock, Glamorganshire.
---- Abbot, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire.
William Woodward. Probably of Southwold, Suffolk.
Gabriel Camelford. Stavely Chapel, Westmoreland.
John Skinner. Weston, Herefordshire.
John Donne. Pertenhall, Bedfordshire. He was a fellow-prisoner with
John Bunyan.
John Gibbs. Newport Pagnell, Bucks.
Walter Prossor, William Millman, Watkin Jones, Morgan Jones, Jenkin
Jones, Ellis Rowland, and Roderick Thomas, were ministers in various
parts of Wales.
The following ministers, whose names are inserted by Mr. Ivimey in
his list of ejected Baptists (_History of Baptists_, i. 328), did not
become Baptists till after their ejectment; viz., Francis Bamfield,
A.M., John Gosnold, Thomas Hardcastle, Laurence Wise, and Thomas
Paxford.--_The Great Ejectment of 1662, by Dr. Cramp._
[236] Not exactly the same controversy as that about open and strict
_communion_.
[237] These statements are made on the authority of a speech delivered
before the Master of the Rolls, in the important case reported in a
volume compiled by the Rev. George Gould, and entitled _Open Communion
and the Baptists of Norwich_. This book is full of curious information.
[238] For a vindication of Vavasour Powell's religious character--who,
with all his extravagant opinions on prophecy, seems to have been a
most disinterested and zealous man--see _Rees' Nonconformity in Wales_,
and the authorities to which he refers, 114.
[239] _Evan's Early English Baptists_, ii. 183.
[240] _Burnet's Own Times_, i. 58.
[241] _Perfect Diurnal._ Oct. 25th, 1652.
[242] _Whitelocke._ A. D. 1652, p. 553.
See _Evan's Early English Baptists_, ii. 215.
[243] _Hanbury's Memorials_, iii. 475.
The voluntary principle had been clearly laid down during the civil
wars, and in addition to proofs of this already adduced, we may add the
following:--
Henry Burton, in his _Vindication of the Independent Churches_, written
in 1644, observed:--"What serveth the magistrate and the laws of a
civil State for but to keep the peace? And as for parishes, will you
allow no churches but parishes? or are parishes originally any other
but of humane, politic, and civil constitution, and for civil ends?
Or can you say that so many as inhabit in every parish respectively
shall be a Church? Should such Churches and parishes then necessarily
be Churches of God's calling and gathering? Are they not congregations
of man's collection, constitution, and coaction merely? What Churches,
then? And as for tithes, what tithes, I pray you, had the Apostles?
Such as be faithful and painful ministers of Christ, He will certainly
provide for them; as when He sent forth His disciples without any
purse or provision, He asked them, 'Lacked you anything?' They said,
'Nothing.' Surely the labourer is worthy of his hire." And as for
ministers' maintenance by tithes, Robert Baillie stated in his account
of the Independents in 1646:
"The ancient way of maintenance by tithes, or lands, or set stipends,
they do refuse, and require here the reduction to the apostolic
practice. They count it necessary that all the Church officers should
live upon the charge of the congregation,--the ruling elders and
deacons, as well as the pastors and doctors; but all they will have
them to receive is a mere alms, a voluntary contribution, laid down
as an offering at the deacon's feet every Lord's Day, and by him
distributed to all the officers and the poor of the congregation as
they have need."
A series of propositions is contained in a document presented to the
Parliament in the year 1647 (_Hanbury_, iii. 247) and one of the
propositions is to the effect that the officers of the Church ought to
be maintained by the free contributions of the people. The same opinion
is expressed in Hooker and Cotton's _Survey of Church Discipline_, a
publication reprinted in London in the year 1648. Though, under the
Protectorate, times had changed, and the political relations of the
Independents and Baptists had changed too, it cannot be doubted that
many throughout the Commonwealth maintained the principle expressed in
the extracts just given.
[244] From a MS. _Life of Owen_ in the possession of the late Dr.
Raffles.
[245] The Oxford Vice-Chancellors, though they hold office for four
years, are re-elected each year of the four, and at each re-election
make an official speech.
[246] _Oratio_ ii.--_Owen's Works_, xxi. 581.
[247] _Oratio_ v.--_Owens Works_, xxi. 611.
[248] _Cromwell's Speeches, Carlyle_, ii. 559.
[249] See _Baxter's Life and Times_, i. 70.
[250] _Oxoniana_, iv. 206.
[251] With respect to regulations of this sort in 1650, before
Owen's Vice-Chancellorship, it is said, _Oxoniana_ iv. 210, "Gowns
also had now lost their usual fashion, by others introduced by the
Cantabrigians, especially that belonging to a bachelor of arts, the
sleeves of which were wider than those of surplices, and so continued
in fashion not only till the Restoration of Charles II., but the
Vice-Chancellorship of Dr. John Fell."
[252] _Athen. Oxon._, ii. 738.
[253] See _Grainger's Biographical History_, iii. 302.
[254] Owen was the other.
[255] Howe became minister of Torrington about the year 1650. Goodwin
was appointed President of Magdalen in the January of that year. We
know that Howe was a Fellow after Goodwin's appointment, from the
circumstance of his joining the religious society which the President
established in the College. At first Howe objected to unite, because he
thought too much stress was laid upon indifferent things. Afterwards he
joined upon "Catholic terms."
[256] _Preface to De Divinia Justitia_, Works, ix., 339. It contains
a defence of what he called "his darling university." Burnet, in the
_History of his own Time_, (i. 192.) says, learning was then high at
Oxford, chiefly the study of the Oriental tongues, much raised by the
study of the Polyglott Bible. They read the Fathers; and mathematics,
and the new philosophy, were in great esteem.
[257] _Ath. Ox._, ii. 562.
[258] "July 11, 1654, Oxford:--After dinner I visited that miracle of a
youth, Mr. Christopher Wren."--_Evelyn's Diary_, i. 306.
[259] "_Oxoniana_," edited by the Rev. John Walker, vol. i. 98.
[260] For many particulars and sources of information on the subject of
Oxford University, I am indebted to Mr. Orme's _Memoir of Owen_, chap.
vii.; but Wood's _Athen. Oxon._ is the principal authority.
[261] Thorndike, a Cambridge man, noticed in another part of this
volume, took an active part.
[262] Twell's _Life of Pocock_, 209.
"3rd July, 1654.--That the order of the late Council of State, dated
15th July, 1653, for freeing the paper which is to be used for printing
the Bible in the original and other learned languages, from the
payments of customs and excise, be confirmed, and that according Dr.
Bruno Ryves be permitted and suffered to import into this Commonwealth,
free from customs and excise, so many reams of paper for the use
aforesaid, as with that which is already imported and discharged of
duties, shall make up 7,000 pounds, being the total allowed by the said
former order to be so imported."--_State Papers Order Book of Council._
The handsomer copies were printed on Avergne paper, at that time
considered the best.
[263] The price of one copy to a subscriber was £10; of six
copies, £50. To others the cost seems to have been from £15 to
£18.--_Thorndike's Works_, vi. 203, note. In Jacobson's edition of
_Sanderson's Works_, vol. vi. 375, is a list of subscriptions amounting
to £560. _Walton's Polyglott_ is said to be the first book published in
England by subscription.
[264] _Owen's Works_, iv. 450.
[265] The spirit in which Owen composed this treatise has often been
misrepresented. It is probable that some who have condemned have never
read it. The work on the _Divine Original Authority, Self-evidencing
Light and Power of the Scriptures_--to which the treatise is an
appendix--is also worth studying in connexion with theological
controversies at the present day. The third chapter is very remarkable,
and the last paragraph moves in a direction which Owen's disciples now
would be very unwilling to follow. It shews how the habits of thought
alter even in the same school, and should teach us all a lesson of
charity.
[266] Thus, the editor of _Thorndike_, vol. vi. 170, speaks of
Cambridge between 1613 and 1646. It applies up to the year 1654, when
the regular post began. The first coach from Cambridge to London was
set up in 1653. It is scarcely needful to say that the well-known
carrier was Hobson, who died of the plague in 1630; but carriers
afterwards would convey letters.
From _Antony Wood's Diary_, 1667, it appears that the Oxford coach took
two days to get to London.
[267] _Carey's Memorials of the Civil Wars_, ii. 224.
[268] _Life of Sancroft, by D'Oyley_, I. 57. _Cooper's History of
Cambridge._
[269] _Hamilton's Memoir of Barrow_, prefixed to his works, vol. i. xv.
[270] _Cooper's Hist. of Cambridge._
[271] Dell is sometimes called a Baptist, but he appears from his
_Doctrine of Baptisms_ to have set aside water baptism, pp. 11, 16, 19.
[272] Dell complains that men famous for preaching, on coming to
Cambridge, ceased from that sense of the Gospel which they once seemed
to have. "How suddenly have they been entangled and overcome with the
spirit of the enemy!"
Samuel Hering made certain proposals in 1653, and amongst others that
two colleges should be set apart, in each University, to such as should
solely apply themselves to the attaining the spirit of Jesus, which
study needs few books; the works of Behmen, however, he mentions as a
furtherance thereto. Such colleges he suggested should have the power
of sending forth men to preach. "All teachers," he adds, "without God's
hammer are but, in the history of the letter, hammers for the belly and
ears, but not for the soul."
He wished that churches should be painted black outside, to remind
people of the darkness within.--_Nickoll's Letters of State_, 99.
[273] _Dell's Trial of Spirits_, noticed in _Godwin's Commonwealth_,
iv. 97.
If we are to believe Carter, _History of University_, p. 232, Dell did
not practically carry out his liberal principles, for Carter says:
Moore, fellow of Caius, and keeper of the University Library, desired
to be buried in his own College-chapel; but being refused by Mr. Dell,
the master, the use of the Liturgy, which was his last request, he was
laid in St. Mary's church, under the stone he used to kneel on. Moore
spent seven years in making a catalogue of the library (see _Book
Rarities of Cambridge_, by Hartshorne, p. 16.) Work of that kind Dell
would not appreciate.
