BX 9053 .M5 1884 Mitchell, Alexander Ferrier, 1822-1899. The Westminster Assembly THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY ITS HISTORY AND STANDARDS BEING '^Ije Bflird Eectucc foe X882 BY ALEXANDER F. MITCHELL, D.D. I'KOFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ST. MARV'S COLLEGE, ST. ANDREWS JOINT EDITOR OF 'MINUTES OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY," ETC. PHILADELPHIA PRESBYTERIAN BOARD OF PUBLICATION 1334 CHESTNUT STREET MDCCCLXXXIV 0 PREFATORY NOTE. When appointed Baird Lecturer for 1882, the Author chose as the subject of his Lectures, 'Epochs in the History of the Reformed Church of Scotland.' But the state of his health during 1 88 1, and his desire to complete without delay his researches on the Westminster Assembly — a subject which had engaged his attention for some years, and on which he had previously given lectures on both sides of the Atlantic — led him to ask that he might be allowed to substitute that subject for the one first chosen, and to write additional lectures on it. To this the Trustees most kindly consented, and seven additional lectures were prepared, which with those pre- viously written make up the present volume. His best thanks are due to the Trustees, as well for the indulgence they have shown him as for the kind aid they have promised to help forward the publication of the remainder of the Minutes of the Westminster Assembly. His thanks arc also due to old friends at Cambridge, Oxford, and the British Museum for much kind aid in the pro- vi Prefatory Note. secution of his researches, as well as to a young friend in St. Andrews for revising the proof-sheets of this volume. In the first three lectures the author has given a succinct account of English Puritanism from its origin to the meeting of the Westminster Assembly, and in the tenth lecture he has given a similar account of the history of doctrine in the British Churches during the same period. But through- out he has endeavoured to give prominence to aspects of the history which have hitherto been generally overlooked, and to treat more briefly of those which have been previously dwelt on. It goes without saying that while thankfully owning the good that has been done by the great men of other schools, he has strong sympathies with the worthies of the Puritan or Low Church School, which in the i6th and 17th centuries did so much for the revival of earnest religious life and the maintenance of evangelical doctrine, and which, notwithstanding later reverses, has continued to exercise a benign influence and to permeate with ' its own seriousness and purity ' English society, literature, and politics.^ ' ' The history of English progress since the Restoration, on its moral and spiritual sides, has been the history of Puritanism.' — Green. Excerpt from Deed of Trust by James Baird, Esq., in favour of the Trustees of the ' Baird Trust.' ' Whereas, at the Meeting of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, held in May 1872, I declared my intention to found a Lectureship, to be called " The Baird Lecture," for the illustration and the defence of the vital truths hereinbefore referred to, as well as for the promotion of Christian knowledge and Christian work generally, and for the exposure and refutation of all error and unbelief, under which foundation the Very Reverend Robert Jamieson, D.D., lately Moderator of the General Assembly, was to be the first Lecturer, and that for the spring of the year 1873 \ Therefore, and for the endowment of the said Lectureship, I appoint my said Trustees to hold an annual sum of ^220 out of the revenue of the funds under their charge for the purposes of said Lectureship ; and I direct that the following shall be the conditions and terms on which my said Trustees shall carry out my foundation of said Lectureship : — ' I. The Lecturer shall be a minister of the foresaid Church of Scotland who shall have served the cure of a parish for not less than five years, or a minister of any other of the Scottish Presbyterian Churches who shall have served as pastor of a congregation for a similar period in his own Church ; and in making the appointment, care shall be taken by the Trustees to choose a man of piety, ability, and learning, and who is approved and reputed sound in all the essentials of Christian truth, as set forth in the statement hereinbefore written of what is meant by sound religious principles. ' 2. The Lecturer shall be appointed annually in the vili Deed of Trust by James Baird. month of April by my said Trustees, and the appointment shall be made at a meeting of the Trustees to be called for the purpose, and held in Glasgow. ' 3. The Lecturer shall deliver a course of not less than Six Lectures on any subject of Theology, Christian Evidences, Christian Work, Christian Missions, Church Government, and Church Organisations, or on such subject relative thereto as the Trustees shall from year to year fix in concert with the Lecturer. '4. The Lectures shall be duly advertised to the satis- faction of the Trustees, at the cost of the Lecturer, and shall be delivered publicly at any times during the months of January and February in each year, in Glasgow, and also, if required, in such other one of the Scottish University towns as may from time to time be appointed by the Trustees. ' 5. The Lectures of each year shall be published, if possible, before the meeting of the next General Assembly, or at latest within six months of the date when the last of the course shall have been delivered. Such publication to be carried out at the sight and to the satisfaction of the Trustees, but by the Lecturer at his own cost and risk, and to the extent of not less than 750 copies, of which there shall be deposited, free, two copies in the Library of each of the Universities of Glasgow, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, and St. Andrews, two copies in the Library of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and one copy in each of the Theological Libraries connected with the said Universities, and twenty copies shall be put at the disposal of the Trustees. The price of publication to be regulated by the Trustees in concert with the Lecturer.' Oj^dinance calling Weslininsler Assembly, ix An Ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, for the calling of an Assembly of learned and godly Divines, and others, to be consulted with by the Parliament, for the settling of the Government and Liturgy of the Church of England, and for vindicating and cleariftg of the doctrine of the said Church from false aspersions and interpretations (Passed June 12, 1643). Whereas, amongst the infinite blessings of Almighty God upon this nation, none is or can be more dear unto us than the purity of our religion ; and for that, as yet, many things remain in the Liturgy, Discipline, and Government of the Church, which do necessarily require a further and more perfect reformation than as yet hath been attained v'and whereas it hath been declared and resolved by the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, that the present Church- government by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors, com- missaries, deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical officers depending upon the hierarchy, is evil, and justly offensive and burdensome to the kingdom, a great impediment to reformation and growth of religion, and very prejudicial to the state and government of this kingdom ; and that therefore they are resolved that the same shall be taken away, anH^that such a government shall be settled in the Church as may be most agreeable to God's holy word, and most apt to procure and preserve the peace of the Church at home, and nearer agreement with the Church of Scotland, and other Reformed Churches abroad ; and, for the better effecting hereof, and for the vindicating and clearing of the doctrine of the Church of England from all false calumnies and aspersions, it is thought fit and necessary to call an Assembly of learned, godly, and judicious Divines, who, together with some members of both the Houses of Parliament, are to consult and advise of such matters and things, touching the premises, as shall be proposed unto them by both or either of the Houses of Parliament, and to give their advice and counsel therein to both or either of the said Houses, when, and as often as they shall be there- b X Ordinance of Parliament unto required : Be it therefore ordained, by the Lords and Commons in this present Parhament assembled, That all and every the persons hereafter in this present Ordinance named, that is to say, — {^Here are inserted the names of the members, which are given on p. xii. et seq.'\ And such other person and persons as shall be nominated and appointed by both Houses of Parliament, or so many of them as shall not be letted by sickness, or other necessary impediment, shall meet and assemble, and are hereby required and enjoined, upon summons signed by the clerks of both Houses of Parliament, left at their several respective dwellings, to meet and assemble themselves at Westminster, in the Chapel called King Henry the vil.'s Chapel, on the first day of July, in the year of our Lord One thousand six hundred and forty-three ; and after the first meeting, being at least of the number of forty, shall from time to time sit, and be removed from place to place ; and also that the said Assembly shall be dissolved in such manner as by both Houses of Parliament shall be directed : and the said persons, or so many of them as shall be so assembled or sit, shall have power and authority, and are hereby likewise enjoined, from time to time during this present Parliament, or until further order be taken by both the said Houses, to ts confer and treat among themselves of such matters and things, touching and concerning the Liturgy, Discipline, and Government of the Church of England, or the vindicating and clearing of the doctrine of the same from all false aspersions and misconstructions, as shall be proposed unto them by both or either of the said Houses of Parliament, and no other ; and to deliver their opinions and advices of, or touching the matters aforesaid, as shall be most agreeable to the word of God, to both or either of the said Houses, from time to time, in such manner and sort as by both or either of the said Houses of Parliament shall be required ; and the same not to divulge, by printing, writing, or other- wise, without the consent of both or either House of Parliament. And be it further ordained by the authority aforesaid. That William Twisse, Doctor in Divinity, shall sit in the chair, as Prolocutor of the said Assembly ; and if calling Westminster Assembly. xi he happen to die, or be letted by sickness, or other necessary impediment, then such other person to be appointed in his place as shall be agreed on by both the said Houses of Parlia- ment : And in case any difference of opinion shall happen amongst the said persons so assembled, touching any the matters that shall be proposed to them as aforesaid, that then they shall represent the same, together with the reasons thereof, to both or either the said Houses respectively, to the end such further direction may be given therein as shall be requisite in that behalf. And be it further ordained by the authority aforesaid. That, for the charges and expenses of the said Divines, and every of them, in attending the said service, there shall be allowed unto every of them that shall so attend, during the time of their said attendance, and for \ ten days before and ten days after, the sum of four shillings for every day, at the charges of the Commonwealth, at such time, and in such manner as by both Houses of Parliament shall be appointed. And be it further ordained. That all and every the said Divines, so, as aforesaid, required and enjoined to meet and assemble, shall be freed and acquitted of and from every offence, forfeiture, penalty, loss, or damage, which shall or may arise or grow by reason of any non- residence or absence of them, or any of them, from his or their, or any of their church, churches, or cures, for or in respect of their said attendance upon the said service ; any law or statute of non-residence, or other law or statute enjoining their attendance upon their respective ministries or charges, to the contrary thereof notwithstanding. And if any of the persons before named shall happen to die be- fore the said Assembly shall be dissolved by order of both Houses of Parliament, then such other person or persons shall be nominated and placed in the room and stead of such person and persons so dying, as by both the said Houses shall be thought fit and agreed upon ; and every such person or persons, so to be named, shall have the like power and authority, freedom and accjuittal, to all intents and purposes, and also all such wages and allowances for the said service, during the time of his or their attendance, as to any other of the said persons in this Ordinance is by Xll List of Members of this Ordinance limited and appointed. Provided always, That this Ordinance, or any thing therein contained, shall not give unto the persons aforesaid, or any of them, nor shall they in this Assembly assume to exercise any juris- diction, power, or authority ecclesiastical whatsoever, or any other power than is herein particularly expressed. LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY.i In the order in which their names appear in the Ordinance calling the Assembly, or were subsequently added by the two Houses. PEERS. ^Algernon, Earl of North- umberland. William, Earl of Bedford. *Philip, Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery. *William, Earl of Salisbury. Henry, Earl of Holland. *Edward, Earl of Manches- ter. *William, Lord Viscount Say and Seale. Edward, Lord Viscount Conway. *Philip, Lord Wharton. *Edward, Lord Howard of Escrick. Basil, Earl of Denbigh; Oliver, Earl of Bolingbroke j William, Lord Grey of Warke J vice Bedford, Holland, and Conway. * Robert, Earl of Essex, Lord General. *Robert, Earl of Warwick, Lord High Admiral. 1 An asterisk has been placed before the name of every one who has been found at any time to have attended the meetings, and of every one who is reported to have signed the protestation required to be taken by every member admitted to sit in the Assembly. The names of members added subsequently to the meeting of the Assembly are printed in italics, as are also the particulars about the original members which are not taken from the Ordinance. For convenience of reference I prefix a number to the name of each divine, and I append the same number to the name of each divine in the general Index to this volume, after the Roman numerals indicating the page of this list on which it is found. the Westminster Assembly Xlll MEMBERS OF HOUSE OF COMMONS. *John Selden, Esq. *Francis Rous, Esq. *Edmund Prideaux, Esq. *Sir Henry Vane, Knt., senior. *John Glynn, Esq., Recorder of London. *John White, Esq. *BouIdstrodeWhitlocke, Esq. *Humphrey Salloway, Esq. Mr. Serjeant Wild. ♦Oliver St. John, Esq., His Majesty's Solicitor. *Sir Benjamin Rudyard, Knt. *John Pym, Esq. *Sir John Clotworthy, Knt. *John Maynard, Esq. *Sir Henry Vane, Knt., junior. William Pierpoint, Esq. *William Wheeler, Esq. *Sir Thomas Barrington, Knt. Walter Young, Esq. *Sir John Evelyn, Knt. *.bVr Robert Harley, v. Pym, deceased. *Sir IVilltavi Massani, or Masson, v. Barrington, deceased. "^William Stroud, v. White, deceased. *Sir Arthur \ , , , , TT 1 • I added at ons: Haselrie, f . , r- r ^ n / t n fivtthharlof Robert Rey- 1 ■' no Ids, Esq., J *Zouch Tate, Esq. *Sir Gilbert Gerard {?). *Sir Robert Pye (.?). *Sir John Cooke. Nathaniel Fiennes (?). DIVINES. 1. *Herbert Palmer, B.D., of Ashwell, Herts, Assessor fl//^y White, and Master oj Queen's College, Cambridge. 2. *01iver Bowles, B.D., of Sutton, Bedford. 3. *Henry Wilkinson, sen., B.D., of Waddesdon, Bucks, and St. Dunstan's in East. 4. *Thomas Valentine, B.D., of Chalfont, St. Giles, Bucks, aft. of London. 5. *William Twisse, D.D., of Newbury, ^^r^^j-, Prolocutor. 6. *VVilliam Raynor, B.D., of Egham, Surrey, aft. of St. John Baptist, London. 7. *Hannibal Gammon, M.A., of Mawgan, Cornwall. 8. *Jaspcr or Gaspar Hickes, M.A., of Lanrake, Cornwall. 9. *joshua Hoyle, D.D., of Dublin, afterwards of Stepney, then Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford. xiv ' List of Members of 10. *William Bridge, AT. A., of Yarmouth. 11. Thomas Wincop, D.D., of EUesworth, Cambridge. 11. *Thomas Goodwin, B.D., of London, aft. of Magdalen College, Oxford. 13. *John Ley, M.A., of Budworth, Cheshire. 14. *Thomas Case, M.A., of St. Mary Magdalene, Milk Street, London. 15. John Pyne, of Bereferrers, Devon. 16. Francis Whidden, M.A., of Morcton- ffam^stead, Devon. 17. Richard Love, D.D., of Ekington, and of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. 18. *William Gouge, D.D.,of Blackfriars, London, Assessor after Palmer. 19. Ralph Brownerigg, D.D., Bishop of Exeter, se7it excuse for non-attendance. 20. Samuel Ward, D.D., Master of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. 21. *John White, M.A., of Dorchester, Assessor. 22. *Edward Peale, of Compton, Dorset. 23. ^Stephen Marshall, B.D., of Finchingfield, Essex. 24.* Obadiah Sedgewick, B.D., of Coggeshall, or of Farn- ham, Essex. 25. [John] Carter, M.A., of York, after of Camberwell, or of St. Peter's, Norwich. 26. *Peter Clerk, M.A., of Carnaby, afterwards of Kirkby, York. 27. *William Mew, B.D., of Easington, Gloucester. 28. Richard Capell, M.A., Pitchcombe, Gloucester. 29. *Theophilus Bathurst, or Theodore Backhurst, of Overton Watervile, Wilts. 30. *Philip Nye, M.A., of Kimbolton, Hunts. 31. *f3rocket (or Peter) Smith, D.D., of Barkway, Herts. 32. *Cornelius Burges, D.D., of Watford, Herts, Assessor, aft. of St. Andrew^s, Wells. 2,}). *John Green, of Pencombe, Hereford. 34. *Stanley Gower, of Brampton Bryan, Hereford, and St. Martitis, Ludgate. 35. *Francis Taylor, B.D., of Yalding, Kent. the Westminster Assembly. xv 36. *Thomas Wilson, M.A.^ of Otham, Kent. 37. *Antony Tuckney, B.D., of Boston, and St. Michael Quern., aft. Master successively of Emmanuel atid St. fohn's, Cambridge., and Professor of Divinity after Arrowsmith. 38. *Thomas Coleman, M.A., of Blyton, Lincoln, aft. of St. Peters, Cornhill. 39. *Charles Herle, M.A., of Winwick, La7icashire, Prolo- cutor after Dr. Twisse. 40. *Richard Herrick, orHeyrick, M.A., Warden of Christ'' s College, Manchester, conformed at Restoration. 41. Richard Cleyton, M.A., of Shawell, Leicester, aft. Easton Magna, Essex. 42. *George Gibbs, or Cippes, of Ayleston, Leicester. 43. Calibute Downing, LL.D., of Hackney, Middlesex. 44. *Jeremy Burroughes, M.A., ''Morning Star^ of Stepney. 45. *Edmund Calamy, B.D., of St. Mary's, Alderma^ibury^ London. 46. *George Walker, B.D., of St. John's Evangelist^ Watling Street, London. 47. *Joseph Carrill, M.A., Preacher at Lincoln's Inn, aft. of St. Magnus, London. 48. *Lazarus Seaman, B.D., of All Hallows, Bread Street., Lojtdon, afterwards of Peter House, Cambridge. 49. *John Harris, D.D., Warden of Winchester College, ' took Covenant and other oaths,' but retired. 50. George Morley, D.D., of Mildenhall, Wilts, aft. Bishop of Winchester. 51. *Ed\vard Reynolds, M.A., of Braunston, Northampton., aft. D.D., Dean of Christ Church, Oxf., and Bishop of Norwich. 52. *Thomas Hill, B.D., of Titchmarsh, Northampton., aft. D.D. and Master of Trinity College, Cajnbridge. 53. Robert Sanderson, D.D., of Boothby Pannell or Pagnell, Lincoln, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln. 54. *John Foxcroft, M.A., of Gotham, Notts. 55. *John Jackson, M.A., of Marske, Yorkshire, also preacher at Gray's Inn. xvi List of Me7nbers of 56. *William Carter, of London. 57. *Thomas Thoroughgood, of Massingham, Norfolk. 58. *John Arrowsmith, B.D.^ of King's Lynne, Norfolk, afterwards Master successively of St. JoJuis and Trinity.! Cambridge, and Professor of Divinity. 59. *Robert Harris, B.D., of Hanwell, Oxford, aft. of Trinity College there. 60. *Robert Crosse, B.D., of Lincoln College, Oxford. 61. James [Ussher], Archbishop of Armagh. 62. *Matthias Styles, D.D., of St. George's, Eastcheap, London. 63. *Samuel Gibson, of Burleigh, Rutland. 64. *Jeremiah Whitaker, M.A., of Stretton, Rutland, after- wards of Berniondsey. 65. *Edmund Stanton, D.D., of Kingston-on-Thames, aft. President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 66. *Daniel Featley, D.D., of Lambeth, '• Third atid last Provost of Chelsea College^ 67. Francis Coke, or Cooke, of Yoxhall, Staffordshire. 68. *John Lightfoot, M.A., of Ashley, Staffordshire, after D.D. atid Master of Catherine Hall, Cajnbridge. 69. *Edvvard Corbet, M.A., of Merton College, Oxford, afid Rector of Chartham, Kent, succeeded Dr. Hatntnofid as University Orator a7id Cajion of Christ's Church, Oxon. 70. Samuel Hildersham, B.D., of West Felton, Shropshire. 71. *John Langley, M.A., of West Tuderley, or Tytherley, Hampshire. 72. ^Christopher Tisdale, or Tesdale, M.A., of Uphurst- borne, or Hurstborne-Tarrant, Hampshire. Tl. *Thomas Young, M.A., St. And., of Stowmarket, Suffolk, aft. D.D., and Master of Jesus College, Cambridge. 74. *John Phillips, of Wrentham, Suffolk, brother-in-law of Dr. Afnes. 75. "^Humphrey Chambers, B.D., of Claverton, Somerset, aft. of Pewsey, Wilts. 76. *John Conant, B.D., of Lymington, Somerset, aft. of St. Stephen's, Walbrook. the Westminster Assembly. xvii -]■]. *Henry Hall, B.D., of Norwich. 78. Henry Hutton, M.A., of Caldbeck, Cumberland^ and Prebendary of Carlisle. 79. *Henry Scudder, of Collingborne, Wilts. 80. *Thomas Baylie, B.D.., of Manningford-Bruce, Wilts. 81. *Benjamin Pickering, of East Hoateley, or of Btcck- stead, Sussex. 82. Henry Nye, of Clapham. 83. *Arthur Sallaway, or SalTuay, M.A., of Seavern Stoke, Worcester. 84. *Sydrach Simpson, of London, afterwards succeeded Vines in Pembroke Hall, Cambridge. 85. *Antony Burgesse, or Purges, M.A., of Sutton Cold- field, War., and St Lawrence, Jezury, London. 86. *Richard Vines, M.A., of Calcot, or Wedditigton War., Master of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, aft. a minister in London. 87. *William Greenhill, ^T/.^., ' £'^/^;««_^ ^'Air,' of Stepney. 88. William Moreton, of Newcastle. 89. Richard Buckley, or Bulkley, B.D. 90. *Thomas Temple, D.D., of Battersea, Surrey. 91. *Simeon Ashe, of St. Bride's, afterwards of St. Michaels, Basifigshaw, appointed in room of Josiah Shute, who died before Assembly met. 92. W'illiam Nicholson, ALA., Archdeacon of Brecknock. 93. *Thomas Gattaker, B.D., of Rotherhithe, Surrey, ' vir stupendcB lectionis mag7iique judicii? 94. *James Weldy, or Welby, of Selattyn, Shropshire. 95. Christopher Pashley, D.D., of Hawarden, Flintshire. 96. *Henry Tozer, B.D., Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. Oil. *William Spurstow, D.D., of Hampden, Bucks, the7i of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, afterwatds of Hackney. 98. *Francis Cheynell, or Channell, of Oxford, aft. Master of St. fohfi's, D.D., and Margaret Professor of Divinity. 99. Edward Ellis, B.D., of Guilsfield, Mo7itgomcry. 100. John Hacket, D.D., of St. Andrew's, Holborne, aft. Bishop of Lichfield. » X vi i i L ist of Mem bei'-s of loi. *SamueI De la Place, ) of Fre7ich Ch., 102. *John De la March, ) Londoti. 103. *Matthe\v Newcomen, M.A., of Dedham, Essex. 104. William Lyford, B.D.., of Sherborne, Dorset. 105. *[Thomas] Carter, M.A., of Dynton, Bucks, aft. of St. Olave's, Hart Street. 106. *William Lance, of Harrow, Middlesex. 107. *Thomas Hodges, B.D.., of Kensington, afterwards Dean of Hereford. 108. *Andreas Perne, M.A., of Wilby, Northampton. 109. *Thomas Westfield, D.D., of St. Bartholomew the Great, Bishop of Bristol, attended the first meeting. 110. Henry Hammond, D.D., of Penshurst, Kent, a7id Cano7i of Chris fs Church. 111. *Nicholas Prophet, or Proffet, of Marlborough, Wilts, aft. of Edniontoti. 1 12. *Peter Sterry, B.D.., of London. 113. John Erie, D.D., of Bishopton, Wilts, afterwards Bishop of Worcester, then of Salisbury. 114. *John Gibbon, or Guibon, M.A., of Waltham. 115. *Henry Painter, B.D., of Exeter. 116. *Thomas Micklethwaite, M.A., of Cherry- Burton, Yorkshire. 117. *John Wincop, D.D., of St. Martin's in the Fields, and C/otha/i, Herts. 118. *William Price, B.D., St. Paul's, Covent Garden, and of Waltham Abbey. 119. Henry Wilkinson, jun., B.D., Epping, Essex, after- wards D.D., and of Magdalen Hall, Oxford. 120. Richard Holdsworth, or Oldsworth, D.D., Master of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. 121. William Dunning, M.A., of Cold Aston, Glouc, or Godalston, Notts, iiz.^ Francis Woodcock, B.A.,oi St. Lawrence, fewry, v. More ton, of Newcastle, deceased. \2-i,.'*'John Maynard, M.A., of Mayfield, Surrey, v. H. Nye, deceased. 124. Thomas Cletidon, of All Hallows, Barking, v. Nicholson, who failed to attend. the Westminster Assembly. xix 125. *Da>nel Cawdrey, M.A., St. MartMs in Fields, v. Dr. Harris^ of Winchester, excused attending. 126. * William Rathbone, or Rathband, of Highgate, v. Mo r ley, who failed to attend. 127. *yohn Strickland, of New Saruin, v. Dr. Ward, deceased, 14 Sept. 1643. 128. * William Good, B.D., of Denton, Norfolk. 1 29. John Bond, D. C.L., Master of the Savoy, v. Archbishop Ussher, who, however, was restored ifi 1647. 130. *Huj?tphrey Hardwick, of Hadham Magna, Herts. 131. *yohn Ward, of Jpswichand of Brampto7i,v. Painter, deceased. 132. * Edward Corbet, of Norfolk, or North Reppis, Norfolk y V. H. Hall, of Norwich. 1 33. *Philip Delme, or Dehny, of Frettch Church, Canter- bury, V. Rathbone, deceased. 1 34. * Thomas Ford, M.A., of St. FaitJCs, London, v. Bowles, deceased. \y^.* Richard Byfield, of Long D it ton, Surrey, v. Dr. Featley, deceased. 136. *yohn Dury, or Durie, v. Dr. Downing, deceased^ probably because of his well-known efforts to protnote imiott atnong Protestants. 137. * William Strong, preacher in Westminster Abbey, v. Peale, deceased. 138. * Robert fohnston, of York, v. Carter, deceased. 139. Samuel Boultoft, of St. Saviour'' s, Southwark, after- wards D.D., and Master of Christ's College, Cam- bridge, V. Burroughes, deceased. SCRIBES OR CLERKS OF THE ASSEMBLY. Henry Roborough, of St. Leonard's, Eastcheap, Londofi. Adoniram Byfield, M.A., afterwards of Fulham. Amanuensis or Assistant. John Wallis, M.A., Fellow of Queen's Coll., Cam., after- wards D.D., Savilian Professor of Geometry, Oxford. XX List of Members of the Assembly. Scottish Commissioners, ministers. Alexander Henderson, of Robert Baillie, of Glas- Edinburgh. I gow. Robert Douglas, of Edinr. George Gillespie, of Edin- \fiever sat\ j burgh. Samuel Rutherfurd, of S\.,\ Robert Blair, of St. Andrews Andrews. j [see p. 442]. ELDERS. John, Earl of Cassilis \iiever sat\ John, Lord Maitland, after Earl of Lauderdale. Sir Archibald Johnston, of Warriston. Robert Meldru7n^ in absence of Johnston. John, Earl of Loudon. Sir Charles Erskine. John, Lord Babnerino, v. Loudon. Archibald, Marquis of Argyll. George Winrhani, of Libber- ton, V. Argyll. Admitted to sit and hear in October 1644, the Prince Elector Palatine, and on one occasion permitted to speak.^ ^ I have found no positive evidence that Messrs. C, Love, Moore, and Newscore should be included among the superadded divines. Nor, though I have allowed Dr. Mantpn's name to stand on p. 124, have I found evidence that he should be included among them ; but I find that he was named along with Calamy and Marshall in 1659-60 to advise with the Committee of the House of Commons respecting the Confession, and that he wrote a prefatory epistle to it. TABLE OF CONTENTS. LECTURE 1. Origin of Puritanism, its Development and History under the earlier Tudor Sovereigns, i LECTURE IL Development and History of Puritanism under Queen Elizabeth, 31 LECTURE IIL History of Puritanism under the earlier Stuart Kings, 60 -J LECTURE IV. Preparation for and summoning ok the West- minster Assembly, 96 LECTURE V. Opening of the Assembly ; its Proceedu\'gs and Debates WHILE ENGAGED in revising the thirty- nine Articles, and the Solemn League and Covenant, 128 xxii Table of Contents. LECTURE VI. PAGE Arrival of the Scottish Commissioners, Taking OF THE Solemn League and Covenant, Con- sequent Extension of the Commission of the Assembly, Debates on the Office-bearers and Courts of the Church, 169 LECTURE VIL The Directory for the Public Worship of God, and Proceedings of the Assembly and Parlia- ment thereupon, 212 LECTURE VIIL ^ Treatises on Church Government, Church Censures, and Ordination of Ministers, . . 246 LECTURE IX. Debates on the Autonomy of the Church, the sole supremacy of its Divine Head, and the RIGHT of its Office-bearers under Him to guard its Purity and administer its Dis- cipline : Queries on jus diviniwi of Church Government, 269 LECTURE X. The Assembly's Confession of Faith or Articles of Christian Religion : Part I. Introductory History of Doctrine, and detailed account of the preparation of the Confession, . . 325 Table of Contents. XXlll LECTURE XI. I'ACE The Assembly's Confession of Faith or Articles OF Christian Religion : Part II. Its Sources AND Type of Doctrine: Answers to opjections brought against it, 370 LECTURE XIL The Assembly's Catechisms, Larger and vShorter, 407 LECTURE XIIL Conclusion and Results of the Assembly. 442 APPENDIX. Note A, PrRirANS and Puritanism, .... 477 Note B, Travers and Hooker, 479 Note C, Millenary Petition and Conference on it, 481 Note D, The Pilgrim Fathers, 483 Note E, Laud and the Scots, 484 Note F, The Irish Massacres, 485 Note Additional, Description of Assembly, . . 486 Note G, Presbyter Theory of Eldership, . . 487 Note II, Power of Magistrate circa sacra, . . 490 Note I, Liberty of Conscience and Toleration, . 491 Note K, Acts of Assembly, 1645 and 1647, . . 496 Note M (i), Calvin and the English Reformers, . 497 Note M (2), Edwardian Articles on Sacraments, . 503 Note Additional, Verses on Members of Assembly, 505 Note N, Ball on the Covenants, .... 506 Note Additional, Milton's Relation to Calvinism, 507 Do., Early Editions of the Confession, 508 Do., Subscription OF the Confession, 511 CORRIGENDA. P. 27, note ' 1551 ' ; perhaps ' 1555.' P. 52, 1. 2, delete 'secretly.' P. 95, 1. 16, delete the inverted commas. P. 124, 11. I, 2, 3, see p. XX., footnote. P. 142, 1. 8 of note, for ' two ' read ' three.' P. 236, 1. 1 5, for ' a year ' read ' six years. ' P. 275, 1. 2, for 'they' read 'some.' P. 286, 1. 3 of note, for 'censura' read 'censure.' P. 324, 1. 14, for ' did ' read ' had done.' P. 335, 1. 10 from foot, for ' Wiirtemberg Confessions,' read 'other German Confessions.' P. 412, 1. 8, for 'on' read 'in.' P. 424, 11. 19, 20, for 'given answers' read 'answers given.' P. 456, 1. 20, after ' was ' insert ' . . . ' N.B. — Many of the quotations from the 'King's Pamphlets' in the British Museum are accompanied by the press-mark of the volume quoted, as E 56, E 61, and often also the place of a par- ticular pamphlet in a volume is indicated by a second number, as E. 85, No. 20. THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY ITS HISTORY AND STANDARDS. LECTURE I. ORIGIN OF PURITANISM, ITS DEVELOPMENT AND HISTORY UNDER THE EARLIER TUDOR SOVEREIGNS. The Westminster Assembly, if it does not form a landmark in the history of our common Protest- antism, must at least be admitted to constitute an epoch, and a notable one, in the history of Brit- ish Puritanism. There, for the first time, its long pent-up forces had something like free play given to them, and there were framed those standards, the influence of which in the development of Pres- byterianism, in the New World as in the Old, has been no less potent than permanent. This Puri- tanism Avas no mere excrescence on the fair form of the Church of England, which might be re- moved without hazard of marring her symmetry, or lowering her vitality ; far less was it any fungus A 2 Origin of Puritanism growth, endangering life or indicating decay. Neither was it, as it was at one time the fashion to assert, a mere over-sea fancy which had taken captive a few grateful exiles when abroad, and was spread among not a few restless adventurers and brain-sick enthusiasts at home. It was in the English movement for the Reformation of the Mediaeval Church from its very origin. It was the spring of many of its holiest activities, quickening earnest thought and life, sustaining in Christian enterprise, and nerving for stern self- sacrifice ; and ' for more than a century it exercised an influence such as no other party, civil or reli- gious, has obtained at any period of our history.' - It finds unmistakeable expression in the writings of Tyndale, who first in the sixteenth century gave to British Christians the New Testament in their native tongue. Nay, its root ideas may be traced back to a greater than Tyndale, — to England's one Reformer before the Reformation,^ — the great and dauntless Wyclif, of whom it has been truly ^ Marsden's Early Puritans, p. 3. See Appendix, Note A. ' 'The former (Puritanism) maybe fairly dated as a system from the days of Wyclif — Thorold Rogers in Princeton Review. ' If the Reformation of our Church had been conducted by Wy- clif, his work, in all probability, would nearly have anticipated the labours of Calvin ; and the Protestantism of England might have pretty closely resembled the Protestantism of Geneva. There is a marvellous resemblance between the Reformer with his poor itinerant priests and at least the better part of the Puritans.' — Le Bas' Li/e of Wyclif, pp. 365, 366. Its Development and History. 3 said, his country could produce no Luther in the sixteenth centuiy, simply because it had had its Luther already in the fourteenth. In other words, the thing is older than the name. The names Puritan and Precisian are supposed to have been originally nicknames, applied by way of reproach to those they were used to designate, because they claimed to adhere more purely and precisely than their neighbours to the Word of God as the only authoritative and sufficient rule in matters of doctrine, worship, church polity, and Christian life. This was no empty claim on their part, but one which, not- withstanding many shortcomings and much re- maining narrowness, they honestly and earnestly endeavoured to make good. They were not ashamed of the names imposed on them. They took them meekly, and bore them worthily, and I trust their descendants will never feel ashamed either of the names or of the men who did so much to make them honourable. The points of difference between the Puritans and those who fall to be distinguished from them in the Reformed Church of England seem at first to have been few in number, and of minor importance, partly, perhaps, because the full significance of the principle on which these depended was not yet clearly apprehended by themselves ; but much more because, to a certain extent, that principle 4 Origin of Puritanism was then accepted by almost all leal-hearted supporters of the Reformation. So far as concerned doctrine, the principle in fact may be said to have been embodied in the Sixth Article of the English Church : ' Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that zvJiatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation! They and their oppo- nents at that time were at one as to the suffi- ciency and supremacy of Holy Scripture in matters of faith, and even as to the general import of its doctrinal teaching. Almost all who really valued the Reformation in England held as yet by the evangelical system taught in early times by Augustine, and in later by Anselm, Bradwardine, and Wyclif. It was the Anglo- Catholic party which, as it developed, first broke up the doctrinal harmony of the Reformed Church, and drifted farther and farther from the stand- point of its early leaders, till the Supralapsarianism of Whitgift passed into the minimised Augustinian- ism of Hooker, and that into the Arminianism of Laud, and the semi-Pelagianism of Jeremy Taylor. So far again as concerned matters of worship and church polity, the only expression at variance with the principle of Puritanism in the Articles of the Church was the first clause of the XXth Its Developmcfit and History. 5 Article, asserting the power of the Church to decree rites and ceremonies. This clause was not contained in the corresponding Article as framed in the time of Edward VI. ; and they strenuously contended it had been foisted in somewhat in- considerately in the time of Queen Elizabeth.^ They further contended that, when viewed in connection with the limiting clause that followed, it was insufficient to justify what they condemned and renounced. The rites and ceremonies at which they scrupled were not, they held, things purely indifferent, which the Church, under such a clause, might claim to enjoin, but things unlawful as having been abused to purposes of idolatry and superstition, and therefore to be laid aside as contrary to the spirit if not to the letter of Holy Writ. In this respect too the agreement between them and those who stood aloof from them, was greater in early than in later times. Many of the first Elizabethan bishops agreed with them, and would willingly have abandoned the obnoxious ceremonies if the queen would have consented." * Some of them attributed it to L.iud, but wrongly, as he did its omission to them. It is found in the Latin edition of 1563, but not in that of 1571, nor in the first Engli^h edition of 1563, nor in that of 1571. Lamb, Cardwell, and Hallam doubt if it was authorised by Convocation or by Parliament. "^ Zurich Letters, passim. In the doctrinal declaration issued by them in 1559, the subscriber is required to disallow all 'vain worshipping of God devised by man's phantasy, besides or contrary to the Scriptures.' 6 Origin of Puritanism Indeed, for more than a century there were not wanting great and good men, free from all taint of Puritanism, who contended that, if only the authorities in Church and State could be persuaded to consent; all that the Puritans desired in regard to worship might be conceded without injury to religion or danger to the Church.^ Their assertion of the essential identity of bishops and presbyters in the apostolic church was also to a certain extent allowed ; and while some contended for the reduction of the hierarchy to more primitive dimensions, others who defended it as lawful did so not on the ground of any supposed Divine sanction, but on the ground of antiquity, expediency, or the propriety of the Church adapting her external framework to the state of monarchies as well as of republics. It was not till the very close of the sixteenth century that higher ground was taken by the opponents of Puritanism on this point, and at first it was taken only by a few of them. But it must never be forgotten that Puritanism was something more than a system of doctrine ^ The celebrated John Hales of Eton, though neither Calvinist nor Precisian, did not hesitate to say ' prayer, confession, thanks- giving, reading of the Scriptures, and administration of the Sacra- ments in the plainest and simplest manner, were matter enough to furnish out a sufficient liturgy, though nothing either offprivate opinion or of Church pomp, of garments ... or of many super- fluities which creep into the Church under the name of order and decency did interpose itself.' — Tract on Schism, p. 5. Its Develop7iieiit and History. 7 however scriptural, or a form of worship and church polity however primitive. It was above all, as Heppe has recently so well shown,^ a life, a real, earnest, practical life, — a stream welling forth pure and copious from the deepest depths of their spiritual natures, and by its unfailing supplies stimulating and sustaining many forms of Christian activity and loving self-sacrifice — a fire kindled and kept alive from above, to purge, re-mould, and transform the soul, and so the whole man. It was ^ Geschichte des Fietismus, etc., pp. 20, 21. Their idea was, ' Dass das Christenthum nothwendig Leben, und zwai- ein ernstes, ganz und gar vom Worte Gottes beherrschtes und streng geregeltes Leben sein mlisse, in welcheni der Christ sich nicht gehen zu lassen sondern sich unablassig zu iiben, sich in Zucht zu nehmen, sich selbst in Angesichte des Wortes Gottes zu priifen und durch anhaltendes Gebet, durch Meditation, durch Fasten, iiberhaupt durch methodisclie und ascetische Uebung in der Gottseligkeit einerimmer vollkommeneren Heiligung nachzustreben habe.' 'The distinctive feature of Puritanism was not to be found in its logical severity of doctrine or in its peculiar forms of worship, but in its clear conception of the immediate relation existing between every individual soul and its God, and in its firm persuasion that every man was intrusted with a work which he was bound to carry out for the benefit of his fellow-creatures. Under both these aspects it was pre-eminently the religion of men who were struggling for liberty. The Puritan was not his own. He belonged to God and to his country. The motives which urged other men to give way before the corruptions of despotism had no weight with him. The temptations which drew other men aside to make their liberty a cloak for licentiousness had no attractions for him. Under the watchwords of faith and duty our English liberties were won ; and however much the outward forms of Puritanism may have fallen into decay, it is certain it is under the same watchwords alone that they will be preserved as a heritage to our children.' — History of England from the Accession of James I., by S. R. Gardiner, vol. ii. pp. 487, 489. See also Appendix, Note A, 8 Origin of Puritanism not till this wellspring of higher life was dried up, — not till the glowing fire within which the Spirit of God had kindled had died out, or died down, that Puritanism became rigid and repulsive, and lost its real power both over its own adherents and over the outside world. Let me enter a little more, though it can only be a little more, into details as to its origin and development. I have told you that the principle of Puritanism — the principle which, in fully developed form, was to be enshrined in the xxth chapter of our Confession of Faith ^ — may be traced, at least in germ, in the writings of the noble man who, in the sixteenth century, followed most closely in the footsteps of Wyclif, and is now regarded by many as the true Reformer of his country. More sweetly persuasive, more powerfully constraining, than all the fitful edicts and articles of Henry Vlll., and all the timid concessions of the cautious Cranmer, were the silent, gentle, holy influences proceeding from the lives, labours, and sufferings, from the teachings, oral and written, of the un- official men who had given up all for Christ, and, notwithstanding the hazards they incurred, shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God. They strove to set it forth purely and fully by first of all ^ ' God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in any- thing contrary to His Word or beside it in matters of faith and •worship. ' Its Development and History. 9 translating into their native tongue the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. Foremost among these worthies stands William Tyndale, ' an apostle of our England,' as Foxe has termed him, and beyond question the chief instrument used by God in preparing for the Anglo-Saxon race that best of His gifts to it, our time-honoured English Bible, with its simple, racy yet majestic, and now venerable forms of speech. Tyndale was born in Gloucestershire about 1484, was early sent to Oxford, where he distinguished himself in several liberal studies. He then re- moved to Cambridge, where he prosecuted the study of Greek under Erasmus. Soon after, he formed the resolution which it may be said to have been the one object of his life to carry out, viz., that if God should spare him he would cause the boy that driveth the plough to have more know- ledge of the Scriptures than the priests of the Church then had.^ At first he thought to attain his object through the aid and patronage of Tunstal, Bishop of London, whose learning and liberality Erasmus had so generously lauded. He found, however, by sad experience not only that there was no room for the translator of the New Testament ' in my Lord of London's palace,' but ^ Demaus's Z?7£' (?/■ William Tyndale; also Biographical Notice prefixed to Parker Society's edition of his Doctrinal Treatises, by Professor Walter, pp. Ixi, Ixxiii, Ixxv. lo Origin of PiLvitaiiism also that there was no safe retreat for him in all England. Even in his exile but little peace and safety fell to his lot. His steps were dogged by the emissaries of the king and the prelates, as well as by their foreign sycophants. The reformer's noble work was retarded and his life embittered by their hostile efforts. But in exile and poverty he laboured on even as he had done in England, * studying most part of the day and night at his book, eating but sodden meat if he might have his will, and drinking small single beer;' largely dependent on the charities of Christian friends for the supply of his wants, yet reserving most of what they bestowed on him for the sick and poor, and commending himself to the English merchants at Antwerp, as to Scottish students at Marburg, by his singularly gentle and attractive life. Not- withstanding all difficulties and privations he faltered not in his sacred purpose till he had brought out several editions of his New Testament, had introduced it into Scotland as well as into England, and had got ready for the press a large portion of the Old Testament. In the weary months which he spent in the prison at Vilvorde, just before his trial and martyrdom, it has been supposed that, literally to carry out his cherished purpose, he prepared for the press an edition of the New Testament in the vulgar dialect, and with its spelling conformed to the rude pronunciation Its Development and History. 1 1 of the ploughboys of his native district.^ He perished at the stake on the 6th of October 1536, with the prayer on his h'ps, 'Lord, open the king of England's eyes.' And before another year had begun its course * his prayer may be said to have been answered, for the first volume of Holy Scripture ever printed on English soil came forth from the press of the king's own printer — a folio Testament, of Tyndale's version, with his long- proscribed name on its title-page.' In the prefaces and prologues prefixed to his translation of the several books of the New Testament, as well as in the didactic and controversial treatises which he published separately, Tyndale maintained the sufficiency and authority of Holy Scripture in thorough Protestant and Puritan style, and de- fended the doctrines of grace against the semi- Pelagianism of Erasmus and Sir Thomas More, ere Calvin had yet entered the lists as the champion of the old Augustinianism. He asserted the Scriptural identity of presbyters and bishops, and the propriety of a simple Scriptural form of worship, and especially of that form of observing the Lord's Supper, which came to be identified with the Puritan name and with our Scottish Reformer.^ 1 So Professor Walter (p. Ixxv.) ; but Demaus gives (p. 411) a different explanation of the peculiar spelling of that edition. * Tyndale's treatise Of the Supper of the Lord; vol. iii. pp. 265, 266 of Parker Society's edition of his Vi^orks : 'Come forth 12 Origin of Puritanism Next to Tyndale falls to be placed Miles Coverdale, who followed so closely in his footsteps, labouring in the same great work, and sharing many of the same great trials and privations. Co- verdale is supposed to have been a native of the North Riding of Yorkshire, and to have been born in 1488. He was educated at Cambridge, and formed one of the band of youthful reformers trained by Dr. Barnes, Prior of the Augustine Friars there. * Nothing in the world,' he says in the first letter he wrote to Cromwell, ' I desire but books; these once had, I do not doubt but Almighty God shall perform that in me which he hath begun.' The books were got and God blessed the study of them, so that he became one of the earliest preachers of the new faith in Essex and Suffolk. In October 1535, he published the first edition of his translation of the whole Bible. It appears to have been printed abroad, probably at Zurich ; but in 1537 it was republished in London. Though occasionally favoured by Cranmer and Cromwell, Coverdale had to hurry into exile when the bloody statute of the Six Articles was passed. He spent some time at Tubingen, and for several years he had to content himself with a very humble post in the Palatinate, and to endure pinching poverty, while by his writings he was making reverently unto the Lord's table, the congregation now set round about it and in their other convenient seats.' Its Development and History. 1 3 many rich. He was raised from the post of pastor and teacher at Bergzabern to the bishopric of Exeter by the good king Edward, and contributed largely to the progress of the Reformation in his brief reign. But he had to leave again on the accession of Mary, being rescued from prison and death only by the persistent intercession of the king of Denmark, to whom his brother-in-law — a Scot by name M'Alpin or Machabeus — was chaplain.^ He did not disdain when again in exile to act as a humble elder in Knox's congregation at Geneva ; ^ nor, though himself the author of an English version of the Scriptures, did he refuse to take a principal part in preparing and carrying through the press the well-known Genevan version of the Bible, which became so soon and remained so long the favourite one among the Puritans. On his return to his native country after the death of Mary he consented to take part in the con- secration of the first Elizabethan archbishop of Canterbury, and was permitted to do so, without rochet or surplice, and in his plain black gown.^ Yet for his nonconformity in regard to the habits, as they were termed, or for his connection with the Genevan exiles, he was left for four years ' Biographical Notice of Coverdalc, prefixed to Parker Society's edition of his Remains, pp. vii.-xiv. * Liv}-e des Auglois, printed by J. S. Burn in 1831. ' See documents as to Parker's consecration in Burnet's History of the Reformation ; No. 9 : ' Toga lanea talari utebatur.' 14 Origin of Puritanism without preferment, and within two years after- wards he had to give up the only preferment allotted to him — the humble benefice of St. Mag- nus, London Bridge, Thus the man who after Tyndale did most to perfect our Anglo-Saxon version of the Scriptures, when on the verge of eighty years of age, was consigned to neglect and penury — in such circumstances not less hard to bear than the prison and the stake at Vilvorde. Hugh Latimer^ and John Hooper were hardly less notable characters and bold confessors of the truth in days when it was dangerous to be so, than the two I have mentioned ; and though they were both ultimately placed in high official sta- tions, their influence tended decidedly in the same direction as that of Tyndale and Coverdale. No ^ The following account of him by Alexander Alesius, written just after his cruel martyrdom, cannot fail even yet to interest us in him : — ' He who has made the acquaintance of Dr. Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, has seen Polycarp — a venerable old man, gentle, grave, affable, learned, eloquent, the friend of the poor, dear to all the pious and learned, revered by myself How often have I seen and heard him teaching the gospel before Henry viii., the King of England, in the royal palaces at Westminster, Greenwich, and Hampton Court, with the greatest commendation and applause of the king, of the nobles of the realm, and of all ranks of the community. Who at that time was dearer to the king — and to all the nobility ? Who then was not proud to shake hands with him ? Who did not esteem it a great privilege to converse with him ? And yet such was his humility and kindliness that at court, and in the streets of London, he would take me, an exile, by the arm and converse with me right pleasantly. I remember yet the things he then foretold me, and which events have since verified.' Psalm xxxvii. verses l and 2, in his Primus Liber Psahnorum. Its Development and History. 1 5 one who reads the homely, racy, yet earnest ser- mons of the former, or the record of the theolo- gical discussion in which he took part at Oxford, will venture to identify him with Anglo-Catholic- ism in any shape or form. No one who studies the story of the latter can fail to own that if he was not, as Heylin affirms, the first Nonconformist in England, he was at least, as Principal Lorimer has recently shown, the father of that school of Moderate Puritans, who whether, as at first, under that name, or as in later times, under the name of Evangelicals or Low Churchmen, have clung to the Church of their fathers and made good their right to a place within her pale, emphasising her Protestant teaching, — striving in every possible way to foster her inner life, and her efficiency in every department of Christian work, — at times sympathising with the efforts made for further re- form, and longing to draw closer the bonds between their own Church and the other churches of the Reformation. Early imbibing the prin- ciples of the Reformers, and obliged in con- sequence to flee from his native land. Hooper, after passing through many privations, found a refuge at Zurich. There he studied under Henry Bullinger, — Zwingli's successor, — who was hon- oured through him, and others, as well as more directly by his own writings, largely to aid the progress and determine the character of the 1 6 Origin of Puritanism Reformation in England. He brought back with him to his native country, much of the earnest faith and Hberal thought of his teacher. Imme- diate scope was found for his great powers as a preacher, and notwithstanding his advanced opinions, he was speedily promoted to high office, being installed in one bishopric, and appointed administrator of another. It ought to be more generally known than it yet is, that long before proscribed Papist or contemned Baptist had ven- tured to put in a plea for toleration, this noble- hearted Puritan Bishop had fully grasped its prin- ciple. In one of his earliest treatises he says : 'As touching the superior powers of the earth, it is well known to all them that have readen and marked the Scripture that it appertaineth no- thing unto their office to make any law to govern the conscience of their subjects in religion.'^ In one of the last letters written in the prison from which he passed to his martyrdom, and addressed to the Convocation then sitting, he gave still bold- er utterance to his sentiments : ' Cogitate apud vos ipsos, an hoc sit piorum ministrorum ecclesiae officium, vi, metu et pavore corda hominum in vestras partes compellere. Profccto CJiristiis non ignein, non gladinni, non carceres, non vinada, non violentiam, non bonot'um confiscationem, non reginece majestatis terrorevi media organa constitnit quibus ^ Early Wt'iiings of Bp, Hooper, p. 280. Its Development and History. i 7 Veritas verbi sui vmndo proviulgarehir ; sed miti ac diligenti pr?edicatione evangelii sui mundum ab errore ct idololatria convcrti praecepit.'^ More- over, he firmly asserted that in matters of faith no authority of princes or bishops was to be acknow- ledged ' citra verbum Dei,' and that ' ipsa univer- salis ecclesiae auctoritas nulla est nisi quatenns a verba Dei pendeat! In several other respects Hooper was in advance of his time. In opposing the Bishop of Winchester's book on the Sacrament of the Altar, he maintained that ' it is ill done to condemn the infants of the Christians that die without baptism of whose sal- vation by the Scriptures we be assured ;' and said he 'would likewise judge well of the infants of the infidels who have none other sin in them but original ... It is not against the faith of a Chris- tian man to say that Christ's death and passion extendeth as far for the salvation of innocents, as Adam's sin made all his posterity liable to con- demnation.' The following gems, selected almost at random from his earlier treatises, have all, more or less, a Puritan tinge. ' Men,' he says, ' may have the gift of God to interpret the Scripture unto other, but never authority to interpret it otherwise than it interpreteth itself ' ' The Scrip- tures solely and the Apostles' Church are to be followed, and no man's authority, be he Augustine, * Later Writings of Bp. Hooper, p. 386. B 1 8 Origin of Ptwitanism Tertullian, or other, Cherubim or Seraphim. ' ' Christ and his Apostles be grandfathers in age to the doctors and masters in learning. Repose thyself only upon the Church that they have taught thee by the Scripture. Fear neither of the ordinary power nor succession of Bishops, nor of the major part. ' ' God hath bound his Church and all men that be of his Church unto the Word of God. It is bound unto no title or name of men, nor unto any ordinary succession of Bishops or Priests ; longer than they teach the doctrine contained in Scripture no man should give hearing unto them.' ' There is no church can be governed without this discipline, for where it is not there see we no god- liness at all, but carnal liberty and vicious life.' Perhaps however the most noteworthy of his early writings is his exposition of the ten com- mandments, and particularly his exposition of the fourth, where he explains that the rest of the Sabbath was necessary : first, to secure both to man and beast that periodic repose without which they could never endure ' the travail of earth ; ' second, not that men might give themselves to idleness and pastime such as was then used among Christian peoples, but that, being free from the travail of the world, they might give themselves to meditation on the works and benefits of God, the hearing of his Holy Word, and the care of the sick and poor ; and third, that it might be to Its Developme7it and History. 1 9 them a standing type and figure of the everlasting rest that remaineth for the people of God. 'This Sunday,' he continues, ' that we observe, is not the commandment of men, as many say, that would, under the pretence of this one law, bind the Church of Christ to all other laws that they have ungodly prescribed unto the Church ; but it is by express words commanded that zae slioiild observe this day (Sunday) for our Sabbath.''^ The Puritans therefore of a later time, in contending against the Book of Sports and the pastimes by which the Lord's Day continued to be profaned in many parts of England, only resumed the contest which Hooper had begun — and revived the teaching he had learned from Bullinger, the most conservative in this respect perhaps of all the Reformers. He also favoured a more simple way of observing the Lord's Supper than was then in use,^ wore only on certain occasions the episcopal habits, and associated with himself in the administration of his extensive dioceses several superintendents, to whom he gave special charge of matters of dis- cipline, as well as of the meetings of the clergy for studying the Word of God, and the simpler elements of religious truth.^ * Early Writings of Bp. Hooper, p. 342. "^ Ibid. pp. 536, 537. * Biographical Notice prefixed to Parker Society's edition of his works, pp. xvii, xix. ' No father in his household, no gardener in his garden, nor husbandman in his vineyard was more or better occupied than he in his diocese ... in teaching and preaching to the people there,' 20 Origin of Puritanism Farrar, Bishop of St. David's, who sufifered martyrdom about the same time, seems to have belonged to the same school as Hooper. So also did Ponet or Poynet, Bishop of Winchester, who drew up one of the earliest English Protestant Catechisms, befriended Knox at Frankfort, and was a member of his congregation at Geneva. Even Ridley, who at one time had contended so bitterly with Hooper, seems to have relented in his last days, and not only exchanged friendly greetings with his former antagonist, but ex- pressed a hope that they might be one in red though they had been two in white. He had been zealous in removing from the churches throughout his diocese altars and images, and providing tables for the administration of the Lord's Supper. He disputed ably at Oxford against transubstantiation, and he declared of the priestly robes thrust on him before his degrada- tion that they were m.ore ludicrous than an actor's in a play. Like Hooper and Latimer, he sealed his testimony with his blood rather than give place to Romish error and will-worship. I do not venture to include among these pioneers and earliest representatives of Puritanism the name of the amiable, thoughtful, cautious but somewhat timid Cranmer. No doubt Dr. Hook and other High Churchmen of the present day are right in refusing to accept him as a representative Its Development and History. 2 1 of Anglo-Catholicism. His standpoint was more decidedly Protestant. Like several good men in the old church, he held, at lea.st in his earlier days, that by God's law, a bishop and a priest were one, and in later life he defended with great ability and learning the Reformed doctrine of the Lord's Supper against Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester. From first to last he was not ashamed to own the ministers of the Protestant churches on the Conti- nent as brethren in Christ, to encourage several of them to settle in England, and to provide for them while there. Once and again he invited the co- operation of their leaders in carrying out a scheme he had much at heart, for gathering in council their best men, and engaging them in preparing a common creed, the acceptance of which might bind them more firmly together, vindicate them from the reproaches of their adversaries, and supply an antidote to the creed then being framed at Trent. He drew largely on foreign sources for the Articles he ultimately prepared for the English Church, and still more largely for the materials of the Catechisms he translated or sanctioned. But his own leanings were not towards such a sweeping reformation as had else- where been carried out, perhaps not decidedly in favour of all that before the death of Edward VI. he had been prevailed on to concede. He cer- tainly laid it down in the preface to the English 22 Origin of Puritanism ordinal that ever since the Apostles' days there had been three orders of ministers in the church, and resolutely adhered far more closely to the ancient forms of devotion than was done in the liturgies of the Reformed churches abroad. He urged with much persistence the injunction of kneeling in the act of receiving the communion as well as of wearing the old clerical habits. Ac- cording to a Lasco, he seems to have suggested the enforcing of the former by civil penalties, just as he had by the same means compelled Bishop Hooper to accept consecration in the episcopal robes. He somewhat resented the deference of the Privy Council to Knox and the more thorough- going Reformers, and spoke of them as 'glorious and unquiet spirits which can like nothing but that is after their own fancy,' and denounced their principle (which however he somewhat misunderstands or misstates) ' that whatsoever is not commanded in Scripture is against Scripture' as 'the chief foundation of the Anabaptists and divers other sects.'^ He was, however, a true- hearted Protestant, and one for whom all true- hearted Protestants in the church he adorned have abundant cause to thank God, for the noble service he was honoured to do.^ ' Lorimer's yohn Knox and the Church of England, p. 104. " Perhaps at a time when it has become a sort of fashion to dis- parage him, the following testimony to his worth by a grateful Scottish exile whom he had sheltered and befriended may not be Its Development and History. 2 3 It would be unpardonable for a Scotchman, in such a sketch as this, to omit all reference to John Knox. No doubt he was in one sense a foreigner in England, as were Bucer, Martyr, a Lasco, and others from the Continent, whose counsel and aid were welcomed by the young king and his advisers. But Knox was more closely allied to them in speech, and, from the first, could be utilised as a public preacher in the National Church. By the offices they conferred on or offered to him it is evident that they looked on him as more of kin than the others. By the course he followed it is evident that he acknowledged the kinship, and was not unprepared to sink the Scot in the Briton, and, that, so far as conscience suffered him, he was ready to aid the reforming party in England in the great work they had in hand. Freed from his deemed out of plnce. It is thus Alesius, then Professor of Divinity at Leipzig, in the epistle dedicatory to his Commentary on the Romans, addresses his former patron : 'Te enim tanquam parente istic usus sum, ad te in omnibus difficultatibus pro con- silio et auxilio tanquam ad sacram anchoram confugi. Tua opera at opes semper mihi exposita; erant . . . Hunc [nieum] amorem mirifice auget admiratio excellentis doctrinoe tuoe et acerrimi judicii, magna; sapientire, gravitatis, moderationis, clementire in deliber- ationibus et judiciis, assiduum et indefessum studium in qucerenda et enienda veritate . . . munificentia in conquerendis et alendis hominibus doctis ex omnibus nationibus.' Finally, he testifies that in his lifelong wanderings, which had brought him into contact with men of many cities and nations, he had nowhere met a bishop more learned, more grave, prudent, pious, humane and liberal, and that he only refrains from saying more because he knows it would offend the Archbishop's modesty. 2 4 Origin of Pu^dtanism captivity in the French galleys through English influence, he was first sent as special preacher to Berwick, then to Newcastle, and the neighbouring parts, disputing while there before Tunstal, Bishop of Durham and his doctors, against transubstan- tiation and the other errors connected with the Romish mass. He was next appointed to be one of the King's six chaplains, to whom, as Dr. Hook in his Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury^ informs us, very large powers were at that time conceded. In this office he had not only occasion- ally to preach before the king and court, but also to itinerate in various districts of England, and by preaching, conference, and disputation, endeavour to wean the people from their old superstitions, and win them over to the new faith. He was off"ered the bishopric of Rochester for the express purpose of securing that a man of energy and resolution should be near the cautious and some- what timid primate to encourage him, and also spur him on when occasion called. This proffered honour he declined ; but as one of the royal chap- lains he zealously discharged the duties of his office, and helped in various ways the progress of the Reformation. He was consulted in regard to the Forty-two Articles and the second Prayer Book of King Edward, and from the documents recently recovered and printed by Principal Lori- ' New Series, vol. v, p. 13. Its Development and History. 25 mer,^ it is evident that he took an active part in the revision of both. To the last he contended against kneeling in the act of receiving the Lord's Supper, and did this with such persistence and effect that, after the book was already printed off, an additional rubric was directed to be inserted on a fly-leaf, explaining that this posture was meant solely as a token of thankfulness for the benefits received through the ordinance, but in no sense as an act of homage to ' any real and essential presence there being of Christ's natural flesh and blood,' This has come to be known among High Churchmen as the black rubric, and was un- questionably one of the most Protestant things in this second Prayer Book of Edward vi.- John a Lasco, who, as superintendent of the foreign churches in England, occupied a position apart from the National Church, owed that position * yohn Knox and the Church of Englaiid, pp. 109, 1 1 1, 267. He had administered the Lord's Supper in a simpler form at Berwick. ' Elizabeth, while professing to re-establish this very book of her brother, did so with a few changes which made it less accept- able to the Puritans. In particular she took care to expunge the above rubric, as well as to prefix to the sentences addressed by the minister to the communicants certain words from Edward's first Book which might, at least, leave room for the view which the rubric was intended to exclude. The restoration of this rubric was repeatedly desired by the Puritans in the time of Elizabeth's successor, but, so far as I know, in vain. It was certainly left out in the Prayer Books of Charles I. Its insertion was urged by Archbishop Ussher and other moderate men in 1640, but it was not till 1661 that it was authoritatively restored, and then only in a somewhat weakened form. 26 Oi'igiii of Puritanism to the high esteem in which he was held by Cranmer and the advisers of the king. He was often consulted by them on the affairs of the Church, and stood by Knox in his controversy about the mode of receiving the Lord's Supper, and with Hooper in his controversy about the vestments. In his congregations he generally followed simpler forms than were yet sanctioned for the National Church. In the epistle prefixed to his Forma ac Ratio Tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii in P eregrinormn Ecclesia Londini instituta he ex- pressly affirms that, as England was not then deemed ripe for the complete reformation which the king and his advisers desired it to attain, he had been authorised by the Privy Council and encouraged by the king to draw up for the churches of these Protestant refugees a constitution in strict accordance with Scripture precept and Apostolic practice, and without slavishly adhering to rites and ceremonies of human origin, in order that when the time should come when the laws could be more unreservedly amended, and the nation, as a whole, could bear a more thorough Reformation, it might have, in the practice of these friendly churches within its own borders, a model on which it could rely and to which it might be inclined to defer. The arrangements made in a Lasco's book in regard to worship and discipline resemble generally those of the Reformed churches Its Development and History. 1 7 on the Continent, save that the communicants neither stood nor knelt, but sat, when receiving the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper.'- To a large extent these arrangements were adopted by Knox among the English exiles at Geneva — probably just because they had virtually received the approval or toleration of Edward VI. and his Council. To the same extent and probably for the same reason they were in 1560 adopted also in Scotland. There was one material difference, however, which it is right I should mention. A Lasco, while holding with Jerome and even with Cranmer in his earlier days, that by the Divine law idcJ7i erat Presbyter qui Episcoptis, held also that it was agreeable to Scripture that the presbyters or ministers should have a fixed presi- dent selected from among their own number and duly set over them. He did not, like Knox in the First Book of Discipline, represent such super- intendency as an extraordinary and temporary function in the church, but regarded it as an ordinary and permanent one ; though still the superintendent in his view was of the same order as the other ministers, and there was no duty devolved on him which in case of need an ordinary presbyter might not undertake. The English Reformation then, we are warranted ' loannis h Lasco Opera (Kuyper's edition), vol. ii. pp. lo, 163. This ' Forma' was used from 1550 and printed in 1551. 2 8 Origin of Puritanism to conclude, had not yet advanced so far as the king and his advisers desired it should. There was much they thought still remaining to be done, and which could not well be done, to insure its completeness as well as its more general acceptance till the king should attain ripe age — be able to bring his full influence to bear both on his nobility and his people, and along with his Parliament give final legal sanction to it. But already the move- ment had been pushed on beyond its native strength. Favoured by the king, and many of the educated classes, and the burgesses of the larger towns, it had penetrated but partially among the nobility, and the uneducated masses in the provinces. Notwithstanding the itinerant labours of the royal chaplains and other special preachers, the country had been but partially evangelised. The people, where not positively hostile, were largely indifferent, and unprepared to stand by the new faith when the countenance of authority was withdrawn. Thus a terrible reaction set in when his sister Mary ascended the throne, and the support of the authorities was transferred to the other side. No doubt the cruelties then perpetrated under colour of law burned deep into the heart of the nation that hatred of Rome which it has ever since retained, and prepared even many of the uninstructed masses in the provinces ultimately to welcome or to tolerate changes to which originally Its Development and History. 29 they were not inclined. This unfortunate queen has been known ever since as the Bloody Mary. Her brief reign might well be termed the * killing time ' in England, as the reign of Charles II. was in Scotland, and however some in our day may palliate or minimise its excesses, enough by almost universal consent remains to brand with infamy the queen and her advisers. Five bishops, a considerable number of inferior clergy, and a goodly contingent of pious laymen, about 280 altogether, are said to have been burned at the stake or otherwise to have suffered for their faith.-^ The homely narrative of Foxe, the great martyrologist, has made us all familiar with the sad story of the sufferings and heroism of these martyrs, and though in recent times it has been fiercely assailed it still deservedly retains not a little of its old popularity. While their leaders thus nobly bore witness at the stake to the truths which aforetime they had taught, many of the reforming clergy who had occupied less prominent positions deemed it their duty to act on the counsel of our Lord (Matt. x. ^3), and for a time to leave their native land and ^ It is thus Alesius records the grief and horror which these cruelties aroused among Protestants at the time : ' Recens plaga recrudescere facit vetus vulnus, cui cicatrix obduci cocpit. De vivis episcopis crematis post Polycarpum vix scio extare exemplum etiam apud illos qui fuerunt Christiani nominis jurati hostes, et jam in Anglia vivi ad palum comburuntur episcopi quorum vita et doctrina vere Apostolica fuit I ' 30 Origin of Puritanism. seek shelter where they would be free to worship God according to their consciences. Repelled by the stricter Lutherans of Germany, they were received with open heart and arms by the Re- formed or Calvinistic churches, both in Germany and Switzerland. At Frankfort, Emden, Stras- burg, Zurich, Basel, Aarau, and Geneva, hospitality was extended to them, places of worship were assigned to them, and opportunities for the prosecution of study, and the practice of various industries were afforded to them. If not without privations or occasional differences among them- selves, yet generally in quietness and with profit, they were enabled to pass these sad years, and by intercourse with the chiefs of the Reformation to realise more fully their oneness with them in sympathy and convictions, or by attendance on their academic lectures to add to their stores of knowledge and to get their ideas widened, their principles confirmed, and themselves prepared for further services in happier days, of which I propose to give you an account in my next Lecture. y< To this conference, held on the 14th, i6th, and i8th January, 1603-4, he invited four of the ablest and most moderate of the Puritan ministers, viz., Dr. Reynolds of Oxford, Dr. Chaderton of Cam- bridge, Dr. Sparkes and Mr. Knewstub, along with Archbishop Whitgift, eight bishops and as many inferior dignitaries.^ Had he only held the balance evenly between the contending parties, allowed each fully and fairly to state its case, and endeavoured to decide between them as a calm j udge rather than as a keen partisan, he could hardly have failed to conciliate the favour of the one without alienating the other. But he managed matters with such arro- gance and coarseness as brought him little thanks for the few concessions he ultimately made, and deeply wounded the feelings of the party he refused more fully to relieve. He knew that he had that ' Patrick Galloway was also present and wrote an account of the Conference, to the presbytery of Edinburgh. under the earlier Stuart Kings. 69 party at his mercy and wished to make them feel that it was so. Their desire for a carefully revised translation of the Scriptures was approved of and in due time was carried out, and those who would give the credit of that great undertaking entirely to others need to be reminded that it was originally suggested and pressed by the more learned Puritans, and that no one while he lived took greater interest in helping it on than the old Oxford Puritan who had urged it at this conference. Some of the more objectionable chapters from the Apocrypha were agreed to be struck out of the Table of Lessons, and Archbishop Abbot held that the old injunctions of Queen Elizabeth left ministers the discretion of going further in that direction. Certain additions explaining the nature of the Sacraments were authorised to be made to the Church Catechism, and the rubric of the service for private baptism was so altered as to discourage lay-baptism. The Act of Edward VI. declaring the lawfulness of clerical marriages was promised to be revived. But there was no con- cession in regard to the three nocent ceremonies which Bacon then, and Ussher forty years later, would willingly have given up, nor in regard to the terms of subscription which have, with consent of all parties, in our own day, been changed into a form that would have almost met the scruples of the petitioners ere the church was yet rent and 70 History of Ptiritanism English Protestantism hopelessly divided. There was no attempt to provide a remedy for the scarcity of preachers and the redundance of non- preaching pluralists, — scandals from which the church continued to suffer for nearly half a century. With respect to those meetings of the clergy for prayer and religious conference which Grindal and other bishops had desired to tolerate in the previous reign, as also more formal meetings of the Presbyters in Synod with their Bishop, which no authority would now think of opposing, the king, coarsely interrupting their representative, said they were aiming at a Scottish Presbytery, which ' agreeth with a monarchy as well as God with the devil. There Jack, and Tom, and Will, and Dick, shall meet and at their pleasures censure me and my council.' The closing scene was even more coarse and offensive. ' Well, Doctor,' he said, addressing Dr. Reynolds, ' have you anything else to say ? ' * No more at present, please your majesty,' was the meek reply. ' If this,' rejoined the king, 'be all the party hath to say, I will make them conform, or else I will harry them out of the land, or else do wotse, hang them — that is all.' And this, according to Hallam, was addressed to a man who * was nearly, if not altogether, the most learned man in England.'^ It was a gross violation of the assurance he had given in his writings that ^ Others suppose it was spoken aside to some of the opposite party. For further details as to this Conference, see App., Note C. tinder the earlier Stuart Kings. 7 1 learned and moderate Puritans of this stamp would be held by him in equal honour and love with their opponents.^ The same year which witnessed this memorable Conference witnessed also the summoning of the king's first Parliament and of the_CQnvocation of the Church.- The concessions agreed to at the conference~\rere not submitted for the approval of Convocation, though that is maintained by Anglo- Catholics now, as well as by Puritans then, to be the course which in such a case ought to be followed. It was thought more for the honour of the king that they should be made simply by his prerogative royal, save the one relating to clerical marriages, which required to be submitted to Parliament. But while the House of Commons was discouraged from interfering on behalf of the Puritans,^ permission was given to the Con- vocation to prepare a series of constitutions and canons ecclesiastical which were duly sanctioned by royal authority, and which, so far as the clergy * ' The style of Puritans belongs properly to that vile sect of the Anabaptists only, called the family of love. It is only this sort of men that I wish my son to punish. . . . But I protest upon mine honour I mean it not generally of all preachers, and others that like better of the single form of policy in our Church of Scotland than of the many ceremonies in the Church of England. No, I am so far from being contentious in these things that I do equally love and honour the learned and grave of either opinion.' (E. 204, No. 2.) ' It is called the Convocation of 1603, but though it began on 20th March 1603-4, most of its sittings fell within what even in the old style was the year 1604. ' Three parts of the House were said to be favourable to them. 72 History of Puritanism are concerned, and they have not been allowed to fall into desuetude, are held still to embody the law of the Church of England. They were 141 in number, and several of them were directed expressly against the Puritans, and seem to us sufficiently harsh. ' If cursing,' says Dr. Price,^ 'could have effected their destruction, it would have been now inevitable. The sentence of ex- communication ipso facto was now added to the other penalties of nonconformity.' They were anathematised if they remained in the church, holding any of its rites to be superstitious and repugnant to Scripture. They were anathematised if they seceded and ventured to affirm that their meetings or congregations apart were true and lawful churches. Even in the Convocation which passed these harsh canons one bishop was found bold enough to plead for concession or at least forbearance in regard to subscription and the nocent ceremonies, enlarging on the evils of a house divided against itself, and the mistake of silencing so many able preachers at a time when their services were so much needed, and warning his brethren of a day ' when for want of their joint-labours some such doleful complaint might arise as fell out upon an accident of another nature recorded in the Book of Judges, when it is said that for the divisions of Reuben there were great searchings 1 History of Protestant Nonconformity, vol. i. p. 476. under the ea7'lier Sttiart Kings. "j^) of heart.' One who bore a name long and honourably associated with moderate Puritanism made a more direct attempt to gain the sovereign's ear. Dr. John Burgess, afterwards of Sutton Coldfield, in his sermon before the king at Green- wich, on 19th July 1604, boldly warned him of the dangers of the course on which he had entered, and pleaded for indulgence to the many worthy men who were exposed to his displeasure. The reasons given for this bold step in the apology he made, were ' new and unwonted urging of the ceremonies and subscription beyond what law required (whereby six or seven hundred of the ablest ministers in the land are like to be put out), the general depraving of religious persons (if they be conscionable) under the scorn of Puritanism, as if, the body of religion standing upright, men would yet cut the throat of it . . . the withdraw- ing of ecclesiastical causes from Parliament, though in the present and in your majesty's days safe, yet in the precedent and sanction of doubtful consequence.' Not even Bacon could have put the matter more forcibly, nor followed this up more moderately and persuasively than he pro- ceeded to do. ' Things which I confess I hold not impious, but needless and scandalous, many hundred ministers think them unlawful and would surely die rather than use them. . . . What is yielded upon suit for peace's sake might go out 74 Histo7y of Puritanism with flying colours, one side satisfied with their justifying, and the other gratified with their removal, the form of the present government being still continued with good approbation, and con- firmed by our inward peace.' ^ \ Shortly after the adjournment of Parliament and Convocation a royal proclamation was issued, enjoining strict conformity to the established order /of the church ; many P u rj ta,ii,cl ergyvre re-g i 1 o n c c d , \ some who ventured to petition for indulgence were imprisoned ; their flocks were irritated and the lawfulness of separating from the National Church began to be more openly discussed.^ The number of silenced and deprived ministers is variously estimated. Some place it as high as 1500, but this more probably represents the number of those who at first refused to subscribe to the three articles of the new Canon making the terms of conformity more stringent than Acts of Parlia- ment warranted. Others have reduced the number as low as fifty. Calderwood and Neale say it was above 300, Brooke makes it 400. Others were borne with by individual bishops, and through all this reign even kneeling at the Communion was not enforced in some places, and ' prophesyings ' were in one or two instances winked at. The Archbishop of York is said to have been more tolerant than his brother of Canterbury. Neale 1 Sermon, etc.(E. 145, No. 2.) - Marsden's £ar/j' Furitans, p. 276. under the earlier'- Stuart Kings. 75 gives various touching instances of the hardships to which several of the silenced ministers were subjected, but none of these is so touching as is the case of the Scottish ministers, who about the same time were decoyed from their distant homes, pro- fessedly to advise with the king as to the changes contemplated by him in the Scottish church, but really to deprive their brethren opposed to these changes of the benefit of their counsel and courageous example. Dr. Hook is pleased to make merry over their case as a very harmless piece of revenge for all the lectures they had inflicted on the king in former times. But the device of summoning from Scotland, into what was virtually a foreign land, men whose only offence was the influence their talents and character gave them, and the exercise of the liberty the laws of their country allowed them, was as illegal as it was harsh and spiteful. The long imprison- ment of Andrew Melville^ in the Tower of London, and the life-long detention of his nephew ^ No one who has read the sad story of his later years when a prisoner in the Tower of London, or an exile in a foreign land, can fail to commiserate the hard fate of this great scholar and patriot. One can read, if not without indignation yet without disgust, the passionate words of the youthful Mary, when she thought she had at last got Knox into her power ; but one cannot think with- out indignation and disgust of her son, now in the maturity of his powers, listening behind the tapestry while his honest, if stern, reprover, at length entrapped into what was to him a foreign country, was being badgered and baited by the English Privy Council. 76 History of Puritanism James from his native land, on both of which the Doctor is judiciously silent, were among the most unjust and tyrannical actions of James's reign. They gave to his Puritan subjects in the south a practical exemplification of what he meant by the coarse threat of harrying them out of the land. That in fact was what it came to. A number of their leaders as well as Andrew Melville, Forbes, Dury, and Welsh from Scotland, had to seek abroad, in the Protestant Colleges of France, or among the merchant communities of their countrymen in the free cities of the Netherlands, the toleration which was denied to them at home. There, using in the service of ingenuous youth of other lands or of their countrymen settled in foreign cities, the stores of learning they had amassed in more favourable times, they were honoured to do good work for the Master they loved, and to train a seed to serve Him and to bear the banner of His crown and covenant when they should be called away. Soon after the close of the Hampton Court Conference the long life of Archbishop Whitgift came to an end. He was an acute disputant, a sound, well-read divine, a firm supporter of the Augustinian or Calvinistic theology, a zealous and courageous prelate, but a man of imperious and ' choleric temper,' harsh and cruel towards his opponents. He looked forward with apprehension tinder the earlier Stuart Kings. 77 to the approaching meeting of Parliament, and expressed a wish he might be summoned to give in his account in another world before it met. He may have had a dim presentiment of some of the sad consequences of the tacit alliance he and his fellows had formed with despotism in the state, and more than a dim presentiment of the conse- quences which must follow from the more than tacit alliance, which now could hardly fail to be struck between the more resolute of the Puritans and the patriots of the House of Commons. Whitgift was succeeded by Bancroft, Bishop of London, who had been the champion of the hier- archy at the Hampton Court Conference, was more blind to consequences, more decidedly High Church, and more hostile to the Puritans, — ' a sturdy piece,' according to Bishop Kennet, ' who proceeded with rigour, severity, and wrath ' against them. He was in many respects the true precursor of Laud, not only in asserting the jus diviiiHJH of episcopacy but also in attempting to revive disused ornaments and ceremonies. His primacy was short, and after seven years he was succeeded by George Abbot, a man naturally more tolerant and kindly to all who valued the principles of the Reformation, of more extensive erudition, more thoroughly Protestant, and the last Augustinian, I suppose, who sat on the throne of Canterbury. It is said to have been at his 78 History of Puritanism expense that the great work of his old Augustinian predecessor, Bradwardine — De causa Dei contra Pelagium — was finally given to the world. His former experiences at Oxford had made him fully alive to the dangers which nascent Anglo-Catholic- ism, and a more indulgently treated Romanism, might occasion to the church and nation, and it was no doubt the earnest and hearty services rendered by the moderate Puritans in the defence of the principles of the Reformation, which secured for them gentler usage at his hands. Under his regime their condition appears to have been con- siderably ameliorated. Those who still remained in benefices were not harshly prosecuted as they had been before ; while those who did not see their way so far to conform to the requirements of the Canons and Prayer-Book as to qualify themselves, for benefices were encouraged to use their gifts in the service of the church as lecturers and preachers. Those who scrupled to subscribe Whitgift's terms of conformity, might still obtain orders on more favourable conditions from Irish bishops, and not a few of them acted as chaplains in the families of the nobility and gentry, or earned a precarious subsistence by teaching. Through the liberality of many of the lay friends of the party, and the purchase of impropriated tithes, fixed salaries were provided, and the number of these lecturers was gradually increased. The cause of tender the earlier Sttcm't Kings. 79 religion under their earnest lectures and catcchis- ings prospered much in London and the provin- cial towns, and to their oral teaching was added a multitude of practical religious treatises, issued through the press, which extended their influence far and wide, and made this era one of the most memorable in this department of literature.^ If they had not theoretically abandoned the opinions of Cartwright, practically, like himself in his later days, they had ceased to contend for them, and devoted themselves to peaceful work. Abbot, while a courtier and a conscientious conformist, was like many of the bishops of king James an Augustinian, or Calvinist, in thorough sympathy with the reformed churches abroad, and with no hankering after that scheme which at times had attractions for James himself, and greater for his unfortunate successor, the endeavouring to bring about an understanding between the Papists and the Church of England. It was through his counsels that the king was persuaded in 161 5 to 1 What Heppe says of them at a somewhat later period was certainly true of them at this date also : Wirkten sie nicht nur als begeisterte Prediger, sondern audi als eifrige Katecheten — indem sie die Katcchisation als ein besonders wirksames Mittel zur Ver- breitung des Evangelium's ansahen — sowie als die treuesten, ernsten Seelsorger, als Wohlergcben der ihnen anvertrauten Gemcinden in allerlei Weisen zu lordern und zu heben suchten. Strenge Kirchenzucht, fleissig bcsuchte Katechisationen, und hiiufig zu- sammentretende Conventikel der Gemeindeglieder sah man iiberall wo pietistische Prediger wirkten, MwAebcnso sah man den Segen ihrer Wirksantki.it. — Geschichte des Fietismus, pp. 50, 51. 8o Histoiy of Puritanism authorise the Irish Articles, and so virtually to concede beyond the Irish Channel what had been refused on this side at the Hampton Court Con- ference, and also in i6i8 to send deputies from the English church to the famous Synod of Dort in Holland, and so give practical countenance to the reformed churches on the Continent ; and on more than one occasion he sought to mediate in the doctrinal disputes of the Protestants in France. It is said to have been by his influence that the general reading of the Proclamation regarding sports lawful on the Lord's Day was not enforced. If at times in his last years James showed favour to the Arminians, yet in raising Ussher to the primacy of the Irish church he provided beforehand a friend to shelter the Puritans when their protector in England had passed away, a defender of Pro- testantism whose learning and competency none could question, an Augustinian whose varied gifts Laud and his followers might envy but could not outvie, and dared not contemn. The king's eldest son, Henry, Prince of Scot- land and Prince of Wales, a young man of high spirit and great promise, in sympathy with all that was earnest and good, the one real ornament of his father's court, was cut off by a mysterious illness in 1611. Like that son of Jeroboam, in whose heart some good thing was found, he was taken away, to the grief of all good men, in those under the earlier Siiiari Kings. 8 i anxious times. His removal dashed their cher- ished hopes, that a happy solution of questions pending in Church and State which it was evident could not now be long deferred might by his means have been attained and the hold of the Stuart dynasty on the affections of the English people mightily strengthened. The marriage of his eldest sister to the Protestant Elector Palatine, the prospect of which had cheered him in his last hours, and the consequences of which were ulti- mately to be so much more blessed to the nation than even he could then anticipate, was celebrated soon after his death, and in some measure lightened the gloom of that event. It increased the interest of the people in the fortunes of the foreign Pro- testants, and had the king only shared their spirit its more immediate consequences to the Protestants at home and abroad, and to the Stuart dynasty, would have been more blessed still. The throne at the death of James passed to h i s vounii£r.,aQILCharles, — a prinr^^ ''" rhnrnr^'" •' iriQre_noble, chivalrous, and high-minded ^^""^'i h'^' father, but withal inheriting in aggravated form lii^ despotic principles, favouritism^ duplicity, and frmdnoss for kincrrrnft. Hjs Jather nT~iTts vanity would have him wedded to a Popish princess, whose unquiet, intriguing spirit wrought him only less harm with his people than her super- stitious religiosity was sure to do. F 82 History of Puritanism James had got on ill with his parliaments, Charles got on worse with his — the House of Commons being resolute for redress of grievances Avi Church and State. Determined to assert his prerogative and yield up nothing to the popular kvishes, he in 1628 dissolved his parliament, and lendeavoured for twelve years to govern without /the advice of the Houses. To do this he had to I arrogate increased power to his Privy Council, to * resort to various questionable devices in order to raise supplies, and to surrender himself to the guidance of able but unscrupulous men, who thought to carry out in England the policy Riche- lieu had pursued with success in France, and make their master absolute. They were unscrupulous, perhaps, rather than unprincipled, bjit th^ir great principle was, that if the end of good government was attained, it mattered little whafwerejthejueans usei to attain it, — little li_ow__pr£rDgativc~was stretched^m^ancient liberties were invaded ; little how the spirit of the constitutiorT wa£ violated if any semblance of respect-for the ietter of it could be preserved. They were generally men of pure lives and by no means destitute of high purposes, generous impulses, or genial manners. But, like their master, they lived in isolation, and were un- conscious of the strength of the forces that were ranging themselves against them. They were committed to a dangerous game in which success tuider the earlier Stuart Kings. '^2, meant ruin to the liberties of their country, both civil and religious, — a despotism more abject than that of the most despotic of the Tudors, — while failure meant ruin to their master, to themselves, and all associated with them. To the gentle and tolerant, yet thoroughly Protestant Abbot succeeded in the see of Canterbury, the resolute, untiring, overbearing Anglo-Catholic Laud, who even as Bishop of London had been chief counsellor in Church affairs during Abbot's declining years. Laud was personally blameless in life, vigilant in the discharge of duty, earnestly religious according to his light, devoted to his sovereign, almost the only one of his trusted counsellors w^ho was above taking a bribe or using his power for purposes of mere favouritism or self- aggrandisement ; but narrow-minded, unscrupu- lous, haughty, by no means free from irascibility and vindictiveness, blindly ritualistic, and cruelly despotic.^ For years he was the king's most con- fidential adviser in State as Avell as in Church affairs. He sought and found able and unscrupu- lous coadjutors in the work of 'harrying' Puritans out of the Church and constitutionalists out of the State, setting up, in lieu of their ideal of regulated freedom, the system to which he himself gave the name of THOROUGH, — thorough absolutism in the ' ' In the dull immobile face, the self-satisfied mouth, the rheumy obstinate eyes, can be read as in a book the ex]i!anation of his character and the trageily of his end.' — Edinburgh Krcirw. 84 ^ History of Ptiritanisni State, thorough despotism in the Church. He virtually proscribed and stigmatised as Puritanism the old Augustinian doctrines which his pre- decessor not only tolerated, but approved, and for which the House of Commons so resolutely con- tended. He used the powers of his high office and of the Courts of Star-Chamber and High Commis- sion with a rigour and savagery unknown before, condemning to life-long imprisonment, or to cruel mutilations, or ruinous fines men whose offences did not justifysuchextremeproceedings,andmetingout to grave divines, practised lawyers, physicians, and scholars, punishments till then reserved for the lowest class of felons and sowers of sedition. The indignities perpetrated on Leighton, Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick are well known, and the liberation of these sufferers from their long im- prisonment, and the exhibition of their muti- lated faces raised to its height the popular in- dignation against Laud and his accomplices. Attempts have been made even in our own day to mitigate the disgust and indignation their treatment still awakens by questioning whether the sentence in its full extent was executed in each case, and whether it Avas not pronounced and the fines imposed^ rather in tcrrorevi, than with the 1 It has been concluded that the fines imposed were seldom exacted, as they are not entered in the Exchequer books as being paid. But considering how common it was to make gifts of such casualities to court favourites, it would require some further under the earlier Stuart Kings. 85 deliberate intention of being carried out to the letter. But it is a matter of comparatively minor importance whether Leighton lost one ear or both, whether he had to stand in the pillory and to endure branding and scourging on one occasion or two. The natural feeling will still be what was so well expressed in later years by that son whose boyish letters, found in his father's study, were by a refinement of cruelty used in evidence against him.^ The Archbishop's argument in vindication of the course he followed w^as ingenious, if not in- genuous : that harm — serious harm — was being done to religion by the differences so long toler- ated in regard to minuter matters of ritual and church arrangement, and still more by the em- bittered pamphlets against the hierarchical govern- ment of the Church, and the persistent obtruding evidence than the negative one that tlie fines are not entered in the Exchequer books to prove that they were not meant to be exacted from the untortunate men, so far as tlie means they possessed coukl be got at. In fact, from what we know of the venality of many of the privy councillors and the attempts made by Bishop Williams when in trouble to secure their favour, we seem rather warranted to conclude that it was only a less costly matter to get a fine remitted than to pay it. The argument for disl^elief of facts authenticated by contemporary testimony on the ground of omis- sions in the official records of these times may easily be carried too far. The Journals of the House of Commons (vol. ii. p. 124) certainly mention Lcighton's fine and 'the cutting off his ears.^ ' ' If that I'ersian prince could so prize his Zopyrus who was mangled in his service, how much more will this Lord esteem those who suffer so for him V — Hcrmon on 2 CoR. v. 20. 86 History of Piu'itauisin of those Augustinian or Calvinistic doctrines which erewhile had been generally received and freely taught in the universities and in the Church, and that there was no remedy for this but in absolute submission and unreserved obedience to the king, God's appointed vicegerent — and to the injunctions issued by him through his wise and trusty counsellors in regard to all these things. The course he fol- lowed, as Hallam so pertinently observes, ' could in nature have no other tendency than to give nourish- ment to the lurking seeds of disaffection in the English Church. Besides reviving the prosecutions for nonconformity in their utmost strictness . . . he most injudiciously, not to say wickedly, endea- voured by innovations of his own, and by exciting alarms in the susceptible consciences of pious men, to raise up new victims whom he might oppress. Those who made any difficulties about his novel ceremonies, or even who preached on the Calvin- istic side, were harassed by the High Commission Court as if they had been actual schismatics. The resolution so evidently taken by the court to admit of no half conformity in religion . . . convinced many that England could no longer afford them a safe asylum. 1/The state of Europe was not such as to encourage them to attempt settling on the Continent, though Holland received them kindly. But turning their eyes to the newly discovered regions beyond the Atlantic ocean, they tinder the earlier Stuart Kings. 8 7 saw there a secure place of refuge from present tyranny, and a boundless prospect for future hope. 'They obtained from the Crown the charter of Massachusetts Bay in 1629. About 350 persons/ chiefly or wholly of the Independent sect, sailed with the first fleet. So many followed in the subsequent years that these New England settle- ments have been supposed to have drawn near half a million of money from the mother country before the civil wars. Men of higher rank than the first colonists . . . men of capacious and com- manding minds formed to be the legislators and generals of an infant republic, were preparing to embark for America, [among them John Hampden and Oliver Cromwell,] when Laud, for his own and his master's curse, procured an order of Council to stop their departure. So far were these men from entertaining schemes for overturning the govern- ment at home, that they looked only to escape from imminent tyranny. But this in his malignant humour the Archbishop would not allow. Nothing would satisfy him but that they should surrender at discretion, soul and conscience, to his direction.' That in fact was the issue now unmistake- ably presented by him, — surrender of soul and conscience to his direction, — in matters not of 1 Such is the number given by Ilallam, but this is rather the number of Robinson's congregation in Holland than of that portion (about 100) which actually went over with ' The Mayflower.' For further references to this important event see Appendix, Note D. 88 History of Puritanisni ritual and ceremony only, but of vital Protestant doctrine too, which they believed to be founded on the Word of God, and to have been acknowledged by his own predecessors to be so. That in fact was what Puritanism with all its tenacity was being led on to resist. Having after years of patient and untiring labour at last succeeded, outwardly at least, in moulding his own province and that of York substantially in accordance with his wishes, the Archbishop turned his thoughts to the other dominions of the King where Puritanism had been allowed freer scope or treated with greater indul- gence, as if, while refusing a Cardinal's hat from Rome, he wished to be indeed veliiti papa alteruis orbis. By the aid of the talented but unscrupulous Wentwo'rth, his trusted confidant and chosen instrument in the work of repression, he succeeded in 1634, in securing the adoption of a new and much more elaborate code of canons in Ireland, and in assimilating subscriptions there to those of the Church of England. By care in the appoint- ment of bishops for the future, he no doubt hoped gradually to accomplish his purpose, and to root out the Puritans from that old refuge where they had so long found shelter, and were admitted to have done good service in upholding the Reformed faith among the old English settlers, and the new Scottish colonists. This trusted agent reports with under the earlier Stitart Kings. 