[274] In this notice of Webster I have followed Godwin,
(_Commonwealth_, iv. 96-100) not having been able myself to look into
Webster's writings. It may be stated that Erbery denied original sin,
and was "an advocate for universal restoration, and that all men should
finally be made partakers of eternal felicity in heaven."
[275] _Thurloe_, ii. 463.
[276] _Thurloe_, ii. 464.
This letter is subscribed "James Jollie, who heretofore presented thy
Excellency at the Cockpit with a paper to the Parliament of England."
Cambridge, July 17th, 1654.
Who this Jollie was we cannot tell; perhaps a man like Akehurst, not
understood by many, and charged with being a mystic; but his letter
shews an insight into spiritual perplexities, and a fidelity to his
suffering friend, alike creditable to his head and his heart.
[277] _Diary_, i. 318-320.
The volume preserved in Sion College, which records the augmentation
of Oxford masterships, contains similar entries relative to Cambridge.
Two hundred pounds a year was settled on St. John's and Emanuel for
increasing the maintenance of the masters, a larger amount than we
have noticed in connexion with Oxford. Ninety pounds was the sum fixed
for Jesus College, and the trustees were directed to pay the same
accordingly out of the accruing rents and revenues vested in them, to
Mr. John Worthington, Master of the College, till they should receive
further notice from the Committee.
[278] _Whitecote's Aphorisms, by Salter._
[279] _Burnet's History of his own Times_, i. 187.
[280] Dr. Spurstow has been mentioned before as chaplain to Hampden's
regiment. He was one of the Assembly of Divines, and, after his
ejectment from Cambridge, enjoyed the vicarage of Stepney.
[281] See list of his works, and also an article on Lightfoot, in
_Kitto's Cyclopædia_, edited by Dr. Alexander.
I am indebted to the Dean of Westminster for some friendly suggestions
relative to the character of Witchcot and Lightfoot.
[282] _Burnet's Hist. of his own Times_, i. 188.
[283] The Greek studies at Cambridge in the first part of the
seventeenth century are noticed in the _Life of Thorndike_, appended to
his works vi. 167, 168.
[284] I have seen a petition amongst the _State Papers_ belonging to
the year 1653, to the Protector from John Worthington, Master of Jesus
College, in Cambridge, complaining of some restraint upon the payment
of the augmentation annexed to the mastership of that college (as also
of the augmentations annexed to some other masterships.)
[285] Pages xviii., xix.
[286] See _Southey's Life of Wesley_, ii. 380, and _Stanley's Eastern
Churches_, Introduction, p. vii.
[287] _Calamy's Account_, ii. 755. Wood (_Ath. Ox._, ii. 710) says
that the proposition in the book condemned by Convocation was that
the sovereignty of England is in three estates, King, Lords, and
Commons. This decree of Convocation was itself burnt in Palace
Yard, Westminster, by order of the House of Lords, March the 27th,
1710.--_Calamy's Cont._, 865.
[288] _Calamy's Account_, 761, 81, 105. _Continuation_, 137.
[289] Calamy gives an interesting account of Gilpin's preaching, which
must have been of a very effective kind. He mentions his delivering
sermons without the use of notes as something remarkable.--_Account_,
154.
[290] It is printed in the _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 531, from which
these particulars are gathered.
[291] See _Surtee's History of Durham_, i. 106. Also MS. collections of
the Rev. T. Baker, quoted in notes to _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 542.
[292] "Since the installation of Prince Charles, in 1638, and until the
Restoration, the registration of the annals had been suspended; and
the order is solely indebted to the care and zeal of Edward Walker,
Garter King-at-arms, for the record of the exertions which were made
chiefly by the instrumentality of that faithful officer, and amidst
difficulties of every kind, to save the institution from absolute
decay."--_Beltz' Memorials of the Order_, cxii.
[293] _Annals of Windsor_, ii. 185.
[294] _Whitelocke's Memorials_, 665.
[295] _Scobell_, 18.
[296] In the summer of 1657, "a hot and sickly season," Busby and
some of the boys resided at Chiswick, where was a manor-house founded
for the use of the school in times of sickness by Goodman, Dean of
Westminster, 1570. The names of the Earl of Halifax, John Dryden, and
other pupils of Busby might be seen on the walls at the close of the
last century.--_Lyson's Environs_, ii. 191.
[297] _Athen. Oxon._, ii. 491.
In the memoir of South, prefixed to the vol. of his posthumous works,
8vo., 1717, p. 4 (it does not appear by whom this memoir was written),
it is stated that South "made himself remarkable" by reading the Latin
prayers in Westminster School on the day of the King's "martyrdom, and
praying for his Majesty by name." But what was there remarkable in
that? He, no doubt, read the ordinary prayers used in the school, and
as they contained a prayer for the King, he read it as of course. Had
he deviated from the prescribed form, Busby would have been down upon
him, not with a witness, but with his rod.
[298] Dr. Rainbow, afterwards Bishop of Carlisle, is said to have
adopted a practice similar to that of Bull.--_Zouch Edit. of Walton's
Lives_, 461. _Thorndike's Works_, vi. 117. Note.
[299] _Lyson's Environs_, i. 148.
[300] _Disputation at Winchcomb_, 1653. _Commonwealth Pamphlets_,
British Museum.
Barksdale expressed admiration of the "learned and pious Dr. Hammond,"
which aroused the cry, "An Arminian! an Arminian!"
[301] _Walker's Sufferings_, p. ii., 142.
[302] On his tomb, in Ely Cathedral, it is said:--"_Exulans ab
Academiâ Ecclesiam Anglicanam inter schismaticorum furias, coram ipso
Cromwello concionibus disputationibus publice asseruit tantum non solus
sustinuit, vindicavit_."
[303] _Wood's Ath. Ox._, vol. ii., _fasti_, 132.
[304] _Farindon's Works_, i. _Memoir_, xlii.
[305] These sermons are given in _Farindon's Works_, iii. 361.
[306] See his _Sermons_, vol. iii. 399.
[307] Abridged from the _Autobiography of Sir John Branston_, quoted in
the _Ecclesiastic_, October, 1853.
[308] _Aubrey's Letters_, iii. 363.
[309] _Wood's Ath. Ox._, ii. 465.
[310] _Life_ prefixed to _Sherlock's Practical Christian_, p. 24, 25.
[311] _Hand-Book to Western Cathedrals_, p. 56.
[312] The letter, dated September 13th, 1634, (_State Papers_,)
published in _Laud's Works_, vii. 88, is a very curious one, and
expresses strong disapproval of Goodman's conduct.
[313] See _Laud's Works_, iii. 287.
[314] _Church Hist._, iii. 409.
[315] _Nalson's Col._ i. 371, 372.
There is an interesting account of Goodman in the _Ecclesiastic_,
November, 1852, with extracts from his writings. He wrote a book on the
_Two Great Mysteries, The Trinity and the Incarnation_, which, strange
to say, he dedicated to Oliver Cromwell,--"with flattery," observes
Echard "and a servile petition for hearing his cause and doing justice
to him."
[316] _Elrington's Life of Archbishop Ussher_, 244.
[317] "The poor orthodox clergy have passed one Sunday in silence.
The Bishop of Armagh hath been with Cromwell about them, it is feared
to little purpose, yet some Court holy water was bestowed on the old
man, besides a dinner and confirmation of Church leases to him in
Ireland."--_State Papers Dom._, 1655-56, 10th-20th January.
[318] _Elrington's Life of Ussher_, 279.
[319] When visiting it in 1864, I found the exterior, and one of the
apartments, in much the same state as when Hall lived there.
[320] _Walker's Sufferings_, p. ii. 18.
Mention is made of Morton's daily alms, his single meal, his straw bed
at eighty years of age, his hospitality, and his rising at four o'clock
in the morning.--_Biograph. Brit._
[321] _Worthies_, iii. 172.
[322] "He was observed to run (with emulation without envy) in the race
of virtue even with any of his order, striving to exceed them by fair
industry, without offering proudly to justle their credit, much less
falsely to supplant their reputation."--_Fuller's Worthies_, i. 456.
[323] Fuller says of Owen: "He was bred a fellow in Jesus College, in
Cambridge, where he commenced Doctor of Divinity, and was chaplain
to King Charles whilst he was a prince. A modest man, who would not
own the worth he had in himself, and therefore others are the more
engaged to give him his due esteem. In the vacancy of the bishopric
of St. Asaph, King Charles, being much troubled with two competitors,
advanced Doctor Owen (not thinking thereof) as an expedient to end the
contest. Indeed, his Majesty was mistaken in his birth, accounting
him a Welshman, but not in his worth, seeing he deserved a far better
preferment."--_Fuller's Worthies_, ii. 506.
[324] _Tanner MSS._, vol. lii., 1653-8, 41. This letter is addressed to
Sheldon. There is another in the same volume from Dr. Ferne, lamenting
that churchmen "were wanting to see what those in power would do, as
if there could possibly be any expectation of advantage either from
them," or from "delay." Both letters are printed in the _Ecclesiastic_,
October, 1853.
[325] _Life of Bramhall_, prefixed to his _Works_, i. x., xxii.
[326] _Bramhall's Works_, i. 276, 277.
Yet here it should be remembered that, under date May the 23rd, 1658,
Evelyn says: "There was now a collection for persecuted and sequestered
ministers of the Church of England, whereof divers are in prison. A sad
day! the Church now in dens and caves of the earth."
Kennet in his _Historical Register_, 861, refers to the Lord
Scudamore's charity to the distressed clergy.
[327] It was not published till after the author's death, when it
appeared with a violent and foolish preface by Dr. Samuel Parker.
[328] _Bramhall's Works_, iii. 579.--The whole tract is worth reading
as an example of the way in which Episcopalians met the charge of
favouring Popery. It is an answer to Baxter, who had brought the charge
against Grotius and against Bramhall also. While Baxter accused Grotius
of helping the Papists, Owen accused him of Socinianism. Thorndike, in
the preface to his _Epilogue_, defends Grotius against both.
[329] _Ibid._, 582.
[330] For Milletiere's epistle and Bramhall's reply, see _Works_, vol.
i. cxxi. and 7.
[331] The careful editor of _Bramhall's Works_ has appended a table,
with extensive notes, of Acts and dates relative to the admission into
their new sees of the bishops consecrated or confirmed in the second
and third years of the reign of Elizabeth.--Vol. iii. 216.
[332] _Bramhall's Works_, i. xcv.
[333] 25th of May, 1651.--Vol. i. 278.--A son of Cosin became a Roman
Catholic. A letter of his, in self-defence, to John Evelyn is given
in the _Diary and Correspondence of Evelyn_, iii. 58. The father was
greatly annoyed at his son's conduct, though he had himself, no doubt,
to thank for it. "His indignation," says the editor, "is very much
what Dr. Pusey may be supposed to have felt at Mr. Newman's departure
for Rome." In _Evelyn's Diary_, i. 282, is an account of the origin
of those "offices, which among the Puritans were wont to be called
_Cosin's cozening devotions_."
Dr. Cosin, both in his letters and more solemnly in his last will,
laments over his lost and only son John. In a letter, January 22nd,
1661, he says: "Let him go, he is not worth the owning, nor any further
seeking after him. In the meanwhile they that have thus lured him and
conveyed him away are most unworthy persons."--_Surtees_, i. cxii.
[334] _Evelyn's Diary_, i. 285.
[335] _D'Oyley's Life of Sancroft_, i. 89.
"At Paris our countrymen live peaceably and enjoy our religion
without disturbance. There is a place allowed them, with necessary
accommodations for the exercise of religion. Dr. Stewart did often
preach to them; and for their form of worship, it is the same that
was formerly in England, with the Book of Common Prayer, and the
rites therein used; and also they continue the innovations that were
practised by many of our clergy--as bowing at the name of Jesus
towards the altar, &c.--which I know giveth offence to the good French
Protestants, who, to me, did often condemn those innovations for Roman
superstitions. As for the French Papists, truly they are more civil to
them than was expected."--By Samuel Brett, there present, 1655.--_State
Papers._
[336] There were, besides Morley, the Bishop of Galloway, Stewart, Dean
of St. Paul's, Drs. Earle, Clare, Wolley, Lloyd, Duncan, and Messrs.
Crowder and Hamilton.
We may add that Honywood, who, after the Restoration, became Dean of
Lincoln, remained abroad from 1643 to 1660. His pleasant portrait is
engraved in Dibdin's Decameron, and for his library, his learning, and
his love of books, he is worthy of a place there.--Vol. iii. 261.
[337] _Ecclesiastic_, April, 1852. _Grainger's Biog. Hist._, iii. 236;
_Burnet's Hist. of his own Times_, i. 177.
Baxter tells us "he was the chief speaker of all the Bishops, and the
greatest interrupter of us, vehemently going on with what he thought
serviceable to his end, and bearing down answers by the said fervour
and interruptions."--_Life and Times_, part ii. p. 363. Of course I
do not forget that in this quotation from Baxter we have the report
of an antagonist; but the readiness and candour with which he allows
moderation and other virtues where they existed on the part of any of
the Episcopalians, give weight to his estimates of character.
[338] _Anderson's Colonial Church_, ii. 132.
The following letter from Isaac Basire to Charles II., dated Alba
Julia, (synonyme for Weissenberg, in Transylvania, the same as is now
called Karlsburg,) Easter Tuesday, 1656, is in the State Paper Office.
He says:--"When the whole nation was represented, and met here at their
diet, and it was noised that by reason of a public act, some months
since performed by one in this university, before the Prince, and with
his approbation, against both Independency and Presbytery (flown over
hither out of England), and for Episcopacy--that crew grew so incensed
against me, that they did then threaten to cite me before the National
Assembly, as now; and having missed that first plot, they pretend to
renew their persecution against me at their next general synod, now at
hand; where yet, by the better though not the bigger part, I am chosen
to preside, and undoubtedly do expect the shock, trusting with the
whole success God Almighty, who is thus pleased still to place me on
the militant side. (His holy will be done)."
[339] _Life of Jeremy Taylor, by Willmott_, 129-154, 190.
Dr. Peterson, Dean of Exeter, met with an adventure which ought to
be recorded as an illustration of that generosity to an enemy which
often cheeringly flashes up in such times, relieving the shadows of
persecution. Cromwell one day saw the doctor in the streets of London,
looking like a distressed cavalier. "There," he exclaimed, "goes a
Church of England man, who I will warrant you has courage enough to
die for his religion." That very day a stranger traced the Dean to his
lodgings, invited him to dinner, and presented to him a purse of money.
Help afterwards came again and again through the same channel, the
bounty of the magnanimous usurper being the source.--_Walker_, part ii.
24.
[340] In a paper dated November 2nd, 1652 (printed in _Jacobson's
Edition of Sanderson's Works_), he describes fully his mode of
procedure; and the sort of verbal alterations he made in the forms
of Common Prayer may be seen in his "Confession," given by Walton
(_Lives_, 394). Thorndike observes: "I cannot approve it upon this
score that (besides his prayer before sermon, which custom and former
practice if not the canon itself, allowed as lawful) he hath several
parts of service of his own making; and, though mostly formed out
of the Common Prayer Book, yet certainly varied from thence, and so
directly against the negative command which prescribes this and no
other."--_Letter in the Bodleian Library, printed in Thorndike's
Works_, vi. 117.
See page 340, in this vol.
[341] _Fell's Life of Hammond_, 263, 173.
[342] _Walton's Lives_, 396.
[343] _Walton's Lives_ 405-408.
[344] _Fell's Life of Hammond_, 241, 262, 203, 279.
[345] Quoted in _Thorndike's Works_, vi. 212.
[346] _Harl. MSS._, 6942, 77, British Museum.
[347] _Harl. MSS._, 6942, 18. April 30, 1654. This I find, since I
copied it from the original, is printed in the _Ecclesiastic_, April,
1853.
[348] _Harl. MSS._, 6942, 120.
[349] Amongst the _State Papers_, is a Letter from Thorndike to Mr.
Joseph Wilkinson, April 21st, 1656, respecting _Walton's Polyglott_.
"You know," he says, "the government of the work is in Dr. Walton,
who set it on foot. Correctors of the press he hath, for the Hebrew
and Chaldee, Mr. Clarke; for the Syriac and Arabic, Mr. Castle; with
a third for the Greek and Latin. The purpose is to give what England
affords for the verifying of the several copies."
[350] _Thorndike's Works_, vi. 125.
He is to be ranked amongst the most able defenders of the great
catholic doctrines of the Divinity and Incarnation of our Lord Jesus.
[351] Sanderson is said to have before found fault with Thorndike's
manner of conducting worship at Claybrook.--_Works_, vi. 181.
[352] _Works_, vi. 118.
[353] _Thorndike's Works_, vi. 125.
See also _Letter concerning the Present State of Religion_. Vol. v. 5.
[354] The following is another instance:--
"During the usurpation the Latin prayers were discontinued; but some of
the members, John Fell, John Dolben Allestree, and others, afterwards
men of eminence in the Church, performed the Common Prayer in the
lodgings of the celebrated Dr. Willis, in Canterbury Quadrangle, and
afterwards in his house, opposite Merton College Chapel, and the
practice continued until the Restoration. Dr. Willis's house afterwards
became an Independent meeting. In the museum of the Dolby family, in
Northamptonshire, is a fine painting, by Sir Peter Lely, grounded on
the above circumstance. A copy of this picture was presented to the
society, and placed in the hall."--_Chalmer's Oxford_, vol. ii. 311.
[355] _Evelyn's Diary_, 1649, March 18th and 25th. 1652, December 25th.
[356] January 30th, 1653. January 28th, 1655. It appears from
_Patrick's Autobiography_ that all through the troubles he received the
communion kneeling, p. 37.
April 15th, 1655. "Dr. Wild preached at St. Gregory's, the
ruling powers conniving at the use of the Liturgy in that church
alone."--_Evelyn's Diary._
[357] Kennet says: "The prejudice Cromwell had against the Episcopal
party was more for their being Royalists than for being of the good old
Church," and the Bishop relates that the Protector said: "To disturb
them is contrary to that liberty of conscience which he and his friends
always acknowledged and defended."--_Kennet_, iii, 206.
[358] Quoted in _Keble's Life of Wilson, Bishop of Sodor and Man_, 407.
[359] I am indebted to Mr. Clarence Hopper, to whom the valuable
manuscript volume belongs, for permission to make extracts from its
pages.
[360] I do not see that a second lesson is any where mentioned. Perhaps
the service is not complete.
[361] These particulars occur in petitions to Charles II. after the
Restoration. They are all specified in Mrs. Green's _Calendar of State
Papers, Dom._, 1660, 1661.
[362] Hallam observes: "It is somewhat bold in Anglican writers to
complain, as they now and then do, of the persecution they suffered at
this period, when we consider what had been the conduct of the Bishops
before, and what it was afterwards. I do not know that any member of
the Church of England was imprisoned under the Commonwealth, except for
some political reason; certain it is the jails were not filled with
them."--_Const. Hist._, ii. 14.
Distinction must be made between the sufferings of the Episcopalians
during the Civil Wars and under the Protectorate. I am persuaded, after
a long and careful enquiry into the subject, that the suffering during
the latter of these periods has been immensely over-estimated.
[363] Justice Bennet, of Derby, "was the first that called us Quakers,
because I bid them tremble at the word of the Lord. This was in the
year 1650."--_Fox's Journal_, i. 132.
[364] See the very interesting _Memoirs of Stephen Grellet, by B.
Seebohn_.