89 an apparent chuckle how adroitly he had managed to overreach the good Archbishop of Armagh, who wished to retain in their old honour the Irish Articles, while subscribing hie et mine to the English, and who with all his learning and sound Protestantism was no match in diplomacy for either of these determined schemers. Having succeeded thus far in Ireland, Laud turned his t]ioU|0-hts all the more wistfully^ . to Scotland — now the last refuge of those he had so persistently hunted down, and still a stronglinid of Pimtanism, notwithstanding the changes which James in the interest of absolutism in Church and State hag enaeavoureo, though with but partial suc- cess, to introduce_in the government and ritual of the Church. A series of letters, printed by the late Mr. David Laing in the Appendix to his invaluable edition of Baillie's Letters and Journals, show what pains the English Primate took to draw reluctant Scotch bishops on to the use of their 'whites,' and to countenance more ornate services than had been in favour in Scotland ever since the Kcformation. At length he resolved the time was come to provide them with stronger meat, and he thought the train had been well laid for the changes he contemplated ; but as King James had said long before, 'he knew not the stomach of that people.' and perhaps he recked not what a great conflagration this train he had laid was to 90 History of Puritanism light up. Their Liturgy or Book of Common Order, as Knox left it, or even as King James would have altered it, was regarded by him as no meet form for worshipping the Lord in the beauty of Holiness ; their form of administering the holy communion, even if the act of kneeling were more generally enforced, was in the eyes of high churchmen sadly defective in important par- ticulars ; and their forms of conferring holy orders, even as revised under King James in 1620, were insufficient to convey a valid mission.^ The king, he said (and he was always careful to put him in the forefront when enjoining or advising what he knew would be distasteful), was much troubled to hear of these sad blemishes in the Church of his baptism. He might quite competently have pro- vided a remedy for them by his prerogative royal, i.e. of course, by the advice of LaujjTijiiselfy.a[ho_ was really the^ keeper of his conscience and chjef counsellor hi affairs of State as well as of_ Churchy but heo^ould raTlTp^' ^^^X this were done witb--the~cT5Trctt«:ence of the bishops in_Scot1and. Thus partly by flattery, partly by threats, Spot- tiswoode, the wary primate of Scotland, and his ^ ' In the admission to priesthood the very essential words of conferring orders are left out. At which his majesty was much troubled, as he had great cause, and concerning which he hath commanded me to write, that either you do admit of our Book of Ordination, or else that you amend your own in these two gross oversights. ' — Laud to Weddcrburn. under the earlier Stuart Kings. 9 1 older colleagues among the bishops, were drawn or forced into courses of which their own de- liberate judgment did not approve, and of which they had a sad presentiment that they would put in peril all that by ' canny convoyance ' they had gained during the previous thirty or forty years. No doubt Laud, when on his trial, insisted that all he aimed at was to insure uniformity with the Church of England, and the acceptance in their entirety of the English Prayer-book, Articles and Canons. But, even if it were literally so, he can- not be absolved from gravest responsibility. The men who urged a somewhat different course were the younger men, whom he had himself favoured and promoted, and who could have effected little with the king without his tacit or open acquies- cence. And if changes were to be pressed at all, there was a good deal to be said in favour of the course they proposed, namely, that there should be certain differences allowed between the Litur- gies of the two countries, and the Scots should not be asked ecclesiastically to bow their necks purely and simply to the yoke of England There was a good deal to be said for it, that some of these differences should be concessions to their invincibly puritanic predilections, as the almost entire exclusion of the Apocrypha from the table of lessons, the uniform substitution of the word presbyter for priest, the adoption of the new 92 History of Puritanism (authorised) English version of the Bible in the epistles, gospels, occasional versicles, and even in the prose Psalms intended to be read or chanted, the more especially, if others of them should be concessions (no doubt as moderate and in appear- ance as harmless as possible) to the Anglo- Catholic, and Romanising parties of which these hot-headed young men were pronounced adherents, and to foster whose tendencies was the real, if not avowed, object of this policy.^ A book of canons, in several respects more severe than the English — especially in prohibiting extemporary prayers, under pain of deprivation — was also prepared, and was authorised by royal authority, even before the Liturgy which it en- joined was published. Thus the train was laid and fired, and in one rash hour all that King James and King Charles had succeeded in im- posing, all that Spottiswoode and his brethren had given their days to carry out, all that Laud and Wentworth had given their lives in pawn for, was put in jeopardy. Far different was the issue from that the reckless schemers had intended and expected. It was chiefly disastrous to their so- vereign and themselves, spreading dismay and destruction through their own ranks, not through the rankg--T5r~th€ir opponents.^XEJje English patriots and PuritansT^ir^ppearance at least, had ' See Appendix, Note E. under the earlier Stuart Kings. 93 been cowed ; those who had taken refuge in Ireland had been muzzled, and matters had indeed reached the last extremity. ^"^.„tl'CL.^^"tTb, whr>t;p stf.i"''' l)ersistcncc lias nc\-cr failed at such a crisis, proved equal to the occasion, and fairly turned the tide ofbartle. v\\&\x prcBferviditvi ia^i^v/uuni, once fully roused, had'a contagious influence on the friends of Protestant truth and Puritan order everywhere throughout the British dominions. Over the events which then followed each other so rapidly in Scotland, and the marvellous re- v^olution in which they issued, I must not linger. They arc familiar to you all : the meetings in Edinburgh of peers, gentry, commoners and divines ; the appointment of the Tables or com- mittees by each of them ; their remonstrances against the introduction of the new service-book ; the rejection of their petitions and remon- strances ; the attempt to introduce the obnox- ious book, the tumult which the introduction of it occasioned in St. Giles' Kirk ; the rcnc'ivnl c^^ thr Confession or CO'^^imn^ r^.-;^r.•.->n■lly .app.-rM.o^ j^y j-].,(j king's father in 1581, with certain additions suited to the new crisis ; the petition for a free and lawful General Assembly to determine the matters in controversy, the tardy compliance with the prayer of the petition and the suspension of the orders respecting the ill-omened book ; the preparation for the Assembly, its actual meeting in the High 94 History of Ptwitanism Kirk or Cathedral of Glasgow, its attempted dissolution by the king's Commissioner ; its re- fusal to dissolve till the work for which it had been summoned was done ; its trial and judgment of the bishops and their chief supporters, its » declaration of the nullity of the Assemblies which had given a sort of sanction to the hierarchy, and its restoration of the old presbyterian government of the Church as it had been ratified by King James and his Parliament in 1592; the attempt of the king to accomplish by force what he had in vain striven to effect by policy and proclama- tions ; his quailing when he saw the covenanting host on Dunse Law, consenting to treat with them, and promising them an Assembly and Parliament in which their grievances should be duly consi- dered and redressed ; the renewed outbreak of hos- tilities when neither Assembly nor Parliament was found compliant with his wishes, — the refusal of his English Parliament at last brought to- gether again — and known ever since as the short Parliament — to vote a subsidy for the ex- penses of the war, and the readiness of the Eng- lish Convocation, — the notorious Convocation of 1640 — to do so ; the march of the covenanting army into the north of England, the successes it gained, and the permission granted it to winter there ; the despatch of Scottish Commissioners to London to conclude a new treaty, and the friendly under the earlier S heart Kings. 95 relations tlien established between them and the leading Puritans of the south — all these im- portant events, following each other almost with the suddenness of a dream, are narrated at length in the commonest histories, and are fami- liarly known to all who are acquainted in any measure with the story and fortunes of the Kirk. Ere the negotiations with the Scotch could be brought to a conclusion Charles had been con- strained by the necessities of his position to call another Parliament, which has become famous in all succeeding time as the Long Parliament. It was summoned for the 3d November 1640, on which day Charles once more occupied the throne of his ancestors, surrounded by his peers. ' The Bishops clad in rochet and chimere,' to use the words of Dr. Stoughton, ' once more occupied their old benches, and the Speaker of the House of Commons in florid diction congratulated the monarch on the prosperity of his realms. Out- wardly, the Church like the State looked strong, but an earthquake was at hand destined to over- turn the foundations of both.' A storm which had been long gathering was now to burst i?i pitiless fury, and sweep away abuses which had defied every effort made to reform them. In my next Lecture I shall have much to say of the doings of this eventful parliament. LECTURE IV. PREPARATION FOR AND SUMMONING OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLV, In my last Lecture I gave you a sketch of the history of Puritanism under the earlier Stuart kings, up to the meeting of the Parliament which has since been by universal consent designated the Long Parliament. It met on the ^H Novpmhpr 1 64.0. and continued till it w.a.s..£»y€Jblv dissolved by ^nrnnrti-ll in Tfij^ It was brought together again after the death of the Protector, to resume it.s interrupted work, but failed to secure its per- manence. On 6th November 1640, the Commons, following a precedent set in sev^eral previous parliaments, appointed a grand Committee of religion consisting of all the members of the House, and this not as a mere formality but with instructions to meet from week to week for serious business. Various petitions^ were presented by the patriots and Puritans outside to quicken the zeal of their friends within the House for reform- ' E 159, Specclies aud Passages of this great atiti happy ParHa- menf, etc., p. i6i, 433, 436. Summoning the Westminster Assembly. 97 ation, and in particular, one signed by about 15,000 citizens of London, known as the Root and Branch petition, from the expression occurring in its prayer, that the hierarchy might be abolished ' with all its dependencies, roots and branches.' A counter petition was presented affirming that episcopal government, as it is in itself the most excellent] government, so it is the most suitable ... to the civil constitution and temper of this state, and therefore praying it may 'always be continued and preserved in it, and by it, notwith- standing the abuses and corruptions which in so long a tract of time through the errors or negli- gence of men have crept into it' The petitions w^ere duly considered, and procedure taken on them without delay, though not at once to the extent the root and branch petitioners had desired. Nineteen grievances were tabulated, and evidence in support of them adduced in Committee, and a report thereon was presented to the House. Soon after the House of Lords, though far less under puritan influence than the Commons, also appointed a Committee to take into consideration all innova- tions in the church 'concerning religion.' The Committee consisted of ten bishops and twenty lay peers, under the presidency of Dr. Williams, Bishop of Lincoln and Dean of Westminster, who, like many other victims of Laud's oppression, had just been released from prison. It had power 'to G 98 Preparation for and Su77i7noning send for what learned divines their Lordships shall please for their better information.' The divines named expressly by the House were Archbishop Ussher, Dr. Prideaux, soon after made Bishop of Worcester, Dr. Ward, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, Dr. Twisse of Newbury, and Dr. Hackett. Those added by the Committee were Drs. Sanderson, Holdsworth, Brownrigg, Featley, Burgess, White, Marshall, Calamy, and Hill — all sound Protestants, and men of moderate views — whose names appear subsequently in the list of the Assembly of Divines. The Conference of the Lords' Committee with these divines lasted for six days, during which they had solemn debates in the famous Jerusalem Chamber, and were always entertained by Williams * with such bounti- ful cheer as became a bishop.' First they took into consideration the recent innovations of doctrine, and it was complained that all the tenets of the Council of Trent, had by one or other been preached and printed except those regarding the king's supremacy, which the state had made it treasonable [to question] ; that good works were made to co-operate with faith for justification ; that private confession, enumerating particular sins [to a priest] was inculcated as needful to salvation, that the oblation of the elements in the Lord's Supper was held to be a true sacrifice ; that prayers for the dead, monastic of the Westminster Assembly. 99 vows, Arminian and Socinian errors, were incul- cated. Secondly, the Committee inquired into matters of conformity [to the ritual] and discovered that candlesticks were placed in parish churches on the altars so called, that canopies with curtains, in imitation of the veil before the Holy of Holies, were drawn around the altar ; that a credentia or side table was made use of during the Lord's Supper ; that a direct prayer was forbidden before the sermons, [where aforetime the minister had been at liberty to pray extempore, or use a precomposed prayer of his own, instead of, or in addition to the bidding prayer,] and that ministers were forbidden to expound at large the catechism to their parishioners, [and enjoined simply to teach them its very words]. And thirdly, they consulted about the Book of Common Prayer; whether some legendary Saints ought not to be expunged from the Calendar, the Apocryphal chapters from the lessons, and some things from the rubrics and offices of baptism, marriage, and burial.^ ^ The following additional statement made by Dr. Hill — the last-named of the consulted divines — in his sermon before the House of Commons on ist July 1642, goes as near to the heart of the matter as an earnest Puritan could wish, and yet it might all have been indorsed by the most conservative reformers. He compares the recent state of England to that of Jerusalem at the time when Ezekiel in vision saw the image of jealousy set up in the temple of the Lord, and thus enumerates the corruptions which had been suffered and should be removed : ' 1st, In the schools of the prophets, the nurseries of the church, do not petitions inform you that divers have there chaffered away truth for errors ? Were lOO Preparation for and Summoning The Committee sat till the middle of May, when it broke up without concluding anything. Laud, by that time in confinement, looked on its appoint- ment with alarm, but moderate men like Lord Falkland viewed it with favour, and thought that had it continued its labours, it might have been the means of effecting many needed reforms, perhaps of saving the church and the monarchy. But what the issue would have been, says Fuller, is only known to Him who knew what the men of Keilah would have done with David had he remained among them till Saul came down. It was the last chance for the moderate men ere the Whitaker and Reynolds then in vivis, they would blush to see Bellarmine and Arminius justified by many, rather than confuted. 2d, Remnants of former corruptions left in cathedral churches . . called mother churches, but they have rather proved step-mothers, engrossing the maintenance which should provide the word of truth for other souls. What pity it is that cathedral societies which might have been colleges of learned presbyters, for the feeding and ruling city churches, and petty academies to prepare pastors for neighbour places, should be so often sanctuaries for non-residents, and nurseries to so many drones ! 3d, Cast your eyes on the hundreds of congregations in the kingdom where millions of souls are like to perish for want of vision; truth is like to perish from among them, by soul-destroying non-residents, soul-poisoning innovators or soul-pining dry-nurses. 3. Improve your power to help forward the word of truth, that it may run and be glorified throughout the land : ist. Provide that every con- gregation may have an able trumpet of truth ; 2d, especially that great towns may have lectures— markets of truth ; 3d, afford any faithful Paul and Barnabas encouragement, yea power, if Sergius Paulus desire to hear the word of God, to go and preach, though Elymas the sorcerer should be unwilling. Such ambulatory exercises have brought both light and heat into dark and cold of the West in inster A ssembly. i o i Revolution attained its full height, and the chance was thrown away by the imprudence or panic of the Bishops, who were strongly represented on the Committee. The tide was now sweeping in with full force and bearing all before it. Strafford and Laud had been impeached and committed to the Tower. The former was speedily attainted and beheaded, the latter was left to languish for a time in that durance to which he had consigned many quite as worthy men. The Irish rebellion had broken out, and deeds of fiendish cruelty had been perpetrated against the unoffending Protestants — deeds which only savages or madmen could have corners ; 4th, What if there be some evangehcal itinerant preachers sent abroad upon a public stock to enlighten dark countries?' The last proposal is especially worthy the notice of those who think that the idea of the evangelistic mission of the church is a discovery of the 19th century, instead of being one which has cropped up generally in periods of earnest revival, and notably in that with the history of which we are now concerned. Even before this sermon was preached there was exhiJMted in the High Court of Farliament (E. 181, No. 26), a petition of W. C[astell], ... for the propagation of the Gospel in America and the West Indies, which petition was approved by seventy able English divines, (including among others the names of Brownrigg, Sanderson, Featly, Stanton, Caryl, Calamy, Byfield, White, INIarshall, Burroughs, Cawdrey, Whitaker, etc.) also by Mr. Alexander Henderson and some other worthy ministers of Scotland, (including Blair, Baillie, Gillespie, etc.). Extracts from this remarkable petition will be found in Appendix, Note E. Nay even an additional endowment scheme was propounded about the same time, and there issued from the press a pamphlet (E. 179) entitled Proposals for Good Works, urging inter alia the provision of additional maintenance for ministers and lecturers, and the erection and endowment of new churches in the over-grown parishes in the suburbs of London. I02 P reparation for and Siimmoning devised and executed. The Scotch Commissioners were on the spot, urging on those whose old horror of Popery had been intensified by the recent massacre, to get quit of every so-called remnant of Popery in their Service-book, and of every trace of it in their doctrinal teaching and church constitution, and finally suggesting that a larger and more formal meeting of divines should be speedily called to accomplish these things, and, if it might be, to undertake the grander mission of drawing up common standards for the churches of the three kingdoms, and of bringing them into closer and more kindly relations with each other.^ They themselves had felt that even in Scotland they must not fall back purely and simply on the status qiLo, as it existed before the recent innova- tions were pressed on them, content with their old * E. 157, No, 2, Argutnents given in by the Commissioners of Scotland nnto the Lords of the treaty, persuading confor7nity of chtirch government as one principal means of a continued peace betivecn the two nations, 1641. 'Our desires concerning unity of religion and uniformity of church-government as one especial means to conserve peace in his Majesty's dominions.' With many profes- sions that they do not wish to dictate to another free, independent, and larger kingdom in such a matter, they yet urge with all possible earnestness those considerations which should persuade to this. ' It is to be wished that there were one Confession of Faith, one form of Catechism, one Directory for all the parts of the public worship of God . . . and one form of church-government in all the churches of his Majesty's dominions. . . This doth highly concern his Majesty and the weal of his dominions, and without forcing of consciences seemeth not only possible but an easy work . . .We do not presume to propound the form of government of the church of Scotland as a pattern for the church of England, but do only of the Westminster Assembly. 103 Confession and Catechisms, and Book of Common Order, but that further safeguards must be devised and additional securities taken against the danger of any recurrence to that policy which had wrought them such havoc and woe. They were already indeed looking to Henderson to lead them in the preparation of new standards ; but he, either from the felt difficulties of the task, or from his intense desire to draw into closer union all to whom the cause of Protestant truth, and constitu- tional liberty, in Church as well as State, was dear, preferred that the work should be done on a wider theatre and grander scale than Scotland could offer. All I know of the history of this great man inclines me to believe that if there w^as a truly patriotic leader among them, one more free from narrowness and provincialism than another, or more prepared to allow free play for considerable diversities of thought and modes of administration in a com- represent in all modesty these few considerations according to the trust committed unto us.' These considerations in brief were (i), that their government was the same as that of the reformed generally, — Beza's testimony in its favour being quoted ; (2) yet they had all along been harassed by the bishops of P^ngland ; (3) The reformed churches hold their government to bey'«/'t' divino, while most of those who plead for episcopacy grant that it is only Jure fiiimano ; (4) The church of Scotland was bound by covenant to her form, while England was perfectly free ; (5) Thus ' will the design of King James be carried out in a kgiiimatc way, and the king not only have peace and his due place in all the churches of his own dominions, but his greatness shall be enlarged abroad by his becoming the head of all the Protestants in Europe.' 1 04 Preparation for and Summoning prehensive Presbyterian Church, it was he, — in fact that the closer union of the churches in Britain was chiefly valued by him as a step toward securing the closer union of all the Reformed Churches. But his noble ideas were at times dwarfed and pared down ; sometimes by the blindness and narrowness of lesser men among his own countrymen, sometimes by the jealousies aroused against him in the south as an alien and a Scot, and even he was but dimly conscious of the immense difficulty of the task before him, arising from the divided state of opinion in England, and the bitter animosities of the various parties to each other. Already in the year 1640 it had begun to be felt and expressed .that the friends of the Reformation in both countries must make common cause if they would hope to succeed in securing it against the insidious policy of Laud and his abettors. In a letter, brought down by Henderson to the Scottish General Assembly, from a number of ' their gracious brethren of the ministry at London and about it,' the expression had been used that 'the Churches of England and Scotland seemed to be embarked in the same bottom, to sink or swim together ; ' they had the same enemies, and must unite in defence against their assaults. In the Grand Remonstrance which the House of Commons began to prepare in the autumn of 1641, and had finished before the first of the Westminster Assembly. 105 of December, they declared that while they had no wish ' to abolish all church-government and leave every man to his own fancy for the service and worship of God, or to let loose the golden reins of discipline,' they yet desired that some changes should be made on the arrangements previously subsisting, and that there might be ' a general Synod ^ of the most grave, pious, learned and judicious divines of this island {xio\. of England only), assisted by some from foreign parts pro- fessing the same religion with us, to consider all things necessary for the peace and good govern- ment of the Church.' If they still hesitated to ^ ' We are poisoned in many points of doctrine, and I know no antidote, no recipe, for cure but one — a well-chosen and well- tempered Synod and God's blessing thereon: this may cure us; without this, in my poor opinion, England is like to turn itself into a great Amsterdam, and unless this council be very speedy the disease will be above the cure.' — Speech of Sir Echuard Deerhig (E. 197, p. 105). About the same time appeared — Heads or Reasons for luhieh a General Council ought to be called together in England. The reasons were that (i) iMatters of chief debate necessary to be decided (lest atheism and libertinism increase) may be cleared ; (2) Fundamentals of Christian truth and faith may be fully and invincibly settled by common consent; {3) The public profession of divine worship may be brought to some religious uniformity so far as is expedient for the amiable correspondence of several churches one with another and so fit for the edification of all Christians ; (4) The means of propagating the gospel and kingdom of Christ towards those that are yet in darkness may be agreed upon and set apart for the advancement of God's glory ' (E. 206, No. 14). In E. 170 various petitions are printed, praying for the calling of an Assembly of Divines of the three kingdoms ta' explain the doctrine and reform the govemnient of the Church, that truth ' may hew out a way to peace and unity.' io6 Preparation for and Smnmoning give more definite expression to the wish which lay nearest to the heart of Henderson that Scot- land should be formally invited to send deputies to the Synod and its purpose be enlarged, that Common Standards might be prepared by it for the churches of the three kingdoms, it is clear that by this time they had resolved the Assembly should be something more than a mere English Synod, something like what Cranmer long before had so eagerly desired. If what was resolved on by it should be enacted in the first instance for England only, it was meant it should be so after counsel with others and should form a model which other churches might view with favour as fitted for the guidance of a thoroughly reformed church, and likely to conduce to more intimate and friendly relations among them all. But open expression had been given to the wish that Scotland should take formal part in the proposed Assembly at latest in the communication addressed by them to the General Assembly which met in July 1642. For in reply to that communication the Assembly ventured to refer to what Scotland had done, in earlier and in more recent times, to bring about a closer union between the reformed churches, and ' anew urged on their English brethren that the work of reformation should begin with uniformity of church-government.' There was no hope, in their opinion, of unity in religion or of one Con- of the Westminster Assembly. 107 fession of Faith, one form of worship, and one Catechism, till there was one form of ecclesiastical government. They accepted the invitation given, and assured the Parliament that they would gladly do their part in this great crisis, and indeed had already appointed Commissioners to pro- secute the work of uniformity with England and to endeavour to agree upon Common Standards for the churches of both kingdoms. The views of the Scotch gained the powerful support of Pym, in an able speech he made on 30th September at a Conference^ of the two Houses for union of the three kingdoms in one Directory or Form of Prayer, Catechism, etc., and that able and judicious divines, not only from Scotland but also from other reformed churches, should be asked to join the Assembly. Several months before this date the Houses had actually begun to make ar- rangements for the'meeting of the proposed Synod or Assembly of Divines. A ' gracious message ' (E. 290) had come from the king, 14th February 1641, intimating that 'because his Majesty observes great and different troubles do arise in the hearts of his people concerning the government and liturgy of the Church, his Majesty is willing to declare that he will refer the whole consideration to the wisdom of his Parliament which he desires them to enter into speedily.' This almost ' Journals of House of Commons, vol. ii. p. 789. io8 Preparation for and Summoning necessitated the Parliament calling such an assembly of divines as they had been contemplat- ing. Accordingly, on the 19th April 1642, the House of Commons ordered that the names of such divines as shall be thought fit to be consulted with in the matter of the Church be brought in to-morrow morning. On the following morning the divines recommended for nine of the English counties, and on succeeding days those for the rest of the counties, as also for the city of London, the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and the Channel Islands, were approved ; and on the 25th the list was deemed completed. Two were appointed for each county in England, for each of the Universities and for the Channel Islands, one for each county in Wales, and four for the city of London, The general opinion has been that the divines were recommended by the members of Parliament representing each county and the boroughs within it (the House in one or two instances, however, insisting on a vote being taken on the names proposed), and the balance of evidence seems to me to favour that opinion. It seems likely that some further communication had been made to the king before the 9th of May, when the first bill for calling the Assembly was formally brought into the House or before it passed the third reading ; for, as I have said else- where, ' in a pamphlet bearing date i6th May 1642 of the IVestminster Assembly. 109 and entitled, " His Majesty's resolution concerning the establishment of religion and church-govern- ment," it is stated that he " hath consented that the main matters of difference which have occa- sioned all these distractions shall be framed and discussed by a number of grave, wise, and religious divines which shall be thought fit by the Houses of Parliament : every county electing two for this so grave and weighty a business, that so all things being according to God's true Word scanned and examined by the judicious and religious judgments of these worthy persons the truth may appear ; light and instruction maybe given unto authority, and by their power an uniformity of government and worship agreeable to God's Word may be settled in the Church.' This resolution of his Majesty does not seem to have been persevered in, or to have borne any practical fruit, — the fortune of war being then in his favour, and the counsels of the more moderate of his advisers being over- borne. The bill, after passing the House of Commons, was amended in the House of Lords by the addition of fourteen divines named by the Upper House. These were generally moderate or conservative men ; several of them were royalists, and one a pronounced Arminian. The list was forthwith published and has appended to it the following significant declaration by the Houses, of date 9th April 1642 : ' The Lords 1 1 o Preparation for and Sumiuoning and Commons do declare that they intend a due and necessary reformation of the government and liturgy of the Church, and to take away nothing in the one or other but what shall be evil and justly offensive or at least unnecessary and burthensome : And for the better effecting thereof speedily to have consultation with godly and learned divines : And because this will never of itself attain the end sought therein, they will therefore use their utmost endeavours to establish learned and preaching ministers with a good and sufficient maintenance throughout the whole kingdom, wherein are many dark corners and miserably destitute of the means of salvation, and many poor ministers without necessary provision.' ^ They, as well as the ministers, had set their hearts on something higher and better than any change in the external forms of government and worship as necessary to insure the reformation they desired, and the reclamation of the careless, the ignorant, and the godless. They believed the consciences of such could only be effectually reached by the earnest preaching of the gospel salvation — not by any mechanical drilling in forms, however venerable and imposing. The bill as amended had passed both Houses by the first of June, and only waited the king's assent to make it law, and insure the meeting of the Assembly in the following month. The king's ^ E. 144, and also 146. of the Westminster Assembly. 1 1 1 assent being withheld, a second and a third bill were brought in before the close of the year ; but all was in vain, for the king would not pass either of them. At last, as Mr. Masson tell us, 'hopeless of a bill that should pass in the regular way . . . the Houses resorted in this as in other things to their peremptory plan of ordinance by their own authority. On 13th May 1643 ^'"^ Ordinance for calling an Assembly was introduced in the Commons, which Ordinance after due going and coming between the two Houses reached its maturity on the 12th June, when it was entered at full length on the Lords' Journals.' It was printed on the 13th and again on 20th June. The Ordi- nance is given at length in most editions of the Con- fession of Faith, and I need not occupy your time by quoting it here, as in its final form it is re- printed and prefixed to these lectures, along with a full list of the members, and a somewhat more detailed account of them than is there supplied. The purposes for which the Ordinance declares that the Assembly was called were ' for settling of the government and liturgy of the Church of England, and for vindicating and clearing of the doctrine of the said church from false aspersions and interpretations as should be found most agreeable to the Word of God, and most apt to procure and preserve the peace of the church at home, and nearer agreement with the Church of I 112 Preparation for and Stumnoning Scotland and other Reformed churches abroad.' It authorises the members to discuss such of these matters as shall be proposed to them by both or either of the Houses of Parliament, but prohibits them, without consent of the Houses, from divulg- ing the same by printing, writing, or otherwise. It provides that Dr. Twisse of Newbury shall be Prolocutor, that a sum of four shillings a day shall be allowed to each of them to defray their expenses, and that all and every of them shall be free of any penalty for non-residence or absence from their cure ; and finally, that they shall not ' assume or exercise any jurisdiction, power, or authority ecclesiastical whatsoever, or any other power what- soever, other than is herein particularly expressed.' On account of the concluding restrictions some have doubted whether the Westminster Assembly was really entitled to the name of a Synod ecclesiastical at all. But it may be said in reply to their doubts, ist. That it was at least entitled to rank as an advisory Synod of the kind specified in its own Confession of Faith, chap. XXXI. § 2 ; as much so, at any rate, as the ministers who, at the request of the Scottish Parliament, drew up the Old Scotch Confession and the First Book of Discipline in 1 560-1, or the divines who, in Edward vi.'s reign, drew up the Forty-two Articles ; 2d, That in respect of the limitations imposed by the Ordinance, it only resembled an of the Westniiiistcr Asscvihly. 1 1 3 English Convocation which cannot proceed to business without the sanction of the crown, nor claim authority for its decisions till they have been approved by the sovereign. Even in regard to the method adopted in selecting the members of the Assembly it did not want an able defender in the author of a remarkable treatise entitled 'Consilium de reformandd Ecclcsid Anglicand'^ This author maintained at considerable length, that, while in ordinary circumstances the clergy were rightly left to elect their own representatives in Synods, yet in cases where the clergy were largely corrupted, and the object was to reform the corruptions that had crept in among them, it was quite competent for the magistrate in the exercise of his own judgment to select the members from the sounder part of the clergy,- and that in circumstances such as those in which the English Church then was, the magistrate, in claiming to ' Suggestum amplissimo ccetui autlioritale augustissimi Consessus Regis et Regni ordinum, indicto, ad consultandum de rebus gravis- simis in religione. — Londini 1643 (E 56, 12). - ' Cum enim illustrissimi senatores observassenl Archiepiscopi Laudi ejusque sectatorum artibus non in uno loco Anglix suffectos viros de religione male sentientes et Papismo addictos prudenter cavent ne ab ejusmodi deputantibus ejusdem farina; deputati sub- nascantur. . . . An altaricola qui citari debet ad Synodum, rati- onem redditurus malesana: doctrinx' in vulgus a se sparsce, allega- bitur ut Synodi fiat membrum ? ' The folly of the other way had been sufficiently evinced by the results of the recent and then exploded Convocation of 1640. The course followed, the author has shown, was not unprecedented, and therefore not so revolution- ary as some would make it. 11 1 14 Preparation for and Suminoning choose the members claimed nothing but what was consonant with right reason, and clearly con- firmed by usage, and what had actually been practised in the reigns of three most powerful sovereigns, Edward VI., Elizabeth, and James l. The author of this treatise evidently belonged to the most conservative school of reformers, and cautioned the Parliament to have regard to the best interests of the country, and not to attempt changes which the nation generally was not ripe for, and would not permanently bear. On this ground he ventured to advocate the continuance of a liturgy with some provision for free prayer, and of a moderate Episcopacy, in which the bishop should not be of a different order but only of a different degree from the presbyters, — should be their mouth or executive rather than their head or sovereign ruler, — and should neither ordain, nor depose, nor excommunicate without their assent. He did not favour the introduction of lay elders. More than one treatise advocating similar views was published soon after the Assembly had begun its sittings, notably one by Bishop Hall on a lower platform than that he assumed in the Smectym- nuan controversy. But whether for good or evil, the question of the continuance or discontinuance of Episcopacy may be said to have been virtually determined by the Parliament in the preamble of the Ordinance calling them together, and never of the IVestmijistcr Assembly. 115 really to have been a subject of formal debate in the Assembly itself With all acknowledged limitations of its scope, however, the Westminster Assembly was in fact a great ^ poivev or institution in the English realm in those unsettled times — existing side by side with the Long Parliament, in constant conference and co-operation ' ^ with its leaders, generall}- influencing or moulding ecclesiastical legislation, and treated with unusual deference even when its remonstrances were unacceptable — maintaining a good understanding between the Parliament and the earnest citizens of London, who were its real arm of strength, and gaining and retaining a moral influence over the pious part of the people, which neither Cromwell's temporary supremacy nor the more lasting persecutions of the second Charles should suffice entirely to destroy. Taking it all in all, it was to leave its mark so deeply and permanently on a large portion of our Anglo- Saxon race, that, as Professor Masson has justly observed, it ' ought to be more interesting to them still than the history of the Councils of Constance, Basle, Trent, or any other of the great ecclesiastical Councils more ancient and oecumenical, about which we still hear so much.'- In one important respect, as I have said else- ' Life of Milton in connection 7cilk the history of his time, vol. ii. p. 514. - Il'ici. p. 515. 1 1 6 Preparation for and Sninmoning where,^ it resembled the celebrated council of Nicaea — the most ancient oecumenical of all. ' Not a few of its members had been honoured to suffer on account of the truths to which they clung, and many of them had the courage afterwards to brave suffering, ignominy, and penury rather than renounce their creed and their views of church polity and discipline. Nay, they may be said, by the very act of their meeting, to have put their livings, if not their lives, in jeopardy ;' and so to have given the strongest possible proof of their deep sense of the necessity of the work to which, notwithstanding the prohibition of the king, and his mutterings of treason, they addressed them- selves during these troubled years. The Assembly was designed to include among its members adherents of all the chief parties among English Protestants, with the exception of that of Archbishop Laud, whose innovations and despotic government had been one main cause of the troubles that had arisen, both in church and state. Almost all the clerical members named upon it were in Episcopalian orders, most of them were graduates in Arts, not a few of them graduates in Divinity, either of Oxford or Cam- bridge. Three or four were bishops, five after- wards rose to be so, and several others were known to be favourable to the continuance of Episcopacy 1 Introduction to Rliiiutcs of H'cst/iiinster Assembly, p. xxxii. of the Westminster Assembly. 117 and a liturgy, and some of them to side with the king rather than with the parhament. Many were known to favour Presbytery. A place was found among the members for some of the most pro- minent ministers of the French Church in England, for one of Dutch or German descent, for two or three Irishmen, and for some who, to avoid the persecutions of Laud, had left their native land for a time and acted as pastors to the congregations of English exiles and merchants in Holland. Invitations to send commissioners were addressed to the Church of Scotland, and, it is said also, to the congregational churches of New England. If few of the royalist divines ventured to appear in their places, yet Dr. Featley and one or two more did attend pretty regularly for a time, and the doctor took a prominent part in the debates on the revision of the Thirty-nine Articles — de- bates probably as important in a doctrinal point of view as any that occurred at a later stage. If Ussher, the greatest of these divines, was ' con- spicuous by his absence,' the Assembly at least gave the most unmistakcable proof of its high regard for him and of its earnest desire to compre- hend within the reconstituted church those who shared his doctrinal views, by drawing its state- ments on so many of the most important doctrines from the Articles prepared by him in 161 5 for the Church of Ireland. 1 1 8 Preparation for and Summoning Yet most various estimates have been formed of the merits of the divines and of the value of their work. Clarendon and several of the satirists of the age have spoken of them with contempt and scorn, and others have accorded them only faint praise. But Bishop Hall was not ashamed to address them as his learned and reverend brethren, nor the five dissenting brethren frankly to acknowledge their worth. Richard Baxter, who was perhaps as competent as any of their con- temporaries to give an impartial verdict, does not hesitate to affirm that ' the divines there congre- gated were men of eminent learning and godliness, ministerial ability and fidelity ; and being not worthy,' he modestly adds, ' to be one of them myself, I may the more freely speak that truth which I. know, even in the face of malice and envy, that so far as I am able to judge by the information of all history . , . the Christian world since the days of the apostles had never a Synod of more excellent divines.' This, it has been well said by Dr. Stoughton, ' is high praise, but it comes nearer the truth than the condemnatory verdicts pronounced by some others. The Westminster divines had learning, scriptural, patristic, scholas- tical and modern, enough and to spare, all solid, substantial, and ready for use. . . . They had a clear firm grasp of evangelical truths. The godliness of the men is proved by the spirit of their writings of the Weshniiister Assembly. 1 1 9 and by the history of their lives. Their talents and attainments even Milton docs not attempt to deny.' Hammond admits the learning of many. Hallam, no less competent a judge, admits that ' they were perhaps equal in learning, good sense, and other merits to any Lower House of Convoca- tion that ever made a figure in England.' Indeed in two important respects we may say that they had the advantage of any Lower House. There were called in to the aid of the divines a number of the laymen distinguished among their fellows in Parliament as statesmen or scholars, and not unacquainted with Theology. And when under the Solemn League and Covenant the original purpose of the Assembly was extended there were associated with these English divines and laymen some of the most distinguished of the Scottish ministers and elders. Hence it is, I think, that their work has stood the test of time, and is still held in honour by the Presbyterian Churches. As I have said elsewhere,^ even the tv.'enty names of special eminence with which a recent critic has credited them constitute a larger pro- portion of the whole than may at first sight appear, for they are the names of men who were regular in their attendance, and prominent in the discus- sions, and they form at least a third of those who * Minutes of Westminster Assembly, p. xxxiii., etc., article ' Westminster Assembly ' in Johnson's Universal Cyclo/'tcdia. 1 20 Preparation for and Suminoiiing were so. But more may fairly be claimed for them and several of their companions than that critic is disposed to concede. Dr. William Twisse, the Prolocutor, was a man not only of subtle and speculative genius, but also of profound and varied learning. He was one of the most influential theologians of his day, held in honour by the Reformed Churches on the Continent as well as by those in Britain. Sir John Savile, who had sought the assistance of the ever memorable John Hales for his edition of Chrysostom, did not disdain to call in the aid of Twisse in preparing for the press Bradwardine's great work, De Causa Dei contra Pelagiinn. Bishop Hall — himself a royalist and resolute defender of the hierarchy — says of him, that he was ' a man so eminent in school divinity that the Jesuits have felt, and for aught I see, shrunk under his strength.' Yet with all his eminence he did not claim, nor, proud as his brethren were of him, did they consent to mould their Confession according to his peculiar views either as regards the order of the Divine decrees or the nature of justification, or as to the power of God to pardon sin without requiring any atonement for it. He had suffered greatly in the war from the royalist soldiers, and though Pro- locutor of the Assembly, and held in honour by the Parliament, he died ' in great straits.'^ Dr. Edward ^ The satirists of the clay are never weary of bantering the of the Westminster Assembly. i 2 1 Reynolds was a divine 'eloquent, learned, cautious,' and that may have been the reason why the Assembly devolved on a committee of which he was convener the adjusting of those much- maligned sentences in their Confession regarding predestination and pretention. He was one of the most active and influential members of the Assembly, and possibly wc owe to him its direc- tory for Thanksgiving after Sermon, as well as the General Thanksgiving added to the Book of Com- mon Prayer after the Restoration. Dr. Edmund Calamy was a more liberal and cautious Calvinist still ; and no one can read the minutes of the Assembly's debates on the extent of redemption without acknowledging that he was a genuine dis- ciple of Ussher and Davenant, and feeling thankful that he and some others of the same school deemed it their duty to cast in their lot with their noncon- formist brethren in 1662 when Reynolds and W'allis abandoned them. Lightfoot, Coleman, and Seaman were all distinguished oriental scholars, and Gatakcr was not only a distinguished Hebrew and Greek scholar, but also one of the first in Britain to write in defence of the opinion then divines aboul their four shillings hire. But up to the time vehemently threatened to have all their ecclesias- tical livings and promotions taken from them if they disobey these injunctions. Which if it be true we must not expect to have the Protestant religion cither maintained or propagated from thence, since evil counsellors can so soon frustrate good promises for that purpose.' Thus the members named to be of the Assembly knew that it was at the risk of their liberty and livings, and under threat of that terrible penalty of prenninirc that they resolved to obey the Ordinance of the two Houses. Yet on July ist, the day appointed for their assembling, a goodly number had the courage to meet together in the appointed place. Conforming to the custom of the English Convocation, in whose room they were virtually surrogated, they first met for divine service in Westminster Abbey, and both Houses of Parliament adjourned early in the forenoon that their members also might be present on the occasion. The following is the quaint notice of this meeting given in No. 25 of the news- paper already referred to : ' On Saturday last the Assembly of Divines began at Westminster accord- ing to the Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament, when Dr. Twist of Newbery in the County of Berks, their Prolocutor, preached on John xiv. and 1 8th, " I will not leave you comfortless, I will come unto you," — a text pertinent to these times of sorrow, anguish, and misery, to raise up the droop- 132 Opejimg of the Westminster Assembly: ing spirits of the people of God who lie under the pressure of Popish wars and combustions.' (E. 59.) The chronicler forbears to relate any of the points of the said sermon, because he supposes it will be published in print for the satisfaction and comfort of all who may desire to read it, but to the annoyance and regret of posterity the sermon had either not been published or has now com- pletely disappeared.