[365] See _Journal_, and _Sewel's History of Friends_.
[366] He supplies numerous instances of this in his own Journal.
[367] _Sewel's History of Friends_, i. 15.
[368] _George Fox's Journal_, i. 104.
[369] _Penn's Preface to Fox's Journal_, i. xl.
[370] Penn states the doctrines of Quakerism in his preface, xiii. _et
seq._
[371] "They asked me if I had no sin? I answered, 'Christ my Saviour
has taken away my sin, and in Him there is no sin.'" "They pleaded
for imperfection, and to sin as long as they lived, but did not like
to hear of Christ's teaching His people Himself, and making people as
clear, whilst here upon the earth, as Adam and Eve were before they
fell."--_Journal_, i. 124, 288.
[372] Fox had an intense aversion to all Gnosticism.--See _Journal_, i.
143. I do not ascribe mysticism to him in any bad sense of the word.
[373] He describes himself as passing through strange states of extasy,
(_Journal_, i. 144) and even claims gifts of prophecy and miracle,
(i. 219.) He had a habit of comparing sinners to different sorts of
animals, _Journal_, i. 190, &c. A curious parallel to this is found
in _Athanasius_, who describes heretics in a similar way. Comp.
_Athan. Orat._ iii. _contra Arianos_. _Athanasius's Treatises against
Arianism_, p. ii. 484, _Oxf. Edit._
For authorities respecting Quakerism see a good note in _Mosheim's
Ecclesiastical History_, 846.
[374] _Journal_, i. 151.
[375] _A Collection of many select and Christian Epistles, written by
George Fox_, p. i.
[376] See _Fox's Epistles_, p. 2.
"There is an English ship come in here from Newfoundland. The master
hath been on board of us. There is not, they say, one person in the
ship, officer or mariner, but are all Quakers."--_Thurloe_, v. 422.
There are references to the spread of Quakerism in the same collection,
iv. 333, 408, 757.
[377] _Sewel's History of Friends_, i. 105.
[378] _Journal_, i. 213.
[379] Two striking cases, however, occurred in New England. See
_Besse's Sufferings_, 235.
[380] _Sewel's History_, i. 112.
[381] In a Diurnal, February 16, 1654-55, mention is made of letters
from several places, which speak of Quakers and Ranters, and others
that disturb ministers in their sermons in public churches, and the
meetings of ministers and other Christians in private, in several
places of England. The Quaker meetings are said to be receptacles for
Papists, and Popish priests and friars.
In another Commonwealth newspaper it is said: "Some think this Fox is
a Popish priest, because of his tenets of salvation by works." Most
absurd and incredible stories are told of Fox and Mr. Fell.
The monstrous things related in these newspapers defy belief. What
was thought of Quakers in high quarters may be seen in the Pell
correspondence.--_Vaughan's Protectorate_, ii. 309.
[382] The difficulty in believing these stories does not arise from
what we know of the moral character of the Jesuits, but only from their
reputation for cleverness, and from what we know of the shrewdness
of the Quakers. The Quakers were not likely to be so deceived by the
Jesuits, and the Jesuits were not likely to adopt a scheme of action
which promised so little success. But the _Provincial Letters_ of
Pascal, written during the Protectorate, prove that Jesuit morality
placed no bar in the way of such dishonest intrigues.
[383] _Abstract of the Sufferings of the People called Quakers_, i.
216, 222, 223. See also _Evelyn's Diary_, i. 332.
The Quakers were often very violent. There is a very intemperate and
foolish pamphlet, entitled, _A True Testimony against the Pope's Ways,
in a Return to that Agreement of '42 of those who call themselves
Ministers of Christ (but are proved to be wrongers of Men and of
Christ), in the County of Worcester: by Richard Farnsworth, a Quaker_,
1656. Richard Baxter is first on the list of persons attacked.--See
also _Sussex Arch. Collections_, vol. xvi. The Quakers were assailed in
their turn most furiously. For example, there is a tract entitled, _The
Deceived and Deceiving Quakers discovered; their Damnable Heresies,
Horrid Blasphemies, &c., laid open, by Matthew Caffin, a Servant of the
Lord, related to the Church of Christ, near Worsham, in Sussex_, 1656.
This was answered by James Nayler, with like scurrility. It is curious
that Caffin denies the man of sin to be Popery, and maintains that he
is a person yet to appear. Nayler sets Caffin down as Antichrist.
[384] _Quakers' Sufferings_, i. 70.
[385] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 112.
[386] _Sewel_, i. 158.
[387] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 46. His trial has been already mentioned
in this volume, p. 133.
[388] His dying words place him in a much better light than that in
which he is commonly viewed.--See _Sewel's Hist._, i. 207.
[389] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 216. The petitioners were called in, to
the number of thirty, and Mr. Sprigg made a short speech, saying that
they did not countenance the wicked, and were no partakers of their
crime; but upon the common account of liberty, found it upon their
spirits to become petitioners in this thing, leaving it to God to
direct the House.
See the beautiful apology for Nayler in _Lamb's Elia, Quakers' Meeting_.
[390] p. 16.
[391] Baxter says Sir H. Vane spoke against him in the House of
Commons; and he adds, "I confess my writing was a means to lessen his
reputation."--_Life and Times_, p. i. 76.
[392] _Baxter's Life and Times_, p. i. 77.
[393] _The Life of one Jacob Bœhmen, wherein is contained a perfect
Catalogue of his Workes._ London, 1644.
[394] "I have seen myself," says Baxter, "letters written from
Abingdon, where among both soldiers and people, this contagion did then
prevail, full of horrid oaths and curses, and blasphemy, not fit to
be repeated by the tongue or pen of man; and this all uttered as the
effect of knowledge and a part of their religion, in a fanatic strain,
and fathered on the Spirit of God."--_Baxter's Life and Times_, p. i.
77.
It must be remembered Baxter would make the most of all this.
[395] Such things may be found by those who search after them.
Historically they are of little worth; in other respects worse than
worthless.
[396] The following are titles of books by Muggleton: _The Answer to
William Penn, Quaker, his book, entitled The New Witnesses proved
Old Heretics, wherein he is proved to be an ignorant spatter-brained
Quaker_, &c. _Looking-Glass for George Fox, and other Quakers, wherein
they may see themselves to be right Devils_, &c. _The Neck of the
Quakers Broken_, &c.
[397] Ministers in Edinburgh had a basin and ewer placed in a frame of
iron fastened to the pulpit, and there performed the ceremony.--See
_Travels by Sir W. Brereton_, p. 110, published by Cheetham Society.
Bishop Wren, in his injunctions, orders that "the _fonts_ at baptism be
filled with clean water, and no dishes, pails, nor basins, be used in
it, or instead of it."--_Cardwell_, ii. 204.
[398] _Gillingwater's History of Lowestoft._
[399] _Hanbury's Memorials_, ii. 568, i. 536.
[400] _Martindale's Autobiography_, quoted in _Hunter's Life of
Heywood_, 42.
[401] _Hall's Works_, 555.
[402] Dedication to his _Commentary on Ezekiel_.
[403] As it is our object to afford glimpses of domestic life, it is
worth while to insert the following letters, trivial though they be,
preserved in the State Paper Office. They are from parents to their son
at school, and present an odd and amusing jumble of advice:--
"London, 16th Nov., 1641.
"Son John, the Lord bless thee, and these are to let you know that,
thanks be to God, we are all now indifferent well. I have had a great
desire, this long time, to come into the country to see you; but I have
been very ill of a pleurisy, which hindered me, and now the ways are
deep and the days are short, and your mother and sisters long to see
you. Therefore I have desired your master in the enclosed to let you
come up to London upon Friday next, at the return of this carrier. You
may come up in the waggon, which if you do, your mother would have you
keep on your coat to keep you warm. I would have you the rather come
upon Friday next, because the next week we have a great feast at the
Hall, and your mother would have you there. When you come up, bring
with you both your coats and your two best suits of apparel, and your
mother would have you bring up your writing book, and the book wherein
you take the heads of your master's sermons in; and this is all I have
to say till I see you, which I expect will be on Friday night next.
"Your loving Father,
"GEORGE WILLINGHAM.
(Addressed) "To his loving son John Willingham, at Mr. Herring's house,
in Duddinghurst, these."
The following letter is written to the boy by his mother:--
"John, think it not strange that you have not received your clothes
before. The reason you may well know, which was the vexation you put
me and your father to at your departing, which lets us understand that
your heart is not reformed, notwithstanding all your good education. I
have sent you your clothes--a pair of stockings, a pair of gloves. I
would have you wear your fres jump (freize jacket) every day and your
waistcoat a'nights, and have a care of your clothes, that you keep
them in your trunk, and above all look to your heart in all the duties
that you perform, and improve the day of grace, which God yet affords
you, and improve your time, that you spend it not in play, and neglect
your learning, and labour to be a comfort to your parents and not a
grief. I have sent you some plums, of your brother's christening. Had
I sent them as you did your father's nuts they would come short to
you. You sent your father a pint of nuts which cost him eightpence.
Had you regarded your father, you would have tied and sealed them up.
Your brother Samuel and sister is well and remember them to you, and
remember me to your master Herring, and Mrs. Herring, and your old
Mistress and Mr. Chadley. Thus I rest praying to God, for I rest your
careful mother,
"ANNA WILLINGHAM.
"Your brother's name is Ebenezer.
(Addressed) "To John Willingham, living at Mr. Herring's, at
Duddinghurst, deliver these."
There are also letters, &c., endorsed, "Intercepted, 1641, to
Willingham." Probably it was suspected they were letters of political
significance.
[404] As to Lancashire, Dr. Hibbert observes, in his _History of the
Collegiate Church of Manchester_, i. 272:--"The greatest discontent
was excited at the mode of solemnizing marriages, which was no longer
before the altar, or accompanied with the pledge of the ring, which
had been hitherto considered essential to the contract. This meanness
of ceremony was so ill relished, that many clandestine marriages were
celebrated by unauthorized persons, or ejected clergymen." The author
mentions the case of a woman who refused to submit to Presbyterian
rites, but asserted herself a "wife before God."