^ The writer then continues : ' The number that met this day were three score and nine, the total number being (including the members of both the Houses of Parliament, which are but thirty) one hundred and fifty-one, whereof if forty meet the first day, it maketh the Assembly valid according to the Ordinance.' Lightfoot, who ^ The very day the Assembly met, however, a pamphlet was published with the title The English Pope, etc., with an epistle to the reverend divines now convened by authority of Parliament, in which, after reference to the slanders of the royalists, they are addressed thus encouragingly : ' Be of good courage, ye that have the honour to be of this Assembly. Fear not the name of traitors while you give judgment for loyalty, nor the name of Anabaptists while you propugn piety, nor the name of schismatics while you settle unity. If they believed the calumnies they circulate against you, it would have been better they had forwarded your meeting than procured proclamation declaring it treason, but they do not but fear you will disappoint all. Be you therefore the more courageous for this, and if you cannot totally eradicate all those doctrines of division which the prelates have sowed among the good wheat, yet denounce against them and publish your detestation of them ; and if you cannot yet erect a perfect form of discipline by reason of the secret wars made upon you and the sinews of authority withheld from you, yet present us with some models of it, that the world may see how far you are from affecting anarchy and con- fusion.' (E. 53, No. 13.) Its Proceeding's and Debates. i> probably was present at the opening of the Assembly, supplies the additional information that, besides the members of the two Houses and the divines named in the Ordinance, there was also a great congregation in the Abbey Church, and that after the service there all the members of Assembly present went into the gorgeous chapel of Henry VII. This place appointed for their meeting was the place where the Convocation of 1640, notorious for its forlorn attempt to carry out the policy of * thorough ' despotism in Church and State, had met. There the Ordinance was read and the names were called over according to the custom long observed in our Assemblies, with the results already indicated. Lightfoot further tells of * divers speeches being made by divers ' — doubtless, inter alia, with the view of following up what the Prolocutor had done to encourage the members in the great work to which they had been called not- withstanding the opposition with which they were threatened ; and finally he adds that ' the Parlia- ment not having as yet framed or proposed any work for the Assembly suddenly to fall upon, it was adjourned till Thursday following.' To show how intently the movement Avas watched from Oxford, I may add the notice of this day's proceed- ings contained in the court newspaper for Friday, July 7th : * It was advertised this day that the Synod, which by the pretended Ordinance of the 134 Opening of the IVestinznster Assembly : two Houses was to begin on the ist of July, was put off till the Thursday following, being the sixth of this present month, that matters might be pre- pared for them whereupon to treat, it being not yet revealed to my Lord Say, Master Pym, and others of their associates in the Committee for religion, what gospel 'tis that must be preached and settled by these new evangelists. Only it is reported that certain of the godly ministers did meet that day in the Abbey Church to a sermon, and had some doctrines and uses, but what else done, and to what purpose that was done, \\q may hear hereafter.' The day before this was published, the adjournment had been terminated. Certain carefully framed instructions and rules for regulating the procedure of the Assembly having, after consultation with some of the divines, been adopted by the Houses, were brought in and read. All of them indicate that serious business was meant, and freedom of discussion was to be pro- tected to the utmost. They provide, first : that two assessors shall be joined to the Prolocutor to supply his place in case of absence or infirmity ; second: that scribes shall be appointed to set down all proceedings, and these to be divines who are not of the Assembly, viz., Mr. Henry Roborough and Mr. Adoniram Byfield ; third : that every member, at his first entry into the Assembly, shall make serious and solemn protesta- Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 3 5 tion not to maintain anything but what he believes to be truth in sincerity, when discovered unto him ; fourtJi: that no resolution shall be given upon any question the same day wherein it is first pro- pounded ; fifth : that what any man undertakes to prove as necessary, he shall make good out of the Scriptures ; sixth : that no man proceed in any dispute, after the Prolocutor has enjoined him silence, unless the Assembly desire he may go on ; seventh : that no man shall be denied to enter his dissent from the Assembly and his reasons for it on any point after it has been first debated in the Assembly, and thence (if the dissenting party desire it) the same to be sent to the Houses of Parliament by the Assembly, not by any particular man or men in a private way, when either House shall require ; eighth : that all things agreed on, and prepared for the Parliament, be openly read and allowed in the Assembly, and then offered as the judgment of the Assembly, if the major part assent ; provided that the opinions of any persons dissenting and the reasons urged for their doing so, be annexed thereunto if the dissenters require it, together with the solutions {i.e. answers, as we now designate them), if any were given to the Assembly, of these reasons.^ Possibly there may have been some talk also at this session of revising the Thirty- nine Articles. At least under date of July nth the 1 Journals of the House of Commons, vol. iii. p. 157. 1 36 opening of the Wesiminster Assembly: London correspondent oi MerciLvms Aitlicus reports this, though he mixes it up with the proceedings which took place on Saturday. ' It was this day- certified that the ministers of their Assembly being met on Thursday, according to adjournment, fell pre- sently upon the altering of the Thirty-nine Articles so solemnly agreed upon in the beginning of the reformation of this Church. . . . Notice of this being brought to the Lower House, caused it to be diversely spoken of; some wiser than the rest de- clared that it was not within the power of their commission to alter either the doctrine or the discipline of the church which had been formerly established.' But he errs in supposing that the Assembly anticipated the action of the Parlia- ment. The Journals of the House of Commons distinctly show (vol. iii. p. 156) that directions had been issued by the Houses on Wednesday that it should begin consideration of the Articles. Lightfoot has no entry in his journal in regard to the work of Friday ; but from another source we learn that it was observed by the Assembly and the Houses as a fast — a season of humiliation, and prayer for Divine guidance and blessing on the work they were about to begin. As on the open- ing day there met in Westminster Abbey both Houses and the Assembly, and no doubt a large congregation. The preacher in the forenoon was Oliver Bowles, one of the oldest members of the Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 3 7 Assembly, and the author of a work Dc Pastore Evangelico, which was republished in Holland even after Baxter had put forth his famous treatise ' The Reformed Pastor,' to inflame his brethren in the ministry with something of his own consuming zeal. The sermon of Bowles was published under the title ' Zeal for God's House quickened,' and as a manifesto of the intentions and desires of the Houses and of the divines in their confidence, even its preface is noteworthy, ' Out of your vigilant care,' he says, addressing the members of the Houses, 'you have found out a way ... to convene an assembly of grave and learned divines with whom you might advise concerning the settle- ment of doctrine, worship, and church-government. You saw cause which might move you so to do in respect, ist, of those licentious spirits who took occasion as to vent their own fancies so to attempt anything in matter of doctrine and worship ; 2d, in that for want of an established church-govern- ment we were, and still are, in danger to fall from a tyranny to an anarchy ; 3d, in that evil-minded men, seeing no effectual means provided to suppress such variety of sects as did start up, were ready to censure you as the favourers of such opinions.' Then, after referring briefly and with approbation to their giving way for the admittance of divines of different judgments to be chosen as members of Assembly, and according liberty to them to ex- 1 3 S Open iiig of the Westin ins lev A ssembly : press their several views, he proceeds thus to give his estimate of the importance of the work assigned to them : * Is not your work a counterwork to that great and long-plotted design whereby Popery should have been readvanced/ God's saving truth been suppressed, his worship substantially corrupted or utterly destroyed ? Is it not a work of the largest extent as that which concerns all other Reformed churches, whose happiness or misery will be involved in ours ? Yea, ages to come will either bless or curse you as you shall follow or neglect the opportunity.' His sermon pointed, as the Puritan leaders had done in 1560 and again in 1603, to an earnest preaching ministry as the great want of the times, and enlarged, as became the author of the De Pastore Evangelico^ on the manner in which such a ministry should strive to preach, almost as was dpne afterwards by the Assembly itself in its directory for preaching, 'zealously, compassion- ^ No one could be more persistent than Laud in disclaiming all inclination towards reunion with Rome till it was other than it then was. ' But facts were too strong for him. The i^evival of "Catholic" principles was the signal for fashionable conversions. The Jesuits smiled approval, for they knew that their day was come. The queen's chapel and the chapels of foreign ambassadors were thronged with high-bom ladies, sighing for readmission into the true fold. The stern and sincere Protestant, to whom ritualism was never anything but Popery in disguise, saw the liberties which the Smithfield martyrs had won being silently filched from him. He knew' that there was another struggle before him, or the sticks were again growing which would form the fagots of new pyres.' — Edinbu7-sh Review for October 1882. Its Proceedings and Debates. 139 ately, convincingly, feelingly, frequentl)', gravel}-.' (E. 6}^^ The sermon, all in all, is a noble one. Matthew Newcomen, who preached in the after- noon of the same day, adverted, as became a Smectymnuan divine, to the preciousness of every grain of God's truth, every ' selvedge ' of Christ's seamless robe, and affirmed ' he must have a heart more ignorant and unbelieving than the apostle's lSlcott]'; (i Cor. xiv. 24) that should come in and be an ear-witness of your proceedings, and not worship God and report that God is in you of a truth. Verily I have often from my heart wished that your greatest adversaries and traducers might be witnesses of your learned, grave, and pious debates, which were able to silence, if not convert malignity itself (E. 63.) This day of prayer was but the first of many days similarly observed in these earnest anxious years. We may not venture to assert that, with all their care, no human infirmity was allowed to mingle with the simplicity of their waiting upon God to receive indications of His will. For in what crisis of the Church's fate dare we maintain that infirmity did not to some extent mingle with and mar many a holy sacrifice, many an act of true service to Christ ? Yet we may with- out misgiving indignantly repel the theory which would ascribe any part of their conduct to conscious h)-pocrisy or self-deception. Thc)- were true men of God, desiring from their vcr}- hearts to do His 140 opening of the Westminster Assembly : work in their generation, and feeling deeply their need of His aid and blessing, that they might do it well. But they were men, after all, of like passions with ourselves, liable to err in judgment and in tem- per, compassed about with infirmities and having their mental vision obscured by not a few prejudices. To say that of them is to say no more than we should have to say of the best of their opponents. The same day Mr. Rouse and Mr. Salloway were deputed by the House of Commons 'to return thanks to Dr. Twisse, Mr. Bowles, and Mr. Newcomen, for the great pains they took in the several sermons they preached at the desire of both Houses in Westminster Abbey, before both Houses and Assembly, upon the day of the first meeting of the Assembly, and upon the fast-day for the Assembly,' and to desire them to print their sermons. On the following day when the Assembly met, the protestation or vow,^ which was framed accord- ing to the third of the regulations already quoted, ^ The suggestion of this seems to have come from one of the ablest and most active members of the Assembly. In a sermon preached by Palmer before the House of Commons he had said, ' I humbly wish a profession or promise or vow (call it what you will) to be made by all us ministers in the presence of God to this effect : That we shall propound nothing nor consent nor oppose, but what we are persuaded is most agreeable to the Word of God ; and will renounce any pre-conceived opinion if we shall be convinced that the Word of God is otherwise. So shall we all seek Christ and not ourselves nor sidings ; and God's truth and not victory or glory to ourselves.' (E. 60, No. 3.) Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 4 1 and is still inserted in the preface to most edi- tions of the Confession of Faith,^ — having been approved of by the Houses of Parliament — was taken by every member present — peers and com- moners as well as divines. The vow and the rules of procedure already given were subsequently appointed to be read in the beginning of each week or month, to remind the members of the very solemn obligations under which they acted in the great work they had undertaken. There was then, also, put into the hands of the divines what is termed the new Covenant or Oath, being the second of those vows by which, previous to their alliance with the Scots, the members of the English Parlia- ment, in presence of the dangers which threatened them, thought it incumbent to bind themselves to resist Popery and all innovations in religion. This, however, was soon to be superseded by a newer and more memorable covenant, and it does not appear to have been actually taken by the divines. At the same meeting Mr. White of Dorchester and Dr. Burgess of Watford were nominated assessors to supply the place of the Prolocutor in case of infirmity or absence. It was also arranged 1 ' I do seriously promise and vow in the presence of Almighty God, that in this Assembly, whereof I am a member, I will main- tain nothing in point of doctrine but what I believe to be most agreeable to the Word of God, nor in point of discipline, but what may make most for God's glory and the peace and good of his church.' — J oiirnals of House of Commons , vol. iii. p. 157. 142 opening of the Westminster Assembly : with consent of Parliament, that the Assembly should proceed at once to revise the first ten of the Thirty-nine articles of the Church of England, so as to clear them from the false glosses which of late had been put on them by Pelagianising and Romanising divines, and above all by that bold pervert-^ to Romanism, who in 1634 first propounded the theory revived in our own day in Tract No. 90, that subscription of them was not largely inconsis- tent with acceptance of the decrees of Trent. To prepare their work, and perhaps to conform to the precedent set by the Synod of Dort, the whole Assembly was 'cast into three equal committees,' according to the order in which the names of the divines stood in the Ordinance of the Houses. All these three, however, were open committees, to which any member interested in their business might come at pleasure. All three were to meet ^ Davenport or Franciscus a Sancta Clat-a by name. The title of his book was ' Deus, natura, gratia, sive Tractatus de prcedestina- tione, de meritis et peccatorum remissione, etc., ubi ad trutinam fidei Catholicce examinatur confessio Anglicana et ad singula puncta quid teneat, qualiter differat, excutitur, doctrina etiam Doctoris subtilis . . . olim Oxonire et CantabridgiK et solenniter approbata et honorifice prrelecta exponitur et propugnatur: Lugd. 1634.' The fact that two editions of the book were issued in two successive years, that it was inscribed to the king, and urged him to complete the work his favourite divines had so well begun, is proof at once whom the Jesuits deemed their true allies, and how confident they were that these allies had prepared the way for them. Earnest Protestants might well feel that in such circumstances their very reverence for the Articles required that they should authorita- tively vindicate them from the false glosses put on them. Its Proceedings and Debates. 143 on Monday at one o'clock. The first was to meet in Plenry VII.'s Chapel, taking in hand the first, second, third, and fourth Articles. The second was to meet in the place used heretofore by the Lower House of Convocation (that is, as we are informed by Dean Stanley, St. John's and St. Andrew's Chapel on the north side of the Abbey — a little chapel below stairs). It was to proceed on the fifth, sixth, and seventh Articles. The third was to meet in the Jerusalem Chamber, long the usual meeting-place of the Upper House of Convocation, and was to take up Articles eighth, ninth, and tenth. A sub- committee of six or eight persons, partly divines, and partly members of the House of Commons, was appointed to seek for ancient copies of the Thirty- nine Articles, that the Assembly and its Com- mittees might found their proceedings on the most authentic. The learned Selden, who was prob- ably Convener, made report on 15th July of the proceedings of this sub-committee, and brought in many copies. No doubt one of these was that copy of the Latin Articles of 1563 still preserved in the Bodleian, and said to have been found by him in Archbishop Laud's library. It has been deemed of importance in our own day, from its bearing on the disputes which have been revived as to the authenticity of that clause of the twentieth Article, to which I referred in my first lecture as asserting the power of the Church to decree rites and 144 Opening of the Westminster Assembly : ceremonies, and claiming for it authority in con- troversies of faith. The Assembly, at the close of this long session, adjourned till Wednesday in the following week, and left Monday and Tuesday free for the import- ant work assigned to the Committees. Lightfoot tells us that at their first meeting Dr. Burgess was chosen chairman of the first Committee, Dr. Stanton of the second, and Mr. Gibbon of the third ; but neither he nor any other extant authority has supplied a list of the three Committees as they stood on that day. Three lists are found in the manuscript minutes preserved in Dr. Williams' library, which I take to be lists of these committees as they stood at certain dates. The first of them bears the date of 2d November 1643, and is given by Dr. Briggs in his recent interesting paper on the West- minster Assembly in the January number of the Presbyterian Revieiv for 1880. The second bears the date of 15th February 164.^4. The third, of date 1 2th April 1644, is inserted at page Ixxxv of my Introduction to the published volume of the Minutes of the Assembly, and is here subjoined. By the date at which it was drawn up some of the original members had died, Dr. Featley and a few others had withdrawn, and most of the superadded divines had taken their seats in the Assembly. Possibly the last two names on the second Com- mittee should be removed to the third. At least Its Pi'oceedings and Debates. 145 such a change is needed to make the numbers in each equal.^ When the Assembly met on Wednesday, and the report from the first Committee was given in by Dr. Burgess, great debate arose because they had not 1 First CommitteeJ\ \Second Committee. \ [ Third Committee.^ Mr. Palmer. Mr. Clayton. Mr. Salloway. Mr. Bowles. Mr. Gipps. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Wilkinson, Sen""- Mr. Burroughs. Mr. Burgess. Mr. Valentine. Mr. Calamy. Mr. Vines. Mr. Raynor. Mr. Walker. Mr. Greenhill. Dr. Hoyle. Mr. Caryl. Dr. Temple. Mr. Bridge. Mr. Seaman. Mr. Ashe. Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Reynolds. Mr. Gataker. Mr. Ley. Mr. Hill. Mr. Spurstow. Mr. Case. Mr. Jackson. Mr. Cheynel. Dr. Gouge. Mr. Carter of L[ondon]. Mr. De la March. Mr. White. Mr. Thorowgood. Mr. Newcomen. Mr. Marshall. Mr. Arrowsmith. Mr. Carter of D[ynton]. Mr. Sedgwick. Mr. Gibson. Mr. Hodges. Mr. Clark. Mr. Whitaker. Mr. Perne. Mr. Bathurst. Dr. Stanton [Conv'']. Mr. Prophet. Mr. Nye. Mr. Lightfoot. Mr. S terry. Dr. Smith. Mr, Corbet. Mr. Guibon [Coav'']. Dr. Burges [Convener. .] Mr. Langley. Mr. Michaelthwaite. Mr. Green. Mr. Tisdale, Dr. Wincop. Mr. Gower. Mr. Young. Mr. Price. Mr. Taylor. Mr. Philips. Mr. Wilkinson, Jun""- Mr. Wilson. Mr. Couant. Mr. Woodcock. Mr. Tuckney. Mr. Chambers. Mr. De la Place. Mr. Coleman. Mr. Hall. Mr. Maynard. Mr. Hcrle. Mr. Scudder. Mr. Paynter. Mr. Herrick. Mr. Bayley. Mr. Good. Mr. Mew. Mr. Pickering. Mr. Hardwick. Mr. Wrathband. Mr. Cawdry. Mr. Hickes. Mr. Strickland. Mr. Bond. Mr. Harris. 146 opening of the Westminster Assembly : adduced any passages of Scripture for the clearing and vindicating of the real sense of those Articles wherewith they were intrusted, and the question was raised whether, in proceeding upon all the Articles, Scripture should be adduced ' for the clearing of them ' and fixing of their meaning. This question after long debate was determined affirmatively. From this date onwards to the 12th of October the Assembly was mainly occupied with the revision of the Thirty-nine Articles. The keen and lengthened debates which occurred in the dis- cussions on these Articles could not fail to prepare the way for a more summary mode of procedure in connection with the Confession of Faith. The proceedings then were more summary, or at least more summarily recorded, just because the previous discussions on the more important doctrines of the Protestant system, and especially on that of Justi- fication by Faith, had been thorough and exhaustive, and pretty fully recorded. Lightfoot has preserved no detailed record of these discussions, but in part at least they are fully reported in the first volume of the MS. Minutes of the Assembly. Dr. Featley's two speeches in the debates on the eighth Article and his five speeches on those on the eleventh, as well as his speech in regard to the Solemn League and Covenant, were published shortly after his death. They are learned, acute, and forcible, and as they give more satisfactory insight into the matters Its Proceedings and Debates. 147 discussed than the desultory notes taken by the scribes, I subjoin a few extracts from them.^ In regard to the eighth Article on the three creeds to which a persistent party in the Assembly, as afterwards in the House of Commons, objected, it appears that the exceptions taken were partly against the titles of the creeds, and partly against their contents. ' It is objected,' the Doctor says, ' by some of our learned brethren that the Nicene creed is in truth the Constantinopolitan, that the creed which goeth under the name of Athanasius was either made by Anastasius or Eusebius Vercel- lensis. Certainly Meletius, Patriarch of Constanti- nople, resolves it negatively, . . . and for that which is called the Apostles' Creed the father, who so christened it, is unknown. Hereunto I answer that though the entire creed which is read in our churches under the name of the Nicene be found totidem verbis in the Constantinopolitan, yet it may truly be called the Nicene, because the greatest part of it is taken out of that of Nice, and howso- ever some doubt whether Athanasius were the author of that creed which bears his name, yet the greater number of the learned of later ages entitle him to it ; and though peradventure he framed it not himself, yet it is most agreeable to his doctrine, and seemeth to be drawn out of his works, and in that regard may be rightly termed HIS creed. For ' Speeches in the Assembly, generally bound with his Dippers Dipt. 148 opening of the Westminster Assembly : the third creed, although I believe not that the Apostles either jointly or severally dictated it, yet I subscribe to Calvin's judgment, who saith that it was a summary of the Christian faith extant in the Apostles' days, and approved of by them. Howsoever, according to the rule of Aristotle, we must use the language of the vulgar though we vote with wise men and think as they do.' The things in the contents of the creeds most objected to are, he then proceeds to say, (i) the too peremp- tory way in which the Athanasian affirms the damnation of those who do not believe its doctrine. To this he answers with Vossius that it is to be applied to such only as have capacity to under- stand it, and whose consciences are convinced of its truth ; (2) that in the Nicene creed Christ is spoken of as ' God of God ; ' to which he replies that ' though Christ is God of God it doth not therefore follow that the deity of the Son is from the deity of the Father, as it does not follow quia Deiis passiis est, ergo Deltas passa est or qicia Maria est mater Dei, ergo est Maria mater deitatis ;' (3) that it is said in the Apostles' Creed Christ de- scended into hell ; to which objection he deems it sufficient to reply that all Christians acknowledge that Christ in some way descended into hell either locally, as many of the ancient fathers, and some of the moderns, or virtually, as Durandus, or meta- phorically as Calvin, or metonymically as Tilenus, Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 49 Perkins, and this Assembly, and therefore no man need to make scruple of subscribing to this Article as it stands in the Creed, seeing it is capable of so many orthodoxal explications.' Notwithstanding Dr. Featley's advice to them to be content to use the language of the vulgar, though thinking as wise men do, the Assembly deemed it better to alter the wording of Article Vlll. so as to make it clear that they did not regard these ancient symbols as, strictly speaking, the work of the Apostles or of the Council of Nicea or of Athanasius, but only as being commonly so called, or going under their names, an instance of wondrous caution, which should be admired all the more by those who do not credit them with the highest scholarship or critical research, as some in our day still refuse to do. The main question on which the long debates on the Article of Justification turned was whether i^ the merit of the obedience of Christ as well as the merit of his sufferings was imputed to the believer for his justification. Several of the most distin- guished members of the Assembly, including Twisse the Prolocutor, Mr. Gataker, and Mr. Vines, maintained, as had been formerly done by Rollock in Scotland, Piscator in Germany, and Tilenus in France, that it was the sufferings or the passive obedience only of Christ which was imputed to the believer. The Prolocutor spoke at least twice 1 50 opening of the Weshninster Assembly : in the course of the discussion ; Gataker oftener and at greater length, and with greater keenness. Dr. Featley, who was the chief disputant on the other side, and who was a thorough Protestant and Calvinist, though a decided royalist and Episco- palian, spoke at least five times, maintaining, as Ussher had formulated it in his Irish Articles, and the great majority of English Puritans had accepted it, that Christ's active obedience or fulfilling of the law, as well as his passive obedience or suffering of its penalty, was imputed to the believer, and was necessary to constitute him righteous in the sight of God and entitle him to eternal life. I can only find room for a few brief extracts from Dr. Featley's fifth speech, which bears the title, ' Concerning the resolve of the Assembly that the whole obedience of Christ is imputed to every believer.' He first notices and states not unfairly the three objections taken to the proposition by Gataker that it was re- dundant, yet deficient, and novel; redundant in that the word zvhole obedience of Christ must include his obedience to the ceremonial law as well as to the moral ; deficient in that the word obedience could not be held to include Christ's original righteousness ; novel in so far as the imputation of Christ's active as well as passive obedience was never defined for dogma before the French Pro- testant Synods of Gap and Privas.^ To the objec- ^ Quick's Synodicon, vol. i. pp. 227, 34S. Its Proceedings and Debates. 151 tion of redundancy Fcatlcy replied that though ive were not bound by the-'ceremonial law, yet the Jcivs were, and that this was part of the meaning of the Apostle when, in Galatians iv. 4, he speaks of Christ as being made under the law to redeem them that were under the law. To the charge of deficiency he rejoins that though Christ's original righteousness was requisite in him both as high priest and sacrifice, yet it was not properly the work of Christ but of the Holy Ghost, and so not to be imputed to us as any act of our Mediator. To the objection of novelty he replied that the doctrine itself was much more ancient than the French Synods in question, adducing testimonies in its favour from Chrysostom, Augustine, Bernard, Luther, Calvin, Peter Martyr, and others. He then proceeds as follows : — ' Here methinks I hear those who are most active in the Assembly for the imputation of the mere passive obedience of Christ, like the tribunes among the Romans, obminciare et intercedere^ that they may hinder and stop the decree of the Assembly, alledging that though some of the ancient fathers, and not a few of the reformed doctors, cast in their white stone among ours, yet that we want the suffrage of Him who alone hath the turning voice in all debates of this kind, and that according to our protestation made at our first meeting we ought to resolve upon nothing in matter of faith, but what 152 opening of the Westminster Assembly : we are persuaded hath firm and sure ground in Scripture, and howsoever some texts have been alledged for the imputation of both active and passive obedience, yet that at our last sitting they were wrested from us, and all inferences from thence cutoff; all the redoubts and forts built upon that holy ground were sleighted. It will import, therefore, very much those who stand for the affirmative to recruit the forces of truth and repair the breaches in our forts made by the adversaries' batteries,' He then takes up in detail the several texts which had been adduced, and replies with considerable pertinency to Gataker's arguments respecting each. The latter had said that by obedience in Rom. v. 18-19, the apostle meant the special obedience which Christ gave to His Father's commandment to lay down His life for the sheep, just as in Philippians he spake of Christ becoming obedient unto death. To this Dr. Featley replies that the word in the former passage was not viraKorj but BiKalco/xa, which was never taken in Scripture for suffering or mere passive obedience ; further, that no man is said to have justification of life or abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness by suffering only ; and finally that the obedience here mentioned, being set in opposition to Adam's disobedience, must be active as Adam's was. From the life of Lightfoot prefixed to the Latin edition of his works Its Proceedings and Debates. 153 we learn that the same view \vas ably maintained by that eminent scholar, and extended to viraKor] as well as hiKaioy^jLa} On the text I Cor. i. 30, Christ is made to us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, etc., Gataker had argued that Christ is made to us righteousness as he is made wisdom, but he is not made to us wisdom by imputing his wisdom to us, but by instructing us ; so neither is he said to be made righteousness because his righteousness is imputed to us, but because by his grace he makes us actually righteous. To this Featley replies (i) that whatever Christ is made to us he is made perfectly, but he is not made perfectly wasdom or righteousness save by imput- ing his own righteousness and wisdom to us which are most perfect ; (2) Christ is made righteousness to us in the same sense as he is made redemption, but he is made redemption unto us by imputing his passive obedience ; therefore in like manner he is made righteousness to us by imputing his active obedience. In the same manner he replies to the arguments founded on 2 Cor. v. 21 and Col. ii. 10, and then concludes as follows : ' No man who standeth rectus in ciwia as Adam did in his inno- cency or the angels before they were confirmed in grace, is bound both to fulfil the law, and to satisfy for the violation thereof; but to the one or to the other, to fulfil only the law primarily, and to satisf}' * Li^ktfootii Opera, vol. i. Vita, § 3. 1 54 Opening of the ]]^estniinster Assembly: for not fulfilling it in case he should transgress; but that is not our present case, for we are all born and conceived in sin, and by nature are the children of wrath, guilty as well of Adam's actual transgression as our own corruption of nature drawn from his loins. Therefore, first, we must satisfy for our sin and then by our obedience lay claim to life accord- ing as it is offered to us by God in his law.' * We grant freely that Christ's death is sufficient for the satisfactory part, but unless his active obedience be imputed to us we have no plea or title at all to eternal life. I may illustrate this by a lively similitude such as that to which the apostle else- where alludes. In the Olympian games he that overcame received a crown of gold or silver, or a garland of flowers, or some other badge of honour ; but he that was overcome, besides the loss of the prize, forfeited something to the keeper of the games. Suppose some friend of his should pay his forfeit, would that entitle him to his garland .'' Certainly no ; unless , . . in another race he outstrip his adversary he must go away crownless. This is our case by Adam's transgression and our own ; we have incurred a forfeiture or penalty ; this is satisfied by the imputation of Christ's passive obedience ; but unless his active be also imputed to us we could have no plea or claim to our crown of glory, for we have not in our own persons so run that we misfht obtain.' Its Proceedi7igs and Debates. 155 After this speech the divines called for a vote on the question, and though some of eminent parts in the Assembly dissented, yet far the major part voted for the affirmative, that Christ's zvJiolc obedience was imputed to the believer. Before the close of the session, however. Dr. Featley seems himself to have been disposed to yield somewhat to the great divines opposed to him. Perhaps he had got a quiet hint from his correspondent at Oxford to do so. He produced a copy of the letter referred to by the Prolocutor in the course of the discussion, which had been written by King James to the Synod of the French Protestant Church which met at Privas in 161 2. In this letter the king counselled them to let this question and those depending on it ' be altogether buried and left in the grave with the napkin and linen clothes wherein the body of Christ was wrapped . . . lest peradventure by too much wrangling they seem to cut in two the living child which the tender-hearted mother would not endure, or divide the seamless coat of Christ which the cruel soldier would not suffer.' The reason he assigned for this counsel was that the question was altogether new, and not necessary to be determined, unheard of in former ages, not decided by any council, nor handled in the fathers, nor disputed by the school- men. Probably it was on this account that when the Assembly came to treat of the subject of 156 opening of the Westminster Assembly : Justification in their Confession of Faith they left out the word ivJiole to which Gataker and his friends had most persistently objected, so that the clause, which in their revised version of Article XI. had stood in the form 'his whole obedience and satisfaction being by God imputed to us,' was in the confession changed into ' imputing the obedi- ence and satisfaction of Christ,' which though it hardly seems to us to include, still less to favour their view, they were content to accept as less rigid than the other. At least on its being con- ceded Gataker and his friends agreed to drop further controversy on the question, as has been distinctly recorded by Simeon Ashe in his funeral sermon for his old friend Gataker. Before the 12th of October, the Assembly had revised fifteen of the Articles, and were proceeding with the sixteenth,^ when, by order of the Houses, they laid aside this work and proceeded to take in hand the government and liturgy of the Church. What they had accomplished previously they regarded as superseded by a later order to draw up a Confession of Faith. It was only after repeated peremptory messages from the House of Commons that they consented to send it up to them, and they accompanied it by an explanatory preface in which they stated that they regarded ^ They had resolved to change ' may depart from grace given ' into ' may fail of the grace of God attained.' Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 5 7 the work as in several ways imperfect, and as having relation only to the Church of England, and therefore as superseded by the more recent order sent to them to prepare a Confession of Faith for the churches of the three kingdoms. The Articles, as far as revised by the Assembly, have been often reprinted, not, however, in the exact form in which they were sent up by the Assembly to the Houses, but in the form in which they were passed by them, and were included among the documents submitted for the acceptance of the king in the negotiations of 1648. The full form, together with the preface of the Assembly, is to be found in a rare volume of tracts contained in the library of the British Museum (King's Pamphlets, E. 516). The only material difference between the two forms is that while Article VIII. is omitted from the former, it is retained in the latter, and in a revised version slightly different from that given in Lightfoot's Journal. ' The creeds that go under the name of the Nicene Creed, Athanasius' Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, are thoroughly to be received and believed, for that they may be proved by most certain warrant of Holy Scripture.'^ While the revision of the Articles was being carried forward at Westminster, the cause of the 1 The Preface as well as the ultimate revision of this Article are given in the appendix to the printed Minutes of the Assembly. 158 Ope7iing of the Westminster Assembly : Parliament had been going backward in the country. One and another defeat had been sustained by their forces, and their supporters in various parts were becoming so disheartened, that at the request of the House of Commons divers of the members of the Assembly were sent away from their duties there, and instructed to go to various parts of the kingdom, and stir up the people to greater zeal in their cause. It might have been well for the Assembly itself had such a policy been followed more frequently when it became apparent that the work for which it was called was not to be rapidly completed. The immuring of so many of the ablest ministers for so long a time in London, if it strengthened their hold on that great city, tended to weaken their hold on their parishioners in the country and in the provincial towns, and so to separate the metropolis and the provinces as to make the revolution ultimately effected by the leaders of the army a far easier matter than it would have been had the elite of their ministers been able to be more in their parishes, and to guide opinion at so many important centres in harmony with what it was in London. It was at the same crisis in their fortunes that the Parliament finally made up their minds to outbid the king for the Scotch alliance, and despatched commissioners to Scotland to arrange terms with the Convention of Estates and General Assembly there, and in the < Its Proceedings and Debates. 1 59 name of the Houses and the Assembly more formally to invite the assistance of Scottish com- missioners in the deliberations of the Assembly. All the Scottish leaders looked favourably on the cause which the English Parliament was defending", but all were not at first agreed that they ought to take a side in the contest between it and the king. Henderson and several other trusted counsellors had previously urged that the true position for them to assume, in the first instance, was that of mediators between the parties. But the coldness of their reception at Oxford had discouraged even these, while the concessions of the Parliament on the subject of episcopacy ' flattered the ambition of the nation,' and in the end the fervid eloquence of Johnstone of Warriston, advocating active parti- cipation in the contest, carried all before it.^ It was unanimously agreed that common cause should be made with their English brethren, and that every possible aid should be given them in the war into which they had been driven in defence of their religion and liberties. Yet all were determined not to draw their swords about mere civil grievances, however insupportable these were deemed to be, but to place the cause of the true Reformed religion and the government of Christ's Church according to His Word in the forefront, if not to bring the Ark of God itself into the battle. They would ' Haillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 90. i6o Opening of the Westminster Assembly : not have the civil league which the English com- missioners offered them, but pressed for a solemn religious bond like that into which in times of trial they and their fathers had entered, and which in their recent Vow or Covenant the English Houses had actually indorsed. The English commissioners were obliged at last so far to yield to the wishes of the Scotch as to make the proposed treaty a solemn League and Covenant * for the defence and preservation of the Reformed religion in the Church of Scotland in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, and for the reformation of religion in the kingdoms of England and Ireland according to the Word of God and practice of the best Reformed Churches, and for bringing the Church of God in the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion. Confession of Faith, form of church-government, directories for worship and for catechising,' and then, only subordinately or con- junctly, 'for the defence and preservation of the rights and privileges of the Parliament, the liberties of the kingdoms, and of the king's Majesty's person and authority in the preservation and defence of the true religion and liberties of the kingdoms.' This Covenant, drafted by Henderson and ac- cepted by the English commissioners, was forth- with transmitted to England, where after some very slight changes it was approved by the Assembly Its Proceedinps and Debates. 1 6 1 %!> and accepted by the Houses, and finally was directed to be subscribed throughout the kingdom, as it also was in Scotland. It was subscribed there with singular unanimity and enthusiasm, and if with less general spontaneity in England yet certainly more extensively than is sometimes represented. Neale, who is by no means a blind admirer of the Scots, informs us that ' most of the religious part of the nation who apprehended the Protestant religion to be in danger, and were de- sirous of reducing the hierarchy, were zealous for the Covenant,' that others who were on the side of the Parliament took it in obedience to their authority, being sensible that on no other conditions could the assistance of the Scots be secured, and that a num- ber of the episcopal divines who made the greatest figure in the Church after the Restoration did not refuse it, as Cudworth, Wallis, Reynolds, Lightfoot, and many others. Lightfoot was so keen for it that he does not hesitate to speak of Dr. Burgess, who opposed it and petitioned the House of Com^ mons to be heard against it, ' as a wretch to be branded to all posterity, seeking for some devilish ends, either of his own or others, or both, to hinder so great a good of the two nations,' * to put in a bar against a matter of so infinite weight, and asperse such an Assembly with so much mire and dirt.'^ ^ Lightfoot's y(?«/r«(z/, pp. 12, 13, 14. Dr. M'Crie seems to have doubted whether Lightfoot had not exaggerated both as to Dr. L 1 62 opening of the Westminster Assembly : Dr. Burgess, however, was not the only objector in the Assembly when the Houses referred the Cove- nant to them for their judgment and counsel as to whether it might be lawfully sworn. Dr. Price seems to have joined him in his opposition and petition, though he gave in sooner, and was let off more easily. In addition to them Dr. Featley and one or two royalists, who still remained in attend- ance, opposed it out-and-out, and if Mr. Lance did not join them he slunk away from the Assembly about the time they had to leave it, and had great difficulty some years after in securing its appro- bation to his appointment to a London charge. Twisse, Gouge, and Gataker had joined in object- ing to the 2d Article as originally drafted for the extirpation of prelacy without any limitation, — affirming, that while opposed to such episcopacy as had hitherto been in the Church of England, they were not opposed to, and could not be expected to swear to endeavour the extirpation of, all prelacy or stated presidency over the ministers of the Church. To satisfy their scruples it was agreed to insert after the word ' prelacy ' the explanatory clause already inserted in the Ordinance calling Burgess's offence and punishment. But the Journals of the House of Commons (vol. iii. pp. 225, 242) confirm his account, and show that ' the turbulent doctor ' was suspended from the Assembly, and had to make a humble apology to the House ere he was restored. Baillie had not yet come up, and so has not reported the matter with his usual accuracy. Its Proceedings and Debates. 163 the Westminster Assembly (that is, Church-govern- ment by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors and Commissaries, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Archdeacons, and all other ecclesiastical officers depending on that hierarchy).^ There can be no doubt that it was with this distinct limitation that the Covenant was taken by many, both laymen and divines, in England, and perhaps as little doubt that it was understood by most in Scotland in a more absolute sense ; and if there is no great foun- dation for the remark of Neale that ' the wise men on both sides endeavoured to outwat each other in wording the Articles,' there is foundation for the remark that with much in it that was noble and good and thoroughly justifiable at such a crisis in ' 'J"he Assembly reported to the House of Commons that they liad received the Covenant with great joy and contentment, and had fully debated and considered of it, and ' that they do approve of the said Covenant, and judge it to be lawful in point of conscience to be taken, and that they do humbly advise that these explanations fol- lowing should be suljjoined to the Covenant, viz., I. By the clause in the hrst article of theCovenant, "according to the Word of God," we understand "so far as we do or shall in our consciences conceive the same to be according to the Word of God ;" 2. By " Prelacy " in the second article of the Covenant we understand " the church- government by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors, Commis- saries, Deans and Chapters, Archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical officers depending upon the hierarchy." ' The House approved of both explanations, and recommended the insertion of the clause relating to Ireland in the preamble. They hesitated most over the fifth article, which pledged them in their station to endeavour liiat the kingdoms should remain conjoined in firm peace and union to all posterity, and that justice may be done on the wilful opposers thereof. 164 Opeiiing of the Westminster Assembly : the history of the three kingdoms, it was not free from the seeds of future misunderstanding and dis- sension. Dr. Stoughton has spoken far more to the point, and according to actual facts, than Neale when he says, 'The English Commissioners, by accepting the Covenant, pledged themselves to the cause of which the Scotch Presbyterians regarded it as the symbol, and looking to the ecclesiastical opinions of the English Commissioners Vane and Nye, we cannot defend their conduct on this occasion against the charge of inconsistency.' Nor was this the full extent of Mr. Nye's fault. He must not only bear the blame of having committed himself by tacit acquiescence, but also by explicit words. In his speech at the taking of the Cove- nant by the House of Commons and the Assembly of Divines in St. Margaret's Church, Westminster, to which I shall have occasion to refer in my next lecture, he gave utterance to words which could not but lead the Scotch to believe that he thought favourably even of their ecclesiastical order : ' If England,' he says,^ 'hath attained to any greater perfection in so handling the word of righteousness ... as to make men more godly, ... if in the churches of Scotland any more light and beauty in matters of order and discipline be in their assem- blies, or more orderly, ... we shall humbly bow ^ Speeches delivered before the subscribing of the Covenant, the 25th of September, at St. Margaret's, Westminster. I I/s Proceedings and Debates. i 65 and kiss their lips that can speak right words to us in these matters.' . . . These kindly sentiments seem still to have animated him when he penned or put his name to the Apologetical Narration of the five dissenting members of the Assembly. And so the Scottish Commissioners had some right to feel both surprised and indignant when on the 20th February 1644, there being very fair appearances of agreement in the matters disputed between the two parties, after long and keen debates, Mr. Nye interfered to ' spoil all their play,'^ and offered to prove their favourite church-government 'incon- sistent with a civil state ;' and again on the follow- ing day when seeing the Assembly full of the prime nobles and chief members of both Houses, he did fall on that argument again and offered to demon- strate that their way of drawing a whole kingdom under one national Assembly was formidable, yea, thrice over pernicious to civil states and kingdoms.' It was hardly to be wondered at that he should have been cried down and voted to have spoken against the order, or that \h& prcefervidzim ingeniuni Scotorum should have been roused, and even the calm and judicious Henderson should for the moment have so far given w^ay to his exaspera- tion as to compare him with Sanballat, Tobias, and Symmachus, who sought to stir up their heathen rulers against the Jews, or to Pagan ' Haillie's Letters and Journals, vol. ii. p. 145. 1 6 6 Open ing of the Westminster A sseinbly : writers who stirred up the Roman Emperors against the Christians. The Solemn League and Co\'enant was then, and has often since been fiercely and unjustly denounced, and has at times been advocated with only less fierceness and uncharitableness. But even Presbyterians, who may doubt of its descend- ing obligation, or hesitate with Dr. Hetherington to characterise it as ' the wisest, sublimest, most sacred document ever penned by uninspired men,' will cheerfully grant with Dr. M'Crie that it was ' an un- precedented deed warranted by the unprecedented dangers to which the cause of Christ in Britain was then exposed — an act of heroism which, if like an act of martyrdom it cannot properly be repeated, yet it may be gratefully commemorated. With the exception of that unparalleled scene in the Grey- friars' Churchyard in 1638, of which it was the consequence and completion, the signing of the Solemn League and Covenant was perhaps 'the most remarkable event in Scotland's remarkable history.' 'There are moments,' as Mr. Rawson Gardiner has it, 'when the stern Scottish nature breaks out into enthusiasm less passionate but more enduring than the frenzy of a southern race.' This was one of these supreme moments. Bidding away the suggestions of worldly prudence, they resolved, as with one heart and soul, for the sake of that faith which was dearer to them than life, to lis Proceedmgs and Debates. 