[405] Many Independents, it should be remembered, treated marriage as a
civil contract, and had no religious service.
[406] These particulars are gleaned from _Brand's Popular Antiquities_.
[407] _Hunter's Life of Heywood_, 33.
[408] _Autobiography of Joseph Lister._
[409] According to _Archbishop Islep's Constitutions_ (1362), the
observance of the Lord's Day was to begin at Saturday vespers, like the
feasts that have vigils.--_Johnson's English Canons_, ii. 426.
Eustace, abbot of Flay (1201), went beyond the Puritans in his
Sabbatarianism, and sought to terrify people into a cessation of
labour from three o'clock on Saturday afternoon until Monday sunrise,
by relating all sorts of miracles. A woman, for weaving on Saturday
afternoon, was struck dead with palsy; another woman, who kept her
paste wrapped up in a cloth until Monday morning, found it then ready
baked.--_Johnson_, ii. 95.
[410] _Baxter's Works_, xiii. 457.
[411] Professor Kingsley, in his _Lectures on the Roman and the
Teuton_, ascribes the spread of witch-mania to the influence of the
Romish clergy (p. 293).
[412] In an instructive article respecting _Witchcraft_, in _Charles
Knight's Cyclopædia_, it is remarked "that a large portion of the
witchcraft superstition was propagated by means of books, or through
the tuition of men of letters."
[413] Enquiries about sorcerers, incantations, and witchcraft occur in
the _Visitation Articles of Laud_.--_Works_, v. 417, 432.
[414] There are numerous stories of Lancashire witches in the _State
Papers_. See, for example, _Calendar Dom._, 1634-1635, p. 78.
[415] _Gaule's Select Cases of Conscience touching Witches_, 1646. See
also _Hale's Tracts_, containing _Trial of the Witches at Bury St.
Edmunds_.
[416] Widdrington, in a letter to Whitelocke (_Memorials_, 424), says:
"I met at Berwick with a discovery of witches by a Scotchman, who
professeth himself an artist that way. I know not whence he derives his
skill. His salary was twenty shillings for every witch. He got thirty
pounds after that rate." Of the burning or imprisonment of witches,
cases are mentioned by _Whitelocke_, in pp. 412, 423, 450, 570.
[417] In the Assembly Books of the Corporation of Yarmouth is this
entry:--"August 15th, 1637. That the gentleman, Mr. Hopkins, employed
in the country for discovering and finding out witches be sent for to
town, to search for those wicked persons, if any may be, and have his
fee and allowance for his pains, as he hath in other places."
[418] There is amongst the Baxter MSS. in Dr. Williams's Library,
a long letter respecting something of this kind, which I remember
noticing many years ago.
[419] "During the few years of the Commonwealth, there is reason to
believe that more alleged witches perished in England than in the whole
period before and after."--_Lecky's Rise and Influence of Rationalism_,
116; _Hutchinson's Historical Account of Witchcraft_, p. 68.
[420] This is stated on the authority of the article on _Witchcraft_ in
_Knight's Cyclopædia_.
Hutchinson says, of the thousands of executions for witchcraft in
250 years, he had ascertained only about 140 cases in England. Other
writers placed the numbers higher. Some estimates appear absurdly
extravagant; for example, that in _Barrington's Observations on the
More Ancient Statutes_.
[421] I do not profess to be learned in these matters, but I would
just add that caps fitting close to the head were not necessarily
badges of Puritanism; for, to mention no other instances, they may
be seen in the portraits of Andrewes and Taylor. Bands are said to
have been introduced in 1652, but I do not know on what authority the
statement rests. In the portrait of William Jenkyn, already noticed,
an indescribable piece of ornamentation appears in the front of his
dress. Caryl's portrait shews no gown at all, only a plain, tight
dress. I mention these trifles simply to indicate that there was a
variety of costume amongst the Puritans. They were firm in resisting
the use of Popish vestments; but they do not seem to have maintained
anything like uniformity amongst themselves. I may add that the authors
of the Seventy-fourth Canon could have had no such childish ideas
about clerical costume as many express in the present day, for they
distinctly declare: "In all which particulars concerning the apparel
here prescribed, our meaning is not to attribute any holiness or
special worthiness to the said garments, but for decency, gravity, and
order, as is before specified."
[422] Weever, writing in 1631, complains of pews as a novelty. "They
are made high and easy, for parishioners to sit or sleep in, a fashion
of no long continuance, and worthy of reformation."
In the Visitation Books of the Archdeacon of Norfolk there are
many presentments in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. against
high-backed pews as nuisances. In 1638, some of the parishioners of
Great St. Andrew's Church, Cambridge, were presented for not kneeling
at the Sacrament, and excused themselves by saying their seats were so
straight that, being filled, they could not kneel.--_Hist. of Yarmouth,
by C. J. Palmer_, 127.
[423] The purchasing of hour-glasses is an item occurring in the
Windsor Churchwardens' accounts. In the same records are the following
curious entries for 1652-3:--
"Paid for fastening the paraphrase of Erasmus to the desk, viii.
d.; for nine pounds of candles, for the use of morning prayer, vs.
id." The charges for sack after preaching are numerous.--See _Annals
of Windsor_, ii. 266, _et. seq._ "For one pint of sack, given to a
merchant of Bristol who preached in the parish church, by William
Myelles, Mayor, his appointment, 8d."
The church plate at Windsor was for safe custody deposited in the
Guildhall. It consisted of two silver flagons, two chalices, one silver
cover, and one bread-plate.--_Annals_, ii. 271.
[424] It has been stated, but I do not know on what authority, that
Baxter read his sermons. Altogether, the advice given in the Directory,
under the head "Of the Preaching of the Word," is so admirable that it
deserves to be studied by every Christian minister.
[425] _Oxoniana_, i. 64; _Peck's Desiderata Curiosa_, _lib._ xx.;
_Stanford's Life of Joseph Alleine_, 113. In some parts of Switzerland,
the practice of wearing hats at sermon time is still maintained.
[426] _Perfect Occurrences_, June 22nd, 1644.
[427] _Baillie_, ii. 149.
[428] _Hanbury's Memorials_, ii. 105, 111.
[429] The omission of singing in public worship was continued in the
Baptist church at Maze Pond, Southwark, until the year 1733.--_Ivimey's
Hist. of Baptists_, Sup., 432.
[430] Sternhold's version was first published in 1548 or 1549, and was
dedicated to King Edward VI. Hopkins' additions appear in 1551.
The following may be mentioned as of a Puritan character:--
_Dod's Psalms of David; with a Public Thanksgiving on the Fifth of
November, composed into Easie Meter, a Song meete for Young and Old._
1620.
_Psalms of David, by George Wither, 1632, printed in the Netherlands;
dedicated to the Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia._
_The Psalms, in prose and metre, by H. A., Amsterdam_, 1612. H. A.
means Henry Ainsworth, the Nonconformist.
For a list of versions, see _Lownde's Bibliographers' Manual_ (Bohn's
edit.)
[431] _Humble Advice; or, the Heads of those Things which were offered
to many honourable Members of Parliament, by Richard Baxter, at the End
of his Sermon, December 24th, at the Abbey in Westminster._ 1655.
Baxter recommends the version "first approved of by the late
Assembly of Divines, and, after, very much corrected and bettered in
Scotland." This was Rouse's. Mr. Lathbury, to whom I am indebted for
the reference, incorrectly supposes it to be Barton's.--_Hist. of
Convocation_, 510.
[432] _Weekly Account_, 1643, October the 4th.
Substitutes for theatrical entertainments were ingeniously contrived
under the Protectorate, of which a curious example is afforded in a
description of a public amusement upon Friday, May the 23rd, 1656,
which I find amongst the _State Papers_.
[433] The following extract is worth notice:--
May the 1st, 1654, _Moderate Intelligencer_.
"This day was more observed by people's going a-maying than for divers
years past, and indeed much sin committed by wicked meetings, with
fighting, drunkenness, ribaldry, and the like. Great resort came to
Hyde Park; many hundred of rich coaches, and gallants in rich attire,
but most shameful powdered hair men, and painted and spotted women.
[434] Macaulay says: "If the Puritans suppressed bull-baiting it was
not because it gave pain to the bull, but because it gave pleasure to
spectators." Is this a fair statement? I do not discover in _Scobell_
any act or ordinance against bull-baiting at all. There is one against
cock-fighting, and the reason alleged for suppressing the practice is,
that it disturbed the public peace, and was connected with dissolute
practices to the dishonour of God. The prohibition of races, and the
grounds of the prohibition, have been already noticed.
[435] _Scobell._
[436] The following is extracted from the biography of John
Bruen.--_Nonconformity in Cheshire_, 56:--
"Master Done being young and youthly, yet very tractable, could not
well away with the strict observation of the lord's Day, whereupon we
did all conspire to do him good, ten of my family speaking one after
another, and myself last, for the sanctifying of the lord's Day.
After which he did very cheerfully yield himself; blessed be
God." ... "I [John Bruen] coming once into his chamber and finding over
the mantel-piece a pair of new cards, nobody being there I opened them,
and took out the four knaves and burnt them, and so laid them together
again; and so for want of such knaves his gaming was marred, and never
did he play in my house, for aught I ever heard, any more." Puritans
played at billiards, bowls, and shuffle-board.--See _Newcome's Diary_.