167 put in jeopardy all they had gained, and make common cause with their southern brethren in the time of their sorest need. If ever nation swore to its own hurt, and changed not, made sacrifices ungrudgingly, bore obloquy and misrepresenta- tion uncomplainingly, and had wrongs heaped on it most cruelly by those for whom its self-sacrifice alone opened a career, it was the Scottish nation at that eventful period of its history. It felt that the faith which was its light and life was really being imperilled, and it was determined, as in the days of Knox, to dare all for its safety and triumph, in England as well as Scotland. The Covenant in the eyes of all true Scotsmen will ever stand identified with the cause of Pro- testantism, the cause of civil and religious liberty, in a great crisis of British history ; it will be recog- nised as a testimony against Popery, sacerdotalism, and all profaneness, which at no small cost our fathers kept up when it was abandoned elsewhere, and which we ought not to let down though we may have to bear it in other forms, or to carry it out in other ways. In the eyes of many patriotic Englishmen at that crisis of their struggle for their religion and liberties, it appeared hardly less glorious. ' This covenant in the midst of our troubles . . . did mightily revive and cheer our drooping spirits, and was as life from the dead.' ' We shall never forget,' say the Lancashire ministers, ' how solemnly it was 1 68 Opening of the Westminster Assembly. sworn, many rejoicing at the oath, and sundry weeping for joy. We thought within ourselves that surely now the crown is set on England's head ; we judged the day of entering into this Covenant to be England's coronation-day, as it was the day of the gladness of our hearts.' ' The day when this Covenant was subscribed,' says the Erastian Coleman, ' was a day of contentment and joy. The honourable gentry accounted it their freedom to be bound to God, the men of war accounted it their honour to be pressed for this service, our brethren of Scotland esteemed it a happiness and a further act of pacification. Our reverend divines deserve not to be last either in praise or perform- ance.' Nor were thoughts of its influence on posterity absent from the minds of pious Indepen- dents. ' Heartily beseeching God,' says Caryl, ' our God, the great and mighty and terrible God, who keepeth covenant for ever, to strengthen us all in perforn^ing the duties which we have promised in this Covenant, . . . that the children which are yet unborn may bless us and bless God for us.' LECTURE VI. ARRIVAL OF THE SCOTTISH COMMISSIONERS, EXTENSION OF THE assembly's COMMISSION CONSEQUENT ON THE ADOPTION OF THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVE- NANT, DEBATES ON THE OFFICE-BEARERS AND COURTS OF THE CHURCH. In my last Lecture I gave you an account of the opening of the Westminster Assembly and of the more important doctrinal debates which occurred during its early sessions, while it was occupied in revising the Articles of the English Church, and adjusting the Solemn League and Covenant. To-day I propose to give a brief account of its debates and proceedings while occupied in drawing up its Propositions concerning church-government, or, as it is now usually termed, its Form of Church- government, as well as its Directories for public worship and for church-government and discipline. Before doing this, however, I am to advert to the arrival and reception of the Scottish Commissioners, and I deem it best, though deviating somewhat from strict chronological order, to introduce this by quoting to you that graphic account of the Assembly which was furnished by Robert BailHe, I 70 Arrival of Scottish Coinmissioncrs : one of these commissioners, shortly after the date at which we have arrived, and which, from its unique interest, has been quoted at length by almost all who profess to treat of the Assembly. After narrating briefly to that correspondent to whom he was to intrust so many of the secret actions and motives of himself and his brethren, his admission to the Assembly, and the welcome he received, Baillie (vol. ii. pp. 107- 109) goes on as follows: — * Here no mortal man may enter to see or hear, let be to sitt, without ane order in wryte from both Houses of Parlia- ment. . . . The like of that Assemblie I did never see, and, as we hear say, the like was never in England, nor any where is shortlie lyke to be. They did sit in Henry the 7th's Chappell, in the place of the Convocation ; but since the weather grew cold, they did go to Jerusalem chamber,^ a fair roome in the Abbey of Westminster, about the bounds of the CoUedge fore-hall, but wyder.^ At the one end nearest the doore, and both sydes are stages of seats as in the new Assemblie-House at Edinburgh, but not so high ; for there ^ ' The fairest room in the Dean's lodgings ' and ' for historical associations and artistic accessories second in interest ' only to the Abbey itself. It got its name either from the representations of gospel scenes on the old tapestry, wainscot, or stained glass, or from its proximity to the sanctuary, tlie place of peace. See Gilbert Scott's Gleanings from and Stanley's Memorials of West- minster Abbey. - This has generally been supposed to be the hall fronting the High Street, which continued till recently the Hall of Glasgow College. But the proportions of the Jerusalem Chamber are alto- gether different from those of that hall. It is not wider but narrower than it, and considerably higher in proportion to the length. The only explanation I can suggest is that which I gave at the meeting with Dean Stanley in 1875, ^^^'^^ Baillie spoke of a fore-hall or high hall which was demolished even in his own life- time, and was of different proportions. Letters, vol. iii. p. 438. TakiiiQ of Soleiuii League and Covenant, i 7 1 will be roome but for five or six score. At the upmost end there is a chair set on ana frame, a foot from the floor, for the Air. Proloqutor Dr. Twisse. Before it on the floor stand two chairs for the two Mr. Assessors, Dr. Burgess and Mr. Whyte. Before these two chairs, through the length of the roome, stands a table, at which sitt the two scribes, Mr. 15yfield and Mr. Roborough. The house is all well hung [with tapestry], and hes a good fyre, which is some dainties at London. Foranent the table, upon the Proloqutor's right hand, there are three or four rankes of formes. On the lowest we five doe sit. Upon the other, at our backs, the members of Parliament deputed to the Assemblie. On the formes foranent us, on the Proloqutor's left hand, going from the upper end of the house to the chimney, and at the other end of the house, and backsyde of the table, till it come about to our seats, are four or five stages of forms, whereupon their divines sitts as they please ; albeit com- monlie they keep the same place. From the chimney to the door there are no seats, but a voyd for passage. The Lords of Parliament use to sit on chairs, in that voyd, about the fire. . . . We meet every day of the week, but Saturday. We sitt commonlie from nine to one or two afternoon. The Proloqutor at the beginning and end hes a short prayer. The man, as the world knows, is very learned in the questions he hes studied, and very good, beloved of all, and highlie esteemed ; but merelie bookish, and not much, as it seems, acquaint with conceived prayer, [and] among the unfittest of all the company for any action ; so after the prayer he sitts mute. It was the canny convoyance of these who guides most matters for their own interest to plant such a man of purpose in the chaire. The one assessour, our good friend Mr. Whyte, hes keeped in of the gout since our coming ; the other. Dr. Burgess, a very active and sharpc man, supplies, so farr as is decent, the Proloqutor's place. Urdinarlie there will be present abov-e threescore of their divines. These are divided in[to] three Committees ; in one whereof every man is a member. No man is excluded who pleases to come to any of the three. Every Committee, as the Parliament gives order in wryte to take any purpose 172 Arrival of Scottish Connnissioncrs : to consideration, takes a portion, and in their afternoon meeting prepares matters for the Assemblie, setts doune their minde in distinct propositions, backs their propositions with texts of Scripture. After the prayer, Mr. Byfield the scribe, reads the proposition and Scriptures, whereupon the Assem- blie debates in a most grave and orderhe way. No man is called up to speak [as was then the custom in the Scotch Assembly] ; bot who stands up of his own accord, he speaks so long as he will without interruption. If two or three stand up at once, then the divines confusedlie calls on his name whom they desyre to hear first : On whom the loudest and maniest voices call, he speaks. No man speaks to any but to the Proloqutor. They harangue long and very learnedlie. They studie the questions well before hand, and prepare their speeches ; but withall the men are ex- ceeding prompt, and well spoken. I doe marvell at the very accurate and extemporall replyes that many of them usuallie doe make. When, upon every proposition by itself, and on everie text of Scripture that is brought to confirme it, every man who will hes said his whole minde, and the replyes, and duplies, and triplies, are heard ; then the most part calls, To the question. Byfield the scribe rises from the table, and comes to the Proloqutor's chair, who, from the scribe's book, reads the proposition, and says, as many as are in opinion that the question is well stated in the proposition, let them say Aye ; when Aye is heard, hg says, as many as think otherwise, say No. If the difference of Aye's and No's be cleare, as usuallie it is, then the question is ordered by the scribes, and they go on to debate the first Scripture alleadged for proof of the proposition. If the sound of Aye and No be near equall, then sayes the Pro- loqutor, as many as say Aye, stand up ; while they stand, the scribe and others number them in their minde ; when they sitt down, the No's are bidden stand, and they likewise are numbered. This way is clear enough, and saves a great deal of time, which we spend in reading our catalogue. When a question is once ordered, there is no more debate of that matter ; but if a man will vaige, he is quicklie taken up by Mr. Assessor, or many others, confusedlie crying. Taking of Sole 11111 League and Covenant. 173 Speak to order, to order. No man contradicts another expresslie by name, but most discreetlie speaks to the Pro- loqutor, and at most holds on the generall, The Reverend brother, wholatehe or last spoke, on this hand, on that syde, above, or below. I thought meet once for all to give yow a taste of the outward form of their Assemblie. They follow the way of their Parliament. Much of their way is good, and worthie of our imitation :^ only their longsomenesse is wofull at this time, when the Church and Kingdome lyes under a most lamentable anarchy and confusion.' Many memorable meetings have taken place in this Jerusalem Chamber since the middle of the 17th centur}^ but to the descendants of the old Puritans, perhaps none more memorable than that which took place on the 22d July 1875, when the representatives of the Presbyterian churches of England, Scotland, Ireland, the United States, and Canada, having agreed on the basis of our general Presbyterian Alliance, adjourned to the old Abbey of Westminster, and under the guidance of its kindly Dean, clad not in his robes of office, but in plain black gown and bands, streamed into and filled the old chamber where their fathers sat and elaborated those standards which we still revere. The Dean, taking the chair and asking us to regard him for the time as our Prolocutor, proceeded in the frankest way to discuss with us various details referred to in the above extract from Baillie ; with a merry twinkle in his eye he quoted to us some of ' It has been adopted more entirely by the American than it yet has by the Scottish churches. 1 74 Arrival of Scottish Commissioners : the sharp sayings of Selden, and promised that, in the series of decorations of a historical character then being arranged round the walls of the cham- ber, a place would be given to the great Puritan Assembly. This promise he was spared to fulfil, though he has made choice of an incident which, notwithstanding the halo of romance with which tradition has surrounded it, is of very doubtful authenticity. It was on the 14th September that intimation was given to the Assembly that certain Commis- sioners from the Church of Scotland had arrived, and desired next day to come in to the Assembl}-, as they had been authorised by the Houses to do. These were Alexander Henderson, George Gillespie — the one their most trusted leader, the other their ablest debater — and John, Lord Maitland, then a ' very gracious youth,' and found most useful in keeping up friendly relations between the Scotch and the House of Lords. When they appeared the following day, the Covenant, as finally adjusted, was being read, and when that had been finished, an address of welcome was made to them by the Prolocutor, and seconded by the ever-ready and copious Dr. Hoyle, something being added by Mr. Case, though he had not been specially appointed to speak as the others had been. Henderson, in name of the Scottish Commissioners, made a suitable reply to these addresses, expressing the Taking of Sole7iin League and Covenant. 1 75 deep sympathy of the Scottish nation with them in their many troubles, their earnest resolve to make common cause with them in the war, and to aid them to their utmost power. He also expressed their readiness as Commissioners to take part in the important work in which the Assembly was engaged. At the same time he claimed that, in all matters of uniformity between the churches and the two kingdoms, they should be dealt with, not as so many units in the Assembly, but as the representatives of one of the covenanting churches and nations. After this the Assembly resumed consideration of the Covenant, and full expla- nations were given to the Scotch Commis- sioners of the clauses which had been previously debated and the alterations proposed to be made on one or two of them. When all had passed with general consent and cheerfulness, and Dr. Burgess, who had been suspended for opposing it, but had since made his peace with the Houses, had also made his explanations to the Assembly, the Prolo- cutor gave thanks to God 'for the sweet concur- rence' in the Covenant. It was resolved that it should forthwith be taken by the Houses and the Assembly with all solemnity. Accordingly, on Monday the 25th September the members of the House of Commons and of the Assembly met for this purpose in St. Margaret's Church, Westminster. This little church on the north side of the Abbey 176 Arrival of Scottish Co minis sioiiers : is almost dwarfed by its more stately neighbour, but it had a consequence of its own from its being the church to which the members of the Houses, and especially of the House of Commons, were accustomed on special occasions to resort, and where, after the meeting of the Long Parliament, they had insisted on having the Communion administered to them in the old way which had been followed in most parish churches before Laud began his innovations, i.e. with the Communion table brought out from under the East wall into the middle of the church or chancel. On that occasion Dr. Gauden had officiated, and preached a very notable sermon. {Jourjials, ii. 24, 37, 41.) The following is Lightfoot's^ account of the memorable service at the taking of the Covenant on 25th September : — 'After a Psalm given by Mr. Wilson, picking several verses to suit the present occasion out of several Psalms, Mr. White prayed near upon an hour. Then he came down out of the pulpit, and Mr. Nye went up and made an exhortation of another hour long. After he had done, Mr. Henderson, out of the seat where he sat, did the like — all tending to forward the Cove- nant. Then Mr. Nye being in the pulpit still, read the Covenant, and at every clause of it the House of Commons and we of the Assembly held up our hands and gave our consent thereby to it, and then ^ Journal \n vol. xiii. p. 19 of Pitman's edition of his \vork.s. Taking of Solemn League and Covenant. 1 7 7 all went into the chancel and subscribed our hands. Afterwards we had a prayer by Dr. Gouge, and another psalm by Mr. Wilson, and departed to the Assembly again, and after prayer adjourned till Thursday morning because of the fast.' Two hundred and twenty-eight members of the House of Commons on that day lifted up their hands to heaven, worshipping the great name of God, and promising to be faithful in His covenant. Among these is found the name of Oliver Cromwell, who, like Nye, was either not disinclined at that juncture to make common cause with the Presby- terians, or wished not to be thought so as yet. In a few years after, acting on the principle laid down by Nye, in a debate to which I have previously referred, that national ecclesiastical assemblies were pernicious to civil states and kingdoms, Cromwell by his soldiers forcibly dissolved the General Assembly of the Scottish Church which they thought he had covenanted to preserve to them.^ A few days before the Covenant was taken by the House of Commons the tide of war which had ' 'This act of tyranny,' as Dr. M'Crie says, ' must of course be pronounced justifiable on the above principle;' but then what becomes of the other principle ostentatiously advocated by both of them, of tolerating all Churches ? Was it that Cromwell, like many less noble-hearted and less Christian men, found it easier to cut than to loose the Gordian knot, to govern by military power than to consolidate the institutions of the country and to guide and control tlie deliberations of its free representative assemblies, either civil or religious ? M 178 Arrival of Scottish Commissioners : set in so heavily against them had again turned. Gloucester, besieged 'by the flower of the English nobility and gentry with courage as high as became their birth,' had been relieved by the Parliamentary forces, and a battle had been fought at Newbury in Berkshire on Wednesday, 20th September, particu- lars of which must have reached them before they held up their hands to heaven. ' Perchance,' Dr. Stoughton has it, ' some held them up all the more firmlyinconsequence of what they had just been told of the persistent valour of the army. For all along the valley . . . Essex's men, wearing fern and broom in their hats, had fought from four o'clock in the morning till ten at night.' ' Much prowess,' says the contemporary account, 'was showed on both sides, and when night came on the royal forces' still stood in good order on the further side of the heath, but by next morning they were gone, and the Parliamentary army marched quietly over the ground they had occupied.-^ On his return to London the Lord General was received with every demonstration of joy — even the Assembly of Divines waiting on him in the painted chamber ^ The same morning the following paper was received by Essex from Prince Rupert : ' We desire to know from the Earl of Essex whether he have the Viscount Falkland, Captain Bertue, etc., pri- soners, or whether he have their dead bodies, and if he have, that liberty may be granted to their servants to fetch them away.' Truly, as the chronicler concludes, ' there is no victory in civil war that can bring the conqueror a perfect triumph,' and Essex might well be ' sorry for the loss of so many gallant gentlemen on the other side.' Taking of Solemn League and Covenant. \ 79 to offer him their congratulations. The Prolocutor made a speech on the occasion, and the General returned thanks for the honour done him. It was not till the 15th October that the Cove- nant was sworn by Essex and the peers of the Par- liamentary party — 'the little house of Lords,' as Baillie calls them, — along with the city authorities, the officers of the army, and the Scotch, resident in the city ; and the same day, or on the Lord's day following, it was tendered in a number of the city churches to the parishioners, and soon after was sent into the provinces along with an address explaining those things in it which seemed to create difficulty, and urging its being taken without delay by all leal-hearted supporters of the Parlia- mentary cause. The Solemn Leagueand Covenant being adopted, the Scotch did not delay to urge on the practical fulfilment of those engagements for reformation and uniformity in religion which had been placed in the forefront of it and gave it its main value in their eyes. The Westminster Assembly, originally called to reform the government and liturgy of the Church of England and to vindicate and clear its doctrines from false aspersions, had now its mission extended, and elevated into the prepara- tion of a common confession of faith, catechisms and directories for public worship and church- government for the churches of the three king- i8o Arrival of Scottish Commissioners: doms. The Scotch had long maintained that the question of church-government was the true key of the position, and must be first won if they were to be settled rightly. Others than mere worldly tacticians might have hinted to them that the dis- cussion of it was likely to engender strife and begin alienations which it was their duty and might be their wisdom to allay or delay to the very uttermost ; but they deemed it so necessary that they brought every influence to bear on the Houses to induce them to give directions that it should be set about without loss of time ; and with all their abhorrence of Erastianism they did not scruple on various occasions to bring the influence of the Houses to bear on the Assembly in this way. So on Thursday, I2th October, the Assembly ' being at that instant very busy upon the XVlth Article, and upon that clause of it which mentions departure from grace' there came an order to them from both Houses of Parliament enjoining^ them forthwith to ' confer and treat among themselves of such a discipline and government as may be most agreeable to God's holy word, and most apt to pro- cure and preserve the peace of the Church at home, and nearer agreement with the Church of Scotland and other Reformed Churches abroad ; ' . . . and also of ' the directory of worship, or liturgy, here- after to be in the Church, and to deliver their opinions and advices of and touching the same to ^ Liglitfoot's y^wrwa/, p. 17. Extension of Assembly s Commission, etc. i8i both or cither of the Houses of Parliament with all convenient speed. . . .' It was in pursuance of this order that they began and prosecuted to the . bitter end those almost interminable debates with the Independents which, fragmentarily as they are taken down, fill so large a portion of vols. i. and ii. of the MS. minutes of the Assembly, and which are more summarily and sometimes more vividly described in \J\^\.{oo\ls Journal^ and in Gillespie's Notes.^ The vidimus of the several votes and resolutions prefixed to the latter, and probably copied for Gillespie from some official document, is only less valuable as a synopsis of their labours in this department of their work than the ' Propo- sitions concerning Church-Government,' and the ' Directory fqr_ChurdL-Gnvernmrnt, Ordination of ministers, and Excommunication,' in which they themselves embodied the matured results of their deliberations. The work began, like all their most serious work, with a solemn fast — a day of humilia- tion and prayer to implore God's guidance in and blessing on their labours. Burgess, Goodwin, and Stanton led their devotions, and Whitaker and Palmer preached. On the two following days the method of procedure was considered, and several keen discussions took place upon it as to whether they should begin by debating generally if the Scripture contains a rule of church-government, ' Forming vol. xiii. of his Works. ''■ In vol. ii. of his Works. 1 82 Christ the Head of the Chtirch. or by defining what is the meaning of this word Church, or, passing over these questions in the first instance, should proceed at once to particulars, and debate of the government and governors of the Church. This last course was ultimately agreed on as likely to stave off as long as possible the discussion of matters on which they already began to fear they might not be able to secure entire agreement. The next day careful and elaborate reports were presented to the Assembly by the second and third committees on the subject of the officers of the Church. The third committee pre- sented the first draft of that marvellous paragraph whiclT_still stands at the head_ofJhe Propositions concgrniag^Church-Government as usuallyiprinted in Scotland ; 'Jesus Christ, upon whose shoulders the government is, whose name is called Wonder- ful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace, of the increase of whose government and peace there shall be no end, etc., He being ascended far above all heavens and filling all things, etc., hath appointed officers in the Church the names where- of are these ' (or, as it was slightly altered by the Assembly, ' hath given all officers necessary for the edification of His Church . . . some whereof arc extraordinary, some ordinary'). To this is sub- joined a list of their names and of the passages of Scripture which refer to them. The second com- Christ the Head of the Chttrch. 183 mittee gave in a paragraph which, with sHght alterations, passed the Assembly on the following day, and is inserted by Gillespie in the vidiiniis prefixed to his notes, though it has not been for- mally embodied either in the Propositions or the Directory : ' Christ, who is priest, prophet, king and head of the Church, hath fulness of power, and con- taineth all other offices by way of eminency in himself, and therefore hath many of their names attributed to him.' To this were appended the Scripture proofs, and detailed enumeration of the names of office given to Christ in Scripture, viz., apostle, pastor or shepherd, bishop or overseer, teacher, minister or 8idKovo morf> ' keen and prolonged^_thanjthos£_abQiiLlhe^ y Here too, at least for a time, the Scotch found themselves forsaken by a number of their best English friends, and that on a question which they were far more unwilling to settle by compromise than the preceding one. The following is Baillie's \ somewhat homely but graphic narrative of the proceedings upon this question •} — ' The next point whereon we stick is ruling elders. Many a brave dispute have we had upon them these ten days. . . . ^ Letters and yonnials, vol. ii. pp. no, iii, also Ii6. Debates on Elder s Office. 1 8 7 I profess my marvelling at the great learning, quickness, and eloquence, together with the great courtesy and discretion in speaking of these men. Sundry of the ablest were flat against the institu- tion of any such office by divine right, as Dr. Smith, Dr. Temple, Mr. Gataker, Mr. Vines, Mr. Price, Mr. Hall, and many more.' Then follows a clause which T can reconcile with the facts of the case as di.sclosed in the MS. minutes of the Assem- bly only by taking it away from the sentence going before anq prefixing it to the sentence which follows. ' Besides the Independents, who truly spake much ancT exceeding well, the most of the Synod were in our opinion, and reasoned bravely for it, such as Mr. Seaman, Mr. Walker, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Newcomen, Mr. Young, Mr. Calamy. Sundry times Mr. Henderson, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Gillespie — all three spoke exceeding well. When all were tired it came to the question. There was no doubt we would have carried it by far more voices ; but because the opposites were men v^ery considerable, above all gracious and learned little Palmer, we agreed upon a committee to satisfy if it were possible the dissenters. For this end we met to-day, and I hope ere all be done we shall agree. All of them were ever willing to admit of elders in a prudential way {i.e. as an expedient human arrangement), but this to us seemed most dangerous and unhappy, and there- 1 88 Debates on Elder s Office. fore was peremptorily rejected. We trust to carry at last, with the contentment of sundry once opposite, and the silence of all, their divine and Scriptural institution.' ' This,' Baillie adds, ' is a point of high consequence, and on no other do we expect so great difficulty except alone on Independency, wherewith we pur- pose not to meddle in haste till it please God to advance our army, which we expect will much assist our arguments.' How far the expectation expressed by Baillie in the above extract was ultimately realised is a question on which differ- ence of opinion has long existed and may fairly exist, even among those who peruse with care the notes of the debates contained in the MS. minutes and in Lightfoot's Journal. My own opinion isjthat the utmost that the Assernbly^atjhjs stage of its proceedings could be got to formulate was, that the office of elder was scripturally warrantable, not that it had been expressly instituted as an office that was to be of perpetual and universal obligation in the Church like the ministry, or that that was not to be regarded as a true or complete congregational Church which wanted it, but only 'that Christ furnisheth some with gifts for it and commission to exercise them ivhen called thereto! Their main scriptural warrant for it and for the ordination of those holding it was derived not from the New Testament but from the Old, from the example of Debates on Elder s Office. 1 89 those ciders of the Jewish people who had a place in the local councils and in the great Sanhedrim at Jerusalem along with the priests and Levites. 'As there were in the Jewish Church elders of the people joined with the priests and Levites in the government of the Church, so Christ, who hath instituted a government and governors ecclesias- tical in the Church, hath furnished some in his Church, besides the ministers of the Word, with gifts for government and with commission to exercise the same ivJien called thereunto^ who are to join with the ministers in the government of the Church, [which officers reformed Churches com- monly call elders'].^ The texts adduced in proof of this proposition from the New Testament were Romans xii. 7, and ist Corinthians xii. 28. But neither proof-text was held by many of them to amount to a positive and distinct divine institution of this office. The text which was appealed to throughout by more zealous defenders of the divine institution of the office was ist Timothy v. 17, and had they got that inserted among the proof- texts they would have gained their case beyond dispute. On the other hand, I do not regard the common Presbyterian interpretation of that text as having been positively rejected by the Assembly at this date, — but as held over for further conside- ration if at any future period of their sittings God ' This was added on 14th Nov. 1644, Lightfoot's yountal, p. 330. iQO Debates on Elder s Office. should give them further light and greater unani- mity. //While they did not indorse at this period what has been termed the 'presbyter theory' of the elder's office, they did not, as some assert, posi^ tively reject it ; and ere the close of their sittings, when/graciousand learned little Palmer ' had gone to his reward, and the^cotch ComrnisiToners had returned to their native land, Mr. Marshall, in pre- paring answers to the so-called Erastian Queries of the House of Commons, brought in to the Assembly from the committee the following pro- position : — ' The government which is jure divino is that which is by preaching and riding elders in presbyteries and synods by way of subordination and appeal;' and certain persons named in the minute, being a majority of those tnen in attend- ance on the Assembly, judged the proposition true, and expressed their willingness to bring in the proofs of it : viz., Drs. Gouge and Burgess, Messrs. Marshall, Case, Whitaker, Delmy,Cawdrey,Calamy, Young, Sedgewick, Ashe, Seaman, Gipps, Green, Delamarch, Perne, Gibson, Walker, Bond, Valen- tine, Conant, and Strickland.^ If they had in any sense rejected the ' presbyter theory ' of the elder's office, they could never have entertained the pro- position given above, and referred it to a committee to bring in the scripture proof of it. Neither could they have allowed the London ministers 1 Minutes of the Assembly, p. 525. Debates on Eider s Office. 1 9 1 under their very eyes to have maintained it in their Jus Dii'iiiuin Rcgimiiiis Ecclesiastici, and to have adduced in its support the obnoxious text. Dury, who was a member of the Assembly and famous for his efforts to promote union among the Protestant Churches, in his Model of ChurcJi- Govcrmncnt, printed in the same year, advocated the same theory and by the same text, as did also Dickson and others in Scotland. James Guthrie of Stirling, in his Treatise of Ruling Elders and Deacons, took a similar view of the office and of this famous text, as Rutherfurd also did in his MS, Catechism. And I hold that it remains as free to an)- one owning the Westminster formularies to do so still as it was in the British Presbyterian Churches before the Westminster Assembly met.^ If that Assembly did not indorse the presbyter theory, it certainly did not proscribe it in any man- ner of way, and most assuredly the Church of Scot- land has not done so either in earlier or later times. But the subject on which _tlie most pjptracted and ernBTtferccT^iscussions occurred was that from which Baillie and the Scott[sh_ Commissioners- shrank as lorig as they^ossiblycould, because they,,, foresaw only too clcarl^that another force thaw- that oKgrgument was being arra}cd against theoi^ and \\^asgrowing_jn strength and determination, - ^ See Appendix, Note G. - Baillie's Letters and Jottnialsy vol. ii. p. 122. 192 Debates on CIrarcIi-Govermnent. and that however victorious they might be in the field of debate, and however large their majority in the Assembly, yet if their battalions in the other field did not keep up with the ' Ironsides ' of Cromwell in deeds of daring and prowess, the con- flict was likely to end, as in fact it did end, in that armed minority overruling Assembly, Parliament, and the majority of their supporters, overturning the constitution from its foundations, and setting up a military despotism — it might be a mild and bene- ficial one — but still replacing the despot Charles by one as absolute and uncontrolled by Parliament, I if far more capable than he.flThe points to be ^discussed were, inter alia, whetTier many congrega- tions might be under a common presbytery^m" each with its owii_presbytery^or eldership oughjLto fbrm an independent church; 2d, whetTier appeals might be carried from congregations to a common or classical presbytery, and from that again to a provincial synod and national assembly, and might be authoritatively disposed of by them, or whether such synods and assemblies ought to be advisory only;,/' 3di whether the power of ordination to the ministry did not properly vest in the common or classical presbytery, or whether it might be com- petently, at its own pleasure, assumed by any single congregation which might without inconveni- ence associate with others. These were questions which, apart from political scheming and personal Debates on CJmrch-Govcrninent. 193 feeling might, one would have thought, have been calmly and temperately, and within reasonable time, discussed and settled, so far as the Assembly or the Parliament could claim to settle them. At first even, according to the confession of Baillie, the Independents conducted themselves with becoming modesty and good temper, and spoke ably and well. They signed the manifesto of the leading members of Assembly, dissuading from ' the gather- ing of churches till the questions in dependence should be determined.'^ In that ' Apologetical Narration ' in which they prematurely brought the controversy before the public, they claimed for themselves 'forbearance in the midst of provoca- tions,' ' quiet and strong patience,' agreement with their Presbyterian brethren in matters of doctrine, and readiness to yield in matters of discipline ' to the utmost latitude of their light and conscience,' desiring only 'a latitude in some lesser differences ' in which they might not be able to come up to the common rule.- But they allowed themselves to be 1 Certain considerations to dissuade men from further gathering of churches at this Juncture, the last being that it is not to be doubted but the counsels of the Assembly of Divines and the care of Parliament will be not only to reform and set up religion through- out the nation, but will concur to preserve whatever shall appear to be the rights of particular congregations according to the Word, and to bear with such whose consciences cannot in all things conform to the public rule so far as the Word of God would have them bonie withal. (E. 79, No. 16.) •J Even after the expulsion of Dr. Featley the injunctions of the Houses .against divulging the proceedings of the Assembly by N 194 Debates on ChuTch-Governmcnt . unduly provoked by some passionate replies which were made to their somewhat untimel)' publication, and the debates in the Assembly not only became keen but embittered. Candour and charity fell sadly into abeyance on both sides, and things went from bad to worse till the attack culminated in that disgraceful outbreak to which in my last I referred, when Nye in the presence of his parliamentary friends, arraigned that Presbyterian system, about which he had previously said such kindly things, as prejudicial to the civil state, and_maintained__that the^3£Stem_of_gathering into one the Churches of^an entire kingdom tended to encroach on the civil printing or writing continued to be ignored. The following notice by an intelligent correspondent of the Mercnrijts Britamiicns will show how widely hopes of a favourable settlement at this time prevailed : — ' The Assembly have made as yet a happy, peaceable, and learned progress through the Articles of religion and through the officers of the Church, extraordinary and ordinary, and they have discussed all by a lighter brightness than their own — that of the holy Scriptures. I cannot but expect from them an excellent draught of government with a glory more than ordinary, [they] having been so long in the mount with God : for this I dare affirm there is almost the piety and learning of two nations. England and Scotland, in one room.' Then after referring, in terms of high commendation, to their letter to the foreign reformed Churches, the writer proceeds : ' There is of late a paper set out by our reverend brethren, but by no Independents, viz., Mr. Good- win, Mr. Nye, Mr. Burroughs, Mr. Greenhill, Mr. Bridge. In this you may see how long they hold us by the hand, and where they let go and take us by the finger. They have the same worship, preaching, praying, and form of sacraments, the same church officers, doctors, pastors, elders, deacons, the same church censures in the abridgment but not at large. So I suppose here is all our difference, yet they allow an equivalency to our presbytery and Debates on CInirch-Govcritincnt. 195 domain, and was thrice over pernicious to the State.^ This meant seemingly that he was prepared to make common cause with the Erastians, and rather than allow the majority to have the orderly Pres- byterian establishment they desired, would unite with these in cramping the independence of the Church, and in discrediting every form of church- government but his own. Had he been professedly a voluntary, one could to some extent have under- stood him, but besides the fact of his holding a parish in a national Church (which drew into one the Churches of the kingdom), in the hope of latitude to be allowed him under the new government, he ought to have remembered that in this respect the Pres- l:)yterians were but claiming what almost all the reformed Churches claimed, and that the dishonour he cast on the Scotch extended to all the rest. The excitement and ill-feeling occasioned by this unfair attack on the system the majority favoured was never thoroughly got over on either side, nor was confidence ever again fully restored between them, councils and excommunication of Churches, which is consociation with Churches and non-communion with Churches. Is it not a pit^ we should break for such a little knot in a golden thread ? Only this I must say, they tell us how disengaged and disinterested they were in their holy pursuit after a form, and had no state or kingdom in their eyes, and that may be the reason (with reverence to their cause and persons) why they straiten the form to single congregations and make it of no more latitude, and so have happened their differences from us — having rather the model of their private Churches in their thoughts to provide them a more public' (E. 8l, No. 20.) 1 See Appendi.\, note H, for Rutherfurd and Gillespie's view. 196 Debates on CIiurch-Govemiment. though Nye for a time exerted himself to be v unusually complaisant to the Scotch. They had trusted him once, and in reliance on the fair professions he made in the day of his country's sore distress, had hazarded their earthly all in a struggle in which they were only indirectly con- cerned, and in which Henderson for a time had doubted whether they ought to take an active part at all ; and to be told so bluntly to their face that their beloved presbytery was thrice over pernicious to the civil state by one who had so lately been a suppliant to their Assembly as well as to their Parliament for aid, and had spoken so kindly of their order, was an act which fully warranted them to be on their guard in all their dealings with him ^___tliereafter. -"I'he debates were resumed again and again. The nature of the Church and the rights of con- gregations were insisted on by one side, the power of presbyteries in government and ordination, and the right of appeals to even higher courts, and the examples of such furnished under the Jewish as well as under the Christian dispensation, by the other, till every possible argument had been ad- duced, and both sides were thoroughly exhausted. Reasons of dissent from the decision of some of the questions in dispute were given in, and answers to the reasons were drawn up. ' Truly,' says Baillie, ' if the cause were good, the men have Debates on Chureh-Governincul. 197 plenty of learning, wit, eloquence, and above all boldness and stiffness to make it out ; but when they had wearied themselves and over-wearied us all, we found the most they hadJu say against^ the presbytery was but curious idle niceties, yea that all they^ could brmg w'as no ways concluding. Every one of their arguments, when it had been pressed to the full in one whole session and some- times in two or three, was voiced and found to be light unanimously by all but themselves.'^ Dr. Stoughton's commentary on this account of Baillie hardly shows his usual candour : — ' The reasoning of the Independents,' he says, ' would of course be found wanting when weighed in the Presbyterian balance, and the majority of the Assembly would naturally consider their own votes an ample refutation of their adversaries' arguments.'- But the whole Assembly was not, as he admits in other places, wedded to the Presbyterian system. A number of the members had leanings to another,, and were only brought to acquiesce in the Presby- terian as allowable in consequence of these de- bates, and the fact that all pronounced against the Independents was a thing of more importance than he grants, especially when we couple it with the other fact that these had said in their Apolo- getical Narration that they had with deliberation * Letters, etc., vol. ii. p. 145. * Church of Civil Wars, vol. i. \i. 419, 198 Debates on CJuLrch-Government. selected this theatre whereon to plead their cause, as one they might count on to be fair and just, where much of the piety, wisdom, and learning of two kingdoms are met in one, honoured and assisted with the presence of the worthies of both Houses.^ But this was not all. The mass of the members of Parliament who heard the debates soon began to give practical if dilatory and partial evidence that they knew if victory was to be decided by votes either of the Assembly or of their own supporters, it would not declare for the Independents. Many endeavoured to get a fair accommodation for them within, others to secure them a toleration outside the national Church ; but few indeed would have ventured to pronounce that they had beaten their opponents in argument, or won over any considerable part of the Puritan laity, and that the national Church, to give general satisfaction to these, must be reconstituted after their model. On the contraryj^votes began to pass the Houses which showed clearly that the national Church was to bePxeshyterian not Congreiiatioiial in its polity, and that^he C■hH'^^^^f'g '^f the^king- dom were to be_g[athered into one whole, though to "guard against consequences Nye had insinuated its independence was to be cramped or com- promised by appeals being allowed from its J highest courts to Parliament. It was at this ^ Pp. 27, etc. Debates on Church-Government. 199 juncture, and with Dr. Hcthcrington^ I incline to think that possibly it was to put off this work of reconstruction till he and his party were stronger and able to overbear those they could not outvote, that Cromwell obtained an order from the House of Commons to refer it to the Committee of both kingdoms ' to consider the differences of the mem- bers of Assembly in regard to church-govern- ment, and to endeavour an union between them if possible, and otherwise to consider how far tender consciences that cannot in all things come up to the rule to be established may be borne with according to the Word.' ' They knew,' says Baillie,- ' when we had debated and had come to voicing, they could carry all by plurality in the Committee ; and though they should not, yet they were confident, when the report came to the House of Commons, to get all they desired there passed. So without the Assembly they purposed immediately from this Committee to get a tolera- tion of Independency concluded in the House of Commons long before anything should be gotten so much as reported from the Assembly anent presby- teries. Here it was that God helped us by \i.e. be- yond] our expectation. Mr. Rouse, Mr. Tate, and Mr. Prideaux, among the ablest of the House of Commons, opposed them to their face. My Lord Chancellor, with a spate of divine eloquence, ' History of Westminster Assembly, p. 209. " Letters and yoitrnals, vol. ii. p. 237. 200 Committee on Accommodation. Warriston with the sharp points of manifold argu- ments, Maitland, Mr. Henderson, Mr. Gillespie, and all made their designs to appear so clearl}" that many did dislike them ; yet Harry Vane went on violently.' Notwithstanding this unpromising commence- ment many conferences took place between the leaders of both sides of the Assembly under the direction of this Committee, and these at a later period were renewed, and various written papers passed between them which were ultimately pub- lished, first under the title of ' The Reasons pre- sented by the Dissenting brethren against certain Propositions concerning Church Government, together with the Answers of the Assembly of Divines to these Reasons of Dissent,' etc.; and again under the title, ' The Grand Debate con- cerning Presbytery and Independency, by the Assembly of Divines convened at Westminster by authority of Parliament' Full particulars as to the debates on Church-Government and Ordina- tion, both in the Assembly and before the Com- mittee on Accommodation, are given by Dr. Hetherington in his history, and I the more readily refer you to his pages for details, as that is undoubtedly the most valuable part of his book. It is sad to think that men should have come so near as these men did in matters of doctrine and worship, and so far in church-order too, and )'et Conumttce on Accommodation. 201 should not have been able amicably to arrange the remaining points of difference between them, l^ut the more I have studied the documents the less inclined do I feel to throw the whole blame, or even the larger share of it, on the Presbyterians while admitting that there were faults on their side as well as on the other, infirmities of temper, failure in candour, and thorough straightforward- ness, and at times also too stiff anci narrow a view of the whole case, and that the Scottish representatives were not more perfect than their neighbours. But, on the other hand, it is to be borne in mind that infirmities of temper and uncandid dealing were not monopolised by them. These failings were shown, at any rate, to an equal extent by their opponents, and they were but a small minority of the nation — probabl)' not as yet in larger proportion among the ministry outside, than they were in the Assembly itself. It was something akin to presumption (and only the more offensive presumption — obstruc- tion we should call it nowadays — if ostentatiousl}- backed by their friends in the army) to demand that the national Church should either be consti- tuted according to the model they advocated, or should get no constitution at all till legal sccuritx- outside of it were first assured to them. Thus far certainly the Presbyterians had reason on their side when they said : Settle first what the rule is to be ; 202 Opinions on Toleration. make the national Church as comprehensive as you can, preserving its Protestant character ; but do this without more delay, and so give reasonable satisfaction to those who are likely to constitute it, before you proceed to make arrangements for a small minority who are not likely to enter it, and who in fact tell you they are not likely to do so unless you yield to them in other matters than those of the constitution of presbyteries and the authority of synods. Neither were they altogether without reason, according to the generally received principles of their day, when, while promising to forbear with brethren so orthodox in doctrine and consistent in life— even if they elected to remain outside the Church — they refused to do this by opening a door for the toleration of all sects and opinions, even of those who, if they got the upper hand again, would tolerate none but themselves. The orthodox Independents as yet hardly went that length, and even Cromwell in the height of his power did not venture practically to concede that.^ 1 ' We are degenerated into that old, dark, and Egyptian spirit that we seemed to have escaped ... in the putting a stop unto any further light and further reformation above what their carnal prin- ciples would bear, and in compliance with and clasping about the powers of the world for their defence therein, and for the putting a check upon all further truth and reformation than that which consisted with the safety of their place, order, and nation, and suchlike worldly interests ; which course, as it was the ruin of them that are already fallen, so will it prove to this generation if they repent not and do their first works.' — A laiitcnting word, shcnuiiti; that there is a desertion come -upon its, etc. London, 1657. opinions on Toleration. 203 Dr. Owen enumerated no fewer than sixteen funda- mentals which all who were to be tolerated should hold. The amount of indulgence the majority- were prepared to grant them within the Church was such as their own predecessors would have accepted with gratitude at the hands of the bishops. They were to be permitted to hold lectureships and even parishes without being subject to the classes, pro- vided they did not attempt to gather congregations from other parishes. Their adherents in other parishes, if they ordinarily attended their parish churches, were not to be pressed to communicate there, and would no doubt have been winked at in communicating now and then elsewhere. But their claim to be allowed to hold charges in the national Church, and yet to gather congregations out of other parishes and congregations within its bounds, was one that could not possibly be conceded, and to that they tenaciously adhered. Neither could their claim be granted to exclude from sealing ordinances without appeal, all in their parishes who, however credible their profession might be, or blameless their life, did not exhibit such evidence of a work of grace as to satisfy the congregation that they were truly regenerate persons. In this they had the Parliament more decidedly hostile to them than even the Assembly, and were the first to feel the effects of that Erastian interference \\ hich they had themselves rather encouraged. It 204 opinions on Tolei^ation. was on this rock the scheme of accommodation was really and finally wrecked, according to their own confession, 'as the House had not thought meet as yet to give power by a law to purge the congre- gations, and as the rule for purging proposed by the Assembly was not only short but exclusive of what they thought was required in church mem- bers.' Gillespie, Henderson, Reynolds, and many others, would have yielded much to retain them within the reconstituted church, but this they could hardly yield without turning their backs on the National Reformed churches generally, and becom- ing in fact Independents themselves. I have said that the Independents did not ven- ture to plead for a general or unlimited toleration of sects in the Assembly. So far from it that, while they generally objected to the expediency of inserting in the Confession of Faith the strong statement in chap, xx., that for publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices as are contrary to the light of nature and the known principles of Christianity, whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation, etc., heretics may be proceeded against, not only by the censures of the Church, but by the power of the civil magistrate, only one of them ventured to record his dissent against the tnitJi of the proposition.