[437] A curious description of the prevalent fashions of the day is
found in _Fox's Journal_, i. 274:--
People "must be in the fashion of the world, else they are not in
esteem; else they shall not be respected, if they have not gold or
silver upon their backs, or if the hair be not powdered. But if he have
store of ribands hanging about his waist, and at his knees, and in his
hat, of divers colours, red, white, black, or yellow, and his hair be
powdered, then he is a brave man; then he is accepted, he is no Quaker,
because he hath ribands on his back, and belly, and knees, and his hair
powdered. This is the array of the world. But is not this from the lust
of the eye, the lust of the flesh, or the pride of life? Likewise the
women having their gold, their patches on their faces, noses, cheeks,
foreheads; having their rings on their fingers, wearing gold, having
their cuffs double, under and above, like unto a butcher with his white
sleeves; having their ribands tied about their hands, and three or
four gold laces about their clothes, this is no Quaker, say they. This
attire pleaseth the world; and if they cannot get these things, they
are discontented."
[438] Bastwick, quoted in _Hanbury's Memorials_, iii. 81.
[439] _Whitelocke's Memorials_, 628.
[440] _Oldmixon's History of England_, 426.
"I knew them both," he says, "and heard this story told when Mrs. White
was present, who did not contradict it, but owned there was something
in it."
[441] _Rogers' Life of Howe_, 69, 72.
[442] Mr. John Nelson, father of "the pious Robert Nelson," dying in
1657, having "a distaste" "for the intruding ministry of the time,"
requested to be "privately buried by an orthodox minister in the
evening."--_Nelson's Life, by Secretan_, p. 2.
[443] _Harl. MSS._, 5176, 15, quoted in _Lyson's Environs_, i. 42.
[444] _Brook_, iii. 290.
[445] _Baxter's Poetical Fragments._
[446] _Fell_, p. 230.
[447] _Essays_, by Henry Rogers, 17.
[448] _Taylor's Works_, vi. 564-566.
[449] _Life of Quarles, in Sacred Poets, by Willmott._
[450] _Dixon's Life of the Earl of Manchester._
[451] _Memorials of John Hampden_, by Lord Nugent, 336.
[452] _Evelyn's Diary_, i. 342.
[453] _Howe's Works_, vi. 233. Fairclough was Rector of the parish of
Wells, in the county of Somerset. He was one of the ejected ministers;
he died July 4th, 1682, and is buried in Bunhill Fields. Howe gives an
account of his indefatigable diligence in the discharge of his ministry.
[454] _Clark's Lives_, 103.
[455] Samuel Fairclough. He held the living of Banardiston in Suffolk,
and afterwards became Rector of Keddington, in the same county. There
is a remarkable memoir of him in _Clark's Lives_.
[456] _Clark's Lives_, 114.
[457] _Works_, vi. 476.
[458] _Memorable Women of the Puritan Times_, i. 105-116.
[459] These notices are taken from _Dr. Gibbons Memoirs of Eminently
Pious Women_. We have purposely retained some forms of phraseology
which are employed in the original narrative. It would be easy to add
to these illustrations. Some interesting ones are given in _Pattison's
Rise and Progress of Religious Life in England_, chap. xii. See also
_Tomkin's Piety Promoted_. Even amongst the Fifth Monarchy men there
were instances of genuine piety; nor do we doubt that the persecuted
Roman Catholics furnished examples of devotion and beneficence.
[460] Morley stated at the Savoy Conference "that some places had no
ministers at all through all those times of usurpation," and instanced
Aylesbury. Baxter told him: "I never knew any such; and therefore I
knew there were not many such in England." With regard to Aylesbury,
he says the story was false, as he ascertained there were usually in
that town two at a time.--_Life and Times_, part ii., 340. Some poor
parishes might, during a part of the period, be without ministers.
[461] _Life and Times_, part i., 96.
[462] Even what was said by the scoffers is worth noting:--
"Here's now no good action for a man to spend his time in; taverns
grow dead; ordinaries are blown up; plays are at a stand; houses
of hospitality at fall; not a feather waving, nor a spur jingling
anywhere. I'll away instantly."--_Eastward Ho!_ 228.
This testifies to an extensive outward reformation.
[463] _Works_, ii. 251.
[464] _Communion with God_: two Sermons preached at St. Paul's, by
Saml. Annesley, LL.D., 1654-1655, minister of the Gospel at St. John
the Evangelist's, London.
[465] _Owen's Works_, vol. vii. ccccxxxiv.
[466] The one called Germany worse than Sodom, and the other declared
the waters of the Elbe would not suffice for tears to weep over those
dissensions.--_Hase's History of the Church_, 439.
[467] For extract from Becon, see _Strype's Cranmer_, i. 417.
[468] See _Strype's Parker_, i. 465.
[469] These are expressions used in the Account of Twiss.--_Clark's
Lives_, 18.
[470] See _Hase_, 485.
[471] Bishop Burnet, in the _History of his own Times_, says of the
year 1680, (and his words are true of the times just before), "I was
indeed amazed at the labours and learning of the ministers among the
Reformed. They understood the Scriptures well in the original tongues,
they had all the points of controversy very ready, and did thoroughly
understand the whole body of divinity. In many places they preached
every day, and were almost constantly employed in visiting their
flock. But they performed their devotions but slightly, and read their
prayers, which were too long, with great precipitation and little zeal.
Their sermons were too long and too dry. And they were so strict, even
to jealousy, in the smallest points in which they put orthodoxy, that
one who could not go into all their notions, but was resolved not to
quarrel with them, could not converse much with them with any freedom."
In reference to the French refugees, he observes: "Even among them
there did not appear a spirit of piety and devotion suitable to their
condition, though persons who have willingly suffered the loss of all
things rather than sin against their consciences, must be believed to
have a deeper principle in them than can well be observed by others."
Archbishop Trench has drawn an instructive and admonitory parallel
between this condition of things on the Continent, in the 17th
century, and the picture of the Church at Ephesus in the Book of
Revelation.--_Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches_, 73.
[472] Quoted in _Anderson's History of the Colonial Church_, i. 25-27.
_Worthies of England, Derbyshire_, i. 373.
[473] _Anderson_, i., 46-56.
[474] _Advertisement for the Unexperienced Planters in New England,
&c._, p. 32, quoted in _Anderson's Colonial Church_, i. 180.
[475] _Anderson's History of the Colonial Church_, i. 217, 231.
[476] _Ibid._, i. 267.
_Bancroft_, i. 178, 206.
Even Mr. Anderson, who praises Virginia for its tolerance,
acknowledges, "that if the enactments concerning the Church had been
literally enforced, the Puritan would have found no resting-place
within its borders."--i. 270.
[477] _Anderson_, i. 461-2.
[478] See _Articles Subscribed by the Colonists_.--_Ibid._, i. 301.
[479] _Anderson_, i. 308. This was a French translation of Edward the
Sixth's Prayer Book. Edward the Sixth's first Prayer Book (1549) was
translated into French for the use of the King's subjects in Calais and
the Channel Islands, by command of Sir Hugh Paulet, Governor of Calais.
This book was corrected, according to the revision of the second Prayer
Book, in 1532.--_Procter on the Book of Common Prayer_, 37.
[480] _Anderson_, i. 488.
[481] _Bancroft_, i. 248. Afterwards it was declared that "Holy Church"
should enjoy all her liberties and rights.--_Bacon's Laws of Maryland._
[482] _Ibid._, i. 272.
[483] _Holme's American Annals_, i. 163. _Bancroft_, i. 305.
[484] _Anderson_, i. 359.
[485] A copy of the Charter may be found in the State Paper Office,
_Col. Series_, under date 1629, March 4th. An account of it is given in
_Bancroft_, i. 342.
[486] _Cotton Mather's Magnalia_, i. 66. The distinct origin of the
Massachusetts colony has been overlooked by some historians. The
Pilgrim Fathers of New England have been confounded with the planters
of the neighbouring state.
[487] _Baird's Religion of the United States_, 107, 108.--_Anderson_,
ii. 156, 157.
[488] _Bancroft_, i. 349.
The treatment of Roger Williams, who, with all his folly and rashness,
blended qualities of the noblest kind,--can never be justified.
[489] _Heylyn's Life of Laud_, p. 369.
[490] _Heylyn's Life of Laud_, 276.
[491] _Hazard_, i. 344. _Anderson_, i. 412.
[492] December, 1634. _State Papers, Colonial._
"The question about the lawfulness of the cross was warmly agitated
at the time, and the matter was finally settled by the magistrates
commanding that the cross be struck out of the colours for the trained
bands, but retained on the banners of the castle and of vessels in the
harbour."--_Elton's Life of Roger Williams_, 23.
[493] 1634, No. 41, _State Papers, Colonial_; 1637, October 7th and
15th, _Ibid._; 1637, No. 73, _Ibid._ These are all described in _Mr.
Sainsbury's Calendar, Col. Series_, 1574-1660.
[494] 1637, October 6th, _State Papers, Colonial_.
[495] _Ibid._
[496] _Anderson_, ii. 18.
The Council of State, 1649, were informed, by a petition of the
congregation of Nansamund, in Virginia, that their minister, Mr.
Harrison, an able man of unblameable conversation, had been banished
the Colony because he would not conform to the Prayer Book. The
Prayer Book being prohibited by Parliament, the Council directs that
Mr. Harrison be restored, unless there be a cause for his removal
satisfactory to Parliament.--_State Papers, Colonial_, October, 1649;
_Entry Book_, cxv. p. 482.
In the Bermudas, or Somers Isles, Puritanism had become prevalent in
1642. Richard Norwood, a Puritan minister, writes thence, February
28th:--"We have seen an experiment here of that which very few, I
suppose, in England have seen, namely, of the superiority or government
of ministers, or an assembly of ministers esteeming the government to
be theirs, who have the most sway in it." He expects the Government
at home will receive complaints of arbitrary proceedings. The same
writer, May 14th, 1645, speaks of "diversity of opinions touching
ecclesiastical discipline." There were two parties, he says, one under
Mr. White, adhering to the Independent way; the other, and the larger
number, holding to the former discipline used there until Parliament
should order otherwise.
Again, in May, 1647, he speaks of "bitter acrimony" between the two
Independents and two Presbyterian ministers. The reins of government
were slack.--_State Papers, Colonial_, under dates.
[497] _Anderson_, i. 373.
[498] _Anderson_, ii. 57-59.
[499] This Act, passed in 1649, may be seen in _Bacon's Laws_.
[500] _Bancroft_, i. 421.
[501] _Ibid._, i. 432.
[502] _Bancroft_, i. 448.
[503] _Ibid._, 441. See also his preceding pages.
[504] See _Scobell_, July the 27th, 1649, p. 66.
[505] Some in New England held back from this kind of missionary
work,--_Anderson_, ii. 195.
Just on the eve of the Restoration this entry occurs in the minutes of
the synod at Sion College, the 19th March, 1659-60.
"There was then propounded by some of the Corporation for New England
that our help should be administered for the printing of the Bible in
the Indian languages. It was then ordered that the design propounded
was eminently acceptable, and that the ministers would engage that they
would promote the design to their utmost capacity."
[506] _Bancroft_, i. 445.
[507] _Thurloe_, v. 147. We can trace this Gookin in the Colonial
State Papers as admitted a patentee under a grant from the New England
Company (July the 5th, 1622); as praying Charles I. for a patent in the
capacity of planter and adventurer (March the 1st, 1631); as receiving
a warrant to export to New England powder and shot (July the 24th,
1650); as receiving £300 to defray charges of service (September the
21st, 1655); and as passing from Jamaica to New England on board the
_Fraternity_ (December the 19th, 1655).
[508] _Life of Williams_, 111.
[509] _Bancroft_, i. 425.
[510] _Bancroft_, i. 428.
[511] _Whitelocke_, 474.
[512] _Scobell_, 1650, Oct. 3rd.
[513] _State Papers. Colonial._ Feb. 1st, 1651.
[514] _Ibid. Colonial._ Oct. 31st, 1651.
[515] _State Papers. Colonial._ Nov. 13th, 1651.
[516] _Ibid._, Dec. 14th, 1651.
[517] _State Papers. Colonial._ Dec. 27th, 1651.
[518] _State Papers. Colonial._ 1651, Dec. 26th: 1652, Jan. 9th.
[519] _Ibid._ 1653, Aug. 28th, Sept. 19th. _Calendar_, 408.
A large mass of correspondence respecting Barbadoes may be found in
the Record Office. Barbadoes had been a place of banishment for the
Irish taken at Drogheda, and thither were also sent the Royalists who
were made prisoners at Exeter and Ilchester. In a Royalist pamphlet
entitled, _England's Slavery, or Barbadoes Merchandize_, (1659,) a
melancholy account is given of the barbarous treatment of seventy-two
freeborn Englishmen who uncondemned had been sold into slavery.
[520] _State Papers. Colonial._ Sept. 26th, 1651. _Thurloe_, i. 197.
[521] _Anderson_, ii. 19-21.
"In _Virginia's Cure_ the Colony is represented as bearing a great love
to the stated constitutions of the Church of England in her government
and public worship, which gave us (who went thither under the late
persecution of it) the advantage of liberty to use it constantly
amongst them, after the naval force had reduced the Colony under
the power (but never to the obedience) of the usurpers."--Quoted in
_Wilberforce's History of the American Church_, 38.
[522] _Anderson_, ii. 20-23.
Bancroft paints a glowing picture of Virginia under the
Commonwealth.--i. 224.
[523] Mr. Anderson, in his _History of the Church of England in the
Colonies_, ii. 36, speaks of the paucity of his materials respecting
the Bermudas. The particulars given above are picked out of the _State
Papers, Colonial Series_ (see _Calendar_), 1652, Jan. 1st; 1653, June
25th; 1656, Oct. 7th, Nov. 18th; 1658, March 25th, Sept. 7th. It is
stated in the Report, 1656, Oct. 7th, that the islands for the most
part were naturally fortified or otherwise secured by four forts with
sixty guns and five companies; 1,500 men were able to bear aims. About
3,000 inhabitants were without a minister. The charges of Government
were £500 a year, and the tobacco duties amounted to £800.
[524] _Thurloe_, ii. 126.
[525] _State Papers. Colonial._ July 25th, 1657.
[526] _Thurloe_, iii. 497. _Long's Hist. of Jamaica_, i. 239, quoted by
_Anderson_, ii. 75.
[527] _State Papers. Colonial._ Sept. 26th, 1655.
[528] _Thurloe_, iii. 650, iv. 4.
[529] There are several letters by D'Oyley in _Thurloe_.
[530] See papers in _Thurloe_, v. 482-487.
Puritan emigrants from Virginia are charged with fomenting quarrels in
Maryland.--_Leah and Rachel_, quoted in _Anderson_, ii. 32.
[531] The persecution of the Roman Catholics in England has been
noticed already. We may add, that in 1656-57, a new oath of adjuration
was prescribed for discovering Papists, and a penalty of £100 was to be
inflicted on any one who attended mass. The ordinance altogether was
very severe.--_Scobell_, 443. Butler, (_Rom. Cath._, ii. 407,) mentions
the execution of a priest for the exercise of his functions.
[532] _Thurloe._, iv. 55. _Bancroft_, i. 261, on the authority of
Chalmers.
[533] _Bancroft_, i. 263.
In a pamphlet, entitled _Hammond versus Heamans_, preserved in the
State Paper Office, there is published what is said to be "His
Highness's absolute (though neglected) command to Richard Bennet,
late Governor of Virginia, and all others, not to disturb the Lord
Baltimore's plantation in Maryland."--1655, vol. xii. 59.
[534] Vol. i. p. 340.
[535] _Anderson_, ii. 272.
[536] _Ibid._, 271.
[537] Durie gives long and amusing accounts of his conversations with
Archbishop Laud. Laud promised to use his influence with the King to
procure him a living. He did so, and Durie went down into Devonshire,
where the living was situated, to take possession, but he found it
occupied by some one else. Laud paid Durie's travelling expenses. The
letters are given in Mr. Bruce's interesting preface to the _Cal.
Dom._, 1633-1634.
[538] _Calendar Dom._, 1633-34, 525.
[539] _Calendar, Dom._, 1633-34, p. 562.
[540] _Ibid._, p. 565, 566.
[541] _Calendar Dom._, 1634-35, p. 148.
A number of other interesting letters from or respecting Durie are
condensed by Mr. Bruce in his Calendar.--See pp. 89, 96, 195, 204, 530.
[542] _Harris's Cromwell_, 304.
[543] See letters illustrative of Durie's efforts abroad in _Vaughan's
Protectorate of Cromwell_, i. 48, 104, 117.
[544] Notices of Durie may be found in _Bayle's Dict._, in _Biog.
Brit._, in _Brook's Lives_, and in _Herzog's Encycl._
[545] _Vaughan's Protectorate_, i. 136.
[546] _Thurloe_, iii. 362.
[547] _Vaughan_, i. 169, 170, 175.
[548] _Original Papers illustrative of the life and writings of John
Milton_, Camden Society; the translation is taken from the _Athenæum_,
Dec. 17th, 1859.
[549] _Thurloe_, iii. 476.
[550] _Ibid._, 558-568.
[551] _Ibid._, 623.
This, however, was an exaggeration. See page 498.
[552] The names of the Committee are given, including Nye, Caryl,
Calamy, Jenkyn. Additions were afterwards made by order of his Highness
and the Council, including the names of Lockier and Sterry.
[553] All the foregoing particulars on this subject are found in a
bundle of papers relative to the Vaudois, preserved in the State Paper
Office.--_Dom. Interreg._
[554] _Vaughan_, i. 260.
Commissioners must content themselves to give "some means of
subsistence to feed and clothe them, with some small sum of money to
those whose houses have been burnt, to enable them to provide timber
against the spring time, that they may build them some small cottages
to shelter."--_Public Intelligencer_, October 13th, 1655.
"The last letters out of Dauphine advise that there is a provincial
synod of them of the reformed religion, where, after they had taken
a view of their own particular affairs, it was resolved that they
would send a deputation to their brethren of the valleys of Piedmont,
consisting of four ministers, two of which are to be of the most
eminent, learned, and zealous men of that province, to be joined with
two younger, and two gentlemen of the country most noted for their
affection to the Protestant religion, and for purity of life and
conversation, who are to go as deputies to see to the distributing of
the moneys collected in this kingdom for relief of our poor brethren
according to the necessity of their conditions and families."--_Ibid._,
October 15th to 22nd.
[555] _Milton's Prose Works_, ii. 220.
In an Order Book (State Paper Office) there is, under date May 18th,
1658, an order for £3,000 to be paid to the suffering Vaudois.
[556] Upon the 2nd of September, 1658, £3,700 was ordered to be paid
to the merchant adventurers at Hamburgh on behalf of the Polish
Protestants.
A petition for assistance by Polish exiles appears under date November
18th, 1658, with the endorsement:--"I know this petition to be true,
and know the petitioners to be very deserving, learned, godly persons,
members of the Churches for whom the collection was made, as are also
some others living with us on our charity, in the same condition with
those petitioners. JOHN OWEN."
The bundle in the State Paper Office, containing the documents from
which we have taken the foregoing particulars, is endorsed, _Papers
relative to the Protestant Exiles from Poland and Bohemia, &c._, 1657,
1658.
[557] _Clarendon's Hist._, 863, and _Burnet's Hist. of his Own Times_,
i. 77.
[558] _Ibid._ Stoupe was minister of the French Reformed Church in
London, and was sent to Geneva in 1654 to negotiate affairs relative
to Protestantism. There are several allusions to him in _Pell's
Correspondence_. In one letter he is spoken of as a man "with good
zeal, but little policy."--_Vaughan's Protectorate_, i. 48.
[559] King James's College, at Chelsea, was founded by Dr. Matthew
Sutcliffe, Dean of Exeter, "to this intent, that learned men
might there have maintenance to answer all the adversaries of
religion."--_Alleyn's Life_, quoted in _Cunningham's Hand-Book of
London_.