^ The leading Independent ministers were not so greatly in 1 Minutes of the Assembly, p. 297. opinions on Toleration. 205 advance of the Presbyterians in regard to tolera- tion as is generally supposed, and their brethren in New England even lagged behind many of the Presbyterians in old England. It was only by circumstances that they were led latterly to make common cause with the sectaries. The earlier utterances even of such a man as Owen, already referred to, are not much in advance of the follow- ing earlier ones of Gillespie:^ 'When I speak against liberty of conscience, it is far from my meaning to advise any rigorous or violent course against such as, being sound in the faith, holy in life, and not of a turbulent or factious carriage, do differ in smaller matters from the common rule. " Let that day be darkness, let not God regard it from above, neither let the light shine upon it," in which it shall be said that the children of God in Britain are enemies and persecutors of each other.' They are still less in advance of those expressed by the ministers of Essex in their Testimony to the truth of Jesus Christ, in which, while soliciting the ratification of the Confession of ' Faith and the establishment of church-government as set forth by the Assembly, and mourning that under pretext of liberty of conscience. Popery, Arminianism, So- J Sermon before House of Commons. To tlie Assembly he said, ' I wish that instead of toleration there may be a mutual endeavour for a happy accommodation . . . There is a certain measure of for- bearance, but it is not so seasonable now to be talkini^ of forbear- ance but of mutual endeavours for accommodation.' 2o6 opinions on Toleration. cinianism, and various other heresies are tolerated, they yet state that they 'judge it to be most agree- able to Christianity that tender consciences of dis- senting brethren be tenderly dealt withal.'^ I have shown you in a former lecture that some of the ear- lier Puritans had very sound ideas on this subject of toleration.^ The plea for it published in the begin- ning of the 17th century, even if it be not, as it professes, the production of a Puritan, would not have come out in the name of one, if there had been none among them favourable to the principle of toleration at that date. Na}^, even in those times of excitement and commotion, when from their dread of the wild opinions that came to light on the removal of the old ecclesiastical restraints, several were giving utterance to very rash and narrow sentiments, there were others among them as well as among the Independents who were working their way to sounder views. Take for instance the following from the Vindication of the Presbyterial Government and Ministry issued by^ the Provincial Assembly of London in 1649 • — ' We abhor an over rigid urging of uniformity in circum- stantial things, and are far from the cruelty of that giant who laid upon a bed all he took, and those who were too long he cut them even with his bed, and such as were too short he stretched out to the length of it. God hath not made all men of a length nor height. Men's parts, gifts, graces, differ ; and if there should be no forbearance in matters of inferior 1 E. 438, No. 4, p. 3. ,- See p. 16. The Question of Toleration. 207 alloy, all the world would be perpetually quarrelling. If you would fully know our judgments herein we will present them in these two propositions : i. That it is the duty of all Christians to study to enjoy the ordinances of Christ in unity and uniformity as far as it is possible.' Then, after showing that Scripture calls for such unity as well as for purity, and that God had promised it and Christ had prayed for it, they proceed to argue that it was certainly a duty incumbent on all Christians to labour after it. 2. 'That it is their duty to hold communion together as one church in what they agree, and in this way of union mutually to tolerate and bear with one another in lesser differences,' according to the golden rule of the Apostle set forth in Phil. iii. 15, 16. Then, after stating that this was the practice of the primitive Christians, they proceed : ' We beseech you therefore, breth- ren, that you would endeavour to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, for there is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. . . For our parts wcdo here manifest our willingness (as we have already said) to accommodate with you, according to the word, in a way of union, and (such of us as are ministers) to preach up and to practise a mutual forbearance attd toleration in all tilings that may consist luith the fundamentals of religion, with the power of god- liness, and with that peace which Christ hath established in his church. But to make ruptures in the body of Christ and to divide church from church, and to set up church against church, and to gather churches out of true churches, and because we differ in some things to hold church communion in nothing, this wc think hath no warrant out of the word of God, and will introduce all manner of confusion in churches and families, and not only disturb but in a little time destroy the power of godliness, purity of religion, and peace of Christians, and set open a wide gap to bring in Atheism, I'oper)', heresy, and all manner of wickedness.' — Pp. 119-121. Or wc may take the views of Dr. Reynolds, as set out at length in his two sermons preached before the 2o8 The Question of Toleration. Parliament after Cromwell's death when the Pres- byterian Church m.ay be said to have got a new lease of power and been in more hopeful case than ever before. In the case of the unavoidable differences of good men, ' there ought to be mutual charity, meekness, moderation, tolerance, humanity used, not to judge, despise, reject, insult over one another, not to deal with our weaker brethren ... as with aliens, but as with brethren.'- In order to this, he says we ' must distinguish of opinions,' some being fundamental relating to those necessary doctrines on which the House of God is built, the errors con- trary whereunto are pernicious. Others are only in the superstructure — not points of faith but ques- tions of the schools. Such, in the Apostle's time, were the disputes touching meats and drinks and days ; and such in our days are those ' touching forms of discipline* and government in the Church wherein men may abound in their own sense with meekness and submission to the spirits of the Pro- phets.' ' When the foundation and necessary doc- trines of law and gospel, of faith and worship and obedience are safe . . . there, in differences of an in- ferior nature which do not touch the essentials ... of religion, iimhial tolerance, meekness and tenderness, is to be used.' In regard to the duty of the magis- trate he says : ' If undue passions and exaspera- tions happen, the Christian magistrate may inter- pose by his authority to forbid and moderate them. The Question of Tolei'ation. 209 He may . . . call colloquies wherein there may be a fraternal and amicable debate and composure of them. And if after all this, differences be not per- fectly healed . . . brethren must mutually bear with one another and pray for one another, and love one another; whercunto they have already attained they must walk by the same rule and mind the same things, and wherein they yet differ, wait humbly upon God to reveal his will unto them ; luJicrc one and the same straight road to heaven is kept, a small d iff er- enee of paths doth not hinder travellers fain coming to the same inn at night.'^ ' It admits of being shown,' says Dr. M'Crie in his Annals of English Pres- bytery^ ' that even the hypothetical intolerance of some of our Presbyterian fathers differed essentially from Romish and Prelatic tyranny. ... In point of fact it never led them to persecute, it never applied the rack to the flesh, or slaked its vengeance in blood or the maiming of the body ... If there is one point in which the English Presbyterians may be said to have failed, it was in their extreme reluctance to impose subscription to their creed, even as a term of ministerial communion. So sorely had they smarted from oaths and subscrip- tions under the n^gime of Laud and his high church predecessors, that they had conceived a rooted aversion to all sorts of "impositions,'' name and thing.' Even Baillie, who was more narrow than ' Reynolds' Works, pp. 937, 948. 2 pp 190,191. O 2 lo The Question of Toleration. many of the English, in his Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time, thus endeavours carefully to distinguish between what he desired and the Court of High Commission had practised : ' But if once the government of Christ (meaning of course presbytery) were set up among us we know not what would impede it by the szvord of God alone, without any secular violence, to banish out of the land those spirits of error, in all meekness, humility, and love, by the force of truth convincing and satisfying the minds of the seduced. Episcopal courts were never fitted for the reclaiming of minds. Their prisons, their fines, their pillories, their nose-slitting, ear-croppings, and cheek-burn- ings did but hold down the fiame to break out in season with the greater rage. But the reformed presbytery doth proceed in a spiritual method em\- nently fitted for the gaining of hearts ; they go on with the ofTending party with all respect : they deal with him in all gentleness from weeks to months, from months sometimes to years, before they come near to any censure.' No doubt it was by means of preaching and teaching, by church discipline and censures that the best of them intended and hoped to keep the English as well as the Scottish nation united in one great national Church, but whether they would have succeeded had they been allowed untrammelled to carry out their purpose, or whether, if they had failed, the more narrow- TJie Question of Tole^'ation, 2 i i minded would have refrained from invoking the aid of the civil magistrate to supplement their censures with his pains and penalties, he would be a bold man who would pronounce too confi- dently. In Cromwell's own parliaments the majo- rity at times were found ready to go further in that direction than the Protector was disposed to allow. And in the Long Parliament, which he first ' purged ' and then dismissed, as well as in the Assembly, there were many ' who were frightened out of calm thought and wise consideration by the monstrous apparitions which were rising on all sides and threatening their newly established church,' and who ' acted as if they had been stricken with panic in a great emergency when their most sacred interests were exposed to im- minent hazards of which they had little know- ledge and no experience.'^ 1 Ilalley, as quoted by M'Crie (p. 312). .See also Note I. LECTURE VII. THE DIRECTORY FOR THE PUBLIC WORSHIP OF GOD. In my last Lecture I gave you an account of the proceedings of the Westminster Assembly while it was engaged in debating the constitution of the Church, the various orders of officers who were to bear rule in it, and the gradation of courts through which that rule was to be exercised, from the lesser presbytery or session of an individual congregation, up through the greater presbytery or classis of associated neighbouring churches, and the pro- vincial synod or meeting of the representatives of neighbouring classes, to the national Synod or Assembly of the representatives of all the pres- byteries or synods of the kingdom by whose direction they proposed that in matters eccle- siastical all should be guided and controlled. In my lecture to-day I am to give you a succinct account of the Directory for Public Worship which was elaborated while these debates were going on, and which was the first of the formularies they prepared and completed in terms of their Solemn League and Covenant. In doing this I may have to some extent to recapitulate what at various Directory for Public Worship. 213 times I have already written on these subjects. Having had to discuss them more than once already I should deal as unfairly by you as by myself if I did not at times content myself with revising or ex- panding the materials I had previously collected. The order to prepare such a directory was given to the Assembly by the two Houses on 12th Oct. 1643, along with the order to 'confer and treat of such a discipline and government as may be most agreeable to God's holy word,' etc. Both orders were proceeded in simultaneously, or taken up alternately at various periods during the years 1643 and 1644. The divines, however, were far more at one with respect to the worship than with respect to the government of the Church. What- ever may have been their theoretical views of the lawfulness of strictly imposed forms or of liturgies leaving room for free prayer, all were prepared, in the interests of peace and Christian union, 'to lay aside the former liturgy,' with the many burden- some rites and ceremonies that had previously been imposed, and in place of a ' formed ' liturgy to content themselves with a simple Directory as a guide and help to the minister in the various parts of the public worship. And so, though there were occasionally keen debates about certain mat- ters of detail, as about the profession of faith to be made by a parent when presenting his child for baptism, the qualifications to be required of com- 2 14 The Directory for the municants and the exact position to be taken by them at or about the table in the act of communi- cating, the work of preparing this Directory went on more rapidly and far more smoothly than that of adjusting the ' Propositions concerning Church Government and Ordination,' and elaborating the practical Directory for church-government and ordination of ministers. It was on the 17th October — the day after that solemn fast to which I have previously referred — when they made their first arrangements about the order in which questions of government were to be discussed, that, according to NeaV they also em- powered a committee to make arrangements for drawing up a directory for worship. This was probably the Grand Committee of divines and members of the Houses which was intrusted with the charge of all matters relating to the covenanted uniformity between the kingdoms. At a meeting of that Committee^ held apparently on i6th Dec. 1643, a sub-committee of five (yet without exclud- ing any member of committee who chose to attend) was appointed to meet with the Scottish delegates to prepare the directory and submit it to a com- mittee, and through them to the Assembly. This sub-committee consisted of Mr. Marshall, who was chairman, and Messrs. Palmer, Goodwin, Young, and Herle, with the Scottish commissioners. To 1 Vol. iii. p. 141. * Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 117. Public Worship of God. 2 1 5 the latter was assigned the duty of drafting what related to public prayer and the administration of the sacraments, and to Mr. Young that of drawing up what related to the reading of the Scriptures. It was devolved on the chairman to prepare a paper on the preaching of the word, and on Mr. Palmer to prepare one on catechising. Their first meetings, according to Baillie,^ were not very pro- mising. Goodwin, who does not seem to have had any part specially assigned to him, was disposed to make trouble, and the papers prepared by Marshall and Palmer were not quite to the mind of our critical countrymen. But Goodwin was propitiated, the papers of Marshall and Palmer were handed to the Scottish Commissioners for revision, and thereafter matters seem to have made more rapid progress. The Committee was able to present its first report to the Assembly on 24th May 1644. The report, according to Lightfoot, was a large report 'concerning the Lord's day and prayer and preaching, which held the Assembly in work all the next week.' * From time to time the remain- ing parts of the Directory were brought forward and discussed, especially during the months of June, July, and November, and before the end of the year, after more or less of upwards of seventy ses- sions had been spent on it, the whole of it passed the Assembly. The first portion of it, embracing ' Letters, vol. ii. pp. 117, 118, 123. ^Journal, p. 277. 2 1 6 The Directory for the probably the preface, the ordinary services for the Lord's day, and the order for the administration of the sacraments, was presented to the Houses on 2 1st November (by Dr. Burgess and several other divines), and without delay was carefully examined and revised by them. A number of verbal altera- tions were made chiefly by the House of Commons. The words ' both ordinary and extraordinary ' were struck out of the first title, also the words 'as in the Church of Scotland' after the clause as to communicants sitting ' about the table or at it' The second paragraph in the section of the celebra- tion of the Communion bearing on the qualification of communicants was re-committed to a large com- mittee. This committee, on 30th November, re- ported their opinion that the paragraph given in by the Assembly should be left out,^ and that in lieu thereof the words ' the ignorant and the scandalous are not fit to receive the sacrament of the Lord's * yourtials of House of Commons, vol. iii. p. 710. It is not quite clear what was the literal form of the paragraph given in by the Assembly. I have not found it in the manuscript Minutes. Under date of 6th June it is given by Lightfoot in the following shape : ' None to be admitted, but such as, being baptized, are found upon careful examination by the ministers, before the officers, to have a competent measure of knowledge of the grounds of religion, and ability to examine themselves, and who profess their willingness and promise to submit themselves to all the ordinances of Christ [or thus,^^^ give just grounds in the judgment of charity to conceive that there is faith and regeneration wrought in them\. The ignorant, scandalous, etc., not to be admitted, nor strangers unless they be well known.' But he has not given the preceding paragraph vei-batim as passed by the Assembly, and when, under date of 1 2th Public Worship of God. 2 i 7 Supper ' should be substituted. This report was adopted by the House. On a subsequent day part of the section on the visitation of the sick was pro- posed to be left out ; but whether in fact it was so it is very difficult to determine. A few verbal altera- tions were suggested by the House of Lords and adopted by the Commons. The most important of them was, that to the direction in the section of singing of Psalms 'that every one that can read is to have a Psalm-book,' their Lordships proposed to add the words, ' and to have a Bible.' The Com- mons, improving on the suggestion, proposed to transfer the words to the section of the public read- ing of the Scriptures, and developed them into a paragraph similar in form to the one in the section on singing of Psalms. ' Besides public reading of the Holy Scriptures every person that can read is to be exhorted to read the Scriptures privately (and all others that cannot read, if not disabled by age or otherwise, are likewise to be exhorted to learn to read) and to have a Bible.' November, he refers again to this one he does not insert it exactly in the same form. He omits the clause relating to baptism, which is also wanting in the corresponding paragraph of Henderson's Government and Or Jcr of the Church, which pretty closely resembles the above. The words within brackets suggested by Henderson as a compromise with the Independents were probably left out at the NoTeml)er revision, and in its practical Directory the Assembly explicitly asserted, ' Although the truth of conversion and regene- ration be necessary to every worthy communicant for his own comfort and benefit, yet those only are to be by the eldership excluded . . . who are found by them ignorant or scandalous. ' 2 1 8 The Directo7'y for the The Ordinance of Parliament superseding the Book of Common Prayer, and establishing and ordering to be put in practice the Directory for Public Worship, as thus revised by the Houses, bears the date of 3d January 1644, i.e. according to our present reckoning, January 1645. But in reality it was not passed till the following day, when the Commons' amendments on the Lords' amendments were accepted by the Lords, nor, though ordered to be printed forthwith, was it actually proceeded with till March. The reason of this delay will immediately appear. The formulary was meant to be a common directory for the churches of the three kingdoms, and though the Scottish Commissioners had assented to it in the shape in which it passed the Assembly, yet as their General Assembly and Parliament were about to meet it was manifestly expedient that their assent also should be obtained before the book, as altered, was issued. So it was taken down to Scotland by Gillespie and Baillie, and in due form was laid before the Scottish Assembly and Parliament. On 5th March two further alterations on it were pro- posed at Westminster at the request (not, as some suppose, of the Independents, but) of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. Neither Baillie nor Gillespie who carried it down give us any hint of this, nor does the Act of the Assembly approving it, nor the supplementary articles for Public Worship of God. 2 1 9 keeping of greater uniformity in accordance with it, supply the omission, unless by the statement in the Act that the Assembly had revised as well as examined and approved the Directory. But the entries^ in the Journals of the House of Commons expressly bear that the proposed changes were desired by the Church of Scotland, and those in the Journals of the other House that the application for them had been presented through the Assembly ' That in the Journals of the House of Comnioits (vol. iv. p. 70) is : ' Mr. Tate reported from the Assembly some few alterations desired by the Church of Scotland to be made in the Directory for Public Worship ; the which were read and upon the question assented unto and carried to the Lords for their concurrence.' The entry in their Journals (vol. vii. p. 264) is as usual more de- tailed : 'A message was brought from the House of Commons by Zouch Tate, Esq., to let their Lordships know that the House of Commons have received a paper from the Assembly of Divines, wherein they offer some alterations in the Directory to which the House of Commons have agreed, and their Lordships' concurrence is desired therein. The alterations were read as follows : (i) In the administration of the sacrament of baptism, after the word " negligent," add these words, " requiring his solemn promise for the performance of his duty." After these the words, "It is recommended to the parent to make a profession of his faith, by answering to these or the like questions," are to be left out ; and these three questions following are to be left out, viz., " Dost thou believe in God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Dost thou hold thyself bound to observe all that Christ hath commanded thee, and wilt thou endeavour so to do? Dost thou desire to have this child baptized into the faith and profession of Jesus Christ?" (2) Instead of the words in the Directory for the solemnization of marriage, " in the place of the public meeting of the congregation, in some church or chapel," these words to be inserted: "in the place appointed by authority for public worship." Agreed to. " The answer returned was that this House agrees to these altera- tions now brought up." ' 2 2 o The Directory for the of Divines, whose own minutes of 6th March con- tain only the vaguest possible reference to 'the alterations last made.' Thus the ' faschious ' and sometimes ' rude and humorous opposition ' of Mr. David Calderwood and some others, who were tenacious of former Scottish customs, appears to a certain extent to have been too strong to be so completely overborne even by Gillespie and Baillie, as has been long supposed. Though no noise was made in the business, and all was ' quietly and calmly ' settled, yet every effort was made ' to get satisfaction to Mr. David ' in most of the things to which he had objected. After consultation with his colleagues in London a draft of the Act about the Directory passed by the Scottish Assembly and ratified by the Scottish Parliament was sent down by Gillespie to the meeting of the Com- mission (intrusted with the printing of the minutes of the Assembly), ' having no alteration,' it is said, ' but in words, and the substance being the same, only it is thought clearer, and that it will sound better here.' This draught in the enacting clauses not only approved the preface of the Directory, but intimated that the preface expressed the intent and meaning of the Directory, and to this extent at least Gillespie pressed its adoption with special urgency. He deprecated a too strait imposition even of a Directory, holding ' that the more straitly it is imposed, it will the more breed scruples and Public Worship of God. 2 2 i create controversies which wise men should do well to prevent, and the rather lest we cross the principles of the good old Nonconformists by too strait im- positions of things in their own nature indifferent, such as many (though not all) be in the Directory.'^ In England it had been ratified according to the meaning and iiitent of the ordinance of Parliament, which w^as probably meant to be pretty strictly enforced, and in fact required to be so to insure the disuse of the Book of Common Prayer. In Scotland, on the other hand, it was ratified accord- ing to the intent of the preface, which was meant to leave greater latitude, and to conserve that spirit of freedom which the tolerant rubrics of the Book of Common Order had done so much to cherish. Accordingly, while customs and practices which could plead no written law in their favour, and were not expressly sanctioned by the new Direc- tory, were to be dropped, though lawful in them- selves, not only were the Scottish usages of the communicants, in the Lord's Supper, communi- cating only at the table and distributing the elements among themselves to be retained, but also other usages which could plead the authority of the Books of Discipline or of Acts of the Assembly, and were not ' otherwise ordered ' by the Directory. Perhaps it was with a similar view that they urged even at the last moment the * Baillie, Letters aud Journals, vol. ii., Appendix, pp. 505, 506. 222 The Directory for the striking out of the very vague questions the southern divines had permitted to be addressed to the parent presenting his child for baptism, viz., that they might be at Hberty to retain the practice sanctioned by their own Book of Common Order and various Acts of Assembly of exacting a fuller profession of faith at that time. The first edition of the Directory published in England bears the date of 1644, but it was really printed in the month of March, which according to our present reckoning would have fallen to the year 1645. The order for printing was issued on the 13th, and appears to have been executed by the 1 8th of March, all having been carefully pre- pared for it beforehand. The Scotch edition of 1645 was printed, not from the manuscript copy submitted to the Assembly in January, but from the English printed edition, and besides a number of insignificant variations from it in the spelling of certain words, only departs from it in placing the table of contents at the beginning instead of the end of the book, substituting in place of the Act of the English Parliament the Act of the Scottish General Assembly approving the Direc- tory and enjoining its observance, and inserting between the first and second titles of the book the Act of the Scottish Parliament ratifying it, and the Acts of the Committee of Estates and of the Commission of the Assembly authorising the Public Worship of God. 2 it, printing of it. As the latter bears the date of 27th May this edition can hardly have been printed before June 1645. It was not till August that an Act passed the Scottish Parliament for publishing it. I have before me complete copies of these original English and Scottish editions of the Directory for the Public Worship of God. The former belonged to the Rev. Immanuel Bourne, one of the ministers appointed by the English Parliament to ordain ministers for the city of London. It has prefixed to it the ordinance for the ordination of ministers, and appended in manuscript ' a speech at the sacrament March 27th, 1659,' and 'a speech after the sacrament.' The latter, which is now the property of the Uni- versity of St. Andrews, appears to have belonged originally to Dr. William Moore, who was Arch- deacon of St. Andrews under the second episco- pacy, and left a number of valuable Puritan books to the University. A neat and accurate reprint of the original Scottish edition of the Directory, with a valuable historical introduction and copious illustrative notes, was published by the Rev. Dr. Leishman in 1868.^ ' The spelling has been modernised, but I have noticed only three other minute deviations from the original in the reprint. These are the omission in the directory for baptism (p. 306) of ' the ' before * right use of their baptism ' and ' of before *all other promises ; ' and the repetition in the directory for the celebration of the communion (p. 310) of 'one,' so that it reads, 2 24 ^^^ Directory for the From the tenor of the preface to the Directory as well as from the testimony of Gillespie, Baillie, and others engaged in framing it, we seem warranted to infer that it was not intended by its framers to form a new liturgy, nor to authorise or encourage the ministers of the Church to turn the help and furniture it provided into fixed and unvarying forms of prayer and exhortation. No doubt Lightfoot and one or two of the others thought it dangerous to say anything against such a practice. But while the lawfulness of stated forms of prayer was not positively denied, everything that could be prudently done was done to persuade the ministers not to rest satisfied with these. It was urged as a special ground of objection to the old liturgy that ' He may be one with us and we one with him ' instead of ' and we with him.' The Acts of the Scottish Parliament ratifying the Directory, and the Acts of the Committee of Estates and of the Commission of Assembly authorising it to be printed, are not given. The illustrative notes are very interesting, but the impression they leave on the mind seems to me to be that rather more is made of the views of certain speakers than facts warrant. The extracts from speeches of members, with three or four exceptions, are wonderfully accurate. But it must always be borne in mind that these are but selections, and at best exhibit only the sentiments of the speakers, and that these sentiments were sometimes modified, sometimes passed from before the close of the discussions. The Assembly distinctly disclaimed responsibility for aught in the scribes' books besides its own resolutions and orders as these were tdiimately adjusted and put on record. 'All our discourses,' Mr. Marshall said on one occasion, ' are recorded by the scribes so far as their pens can reach them, but not to be taken as the judgment of the Assembly.' Nay, silence was not to be construed into assent to things uttered in debate but not 'ordered.' Public Worship of God. 225 it had proved a great means ' to make and increase an idle and unedifying ministry, which contented itself with set forms made to their hands by others [and the same might be said of unvarying forms though made by themselves] without putting forth themselves to exercise the gift of prayer with which our Lord Jesus Christ pleaseth to furnish all His servants whom He calls to that office.' The framers themselves distinctly state that in provid- ing certain materials of prayer and exhortation their meaning was only ' that there might be a consent of all the churches in those things which contain the substance of the service and worship of God, and that the ministers, if need be, might have some help and furniture, and yet so as they become not hereby slothful and negligent in stir- ring up the gifts of Christ in them, but that each one by taking heed to himself and the flock of God committed to him, and by wise observing the ways of divine providence, may be careful to furnish his heart and tongue with further and other materials of prayer and exhortation as shall be needful on all occasions.' Unquestionably they meant that the individuality of the minister — his growing spiritual experience, his maturity of thought, his gifts of expression and utterance — should come out in leading the devotions of the people and acting as their messenger to God, as well as in setting forth the truth as it is in Jesus, 1' 2 26 The Directory for the and acting as God's messenger to them, and also that the one exercise should be to him matter of thought, meditation, preparation and prayer, as well as the other, in order that he might make full proof of his ministry and commend himself to every man's conscience in the sight of God. No party in the Assembly, it seems to me, went more cordially or persistently in this direction than the Scottish Commissioners. It was but the carrying out of principles they had been led on to assert in 1637^ and which their Smectymnuan friends'^ had asserted in England in 1641. The excitement which Laud's foolish action had roused in Scotland still glowed in their bosoms. They heard un- moved the importunate pleading and entreaties of their best friends in the Assembly — Burgess, Calamy, Seaman, Reynolds and Palmer, that if not from regard to their persons, yet from regard to the credit of their ministry and the whole ministry of England, they would consent to leave out from the proposed preface some of the harsher expressions against the old liturgy, and allow it to be laid aside with honour. But they thought the honour of their own country required it should be more strongly condemned than their friends were willing to allow, and Gillespie was so cruel as to tell them that Scotland would not be satisfied ^ Row's History, pp. 398-406. * Answer to Humble Remonstrance, pp. 12-14. Public Worship of God. 227 with less, and that its ceremonies were not, hke those of the law, to be buried with honour, ' but with the burial of the uncircumcised.' Henderson, ^ who had more to do than any other in moulding the sentences^ I have quoted from the preface into the form they ultimately assumed, seems to have felt that, in the temper in which his countiymen then were, less would not be accepted by them. Gillespie said expressly that 'that man who stirs up his own gifts doth better than he that useth set forms,' and that it was ' good to hold out what is best.' That in this they expressed only the general sentiment of the Church they represented is evident from the Directions for Family Worship issued a few years later by the Scottish General Assembly. ' So many as can conceive prayer ought to make ^ Neal has it (vol. iii. p. 143) that several Independents were on the committee which drew up the preface, but an addition had to be made to this Committee. The MS. minutes as well as Light- foot's Journal, represent the several reports about the preface as given in by Marshall; the Convener of the original committee, or by Henderson who was a member of it, and took the most pro- minent part in getting the preface into the shape it ultimately assumed. One party, liaillie tells us, purposed ' by the preface to turn the Directory into a straight liturgy ; the other to make it so loose and free that it should serve for little use ; but God,' he says, 'helped us to get both these rocks eschewed.' They had to concede something, however, to both these parties — to the first, the omission of a direct prohibition to turn the Directory into one ordinary form of prayer ; to the second, the change of the words ' concern the service and worship of God ' into ' contain the siihsiancc of the service and worship of God,' so as to make it clear that the uniformity desired related not to matters of detail but only to those of substantial importance. 2 28 7 he Directory for the use of that gift of God ; albeit those who are rude and weaker may begin at a set form of prayer, but so as they be not sluggish in stirring up in them- selves (according to their daily necessities) the spirit of prayer which is given to all the children of God in some measure : to which effect they ought to be more fervent and frequent in secret prayer to God, for enabling their heart to conceive and their tongues to express convenient desires to God for their family.' These directions are markedly similar in thought and expression to those I quoted from the Westminster Directory, and show unmistakeably how the Church of Scot- land must have understood these and meant her ministers to carry them out. Yet nothing was further from their intentions than to encourage unpremeditated or purely extemporary effusions, or to represent any fluency in these as the stirring up of that gift which is given to all the children of God in some measure. As I have already said, they intended the exercise of prayer to be matter of thought, meditation, preparation and prayer, equally with the preaching of the word ; and though no doubt they deemed the arrangement of the thoughts, and the bringing of the spirit into a proper frame, to be the most essential parts,of the preparation in both cases, they did not mean to prohibit the careful writing of prayers any more than of sermons. Even the Independents, to Public Worship of God. 229 whom some are too ready to attribute both the excesses and defects of the Assembly, had said in their Apologetical Narration/ ' Whereas there is this great controversy about the lawfulness of set forms prescribed, we practised {xvit/ioiit condannwg^ others) what all sides do allow. . . that the public prayers in our Assemblies should be framed by the meditations and study of our own ministers out of their own gifts ... as well as their sermons use to be.' Nay, their Coryphsus, Mr. Nye, in the most important speech he made in the Assembly when this preface was under discussion, admitted there was a middle way betwixt set forms and extem- porary prayers, and said, ' I plead for neither, but for studied prayers.' ^ And as he did not himself object to write his sermons, and occasionally in the delivery of them to refer to what he had written,^ we can hardly suppose that he would have objected to write his prayers as well as to study them. This was the practice of some of the most godly ministers the Church of Scotland has ever had, who, though gifted with readiness of utterance and felicity of devotional expression, and satisfied if in their more private ministrations they could arrange their thoughts and prepare their hearts, yet in the stated services of the sanctuary made conscience of > P. 12. - MS. Minutes of Assembly, vol. ii. f. 287. ' Preaching in Edinburgh, 'he read much out of his paper book.' 230 The Directory for the Avriting down beforehand the substance of their prayers as well as of their sermons, though they were no more in the habit of reading the latter than the former. I have by me one of the common- place books of John Willison of Dundee which shows that this was his usual practice even when far advanced in life. And Dr. M'Crie, the most intelligent and uncompromising defender of non- liturgical worship in later times, has not hesitated to say in explanation of this preface, ' It does not follow from our not praying by a set form that we must pray extempore. Presbyterians at least require premeditation and study in prayer as well as in preaching, and disapprove of mere extempor- ary effusions in the former as well as in the latter.' It is only by attention to this, and to the earnest counsels of the preface to our Directory, that they should be careful thus to furnish botJi heart and tongue for the services of devotion ; that men of average ability and spirituality can hope to do justice to the system of free prayer therein en- couraged, and to enable their people to reap from it the full spiritual benefits it was meant to confer. And were they only more careful and conscientious in doing this we should hear less about the necessity of changing our form of service, and have it more frequently acknowledged, as it has been by our beloved Sovereign in the Journal of her Highland life, that the simple fervent prayer of a Scottish Public Worship of God. 231 minister may touch a chord in the heart which the grandest liturgy had left unmoved.^ I know of no formulary of the same sort which is so free from minute and harassing regulations as to postures, gestures, dresses, church pomp, cere- monies, symbolism, and other 'superfluities,' as Hales terms them, which ' under pretext of order and decency ' had crept into the church and more and more had restricted the liberty and burdened the consciences of its ministers. I know of none in which, throughout, so clear a distinction is kept up between what Christ and his apostles have instituted, and which may be regarded as impcra- tiv^e in Christian worship, and what has been authorised or recommended or permitted, under the rules of Christian prudence, by later and fallible church authorities, and the observance of which therefore is to be required or recommended or allowed, if at all, with greater reserve as well as with more consideration for the scruples even of weaker brethren. As has been well said, ' The obligation to a practice is not the same when it is described as necessary, requisite^ expedient, convenient^ lawful, or sufficient, or when it is directed, advised, or recom- mended, nor finally when it is provided ' in one place that the minister is to, or shall, in another ^ ' The second prayer was very touching ; his allusions to us were so simple, saying after his mention of us, " Bless their children." It gave me a lump in my throat, as also when he prayed for the dying, the wounded, the widow and the orphans.' 232 The Directory for the may^ or in another let him, ^ do such and such things,' The tolerant purpose of those who framed it is fully expressed in their letter to the Scottish Gen- eral Assembly of 1645, in which they say, 'We have not advised any imposition which might make it unlawful to vary from it in anything ; yet we hope all our reverend brethren in this kingdom and in yours also, will so far value and reverence that which upon so long debate and serious deliberation hath been agreed upon in this Assembly . . . that it shall not be the less regarded and observed. And albeit we have not expressed in the Directory every minute particular which is or might be either laid aside or retained among us as comely and useful in practice ; yet we trust that none will be so tenacious of old customs not expressly forbidden, or so averse from good examples although new, in matters of lesser consequence, as to insist upon their liberty of retaining the one or refusing the other because not specified in the Directory.' The materials for prayer and exhortation provided in the Di- rectory were not meant by its framers, as they explain in the preface, to do more than supply help and furniture, of which the officiating minister might avail himself It was said indeed by Mr. Marshall, when he first brought in the part relating to the ordinary services for the Lord's day, that it did * not only set down the heads of things but so Public Worship of God. 22,^ largely, as that with the altering of here and there a word a man may mould it into a prayer.' But when reminded of this some months afterwards, when he brought in the first draught of the Preface bearing a statement that this was not intended, he said, ' Some such expression did fall from my mouth ; I said as one reason why it was so large, here he might have such furniture as that with a little help he may do it. But there is no contra- diction to say that we do not intend it. It is not a direct prohibition.' (MS. Minutes, vol. ii. f. 286 b.) In other words, those who conducted the ordinary services were not directly prohibited from turning the materials furnished to them into an unvarying form of prayer, keeping as near to the words of the Directory as they could ; but at the same time they were not only not restricted or counselled to do so, but they were counselled and encouraged to do something more, according to their ability and opportunities. The materials provided for the ordinary services of the Lord's day are no doubt much fuller than those provided for special and occasional services, and, being meant for the guid- ance of young preachers as well as of ordained ministers, they required to be so. But I confess that the more I examine them, the more I am sa- tisfied that even they were meant to be expanded, and required to be so in order to bring out their real value, and their adaptation to the purpose 2 34 The Diredoj'y for the they were meant to serve. They are so packed with matter, that their full significance cannot otherwise really be brought home to the heart and conscience, nor would they without such expan- sion have satisfied the eager craving for length- ened services which had then set in. Much more is this the case with the occasional services and especially with those for the administration of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. In this last par- ticularly only the barest outline is given both of the exhortations and of the prayers. The ma- terials of the preliminary exhortation supply the outlines of one of the most complete and impres- sive addresses to be found in any of the Reformed Agenda ; and feelingly expanded, as men like the late Dr. Crawford were wont to expand them, could not fail to be most refreshing to every spiritually- minded communicant. They have been collected from various sources, and, like the materials of the prayers, they show that the draft of the Scotch had passed through English hands, and been greatly improved and enriched by doing so. The verbal coincidences with ' the former liturgy ' both in the exhortations and prayers are too many and too marked to be accounted for in any other way, and it is the highest commendation of this part of their work that it has fused into one so much of what was best in the Knoxian and the Anglican Communion Offices. The materials of the Consecration Prayer Public Worship of God. 235 are taken mainly from that in Knox's Book of Common Order, which rises so immeasurably above the other prayers in his Book. But the last part of that, as well as the materials of the concluding thanksgiving, shows more affinity with English forms,^ and tends to make this Directory more com- plete in all that such a service should embrace than any similar office either in the reformed or the ancient church. The Communion according to the Directory was frequently to be celebrated, but it was left to the minister and elders of each congregation to determine how frequently it should be so — regard being always had to their comfort and edification therein. In England, in those times of revival, it was not uncommon that the Communion should be administered monthly^ in Presbyterian and ^ Even with the earlier Edwardian form. The words of the prayer in it ' with thy Iloiy Spirit and word vouchsafe to bless and sanctify these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ,' along with those in the exhortation preceding, 'for us to feed upon spiritually,' 'we dwell in Christ and Christ in us, we be made one with Christ and Christ with us,' reappear in slightly modified form in the Directory: 'to vouchsafe his gracious presence and the effectual working of His Spirit in us and so to sanctify these elements both of bread and wine and to bless his own ordinance that we may receive by faith the body and blood of Christ crucified for us and so feed upon him that he may be one with us and we with him, that he may live in us and we in him and to him.' Probably we owe these and other approximations to the English Communion Office to Dr. Burgess, to whom the final re- vision and transcription of most of the Assembly's formularies was intrusted. He had copies of both liturgies of Edward vi. * ' Blessed be God, we have now our Christian new moons and 236 The Directory for the weekly in Independent congregations. In Scot- "^ land all attainable evidence tends to show that it was administered much more rarely, though even then the practice had begun of the more pious of the people resorting to the Communion when celebrated in neighbouring parishes as well as in their own. In some parishes during the painful contentions between engagers and non-engagers, and between resolutioners and protesters, the cele- bration of the communion was intermitted for two or three years. It is sad to think that men like Blair, Rutherfurd, and Wood should have made their differences in such minor matters a plea for withholding from the congregation of St. Andrews the comfort of this ordinance for more than a year. Perhaps Scotland was not unprepared for the ^ changes which the substitution of the Directory in place of the Book of Common Order involved. Those changes were not so great as some imagine. Free prayer, which from the first had been permitted and encouraged, and had latterly, if Calderwood is to be trusted, become general, was now made imperative on the minister, but 'help and furniture' in the various exercises were provided ; and that evangelical feast of trumpets. We have not only our monthly sacrament feast to refresh our souls withal in most of our congre- gations . . . but our monthly fasts in which the word is preached, trading ceaseth, and sacrifices of prayer, praises, and alms are tendered up to God.' — Preface to Calamy's Sermon, 23d February 1641. The disputes as to discipline led to less frequent celebration. Ptiblic Worship of God. 237 no one should imagine that encouragement was thus meant to be given to ministers to engage in the pubh'c services of the sanctuary in the perfunc- tory manner Dr. Hammond has described, it is directed that each one ' be careful to furnish his heart and tongue with further or other materials of prayer and exhortation as shall be needful on all occasions.' But in England the case was far otherwise. Even inside the Puritan circle, there were not a few who would have preferred to amend rather than ' to lay aside the former liturgy,' and many more of the wisest and best, who, though their own leanings may have been in favour of a more thorough reform, knew how hard it would be to persuade a large part of the nation and of the ministry to accept it, and felt how greatly it w^ould add to the difficulty of the task of preserving unbroken the religious unity of the nation, to pro- scribe that to which so many were attached by most hallowed associations and tender memories. Even the ministers generally were not nearly so well prepared for the change as those in Scotland. Dr. Hammond^ makes merry over what he sup- poses was an ingenious device, under pretence of supplying ships which wanted a minister, to help all such idle mariners in the ship of the Church. This was a little treatise issued within two months after the Directory was published, and entitled 'A ' View of the Ne'w Directory, etc. , p. 80. ■vD 8 The Directory for the supply of prayer for the ships of this kingdom that want ministers to pray with them, agreeable to the Directory established by Parliament, pub- lished by authority; London, John Field, 1645.' — (E. 284, No. 16.) Such a treatise might have been as honestly issued by the Assembly at that time as the volume of ' Prayers for the use of soldiers, sailors, colonists, and sojourners in India and other persons at home and abroad, who are deprived of the ordinary services of a Christian ministry ' was by the Church of Scotland in our own day, and with as little intention of encouraging an idle and unedifying ministry. But I rather incline to think the ' device ' may have been a device of the enemy to burlesque their work. I cannot find any author- ity given by Parliament or the Assembly for the publication, and the preface or reason assigned for the work seems to me to be written in a somewhat serio-comic