[560] The _Public Intelligencer_, of December 10th-17th, 1655, speaks
of "a conference held concerning the Jews in a withdrawing-room, in
the presence of his Highness, between the Committee of the Council and
the ministers and other persons approved by his Highness. Among these
present Mr. Bridge was one." There is a letter on the subject of the
Jews in _Thurloe_, iv. 321.
[561] Even Burnet thought Cromwell meant to employ the Jews as spies.
[562] Samuel Brett has left "a Narrative (dated 1655) of the
proceedings of a great council of Jews assembled in the plain of Ageda,
in Hungaria, about thirty leagues distant from Breda, to examine the
Scriptures concerning the Messiah." The narrative is in the British
Museum.
[563] In addition to what has been stated before on this subject,
notice may be taken of a conversation which Cromwell had with a
minister named John Rogers (see _Brook's Lives_, iii. 328), who spoke
against a National Church--calling it anti-Christian--applying what
he said to the Commonwealth. Cromwell answered that the Commonwealth
Church was not a National Church, "for a National Church endeavoured to
force all into one form."--See also _Wood's Ath. Ox._, ii. 594.
[564] Yet Bates, the physician, who says this, also says she often
mentioned the blood her father spilt. How did he know this, if nobody
was near enough to hear what was said? We cannot help thinking that
imagination has been very busy with the latter part of Cromwell's
life. Elizabeth Claypole has been represented as having pleaded with
her father to spare Dr. Hewit's life. However that might be, certainly
this very lady, in her own handwriting, within two months of her death,
expressed her satisfaction at the discovery of the plot, as of one
which, had it taken effect, would have ruined her family and the whole
nation.--_Thurloe_, vii. 173.
[565] _Thurloe_, vii. 320; _Ludlow's Memoirs_, i. 609.
[566] The account which follows is taken from "_A Collection of
Several Passages concerning his Late Highness Oliver Cromwell in the
Time of his Sickness_, written by one that was then groom of his
bedchamber." The gentlemen of the bedchamber were Mr. Charles Harvey
and Mr. Underwood. This pamphlet is in the British Museum. There is
also another copy of it, with a somewhat different title, as follows:
"_An Account of the Last Hours of the Late Renowned Oliver, Lord
Protector_--drawn up and published by one who was an eye and ear
witness of the most part of it."
"_The Portraiture of his Royal Highness Oliver in his Life and Death_,"
contains no information respecting his sickness. It has a curious
frontispiece, exhibiting Cromwell's effigy crowned, and clothed in
royal robes.
[567] "As near as I can remember them," says the writer of the
_Collection_, &c.
[568] _Fox's Journal_, i. 477.
[569] _Journal_, 485. Fox says, immediately afterwards:--"From Kingston
I went to Isaac Pennington's, in Buckinghamshire, where I had appointed
a meeting, and the Lord's truth and power were preciously manifested
amongst us." This was the celebrated Isaac Pennington repeatedly
noticed in the first volume of this history.
[570] _Thurloe_, vii. 354.
[571] _Bates' Elenchi_, ii. 215.
Fleetwood and Thurloe both speak of divine assurances of Cromwell's
restoration.--_Thurloe_, vii. 355, 364.
[572] The Royalist historians abound in stories of Cromwell's terror
lest he should be assassinated, and of frightful remorse mixed with
that terror. Yet Clarendon, (_Hist._, p. 861,) most inconsistently
says: "He never made the least shew of remorse;" and Ludlow, the
republican, remarks: "He manifested little remorse."--_Memoirs_, ii.
612.
[573] The letters are in _Peck's Desiderata Curiosa_, ii.
[574] This is stated on the authority of Eachard. Neal adopts it,
(_Hist._ iv. 188.) I must confess I do not feel much confidence in such
a report of Cromwell's last sayings.
[575] Neal mentions Goodwin as the person who said this, (_Hist._ iv.
197,) and in so doing he is followed by Godwin and others. But Goodwin
was not a chaplain of Cromwell's, nor was he likely to say what is thus
ascribed to him. Neal gives no authority for his story. Baxter makes no
mention of such an incident. Foster, in his _Life of Cromwell_, says
it was Sterry who answered Cromwell, and he refers generally to the
_Collection of Passages_; but in that collection Sterry's name does not
occur, nor is there one word about this conversation. Baxter states
that an Independent praying for Cromwell, said: "We ask not for his
life, for that we are sure of, but that he may serve Thee better than
ever he had done."--_Life and Times_, part i. 98. The author adds in
the margin, "as it is currently reported without any contradiction that
ever I heard of." There is no allusion to any such circumstance in the
_Collection of Passages_. Ludlow, (_Memoirs_, ii. 610,) ascribes the
prayer to Goodwin, but Ludlow was evidently prejudiced against both
Cromwell and Goodwin. Tillotson, according to Birch, (_Life_, 16,) and
also according to Burnet, (_Hist. of his own Times_, i. 82,) reported
that he heard Goodwin say, a week after Cromwell's death: "Thou hast
deceived us, and we were deceived." Tillotson also alluded to Goodwin's
pretended assurance in prayer, before Cromwell expired. Tillotson would
not fabricate the report, but might he not misunderstand what Goodwin
meant? Eachard and Kennet, in relating the story, do not supply any
corroboration of it. Tillotson is the only authority.
[576] _Carlyle_, iii. 151.
[577] _Collection of several Passages_, &c.
[578] "He did not mean," says the author of the _Collection_, "that it
was safe to sin. No, the laying hold of the Covenant implies faith and
repentance, which the Gospel requires with new obedience."--p. 6.
Throughout this paragraph we adhere to the words in the _Collection_.
[579] P. 7.
[580] P. 12.
[581] "Some variation," says the writer of the _Collection of
Passages_, "there is of this prayer, as to the account divers give of
it, and something is here omitted. But this is certain, that these were
his requests, wherein his heart was so carried out for God and his
people, yea for them who had added no little sorrow to his grief and
afflictions, that at this time he seems to forget his own family and
nearest relations."--13.
The statement that Sterry exclaimed after Cromwell's death, that he was
of great use to the people of God whilst he lived, and that he would be
much more so interceding for them at the right hand of Christ, rests
mainly on the authority of Ludlow (_Memoirs_, ii. 612) who was not
present, and in this instance could only repeat a rumour. He was as
prejudiced against Cromwell and his court as any Royalist could be.
[582] _Commonwealth Mercury_, Sept. 2nd to Sept. 9th. The Protector's
funeral was very magnificent, of which a minute account is given by
the Rev. John Prestwich, of All Souls, Oxford, in a document preserved
amongst the Ashmolean MSS. It is printed in the _Cromwellian Diary_,
ii. 516.
In the newspaper announcing Cromwell's death, there occurs this amusing
advertisement:--"That excellent, and by all physitians approved China
drink, called by the Chineans, Tcha, by other nations Tay, or Tee, is
sold at the Sultaness-Head, a cophee-house in Sweetings Rents, by the
Royal Exchange, London."
[583] Clarendon (_Hist._, 862), says that the day of Cromwell's death
was memorable for a storm, which he describes as very violent. Heath
says it was reported that he was carried away in the storm _the day_
before. (_Chronicle_, 408.) The fact is, that this storm, of which both
the friends and the enemies of Cromwell made so much, really occurred
on Monday, the 30th of August, _four days before his death_. Barwick,
in a letter to Charles II., mentions it as occurring on the 30th.
_Thurloe_, vii. 416. Ludlow, in his _Memoirs_, does the same, ii. 610.
In the title to Waller's poem on the Protector, it is said that it
alludes "to the storm that happened _about_ that time."
[584] Particular notice is taken of the prayers offered for Oliver's
recovery in letters of the period.--See _Thurloe_, vii. 364-7.
[585] _Art._ II. charged him with saying "that some of the Justices
were all for law, and nothing would please them but law; but they
should find that the King's little finger should be heavier than the
loins of the law."
_Art._ XXI. charged him with counselling his Majesty to call a
Parliament in England with a design "to break the same, and by ways of
force and power to raise monies upon the subjects of this kingdom."
_Art._ XXIII. charged him with saying "that his Majesty having
tried the affections of his people, he was loose and absolved from
all rules of Government, and was to do everything that power would
admit."--_Rushworth's Trial of Lord Strafford_, 62, 71, 72.
[586] _Sufferings of the Clergy_, part i. 199-200.
The subject of martyrology strongly tempts to exaggeration. Certain
writers on the catacombs are examples. A curious instance of the
tendency occurs in _Donne's Sermons_, i. 328.
[587] Baxter, and the Presbyterian ministers at the Savoy, speak of
"many hundreds," "several hundreds," and "some hundreds." Hook, in
a letter in the State Paper Office (March 2nd, 1663) says: Of the
ejected Puritans, they were "about 1,500 or 1,600 in the nation,
_besides as near as many before upon the point of title_." All this is
indeterminate, and in Hook's statement there must be exaggeration.
[588] _The Perfect Diurnal_, July, 1646, states that it was complained
of in the House of Commons, that sequestered malignant ministers in
London and other places were admitted to pulpits where they preached
sedition.
On March the 1st, 1647, notice was given the Earl of Chesterfield
not to entertain malignant preachers, nor use the Book of Common
Prayer.--_Ibid._
[589] _Spittle Sermon_ on Eph. iv. 15.--"Speaking the truth in love,"
p. 24-25.
[590] _Pagninus et Arias Montanus._
[591] _Tromolius (Tremellius?) Junius, Beza, &c._
[592] First printed anno 1612.
[593] The name of Dr. Thomas Goodwin is altered into that of John Owen;
Caryl's name is struck out.
Transcriber's Note:
1. Original spelling has been retained.
2. Obvious spelling, punctuation and typographical errors have been
silently corrected.
3. Italics are shown as _xxx_.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Ecclesiastical History of England from the Opening of the Long Parliament to the Death of Oliver Cromwell" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.