vein. It appeared in May and it was not till August that the Parliament took steps to enforce their ordinance as to the old liturgy. Probably Ihe most remarkable and not least useful part of this formulary is the section ' Of Preaching the Word.' This was a subject not usually handled in such treatises, but it was one to which Puritanism from the first attached great importance, and to which all who hold the prophetic or evangelistic in opposition to the sacerdotal theory of the Christian ministry attach Public Worship of God. 239 great importance still. The Puritans mourned over the paucity of preaching ministers in the Church in the reigns of the Tudors and Stuarts, and pleaded with the authorities in Church and State to take further securities for the efficient performance of their function by every parish minister. They did what they could in an unofficial way, by their prophesyings and conferences, to quicken their brethren to a sense of duty in this matter. To train them for it was one of the first objects to which they directed attention when their day of prosperity came round, and at which they laboured with a perseverance and intensity only to be accounted for by the deepest sense of its importance to the well-being of a reformed church. Not that they overlooked catechising or any means of elementary instruction, as Dr. Hammond would insinuate (for their whole history shows how earnest and successful they were in these), but that they held that even such work could not be efficiently carried on so as to promote the real quickening of the lapsed and uneducated masses by mere mechanical drill in the words of a cate- chism and without constant recourse to that simple expository teaching, and personal application which Archbishop Laud and his party had discouraged, but which no authority now-a-days would dream of prohibiting. Even in Cartwright's Directory, prepared in the previous century, special attention 240 The Directory for the had been drawn to the subject of preaching and some wise counsels given respecting it. But in this formulary, drawn up in the heyday of Puritan- ism, we have from the hand of one of the greatest masters, and revised by the ablest of the school, a summary of their thought and experience on a sub- ject which they had made peculiarly their own, and on which if on any they may claim to give counsel still. Dr. Hammond disparages even this, but Mr. Marsden says of it •} ' Every sentence is admirable. So much good sense and deep piety, the results of great and diversified experience, and of a know- ledge so profound, have probably never been gathered into so small a space on the subject of ministerial teaching. It is one that has received attention in successive ages from teachers of different schools and of various tastes and habi- tudes of mind. . . . But a brief chapter of four pages here comprises an amount of wise instruction which will not readily be found elsewhere. The Divines of Westminster were among the masters of this sacred art ; whether we estimate their power by the enthusiasm of their crowded con- gregations, by the better test of their writings and printed sermons, or by the still higher touchstone of permanent success, ... in turning sinners from the error of their ways, in edifying the church and fitting men for God. After a variety of lessons ' Later Furitans, pp. S8, 89. I Ptiblic Worship of God. 241 marked by great judgment and good sense . . . they conclude with a series of admonitions to the preacher to look to the condition of his own heart, and to keep alive the flame of love and holiness within.' In the copy of the Directory which belonged to Immanuel Bourne the first part of this section is carefully and minutely subdivided and annotated, and special attention is directed to the sentence which counsels the preacher still to seek for further illumination of God's Spirit by prayer and a humble heart, ' resolving to admit and receive any truth not yet attained whenever God shall make it known to him.' During the summer and autumn of 1644, while the Assembly and the House of Commons were so busily engaged in adjusting the Directories for Ordination and for Public Worship, the House of Lords had been occupied with the trial of the Arch- bishop of Canterbury. For more than three years he had been kept as a close prisoner in the Tower. Friends had urged him to escape while he was so long neglected, and had offered to aid him in doing so. But he had resolved calmly to abide the issue. From week to week during the greater part of this anxious year the old man came before the peers leaning on his staff, and it is said attired in black gown and cap, and yet even so not always respectfully treated by the populace. Ably and resolutely did he defend himself from the various Q 242 The Directory for the charges brought against him, and the peers hesitated to adjudge his offences treason. But as in the case of Strafford a bill of attainder was at length brought in and finally passed on 4th Janu- ary 1644-5. Even his opponents must confess that * nothing in life became him like the leaving it' A pardon from the king in his favour was produced to the Houses, but it was disregarded by them. His petition, touching yet dignified, that in consi- deration of his age and calling, his sentence might at least be commuted, was also disregarded, and it was only after a second application that the House of Commons acceded even to his modified request that the manner of his death should be changed, and he should not be hanged but beheaded. So on Friday loth January the aged primate was brought forth for execution on Towerhill in the presence of an immense crowd of spectators esti- mated in one of the newspapers of the time at more than 100,000. His last address was a sort of discourse founded on Hebrews xii. i, etc., which was very variously reported in the royalist and parliamentary newspapers, and surely it was small wonder if, as the old man gazed on that sea of up- turned hostile faces, his memory misgave him, or that even with the aid of notes he gave but im- perfect utterance to his thoughts. Then came a brief but affecting prayer as to which there is no Ptiblic Worship of God. 243 material variation,^ and with a single blow of the executioner's axe his grey head was severed from his body, and his spirit passed to its rest. The House of Lords had been far from keen in the prosecution of this last of statesmen-prelates, feel- ing that however grievous his errors had been, there was now but little risk of his doing further harm to the State. Several even of the Commons are said to have shown a disposition to relent. But the ma- jority, Presbyterians as well as Independents, could not be persuaded to let the prosecution drop. The feeling of the London populace and of the more fanatical sectaries against him was very strong, and had been intensified by the many satirical pamphlets which had been put in circula- tion since his fall. The Assembly has been blamed for doing nothing to allay the excitement and prevent the scandal of the chief minister of the Church being doomed to such a fate. Yet neither their own minutes nor the Journals of the Houses furnish the least evidence that as a body they did ^ ' Lord, I am coming as fast as I can. I know I must pass through the shadow of death, before I can come to see thee, but it is but umbra mortis, a mere shadow of death, a little darkness upon nature; but thou by thy merits and passion hast broke through the jaws of death ; so Lord receive my soul and have mercy upon me, and bless this kingdom with peace and plenty, and with brotherly love and charity, that there may not be this effusion of Christian blood amongst them, for Jesus Christ's sake, if it be thy will.' 244 ^-^^ Directory f 07' the aught to help it on. Even as to individual mem- bers I doubt if the expressions Professor Masson has quoted from the sermons of two or three of them were meant specially to refer to him, and not rather to those who were directly responsible for the war, and had actually shed blood in it or in the Irish massacres. The most melancholy ut- terances in the sermons of Woodcock and Stanton reappear in several of those preached in the follow- ing year, when no such reference can be imagined, and are but the emphatic expression of the opinion then all but universally held and acted on that they who shed innocent blood could only atone for it by their own.^ The Scots also have been severely blamed, but with still less occasion. They no doubt felt keenly at first and resented bitterly the sufferings his policy had entailed on them. But Baillie, who knew and did not hesitate to speak their mind, shows no such resentment. He says expressly, when intimating to his correspondent in Holland that the trial had begun, ' He is a 1 The only discourse I have met with which openly vindicates the deed, and glories in it, was not preached before the Houses of Parliament nor by a member of the Assembly of Divines. Its title is ' Jehoiada's justice against Mattan, Baal's high priest,' and its spirit is as atrocious as its title. The author does not give his name, but only his initials, J. H. Even if he was the Julius Herring, still more if he was only a relative of the Julius Herring who was the subject of Laud's coarse and unfeeling joke, ' I will soon pickle that herring,' one cannot speak of his act but in terms of the strongest reprobation. Public Worship of God. 245 person now so contemptible that we take no notice of" his process.' And at a later stage, when speak- ing intemperately of the * malicious invectives ' of one of the prelates of his own country, he adds, ' I could hardly consent to the hanging of Canterbury himself, or of any Jesuit, yet I could give my sentence freely against that liar's life.' The insinu- ation against Henderson in the Oxford royalist paper of the day, is but one of its many slanders against the man who was its ecclesiastical bete noire as unmistakeably, as Lord Say and Scale was its secular one. But by whomsoever the deed may have been prompted, and however it may have been excused at the time when the memory of his rigour and cruelty was fresh, it will now be all but universally admitted to have been a blunder as well as a crime. It brought deserved discredit on the Parliament, revolted not a few of its friends, exasperated a number of the best of its opponents, embittered greatly the relations between the lead- ing clergymen on both sides, and more than almost any other single occurrence destroyed for a genera- tion all hope of honourable compromise and cordial co-operation between them in the cause of religion, and the interests of "highest concern to their common country. LECTURE VIII. TREATISES ON CHURCH-GOVERNMENT, CHURCH CENSURES, AND ORDINATION OF MINISTERS. In my last Lecture I gave you a succinct account of the Directory for the Public Worship of God prepared by a special committee, and after careful revision ad.opted by the Assembly in 1644. I am to-day to speak of the treatises on church- government, church censures, and ordination of ministers, which were prepared almost simultane- ously with that Directory. Two or perhaps, more strictly speaking, three treatises on these subjects were drawn up by the Westminster Assembly in the course of the first two years of its sessions. The one to which it first addressed itself was that for which it began to make preparations immedi- ately after receiving from the two Houses the order for its members to 'confer and treat among themselves of such a discipline and government as may be most agreeable to God's holy word and most apt to procure the peace of the Church and nearer agreement with other reformed Churches. It may be said to have formed the chief occu- Treatises on C/mrch-Government, etc. 247 pation of the Assembly during the remainder of ^ the year 1643 and during the greater part of 1644. It proved a work of great labour and difficulty, and it was in connection with it that those keen and '• almost interminable debates between the Presby- terians and Independents took place, which broke the harmony of the Assembly and retarded its more important work. This treatise was entitled by its framers, Propositions coiicerjiittg Church- Government and Ordination of Ministers, but it is now generally known and referred to as the Fo7'ni of Church- Government, probably because that was the title arranged for the treatise on church-government in ^. the Solemn League and Covenant. Under this title it still holds its place in Scottish editions of the Westminster standards. It embodies in the form of distinct propositions, arranged in logical con- nection, and accompanied with the Scripture proofs which were held to warrant them, the con- clusions in which the Assembly saw fit from time to time to sum up the results of its lengthened and exhaustive discussions. It treats in suc- cession of the Head of the Church, of the Church itself, and the officers whom Christ its Head has given it, viz., pastors, teachers, other church gover- nors (whom reformed churches commonly call elders), and deacons, then of particular congrega- tions, and the officers and ordinances appropriate to them, of church-government, the several sorts 248 Treatises on Cktirck-Government, of assemblies for exercising it, and the common and distinctive powers of these several assemblies, and finally of the doctrine and power of ordina- tion accompanied by a practical directory for the ordination of ministers. Prefixed to Gillespie's Notes of the Debates and Proceedings of the Assem- bly^ as I stated in a former lecture, we have in tabulated form the votes or separate resolutions of the Assembly out of which the Propositions were gradually framed, accompanied in the mar- gin by a notification of the date or at least of the session when each separate vote was passed, and of the fact whether it was ordered, that is, accepted without discussion, or resolved on after debate and perhaps a formal vote. The latest entry, how- ever, in this tabulated form was made in the i86th session, or on 25 th March 1644, ^'^d thus unfor- tunately it does not include the votes regarding the gradation of church courts and their respec- tive powers, nor even the greater part of those relating to the ordination of ministers. It is authenticated by the subscriptions both of the assessors, and of the scribes of the Assembly, and it was probably got by Gillespie and his col- leagues that it might be forwarded to the com- missioners of the General Assembly in their own country, to whom they were required from time to time to give account of their proceedings. But if so, it was not formally communicated to the C/mrch Censures, etc. 249 General Assembly of that year, nor indeed in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance calling the Westminster Assembly could any public use be made of it at that date. It is only one of several indications we have that they occasionally sent documents as well as notes of their speeches to these commissioners, as it is also one of several indications that besides the books in which Byfield inserted notes of the speeches of the members and formal minutes of their meetings there was another (probably under the charge of his colleague Roborough) in which their votes alone, and so the separate propositions contained in their formularies of church order, worship, and doctrine, were recorded as they were voted, which book is now hopelessly lost.^ It was not till the 8th November 1644 that the Propositions, or at any rate the main part of them (I suppose so far as they are printed on the first sixteen pages of the Scotch edition of 1647), were presented by Dr. Burgess and some others of t'he Divines to the House of Commons as * the humble advice of the Assembly of Divines now by author- ity of Parliament sitting at Westminster concern- ing some part of church-government.' And on p. 16 of the edition of the Propositions above men- ^ Vol. i. of the MS. Minutes under session i86 or 25th March 1644 records the appointment of the prolocutor, assessors, and scribes as a committee, but does not indicate the object for which they were appointed. Possibly it was to prepare this vidimus of votes. 250 Treatises on Chiirch-Gove^niment^ tioned, the statement (no doubt given in on this occasion) has been allowed to stand as it origin- ally did : ' Some other particulars concerning church-government do yet remain unfinished, which shall be with all convenient speed prepared and presented to this honourable House.' But when by a subsequent message from the House they were requested to send in with all convenient speed all the parts of church-government that are yet behind,' they replied by Mr. Marshall 'that all the material parts of church-government are already brought up ' with the exception of that relating to church-censures, the itbi of which was a subject of theological dispute about which they had not yet agreed. The conclusions to which they ultimately came respecting it were incor- porated not with the Propositions, but with the Directory for church-government, etc. When and how the Propositions contained on pp. 17 to 26 of the Scotch edition of 1647 were moulded into the precise shape in which we there find them, it is not so easy exactly to determine. In all likeli- hood this was the part of the Directory which was first completed and presented to the Houses, to enable them to make temporary arrangements for the ordination of ministers. From the full notes of the debates given in Lightfoot's/(5'//;''//<^/it is evident that the twelve propositions relating to the doc- trinal part of ordination had by April 3d, 1644, Church Ce7isiires, etc. 251 been put into the exact form in which we there have them, and if by April 19th the directory for ordination was not yet verbatim et literatim as we now have it, any alterations made on it subse- quently must have been of the most trifling kind. The Committee which drew up the first draft of this Directory were Messrs. Palmer, Herle, Marshall, Tuckney, Seaman, Vines, Goodwin, and Gataker, with the Scottish commissioners, and their draft was completed^ between the 3d and the 19th of April, on which day it was discussed, and with modifications adopted by the Assembly. Next morning it was presented to the Houses, Dr. Burgess, in offering it to the House of Lords, saying, ' That these were the first-fruits of the Assembly, and if they shall receive sanction and confirmation from their Lordships it will abundantly recompense for the long time they were in debate, and the Assembly recommends them to the blessing of God for a good success upon them.' At first the action of the Houses, on what had been presented to them, was far from satisfactory to the Assembly." They struck out, from the ordinance they proposed to pass respect- ing ordination of ministers, all reference to the doctrinal part of ordination, and from the practical * Lightfoot's Journal, pp. 237-253. * It is recorded in jfounia/s of the House of Commons, vol. iii. pp. 590, 591. For alterations made see pp. 610, 622, 625. 252 Treatises on Churck-Governmcnt , Directory, all reference to a presbytery as the ordi- nary ministers of ordination. They made provi- sion for the special emergency that had occurred, only by a temporary and extraordinary association of presbyters, and deferred determining the method to be ordinarily and permanently followed until the whole question of church-government was ripe for settlement. They also proposed various alterations" in particular regulations re- commended by the Assembly. This fortunately came to the knowledge of the divines before the ordinance had actually passed, and they asked and got permission to make further suggestions re- specting it. The adjustment of these suggestions gave occasion to considerable debate in the Assembly, and to expressions of disappointment on the part of several divines (notably of Hender- son), that the House of Commons should have taken such liberties with a document they had so carefully drawn up ; and after paring away so much that was deemed important by its framers — especially as to the doctrinal part — should have ventured to prefix to the 'directory part' a preface of their own. The preface as ultimately passed seems harmless enough, but though negatively allowed by the divines, it was as rigidly excluded from a place among their Propositions and in their Directory as it was persistently maintained in the English Ordinance, as printed in 1644, Church Ccnstires, etc. 253 modified and reprinted in 1646, and merged in the larger and more general Ordinance on church- government in 1648.^ At first the divines seemed disposed to content themselves with urging two amendments to the ordinance drafted by the Commons, the one embodying a more satisfactory definition of ordination than the preamble con- tained, and the other restoring the clause requiring an express promise of submission on the part of the people to their pastor. Ultimately, however, thirteen suggestions were sent up, of which eleven were accepted by the House of Commons without difficulty. The other two — being those just re- ferred to, and numbered respectively 8 and 9 — were after further consideration accepted ; the first partially, the second entirely ; but on the dissent of the House of Lords from the latter it ' ' Whereas the woxHl presbyter, that is to say elder, and the word bishop do in the Scriptures intend and signify one and the same function, although the title of bishop hath been by corrupt custom appropriated to one, and that unto him ascribed, and by him assumed, as in other things so in the matter of ordination that was not meet. Which ordination notwithstanding being perfomied by him, a. presbyter, joined with other presbyters, we hold for substance to be valid, and not to be disclaimed by any that have received it. And that presbyters so ordained being lawfully thereunto appointed may ordain other presbyters. And whereas it is also manifest by the word of God that no man ought to take upon him the office of a minister until he be lawfully called and ordained thereunto ; and that the work of ordination, that is to say, an outward solemn setting apart of persons for the office of the ministry in the Church by preaching presbyters, is an ordinance of Christ, and is to be performed with all due care, wisdom, gravity, and solemnity : It is ordained,' etc. 2 54 Treatises on Church-Government, was in the end rejected. Instead of the presiding minister being directed immediately before the ordination to 'demand of the people concerning their willingness to receive and acknowledge the person about to be ordained as the minister of Christ, and to obey and submit tinto hiin as having rule over them in the Lord' etc., he was simply authorised after the ordination 'to exhort and charge the people in the name of God, willingly to receive and acknowledge him as the minister of Christ, and to maintain, encourage, and assist him in all the parts of his office.' As the objection to their suggestion appears to have proceeded mainly from the House of Lords, it is likely that it arose quite as much from dislike of the position it con- ceded to the people, as of the position of rule it claimed for the minister once accepted by them. And, strange as it may seem, though the clause requiring the people to declare their acceptance of the minister, and promise submission to him, was retained in the Propositions and Directory as published in 1647, and was countenanced by the Knoxian Form of Admission of Ministers, the practice which has generally prevailed in the Church of Scotland ever since the Revolution comes nearer to that authorised by the Ordinance of the English Parliament. The people's accept- ance and promises are held to have been evinced by the signature of the call or acquiescence in it, Chtirch Ccnsicres, etc. 255 and at the time of ordination are tacitly assumed, and after the minister-elect has been ordained, and counselled as to his duty, they are exhorted and charged as to theirs. But the main subject of difference between the Assembly and the Houses related to the insertion of a satisfactory definition of ordination in the preamble of the ordinance. The original draft had borne merely that ordination, that is, an out- ward solemn setting apart of persons for the office of the ministry, is an ordinance of Christ, and left out the explanation contained in thefourth doctrinal proposition of the Assembly. They suggested that the ordinance should run 'that ordination by preaching presbyters with prayer and imposition of hands is an ordinance of Christ,' but they ultimately agreed not to press for the insertion of the words ' with prayer and imposition of hands,' so that the clause might stand, 'that ordination by preaching presbyters is an ordinanceof Christ.'^ Thismodified request was substantially granted by the Houses, but it was determined by them that the words ' by preaching presbyters ' should come in not in the first part of the definition, but at its close, to complete the explanation : ' that is, an outward solemn setting apart of persons for the office of the ministry in the Church.' ^ Some further addi- tions were afterwards made to the ordinance on ' Gillespie's Notes, p. 71. * As in note on p. 253. 256 Tj'eatiscs on CJmrcJi-Govcrnment, the suggestion of the Assembly which may pos- sibly not have been in their Directory as originally transmitted. The ordinance retained one varia- tion from the draft of the Assembly which is de- serving of notice. It had been determined there by a majority that the phrase ' zvitJi imposition of hands and prayer' should be changed into ^ by imposition of hands,' etc. Selden, Gataker, and Seaman all pressed this ; but Gillespie contended that ' it neither agreed with the apostle's phrase nor with the opinion of our divines.'^ Yet in the House of Commons, where Selden's influence was generally greater than in the Assembly, the word by was left out, though with was not inserted, but the sentence simply ran, ' shall solemnly set him apart to the office and work of the ministry, laying their hands on him.' The first and larger part of the propositions, as already stated, was only presented to the Houses on 8th November 1644, or more than six months after the part which now stands last had been sent up. The propositions concerning church-govern- ment and ordination, as put into shape by the divines and presented to the English Parliament, s were taken down to Scotland by Gillespie and Baillie, and along with the Directory for Public Worship, they were presented apparently in manu- ' Gillespie's Notes of Debates, p. 45. Church Censures, etc. 257 script to the General Assembly which met in Edinburgh in February 1645. Baillie says they were to have the Assembly's opinion upon them, ' but no Act till they had passed the Houses of the English Parliament.'^ Of course he means they were to have no Executive Act such as they had asked and got for the Directory for Public Worship. The Assembly passed, and the Parlia- ment ratified, an Act approving of the Propositions so far as submitted to them, but instead of decern- ing and ordaining, as in the other case, that they should be observed and practised, it simply authorised their Commission to conclude a unifor- mity on the basis of them as soon as they should be ratified without substantial alteration by the Parliament of England. They never were so ^ ratified in the South, and the Act of the Scottish General Assembly in 1647, approving and establish- ing the Confession of Faith, speaks of the truth of Christ as to the several sorts of ecclesiastical officers and assemblies not as having been embodied in the Propositions approved in 1645, but ^ to be expressed in the Directory of Government.' ^ The circumstances which led to the preparation a of this latter treatise were the following : — The majority of the English Parliament, while willing to substitute a Presbyterian for an Episcopal form X ^ Letters and Journals, vol. ii. p. 260. For the Act see Note K. ^ "^ Peterkin's Records of the Kirk, p. 475. R 258 Treatises on Church-Government^ of government in the National Church, were not disposed to concede the apparent /w;'^ diviiio claim made for it in the Propositions. Even many of the warm friends of Presbytery in the south became satisfied that if they were to retain the bulk of the nation in the reconstituted Church they must be content to get their assent to their favourite system of church-government as one that in its main principles was lawful and agreeable to the Word of God rather than expressly enjoined in it, and that could be justified by considerations of reason or expediency in many of its details for which the texts appended by the Assembly to the ' Propositions ' did not seem to furnish a clear divine warrant, still less a positive and permanent institution. At the desire of these friends of comprehension and their friends in Parliament generally, who, to use Coleman's words, preferred 'may be to must be,' the Assembly set itself to prepare its practical Directory for church- government and discipline, and for ordination of ministers during the latter part of 1644 and the , earlier part of 1645. Henderson took a special interest in the preparation of this Formulary, and culled its materials, in part at least, from his treatise on the Order and Government of the Church of Scotland, in part from the discipline of the French and Dutch Protestant Churches, modifying and toning down the whole, and doing his very utmost to put it into a shape that might Church Ceftsures, etc. 259 be acquiesced in, or borne with, by those whose personal leanings were towards other polities. Yet with every disposition to respect, as far as a loyal Presbyterian could, the scruples of the dissenting brethren, and inclination to yield to them in minor matters, he and his colleagues found it impossible to come to an agreement with them on the basis of the practical Directory any more than on that of the theoretical ' Propositions.' But though it entirely failed to ward off the threatened schism, the Directory did not fail to secure the favour of the majority of the Parliament, and with two or three notable exceptions, to which I shall advert in my next Lecture, it was substantially embodied in the ordinance passed by the Houses on 29th August 1648, and published under the title. The Form of Chiirch-GovernnmU to be used in the CImrchu_of_England and Ireland. This Form contains minute directions for the choice of elders, the erection of twelve Presbyteries and a Synod, in London, and more general directions for the choice of elders and the ' erection of Presbyteries and Synods in other parts of the kingdom. It also made provision for the meeting * Even the ministers and elders met in their provincial assembly at London, in November 1648, venture to say: 'The external government and discipline of Christ, though it be not necessary to the being, yet it is absolutely necessary to the wellbeing of a church. . . . Not that we think that every circumstance in church- government is set down precisely in the word, or is of divine right in a strict sense.' — Vindication of the Presbytcrial Government and Ministry, pp, 1-3. 26o Treatises on Chttrch-Governmejit, of a National Assembly when summoned by Parliament, but in point of fact it never was summoned to meet. The classical Presbyteries were to consist of one minister and at least two elders from every parish within the bounds, the provincial synods of at least two ministers and four elders from every classis within the province, and the National Assembly of two ministers and four elders from each provincial synod, and of five learned and godly persons from each university in the kingdom. These various courts were sub- ordinated to each other after the Presbyterian fashion, that so appeals might be made from the inferior to the superior, and any person who deemed himself aggrieved by the proceedings of a con- gregational eldership might appeal to the classis, from that to the provincial synod, and from that to the National Assembly, and from it to the Parliament. This last provision no pleading nor protestation on the part of the divines could prevail with the Houses to alter, and perhaps that may have been one reason why they did not urge on at once the complete organisation of the Church, though of course the main reason was furnished by the political changes that so soon took place. Presbyteries and a synod were erected in Lanca- shire ^ by separate ordinances, and presbyteries ^ in * ymirnals of House of Commons, vol. iv. p. 668 ; vol. v. pp. 7, 23. 2 E. 430, No. 16; E. 431, No. 4. Church Censures, etc. 261 Somersetshire and Surrey by other ordinances. Any organisation attempted in other counties was rather on the lines suggested by Baxter for the county of Worcester than on the Hnes of the ordinances of Parliament.^ Any associations in them were probably composed of ministers only, and of ministers of different judgments on the question of church-government. It was on the 7th July 1645 that the Assembly's Directory was formally delivered to the Houses by Mr. Marshall and certain other members. The following is the entry in the Journals of the House of Commons (vol. iv. p. 199), regarding it : — 'The House being informed that some of the Assembly of Divines were at the door, they were called in, and Mr. Marshall acquainted the House, That whereas the House had been pleased, at several times, to order the Assembly of Divines to send to them such propositions as they had finished ; which they had done ; that there are some more which needed some proofs out of Scripture, and had been under debate with them and were now finished : They had cast their votes into a model and method ; and now the House may see all before them. They have left out the proofs, both of Scripture and reason, having sent them in with their former votes ; but if the House please to command the Assembly to give in the proofs, they are ready to do it. Some of these votes are plainly held out by Scripture ; others have reasons agreeable to Scripture, and have been alleged : And such as have the light of nature are received and practised in all Reformed Churches. This work, though it appeared short, yet had spent much time, by reason of dissenting judgments ; that, if possible, they ^ There were isolated classes ; see Minutes, p. 536, for Kent. 262 Treatises on Churck-Governmenty might be satisfied. To this short paper of additional votes they have given in the proofs out of Scripture ; and if those proofs, at the first reading, be not convictive, in regard that God hath not laid down the points of church discipline in such clear texts, they desire they may not be laid aside, but that the House will command them to give in the proofs at large.' The Directory for Church-Government was ^ brought down by the Scotch Commissioners Gillespie or Baillie, and laid before the Scottish Assembly in 1647, and by their orders it was printed (with the propositions prefixed, and in the exact shape in which it had passed the Westminster Assembly) before the close of the year, that it might be examined and reported on by presby- teries. Next year the consideration of the reports was again deferred, and in the confusions that followed no action may have been taken respecting it. Baillie says that with four or five reservations it would have been approved of by the Assembly but for the persistent opposition of Calderwood, who objected even to the propositions of which the Assembly had approved in 1645. Both sanctioned congregational elderships as distinct courts, whereas he maintained they were nothing more than committees of Presbytery. The latter provided that the provincial synods should consist not of all the ministers of the bounds, but of a certain number of ministers and elders chosen out of each presbytery, and that the National Assembly Church Censures, etc. 263 should consist not of delegates from the presby- teries, but of three ministers and three elders from each provincial synod, and five learned and godly persons from each university. To all these pro- visions we cannot doubt this uncompromising defender of old Scottish arrangements would resolutely object, particularly to the last,^ which had been opposed, but unsuccessfully, by the Scottish Commissioners at Westminster. But some of these provisions are not unworthy still of the consideration of the larger Presbyterian Churches, which feel that their supreme courts, as at present constituted, are somewhat unwieldy, and hardly so well adapted as they might be for the transaction of judicial business. And if ever the time should come when they should feel that the laity ought to be more directly represented than they yet are by idoneous persons as well as elders, it may cheer them to remember that the Westminster Assembly, notwithstanding the objec- tions of our countrymen, did not hesitate to put on record their decision that ' synodical assemblies do consist of pastors, teachers, church governors, and otJicr fit persons (when it shall be deemed expedient) where they have a lawful calling thereunto.' ' Letters and Journals, vol. iii. pp. II, 20, 2i, 59. * A full and perfect model of discipline,' * a very excellent and profitable piece, the fourth part of our uniformitie was shuffled by through the pertinacious opposition of Mr. David Calderwood and two or three with him.' 264 Treatises on C/m7'ck-Gove7^nment, The Directory was reprinted in 1690 in a neat little volume containing also Henderson's treatise on the Government and Order of the Church of Scotland, on which it was based. Once and again the treatise was reprinted in the earlier half of the succeeding century. It holds its place even in a collection of Confessions, etc., published in 1776. Use was unquestionably made of it in drawing up what are termed the Larger Overtures on Discipline, etc., printed among the proceedings of Assembly 1705, and the Form of Process approved by Assembly 1707. But as a whole it, as well as the propositions, was left unsanctioned at the Revolu- \ tion, and it is not now nearly so well known as it ought to be. It is practical and comprehensive, a storehouse of valuable counsels as to many things in government, and still more in discipline, not touched on in the propositions, and is well worthy of being studied by Presbyterian ministers still, who wish to do full justice to the system of government the Westminster Assembly sanctioned. What wiser statement of church principles could be de- sired than the following : Where the number of the people is so great * that they cannot conveniently meet in one place, it is expedient that they be divided, according to the respective bounds of their dwellings, into distinct and fixed congregations, for the better administration of such ordinances as belong unto tkem, and the discharge of the mutual Church Censures, etc. 265 duties, wherein all, according to their several places and callings, are to labour to promote whatever appertains to the power of godliness and credit of religion, that the whole land in the full extent of it may become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ. Parochial congregations in this kingdom, consisting of ministers and people who profess faith in Christ and obedience unto Christ, according to the rules of faith and life taught by Him and His Apostles, and join together in the public worship of hearing, praying, and administration of the sacraments, are churches truly constituted. . . . Communion and member- ship in congregations thus constituted ... is not unlawful. And to refuse or renounce membership and church communion with congregations thus constituted, as unlawful to be joined with, in regard of their constitution, is not warranted by the word of God. . . . Separation from a church thus constituted, where the government is lawful, upon an opinion that it is unlawful, and that there- fore all the godly are also bound to separate . , . and to join themselves to another church of another constitution and government, is not warranted by the word of God, but contrary to it. . . . Nor is it lawful for any member of a parochial congregation, if the ordinances be there adminis- tered in purity, to go and seek them elsewhere ordinarily.' . . . ' Although the truth of conversion 266 Treatises on Church- Government, and regeneration be necessary to every worthy communicant for his own comfort and benefit, yet those only are to be by the eldership excluded or suspended from the Lord's table who are found by them to be ignorant or scandalous,' ' Where there are many ruling officers in a particular congregation let some of them more especially attend the inspection of one part, some of another, as may be most convenient ; and let them at fit times visit the several families for their spiritual good.' ' These elders ought to be such as are men of good understanding in matters of religion, sound in the faith, prudent, discreet, grave, and of unblameable conversation.' * The deacons must be wise, sober, grave, of honest report, not greedy of filthy lucre.' * It belongeth unto classical pres- byteries to consider, to debate, and to resolve according to God's word, such cases of conscience or other difficulties in doctrine as are brought unto them out of their association, according as they shall find needful for the good of the churches : to examine and censure according to the word any erroneous doctrines which have been either publicly or privately vented within their association to the corrupting of the judgments of men, and to endeavour the reducing of recusants or any others in error or schism ... to dispense censures in cases within their cognisance . . . yet so as that no minister be deposed but by the resolution of a Church Censu7'es, etc. 267 synod : to examine, ordain, and admit ministers for the congregations respectively therein asso- ciated.' * The provincial and national assemblies are to have the same power in all points of government and censures brought before them within their several bounds respectively as is before expressed to belong to classical presbyteries within their several associations.' The sum of all may be given in the words of Henderson in that treatise on ' The Government and Order of the Church of Scotland,' from which this Directory to so large an extent is taken : ' In the authority of these assemblies, parochial, presbyterial, provincial, and national, and in the subordination of the lesser unto the greater, or of the more particular elderships to the larger and general eldership, doth consist the order, strength, and steadfastness of the Church of Scotland. . . . Here is a superiority without tyranny, for no minis- ter hath a papal or monarchical jurisdiction over his own flock, far less over other pastors and over the congregations of a large diocese. Here there is parity without confusion and disorder, for the pastors are in order before the elders, and the elders before the deacons. Every particular church is subordinate to the presbytery, the presbytery to the synod, and the synod to the national assembly. One pastor also hath priority of esteem before \j another for age, for zeal, for gifts, for his good 268 Treatises on Church-Government, etc. deservings of the Church, each one honouring him whom God hath honoured, and as he beareth the image of God, which was to be seen among the Apostles themselves. But none hath pre-eminence of title or power or jurisdiction above others ; even as in nature one eye hath not power over another, only the head hath power over all, even as Christ over His church. . . . And lastly, here there is a subjection without slavery, for the people are subject to the pastors and assemblies, yet there is no assembly wherein every particular church hath not interest and power ; nor is there anything done but they are, if not actually yet virtually, called to consent unto it.' Such is presbytery in theory, and there is no reason why in practice it should not approximate to the ideal more nearly than some recent caricaturists represent it to have done, save that \ye who are intrusted with its administration, not excluding these caricaturists themselves, still come far short of what we ought to be as men, as Christians, and as the descendants of such noble-hearted Christians ; and that is a shortcoming that would mar any form of govern- ment which God has instituted, or human wisdom has devised. LECTURE IX. DEBATES ON THE AUTONOMY OF THE CHURCH, THE SOLE SUPREMACY OF ITS DIVINE HEAD, AND THE RIGHT OF ITS OFFICE-BEARERS UNDER HIM TO GUARD ITS PURITY AND ADMINISTER ITS DISCIPLINE ; QUERIES ON JUS di'vi'num OF CHURCH-GOVERN- MENT. In my last Lecture I gave you an account of the Fropositions conceniTng" xhurch-governmenF and ordlnatioli^of ministers, and the practical Directory for church-government, church censures, and ordination of ministers, in which the Assembly emHo(Jfed~the'resurts of those sharp and tough debates which dragged their slow length along for^weTImgh eighteen months. In the present lecture I propose to advert to controversies which emerged in the course of these debates, but which were afterwards brought up again and discussed more exhaustively. These were the 'scabrous questions' (as others than the Westminster As- sembly have found) of the autonomy of the Church, the supremacy of its Divine Head, and indepen- dence of its officers in the administration of the 270 Debates on the discipline of His house, — questions which divided the friends of Reformation in the Assembly and '\ in the Parliament far more seriously than any of those previously discussed, and the differences on which I believe were one main cause why Presby- terianism was never fully set up in England. In that country, perhaps more markedly than in any other, the way for the Reformation of the \ sixteenth century may be said to have been prepared by the civil power and the laity — by the sovereign and his great council or parliament restraining or opposing the abuses of the ecclesi- astical and the papal powers. Even under the Norman and Plantagenet kings the contest began to be waged, though at times with very indifferent success. It was revived under Edward I., and still more resolutely under his grandson Edward III. As the Popes were then residing at Avignon, and generally creatures of the kings of France, with whom Edward was at war, the nation entered into the struggle almost as heartily as it had done into that for the defence of its Magna Charta when assailed by the Pope. Various statutes for the restraint of abuses, particularly the statutes of Provisors and Praemunire, were enacted and re-enacted in more stringent form. The former, passed in 1351, was meant to restrain the Pope from providing to benefices as they became vacant, or before they became vacant, and so Autonomy of the Church, etc. 271 taking the appointments out of the hands of the electors, — the chapters of cathedrals and mon- asteries,— as well as out of the hands of the king and other patrons. This abuse had become much more prevalent since the papal court had taken up its residence at Avignon, and endeavoured to supplement in this way the revenues of its dignitaries. The abuse was more keenly felt when the papal provisions were, as they then often were, in favour of aliens and non-residents, sometimes in favour of natives of the country with which Edward was at war, and so the revenues destined to enable high officials suitably to dis- charge their functions, repair churches, and exercise hospitality, were drained from the king- dom and spent abroad. A further check was given to papal pretensions in 1353, when the statute of Praemunire was added, to make that of Provisors more effectual. In 1365, certain arrears of the tribute imposed on King John, when he put his kingdom under the Pope, were refused, and the king was autho- rised to resist any attempt to enforce the payment ' with all the puissance of the realm.' Wyclif is supposed to have been present at that parliament, — by Lechler he is supposed to have been a member of it. To the last he continued to urge the civil authorities to resist the pretensions of the Popes, and is said to have counselled the 272 Debates on Mlie parliament of Richard II. (which re-enacted the statutes passed in the reign of his grandfather), that in the state of impoverishment to which the realm was then reduced, it might lawfully with- hold from the Pope other sources of revenue which he had enjoyed from more ancient times. The earlier kings of the house of Lancaster, who owed their advancement to the throne very largely to the favour and influence of the prelates, not only yielded to their demands for increased powers to themselves, but withdrew from the contest with the Popes, and allowed the statutes above mentioned practically to fall into abeyance. Still these remained on the statute-book, and supplied the vantage ground from which Henry VIII. started on his wayward career, and was emboldened first to supersede Wolsey, then to strip his prelates of their independent or quasi independent jurisdiction, to reduce his clergy into subjection to his will, and finally to abolish the papal supremacy in his realm, and so to concen- trate ecclesiastical as well as temporal supremacy within his dominions in the imperial crown. Probably the theory was, as Hallam and other constitutionalists contend, that this power was in the sovereign, as advised by his great council or parliament, and that ecclesiastical as well as civil regulations, intended permanently to bind the subjects of the realm, should have the assent of Autonoviy of t lie Church, etc. 273 their representatives, or that it was more entirely conceded to him, specially on account of his personal qualities. But whatever may have been the theory, the supremacy as a matter of fact, both under Henry VIII. and Edward VI., and again under Elizabeth, was generally claimed as the personal prerogative of the monarch, with which Parliament had no right to intermeddle, as if it belonged to the crown by a sort of right divine not only to judge in particular causes, but also to a certain extent to legislate, or without the consent of Parliament give validity to any ecclesiastical legislation proposed by Convocation. A jus divimun absolutum was claimed for the sovereign in matters ecclesiastical by many who would have scouted any similar claim in matters secular, and of course thisyV/j' divimun was more offen- sively asserted by many of those who, under the early Stuart kings, lent themselves to uphold their right divine more widely, and to justify their absolute and arbitrary procedure in matters civil as well as ecclesiastical. On the other hand, the more thoroughgoing Puritans who were opposed on principle to the absolute power and arbitrary actings of the sovereign in the State, were led on to question these in relation to the Church. Some of their leaders even in the reign of Elizabeth contended that the representatives of the nation in Parliament assembled should have a voice in S 2 74 Debates on the framing or sanctioning ecclesiastical laws, and pleaded with them to shield them from the queen and her ecclesiastical commissioners. At most they confined the supremacy of the sovereign to the judging of ecclesiastical causes according to the laws passed by Parliament, sometimes to the judging of these causes only in the last resort, and for the purpose of remedying what had been done amiss by the proper ecclesiastical tribunals. The spiritual sentences of these tribunals, and especially that of excommunication, they urged should not be pronounced by any lay judge or deputy, and they desired to see the old canon law superseded by some such reformatio Icginn as had been de- signed under Edward VI. Cartwright has been charged with expressing himself with almost papal arrogance as to the powers of the Church. His words were certainly incautious and ill-chosen, but they do not seem to me to imply more than that civil rulers in dealing with church causes must be guided by the rules laid down for them in the word of God, rather than by the rules of canon or of civil law. As Dr. Price has shown, it is only by separating the quotation^ adduced from its ^ ' It must be remembered that civil magistrates must govern it according to the rules prescribed in His word ; and that as they are nourishers so they be servants unto the Church ; and as they rule in the Church, so they must remember to subject themselves unto the Church, to submit their sceptres, to throv/ dovi'n their crowns before the Church ; yea, as the prophet speaketh, to lick AtUonoviy of the C/mrc/i, etc. 2 75 context that it can be brought to bear the inter- pretation they have put on it. Other leading- Puritans in somewhat later times, while personally owning the supremacy and the ecclesiastical com- missioners who executed it, did not conceal their liking for a simpler, freer, and more independent government in the hands of the ministers and other office-bearers of the Church. Even the moderate men invited by the king to represent the party at the Hampton Court Conference ventured to complain of various abuses of the so-called ecclesiastical courts, and to urge the reformation of these abuses. Nor did they find the king pro- fessedly so hostile to their views about some of these abuses as about several of the other changes they asked of him. the dust of the feet of the Church.' Here Ilallam and others end their quotation, whereas they ought at least to have subjoined the explanation which follows : ' Wherein I mean not that the Church doth either wring the sceptres out of princes' hands, or taketh their crowns from their heads, or that it requireth princes to lick the dust of her feet (as the Pope under this pretence hath done), but I mean as the prophet meaneth, that whatsoever magnificence or excellency or pomp is either in them or in their estates and commonwealth, which doth not agree with the simplicity of the Church, that they will be content to lay down. . . . Otherwise God is made to give place to men, heaven to earth, and religion is made (as it were) a rule of Lesbia to be applied unto any estate of commonwealth whatsoever.' — Cartwright's Reply to IVhitgift, p. iSo. In short, he means very much what the Bohemians meant when they say in their Confession that magistrates ' coram Agno coronas deponentes una cum aliis regibus et sacerdotibus , . . spontancam ipsi prses- tent obedientiam quo eliam Spiritus Sanctus . . . ipsos adhor- tatur. Psal. ii. lo, ii.' 276 Debates on the The title of ' the only supreme head on earth of the Church of England ' ascribed to Henry viii., both by Convocation and Parliament, and retained by his son Edward VI., was formally abandoned by Elizabeth, nor, save from James himself and one of his flatterers at the Hampton Court Conference, do we hear more of the sovereign being a mixta persona. But it may be questioned if any real limitation of the supremacy was effected thereby. The Article of 1553 was, 'The King of England is supreme head in earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland.' That of 1563 still asserted that 'The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesi- astical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not nor ought to be subject to any foreign juris- diction.' Had the words in italics been left out, as they are in the Queen's injunctions,^ the article would almost have satisfied the more advanced Puritans as being simply a denial of the jurisdiction claimed by the Pope. But, as it was, they desired to see more excluded from the sweep of the supremacy than ' the administration of the word and sacraments.' The first step towards this may be said to have been taken by Ussher in the Irish Articles, in which the words ' or the power of the 1 Sparrow's Collection, pp. 68, 82. Atitonomy of the Chu7'chy etc. 277 keys ' were added to those already mentioned, though the old statement regarding the supremacy was still retained. It remained for the West- minster Assembly to complete the work by leaving out this last, and adding to their statement of what the sovereign might not do a definite state- ment of what he might, in place of the general reference to the powers exercised by godly kings under the Old Testament, which had satisfied the framers of several of the earlier Reformed Con- fessions. The course of matters on the Continent, at least in Lutheran states, was somewhat similar to what it was in England. Whatever Luther may have originally intended, there is no doubt that after the Peasant war he became very chary of encour- aging popular government in any way, and ulti- mately lodged much of the power in matters ecclesiastical, which some were disposed to intrust to the people, in the hands of the magistrate, either simply in virtue of his civil office, or as being the natural representative of the unorganised Christian laity.^ Ere long, this arrangement, occasioned by circumstances or necessity, was advocated on grounds of reason and Scripture, as being in theory also the best or the most legitimate one. This it was even outside the Lutheran church by Thomas Erastus, a physician and Professor of Medicine at 1 See Schenkel's article Kirche in llertzog's Real-Encyclopiidie. 278 Debates on the Heidelberg. In a treatise^ on excommunication he maintained that the pastoral office was properly and only persuasive, and that the minister had not in virtue of his office any right to exercise ecclesi- astical discipline, or to refuse admission to the most sacred ordinances to any one who claimed it. He might set forth the character and qualifications of worthy communicants, counsel, warn, and entreat those he deemed unworthy, but might not restrain or exclude them. That and all other disciplinary and coercive acts belonged not properly to the minister but to the magistrate in virtue of his office. This treatise was ably answered by Beza,^ whose views were generally espoused by the Reformed Churches on the Continent as well as by the more advanced of the Puritans in England. Many of the laity, however, who sympathised with the Puritans, and a large number of the members of the Long Parliament, were strongly prepossessed in favour of the other view, and thought that the freedom of the laity from clerical oppression was bound up with the maintenance of the supremacy of the civil power, no longer represented by the 1 Explicatio gravissima: questionis iitriwi cxcomntiinicatio jnandato nitatiu- divino an cxcogitata sit ah hominihus. It was written in 1568, but only published in 15S9, after his death. It was translated into English in 1659 and again in 1844. ^ Tractatiis da vera excommimicatione et Christiano prcshyterio. Londini, 1590. Autonomy of the Church, etc. 279 sov^creign alone, but by the Houses of Parliament, who in a sense claimed to represent the yet un- organised Christian laity of the kingdom. In Scotland the course of matters had been very different from what it was in England, possibly before the Reformation, certainly from and after that crisis in the nation's history. Knox, while referring in his Confession to the examples of the godly kings under the Old Testament, and asserting in theory for the civil authorities exten- sive rights in the purgation and conservation of religion, yet in practice confined their rights within narrower and stricter limits, and did not hesitate when he deemed them wrong to act independently of them, sometimes even requiring them to receive the message of Jesus Christ as set forth by him and to regulate their procedure in accordance with it. From the first the General Assembly claimed to meet, as occasion required it should, for the good of the Church. From the first it claimed and exercised large powers of government and discipline. The statutes origin- ally passed were no doubt more general than those which ultimately ratified its jurisdiction, but they were tolerably explicit, and pointed naturally in that direction which was afterwards more decidedly followed. I give below the Act of 1567, and place alongside of it the corresponding 28o Debates on the Article and Act of the Elizabethan Convocation and Parliament : — 'The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain.' 'All such jurisdictions, pri- vileges, superiorities, and pre-eminences, spiritual and ecclesiastical, as by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority have heretofore been or may law- fully be exercised or used for the visitation of the ecclesiastical state and per- sons, or for reformation . . . of the same and of all manner errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempt and enormities, shall for ever, by authority of this present Parliament, be united and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm.' 'Anent the jurisdictioun justlie apperteining to the trew Kirk and immaculat spous of Jesus Christ . . . the king's grace, with advice of my Lord Regent and three estatis of this present Parliament, hes declarit and grantit jurisdictioun to the said Kirk quhilk consistis and standis in preiching of the trew word of Jesus Christ, correctioun of maneris, and administratioun of haly sa- cramentis. And declaris that thair is na uther face of Kirk nor uther face of re- ligioun, than is presentlie be the favor of God establisheit within this realme, and that thair be na uther jurisdic- tioun ecclesiasticall acknow- ledgit within this realm uther than that quhilk is and sal be within the same Kirk, or that whilk flowis thairfra, concerning the premisses.' The import of the Scotch Act is as clear and un- mistakeable as are the declarations of the English Article and Act to the opposite effect.^ If more ^ This difference was asserted by those who pleaded the cause of Scotland in 1640 with their English brethren. 'The second error ariseth from not knowing our laws and so measuring us with your line. It is surmised to us that our enemies object that we have broken our civil and temporal obedience, and trenched upon I Autonomy of the C/mrch, etc. 281 were needed to bring out the contrast the sub- sequent history abundantly suppHes it. The attempt was actually made by King James in 1584, to secure to himself by statute the same powers as an English sovereign exercised in matters ecclesiastical. But in 1592, by the Act which is still deemed the charter of the Church, not only are her courts and their jurisdiction ratified, but the Act of 1584, authorising the appointment by the crown of commissioners in ecclesiastical causes, is declared null and of no force or effect in time to come, and it is expressly provided that the Act of the same year author- ising the king and his council to summon all manner of persons super inqiiirendis, shall be no way prejudicial ' nor derogate any thing to the privilege that God has given to the spiritual office- bearers in the Kirk, concerning heads of religion, the King's prerogative in Parliament by offering acts prejudicial to his Majesty's power such as anent the abrogating all civil power from bishops and churchmen, and rescinding all acts formerly made in their favour ... the Act anent the restitution of presbyteries to their rights of admission, our declaration at the unexampled raising of our Parliament, or such like. We neither know nor will examine if according to your law these may be accounted derogatory to royal authority. But it is most sure and evident by all the registers and records of our laws . . . that they properly belong to the cognition of our Parliament, and that we have proceeded at this time upon no other ground than our laws and practice of this kingdom never before questioned, but inviol- ably observed as the only rule of our government. ' — Information from the Estates of the kingdom qf Scotland to the kingdom of Ktigland, 1640. 282 Debates 07i the matters of heresy, excommunication, collation or deprivation of ministers, or any such essential censures specially grounded [on] and having warrant of the Word of God.' Thus the power of godly kings, according to Scottish law and teaching, was meant to be not privative, but cumulative of that of the office-bearers of the Church. It is only by ignoring these facts and assuming that Scottish law was similar to English, that some modern English historians can make out the semblance of a justification for James in his conflict with the Melvilles and the party in the Scottish Church of which they were the leaders. Whatever their failings and short- comings, these men maintained with the cause of ecclesiastical independence that of constitutional liberty and limited monarchy, against absolutism and arbitrary power just as truly as the patriots of the Long Parliament and the Westminster Assembly. And though overborne for a time after the accession of the Stuarts to the English throne, their views had been reasserted not in word only but also in act. The whole of their ^' second Reformation rested on the re-assertion of these views, and the restoration to their place of honour in the statute-book of those laws in which they were embodied. From the appro- bation of their proceedings expressed by the patriots of the South they were led perhaps too Autono]]iy of the Church, etc. 283 readily to conclude that they agreed with them in their principles, or that it would be easy by a little more argument, and closer acquaintance, to bring them over to do so. They did not make due allowance for national antecedents, and differ- ent standpoints, and holding their views to be bound up almost with the esse as well as the bene csse^ of a church, they urged them with a persist- ency and fervour which seemed overbearing to many of their lay friends in England. And if Baillie has not done them injustice, they had recourse at times to petty arts of diplomacy which, however they might have escaped observa- tion or censure among their own countrymen, could hardly fail to be discovered and resented in the land of their sojourn by the acute and able statesmen with whom they had to deal, and so immeasurably to increase the difficulties of the work on which their hearts were set. Baillie rest- lessly wrote (vol. ii. pp. 179, 197, 252) to friends on the Continent to send testimonies or argu- / ments in favour of the Scottish views to influence the Assembly and the Parliament, and sadly disappointed the good man was when the testi- monies did not in every point come up to his expectations. He busied himself also in organis- ing opposition in the city to the measures of the 1 This question was set out for debate in the Westminster Assem- bly, but not formally decided in it. See Minutes, p. 220. 284 Debates on the Parliament, and was still more sadly disappointed when this piece of artillery * played nip-shot.'^ Even one who deems the House of Commons mis- taken can hardly fail to admire the pluck with which they stood the siege, or to wonder that a man so shrewd as Baillie should have hoped to overpower them by such arms, or to avoid raising against his countrymen and their cause the indignation to which Milton gave voice soon after with all the more scathing bitterness because of his personal differences with them and their friends on the question of divorce.^ But while regard to truth requires me to say thus much of the failings of my honoured country- men, it gives me unfeigned satisfaction to be able ^ Letters and "Journals, vol. ii. p. 362. 2 ' But we do hope to find out all your tricks, Your plots and packing worse than those of Trent, That so the Parliament May with their wholesome and preventive shears. Clip your phylacteries though baulk your ears, And succour our just fears. When they shall read this clearly in your charge New Presbyter is but old Priest writ large.' The ' Scotch What d'ye call ' of the Sonnet Professor Masson rightly conjectures to be Baillie himself. And as another re- marks the name of the sainted Rutherfurd has in it been consigned to posterity rhyming with civil sword. Their phylacteries were not broader than those of his own most cherished friends, nor their lives less truly Christian. The coarse charge of dallying with the widowed ' plurality ' is even more spiteful. They- were the first in England to refuse to give testimonials to ministers seeking institution to more than one parish. Several of them held a benefice in connection with a University chair, but that was a union of offices allowed in the Scottish, French, and Dutch Autonomy of the Churchy etc. 285 now to add that in their great works on Church- government pubhshcd about the same time wea- pons more worthy of the mighty contest were suppHed by Rutherfurd and Gillespie,^ and that the letters and counsels sent from the Continent in answer to their urgent entreaties were not the only nor in my humble opinion the most memor- able of those then addressed to the Church of England to encourage and counsel it in the work of reformation. I have adverted to one remark- V able treatise already (p. 113), which appeared before the Assembly met, and was not altogether to the mind of the Scotch, though in this matter of the power of the keys its author came nearer to their views than to those of the English Parliament.'^ I cannot omit to mention another, which though put into its present shape at a later date to help on such a reformation as the English Puritans Churches of that age who allowed no plurality of parishes. A number driven from their benefices in the country by the Cavaliers were, to preserve them from starving, admitted for a time to sequestrated livings and lectureships in London, but as the country was pacified the number even of these was diminished, and more than one upbraided with this fault offered to resign if assured of the revenues of his own benefice. • The Divine Right of Church Govcriitnent and Exconimunica- iioHy by Rutherfurd, and Aaron^s Rod blossoming, or the Divine Ordinance of Church Government vindicated, by Gillespie, both published at London early in 1646. ** ' Hoc est, ni fallor vera sententia de potestate et ministris clavium quam probatam cupimus inclyto Cretui ut deinceps abrogate tribunali quod celsam Commissionem vocant et abusu curiarum episcopalium e medio sublato, Synedria Ecclesiastica non 286 Debates on the desired in 1660, yet can hardly be doubted to em- body views which its author held and expressed at this earlier date.-^ This is the Parcenesis ad ecclesias, noniinatiin Anglicanain, de optima ecdesiastici regiminis forma pic solicitam of John Amos Comenius, a bishop of the church of the Bohemian brethren, and the only one then remaining of those who had been driven out from their native land in the war of extermination waged against them in consequence of their election of the son- in-law of James I. to be their king. He is sup- posed to have been in England in the autumn of 1642 or spring of 1643, in intimate association not with the Scotch, but with Milton and their mutual friend Hartlieb. Of his relations with them, and his literary or educational activities, a full and interesting account has been given by Pro- fessor Masson in his life of Milton. But he does not advert to the Bishop's keen interest in and alias infligant poenas quam ecclesiasticas . . . Pastores arceant a communione peccantes, quin et intentent extremum illud fulmen excommunicationis, ut non obedietites censura . . . coram tri- bunal! politico sistant.' As to lesser offences of which the laws of the state take no special notice, he says it belongs to the church courts to make strict inquiry ' nee quemquam admittere ad sacrte ceense synaxin qui ea procul a se non' abjecerit et veniam ex penitentia non impetraverit.' — Coftsilhcm de refo7-manda ecclesia Anglic ana. • The Latin letter of the Assembly was certainly sent to the Bohemian and Hungarian as well as to the nearer Reformed Churches. The Ratio Disciplina; Ordinisquc Ecdesiastici in Unitate Fratrwn Boke/nor?iiii, to which in 1660 the Parcenesis was appended, was certainly also published in 1643. Atitonomy of the ClnircJi, etc. 287 thorough acquaintance with the various phases of the movement for the reform of the English Church. Baillie, I think, must have known of these, and that probably was the reason he refused to encourage the Bishop's friend Dury to seek ad- mission to the Assembly. And yet with all his divergences from the wishes of the Scotch and his leanings towards those of Ussher in regard to a reformed liturgy and combination of episcopacy and presbytery, he pronounces decidedly against the whole body of the ceremonies, and in the most importunate manner pleads for the restoration of the key of discipline as well as that of doctrine to the ministers of the Church.^ The question of the autonomy of the Church came up firstJn_tlieJW£stmjnster Assembly when its members were^ preparing the Propositions con- cerning'lITiurchrgQyernment, of which an account was given injnyJastJLecture, and it was then that T ■ ■ ^ lie quotes Olevianus and Schlisselburgius as bearing mournful testimony to the sad state both of the Reformed and Lutheran churches in Germany through the want of discipHne and the intrusion of the civil power into the ecclesiastical domain : ' Est Coisareo-papatus confusio ecclesiastics et politico; potestatis qua domini politici . . . sub pra.>textu custodian utriusque tabulae rapiunt sibi gladium spiritualem ac se dominos supra ecclesiam et minis- terium constituunt.' This was as resolutely to be opposed as the ' Papa-cresareatus,' the assumption of civil power by the Pope. It was to the apostles and their successors, the pastors of the Church, that the Lord had said, ' Ye are the salt of the earth. ' Ergo qui his ecclesiasticam disciplinam manibus excutiunt, salem eos sine sal- sedine esse volunt.' — Parccnesis, p. iii. 2 88 Debates on the that far-famed single combat between Selden and Gillespie^ took place around which later Scottish I tradition has thrown such a halo. Negatively the Propositions are against any human headship, or any right of the civil magistrate to rule in Christ's house. Positively they set forth Christ as the Head of the CKurchrafTd^IeadnDver^l things to the Church, who has given all officers necessary for its edification and the perfecting of the saints. These officers are enumerated, their functions described, and their power of rule and censure asserted. And while a subordination of courts, to whom a right of appeal belongs, is maintained, no mention is made of any right of appeal from them to the magistrate or to Parliament. There can be no doubt therefore that any power meant to be ac- knowledged as belonging to him, or it, must have been regarded as extrinsic not intrinsic, e^ty not eo-w T779 kKK\y](Tia^, circa saci'a not in sacris. When these ^ The manuscript Minutes coincide with Lightfoot's yojirnal in assigning Gillespie's speech not to the session of 20th but to that of 2 1st February. In Gillespie's own Notes it is introduced at the close of the account of the former session with the words, ' I reply,' not I replied, and may simply embody a brief outline of the reply he was to make on the following day. The reply made to Selden on the spur of the moment was that of Herle, who in 1646 succeededDr. Twisse as Prolocutor, and judging even from the fragmentary jottings preserved by Byfield, one cannot doubt that it was a very able reply. Gillespie and Young appear to have taken the evening to arrange their thoughts, and at next session made very telling replies, the former to the general line of argu- ment, the latter to the citations from rabbinical and patristic authorities. Autonomy of the Church, etc. 289 Propositions were being digested into the prac- tical Directory for Church-government, it was pro- posed to insert a proposition describing the authority the magistrate might claim and the duties he was to discharge towards the Church : 'The civil magistrate hath authority, and it is his' duty, to provide that the word of God be truly and duly preached, the sacraments rightly admin- istered, church-government and discipline estab- lished and duly executed according to the word of God.' ^ But after debate it was resolved to waive this and some other propositions in refer- ence to the discipline, and when they were brought up in reference to the Confession of Faith, the above was no longer the first proposition, nor even the first part of the third, and it was considerably changed in form. But the autonomy of the Church and the right of its ofl!ice-bearers to the power of the keys is distinctly implied throughout that Directory, and especially in all that it inculcates as to the powers and duties of congregational elderships, classi- V^ cal presbyteries, and the superior Church courts. Before that Directory was completed, however, the Assembly deemed it their duty to bring under the notice of the Houses the great importance of speedy order being taken for 'the keeping of ignorant and scandalous persons from the sacra- ment.' Their petition has not been engrossed in ^ Minutes of the IVestmitister Assembly, pp. 89, 224. T 290 Debates on the the Journals of either House, but that presented four days later in name of the ministers of Lon- don has been preserved in the Journals of the House of Lords, and as it was no doubt very- similar I shall insert the substance of it in a note.^ The effect of the petitions was such that the House of Lords at once passed and sent down to the Commons an ordinance ' concerning the admis- sion of persons to the sacrament' But the clause in it relating to the keeping away of the ignorant and scandalous was not to the mind of the Com- mons, and instead of passing it in terms so general they resolved to require a full enumeration of what these terms were meant to include, and to refer it to the Assembly of Divines to express the 1 After a reference to the great things the Parliament had already accomplished, and the expectation of greater they had thus been encouraged to cherish, they proceed : ' Extreme necessity doth enforce us, with sad hearts, to present to your deep and pious con- siderations the dangerous and unspeakable mischiefs which like a flood break in upon us, and swell higher and higher every day, every man taking liberty to do what is right in his own eyes, because no ecclesiastical discipline or government at all is yet settled for the guarding of the precious ordinances of Christ, especially that holy sacrament of the Lord's Supper, from profanation and contempt, whence it comes to pass that God is much dishonoured, the tender consciences of many, both ministers and people, are offended, multitudes fall away into several and strange by-paths of separation . . . the pious ministers are extremely discouraged in their ministerial employments, [and] many that have formerly mani- fested good affections, being much wearied with long expectation, do daily withdraw both from the Parliament their orthodox ministers and from one another.' Immanuel Bourne is the first who signs in name of the London ministers. Autonomy of the Church, etc. 291 particulars of that ignorance and scandal for which they conceive that some persons ought to be sus- pended from the Communion. This course, if not meant, as their opponents insinuated, mainly for purposes of obstruction, was at least inconsistent with that which they were content to follow in the case of the more serious censure of excommunica- tion, and it was unfortunate in its issue for them- selves even more than for the Assembly. The first answers to the reference do not seem to have been so detailed as the House desired, and the matter was again remitted to the Assembly. On their representation it was resolved that persons to be admitted ought to have a competent under- standing of the doctrine of the Trinity, of the state of man by creation and by his fall, of redemption by Jesus Christ, and the means to apply Christ and His benefits, of the necessity of faith, repentance, and a godly life, of the nature and use of the sacraments, and of the condition of man after this life ; and it was once more remitted to them to state in detail ' what they think to be a competent knowledge of these things.' This they did without delay, and brought up on 1st April that terse statement which on the 17th was substantially passed by the Houses and embodied in their subsequent ordinance, and soon after made the basis of various catechisms intended to prepare the catechumens for the Communion. It 292 Debates on the is worthy of more attention than for long it has received, and worthy especially of the attention of those who think some simpler statement of doc- trine is needed than the Assembly have supplied in their confession and catechisms, and accordingly I shall insert it in the Appendix to these Lectures (Note L). During the months of April and May various communications passed between the Assembly and the House of Commons respecting a detailed enumeration of scandalous offences, but the new modelling of the army and other pressing business arising out of the war occupied the House so closely that summer, that the pro- mised ordinance and regulations for suspension of the scandalous were left in abeyance. Accord- ingly, on 1st August, the Assembly presented to them a second and more urgent petition on the subject. The same petition was on the 4th of August presented to the House of Lords, and fortunately has been inserted at length in their Journals. I subjoin it in slightly abridged form : After a brief reference to their former petition they ex- press their deep sense of the burthen of the arduous and most pressing affairs which lay on the Houses, and of the fideUty, zeal, and self-denial they had shown in the right ordering of them. Yet considering how God had honoured them above all other Parliaments since the first reformation in putting it into their hearts to repair His house and bring it to farther perfection than at the first, and had blessed them with tokens of His favour, they venture to represent that there can be no more proper way of showing their Autono7ny of the Church, etc. 293 gratitude to God, nor any surer way to preserve His favour, than that the Houses and they should hasten to complete the service they had undertaken for His church. 'When we remember,' they say, ' that as formerly in times of reformation amongst the Jews sometimes the godly magis- trates encouraged the Priests and Levites to promote the reformation by them intended as Hezekiah and Josiah did, and sometimes the Lord's prophets have in like manner encouraged the godly magistrates unto the same work as Haggai and Zechariah did ; so it hath been your often pious care to call upon this Assembly to hasten the work of the government of the Church (when by reason of great diffi- culties it staid longer in our hands than was expected by others or by ourselves desired), and withal you have been pleased to receive with much favour the humble desires of this Assembly, when out of the conscience of our duty both to God and you, we have at any time stirred you up by putting you likewise in remembrance of the same great and most necessary business.' ' We are by these considerations emboldened, yea even constrained with so much the more importunity, to renew our former humble petition for the keeping of all scandalous persons from this sacrament, and which we conceive, as in all the former respects, very neces- sary most reasonable and consonant to those things which have already passed the judgment and vote of the honour- able Houses ; for if any scandalous sins deserve abstention, then likewise all other scandalous sins do lie under the same demerit, and by parity of reason should undergo the like censure. And this is certainly most conform to the general practice and judgment of the churches of God both ancient and modern ; for albeit there may be, amongst learned and pious men, difference of judgment touching the particular kind and form of ecclesiastical polity, and some particular parts and officers thereunto belonging, yet in this one point there is a general consent, that as Christ hath ordained a government and governors in His church, in His name and according to His will to order the same, so one special and principal branch of that government is to seclude from ecclesiastical communion such as shall publicly scandalise 294 Debates on the and ofifend the Church of God, that thereby being ashamed and humbled they may be brought to repentance and glorify God in the day of visitation. Nor do we find that there hath been any great doubt or question made thereof in the Church, until Erastus, a physician, who by his profession may be supposed to have had better skill in curing the diseases of the natural than the scandals of the ecclesiastical body, did move the controversy.' The following are the reasons they assign for their urgency in this matter : — 'As the conscience of our own ministry, and desire of comfortable continuance therein, and the care of all our brethren whose case is the same, and who from many parts mind us of our duty in their behalf ; and as the discharge of that service to which we are by your authority called to present our humble advice in matters of this nature, do hereunto oblige us, so also the bond of our late solemn Covenant engaging us to promote the reformation of our church according to the Word of God and the example of the best reformed churches (both which we humbly assume to be with us in this par- ticular), the longing desires of the godly to have this business settled . . . the great danger to the souls of scandalous communicants which both magistrates and ministers in their places should endeavour to prevent not only in some but in all scandals ; yea, the very practice of heathens them- selves who removed profane persons from their sacra : All these and the like considerations, not without the encourage- ment of these honourable Houses in accepting our former humble desires in this behalf, have at this time engaged us to renew our earnest petition to the same effect.' This petition, any one may see at a glance, was the production not of ignorant enthusiasts, but of intelHgent and thoughtful men, who could reason forcibly in support of their plea, and were in sober earnest in urging it. Some would have had it presented by the Assembly as a body, the more to mark their sense of its importance. But this Autonomy of ike Church, etc. 295 seemed to the majority to be too strong a step, and it was finally intrusted to the Committee, which drew it up, and to Mr. Newcomen, their Convener, who had probably had most to do in preparing it. One solitary member at least had opposed it, and in his thanksgiving sermon before the Commons, on 30th July, had expounded his views to more willing hearers than he had in the Assembly. This was Thomas Coleman, famed for his rabbinic learning and debating powers, who had been driven by the Cavaliers from his parish in Lincolnshire, and forced like many other ministers on the parliamentary side to take refuge in London, where he got the appointment to St. Peter's, Cornhill, one of the sequestrated benefices. He was chosen a member of the Assembly, and became even more decidedly than Lightfoot the champion of Erastianism in it. He specially opposed the clause in the petition ' of Erastus his learning,' and before it was given in had en- deavoured to prejudice the House against it in the sermon he preached before them. On the day the petition was presented he was taken to task by the Assembly, and a committee was appointed to draw up a written representation on the subject to be sent to the House of Commons. Apparently before the report was finally adopted an oppor- tunity 'of speaking was granted to Mr. Coleman, if he would voluntarily recant.' He refused to 296 Debates on the admit much of what had been reported as having been really maintained by him. As to that which he acknowledged he maintained, it was his judg- ment though it might differ from that of the Assembly. He was sorry he had given offence by what he had done both to the Assembly and the Scotch Commissioners, and he promised that he would not add to the offence by printing hss sermon. On Monday, when the Assembly held its next meeting, however, he requested the Assembly either to relieve him from his promise or ' to take order for the occasion,' and he protested that it be considered ' null and void.' He printed his sermon, and engaged in that famous con- troversy with Gillespie, respecting its views, of which Dr. Hetherington has given so detailed an account. I turn rather to another aspect of the contest. The conduct of Coleman, in preaching this sermon and printing it, notwithstanding the promise he had given not to do so, had probably quite as much to do with the further action of the Assembly as the unfavourable rumours which reached them as to the unsatisfactory form the ordinance was to take. A committee of ten of the members, assisted by the Scotch Commissioners, drew up a still more resolute, yet more importunate petition, which was duly adopted and presented by a large deputation, on 8th August, to the House of Commons, and on the 12th to the House Autonomy of the Church, etc. 297 of Lords, in whose Journals it is recorded at length. It bears the signature of William Twisse, Prolocutor, and may be taken as evidence that he was still able occasionally to attend the meetings of Assembly, and to interest himself in their proceedings. Mr. White, who signed it as assessor, and presented it to both Houses, made a brief but hearty speech commending it to their earnest consideration. It asserts, even more resolutely than the previous one, the autonomy of the Church, argues the case with still deeper feeling of the importance of the issue, and pleads more im- portunately for a speedy and favourable settle- ment of the question. No nobler paper proceeded from the Assembly, nor could Twisse have closed his official career more worthily than by putting his name to it. At the risk of tediousness, I must quote from it at least in part. After re- minding the Houses of what they had already done in a matter of so high concern, they say : — ' Our spirits within constrain us yet further humbly to be- seech you in this particular ; and we hope it will not seem grievous unto you, if in conscience of that duty, which we as ministers, and more especially as met in this Assembly, owe to God, to His Church, and to yourselves, we are yet again humble and importunate petitioners in this thing ; seeing God is our record, and we hope it is manifest to your consciences that herein we seek not ourselves, or private interests, but the glory of God, the pure administra- tion of His ordinances, the welfare of souls, and the peace and good of this whole nation. . . . We should not use this opportunity did we not firmly believe that what we 298 Debates on the have desired and do desire herein is the will and command of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the King and Lawgiver in His Church, and therefore we dare not but in His name ask it, and doubt not by His grace to obtain it of the Honourable Houses.' Were it not that they cherished such a hope their hearts would fail within them, ' for this poor nation,' and therefore as watchmen set on Zion's walls, they dared not hold their peace especially when they called to mind that the Honourable Houses had been pleased to bind themselves, and them, and the nation, in a solemn and sacred Covenant, wherein they had sworn to endeavour to remove and reform all that was contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godliness, lest they should become partakers of other men's sins, and be in danger to receive of their plagues. ' God,' they continue, ' hath greatly strengthened your hands against Popery, Prelacy, and superstition, and for the rest of these roots of bitterness which we have covenanted against, especially schism and profaneness, we know no better way of providing against them than this for which we now petition ; which we are confident will (through the blessing of God) be the happiest means of healing the present and preventing future schisms, by removing out of the way that which hath been one of the greatest stumbling-blocks, and by reconciling all the godly in the kingdom, and will give much ease and satisfaction to weak and tender consciences, and which will give the greatest check to profaneness as sealing conviction upon the consciences of sinners most powerfully ; for it is not to be imagined that our denouncing the terrors of the Lord against wicked and profane persons will prevail much upon their hearts, while they may (even as soon as they have heard that sermon) come and recei\'e the sacrament, and therein, as they think, the seal of grace and salvation to themselves.' Then, taking up the charges and insinuations of their opponents, they boldly yet with all deference continue : ' We hope we shall not need to plead for ourselves that the power of keeping away scandalous and unworthy persons from the Lord's table, which Jesus Christ hath placed in the ministers and elders of His Autonomy of the Church, etc. 299 churches (the free and peaceable exercise whereof we humbly desire may be confirmed unto them by your sanction), is not an arbitrary or unlimited power ; for how can that power be called arbitrary which is not according to the will of man, but the will of Christ ? or how can it be supposed to be unlimited which is circumscribed and regulated by the exactest law — the Word of God ; which law, in case any shall transgress and abuse this power to serve their lusts instead of serving Christ in the exercise thereof, we have advised and humbly desire that superior Assemblies may be established amongst us, who may not only relieve the injured, but censure offenders according to their demerit. Nor is this power in the least measure (as we humbly conceive) inconsistent with theliberties of the subject, it being exercised wholly and solely in that which is no part of civil liberty — the sacrament— which certainly none can claim as he is a free-born subject of any kingdom or state, but as he is visibly a member of the Church qualified according to the rule of Christ. Only we crave leave to entreat you to consider that other Christian States, which are jealous of the encroachments of an arbitrary power, and very tender of their own just liberties, have granted the full exercise of the power of censures unto the elderships of their churches ; yea, and among ourselves, power equivalent to this ,was intrusted to ever)' single minister and curate in England as (in our humble apprehensions) appears both by the injunctions of King Edward the Sixth and by the injunctions and articles of inquiry of Queen Elizabeth, princess of famous memory, and by the late Book of Common Prayer and rubric before the sacrament ; nor do uc at present call to mind that any Christian prince or State whose heart God did incline to seek a reformation, as you have covenanted to do, and to establish a government according to the word, did ever deny this power unto the presbyteries in their dominions ; and we trust God loves the Parliament and England so well as not to suffer them to be the first. Yet can we not (lest our own heart should smite us as not having done our duties to the utmost), but con- tinue most humbly to advise and pray that ministers and 300 Debates on the other elders may be sufficiently enabled to keep not only some but all such as are justly and notoriously scandalous from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper ; for should things be so ordered (which God forbid) that any wicked and scandalous persons might without control thrust themselves upon this sacrament, we do evidently foresee that not only we, but many of our godly brethren, must be put upon this hard choice, either to forsake our stations in the ministry, which would be to us one of the greatest afflictions, or else to partake in other men's sins, and thereby incur the danger of their plagues ; and if we must choose one, we are resolved, and we trust our God will help us, to choose affliction rather than iniquity.^ No more memorable petition was presented even to that memorable Parliament than that we have given above, so faithful, yet respectful, so cogent in argument, yet calm in tone, so importunate, yet truly dignified. It was altogether worthy of the occasion, worthy of the venerated divines whose official signatures it bore, and worthy of the great Assembly which all but unanimously indorsed it. If aught would yet have availed to make the Erastian lawyers and over-zealous sticklers for the rights of the laity pause in their course, this petition ought to have done so. But so wedded were they to their own views, and so careless of consequences, that it availed not even to defer the issue. On 19th August they passed and published Directions for the choice of Ruling Elders, and on 20th October Rules and Directions concerning suspension from the Lord's Supper in cases of ignorance and scandal, but with such haste that Autonomy of the Church, etc. 301 on the 22d they had to order the copies which had been printed to be called in and suppressed as being erroneously printed. The deficiencies of the first as well as of the second were forcibly set forth in one of the petitions from the City ministers, transmitted through the Lord Mayor to the Houses on 20th November. These did not alto- gether ' play nipshot,' as Baillie has it. For on 20th February 1645-6 four resolutions, and on 26th two more supplementing the Directions of the 19th August were issued by the Houses, and on 14th March an additional ordinance for the sus- pension of the scandalous, not only, as it professes, correcting errors of the press and supplying defects in the former one, but changing some of its most important and what ought to have been its most carefully considered provisions — those, namely, by which it set itself in opposition to the Assembly and to many of the most devoted of its own lay friends, and substituted, instead of that court of Ecclesiastical Commission which it had abolished, commissioners of its own number to give directions to the elderships in cases not enumerated, and to receive and determine appeals from them. The ordinance of the 20th October had appointed only one body of commissioners, and these the members of both Houses that then were members of the Assembly, and apparently rather with the view that they should prepare matters for the Parlia- 302 Debates on the ment than themselves decide them. The ordi- nance of 14th March, besides correcting a number of the defects in the former one pointed out in the London petition above referred to, substituted for the single body of commissioners formerly- named, a body of commissioners in every province to be appointed by Parliament, who apparently were, in cases of discipline, virtually to supersede the synod of the province. It had been attempted in the first ordinance to give a sort of quasi ecclesiastical character to the commissioners, by confining them to the members of the Houses who* were members of the Assembly. In the second the same end was sought to be attained by requiring in them all the qualifications required of ruling elders, viz., that they ' be men of good understanding in matters of religion, sound in the faith, prudent, discreet, grave, and of unblamable conversation, and such as do usually receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper as members of a presbyterial congregation.' This was the last drop of wormwood in Baillie's cup. ' They have passed an ordinance,' he mournfully writes to Dickson in Scotland, ' not only for appeals from the General Assembly to the Parliament, for two ruling elders to one minister in every church meeting, for no censure except in such particular offences as they have enumerated ; but also, which vexes us most, and against which we have been labouring this Autono})!}' of the C/nirch, etc. 303 month bygone, a court of civil commissioners in every county, to whom the congregational elderships must bring all cases not enumerated, to be reported b)- them with their judgment to the Parliament or their committee.' Hard had the good man laboured, wire pulling and letter writing, if haply the House of Lords might be persuaded ' to scrape out all that concerns the commissioners of shires, and put in their room the classical pres- byteries to be reporters to the Parliament of all not enumerated cases of scandals.' But though Manchester the speaker resolutely opposed the obnoxious clause, the House by a majority of one decided to pass it. This troubled him and his friends exceedingly, but how to help it they ' could not well tell.' They were perplexed, yet not in despair. The Sectaries, the lawyers, and the Erastians had combined against them. They, the Assembly and the City, would make yet one more united effort to preserve their darling presbytery from the threatened discredit. The Assembly seems to have led the way, and their petition and remonstrance alone has found a place in the Journals of the Houses. On 20th March Mr. Marshall directed the attention of the Assembly to the recent ordinance which the Houses had passed after long and serious debate, and which they who had had the honour of tendering their advice would be expected to go before others in 304 Debates on the helping to put in practice. While he blessed God for the zeal shown by the Houses in en- deavouring to settle the government of the Church, yet he felt there were some things in the ordinance which lay heavily on his own conscience and the con- sciences of many of his brethren, and he urged the Assembly seriously to consider whether anything further could be done to set them right. After Mr. Vines and Mr, Seaman had briefly expressed their concurrence in his views, he and they and Mr. Newcomen, the convener of the former com- mittee, were appointed to consider what in point of conscience might warrant their making once more their humble address to the Houses. The same day their report was presented, and with a few alterations approved of The petition is a brief but pithy recapitulation of their former arguments and remonstrances. While thanking God for the many blessings he had made this Parlia- ment his instruments to convey unto these poor kingdoms, and professing themselves thereby the more obliged to show ail readiness to carry out their wishes so far as conscience permitted, yet, out of a sense of their duty to God, to the Parliament, and to the souls of the rest of their brethren, they felt constrained to represent in all humility and faith- fulness that there was still a great defect in the enumeration of scandalous sins, and that the provision of commissioners to judge of scandals Autonomy of the Church, etc. 305 not enumerated appeared to them so contrary to the way of government which Christ had appointed in His Church, that they dared not practise accord- ing to that provision, nor, considering the trust reposed in them, altogether hold their peace at this time. Therefore they humbly pray that the several elderships may ' be sufficiently enabled to keep back all such as are notoriously scandalous from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper,' affirming that it expressly belonged to them by divine right and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ, and that by the help of superior Assemblies all inconveniences feared from maladministration may be prevented, and the magistrate 'to whom,' they say, ' we profess the Church to be accountable for their proceedings in all their elderships and church assemblies, and punishable by him with civil censures for their miscarriages, may be so abundantly satisfied of the equity thereof,' that they trust his heart will be moved by God to strengthen the hands of church officers in their duties, and even to command them to act zealously and faithfully in them. On Monday morning the Assembly in a body carried up the petition, which was presented by Mr. Marshall.^ The * The petition is reprinted in full in Minutes of Westminster Assembly, pp. 209, 210, 211. The remonstrances of the Scotch to the same effect and the surreptitious publication of their papers added greatly to the irritation of the Commons. 3o6 Debates on the House of Commons did not take it in good part, and after it had in various sessions been discussed in grand committee and in the House, it was on nth April resolved by 88 to '^6 that the petition presented by the Assembly of Divines was a breach of the privilege of Parliament. A com- mittee, of which Selden was a member, was appointed to state the particulars of the breach of privilege, and to draw up certain queries to be put to the Divines regarding ih^jiis divinuni of church- government. The statement was approved by the House on the 21st, and the queries on the 22d April, and a small committee was appointed to communicate 'in a fair manner' to the Assembly the vote of the House as to the breach of privilege, to enlarge on the several heads of the statement above mentioned, and to deliver the queries. Seldom has the House of Commons put itself into a less dignified position than it did on this occasion. Willing to wound, yet afraid to strike, deliberately ignoring the other House of Parlia- ment, and the large minority of its own members who were averse to its policy, it rushed into a conflict in which success could bring it no glory, and failure must bring certain discredit or dis- honour. The sympathies of religious people — of all but the most splenetic of those who usually opposed them — could not fail to be drawn forth towards the men who under constraint of conscience Autonomy of the Church, etc. 307 had stated in so calm and respectful terms their inability to act on the conditions which by a narrow majority had been fixed, and their determination to suffer rather than to be instrumental in carrying out what they believed to be wrong. If the thing itself was a mistake, the manner in which it was performed was far more decidedly so. It was not worthy of an English House of Commons in such a case to send delegates to say by word of mouth what themselves had not ventured to put on record. If their own isolated position and the general respect for the Assembly restrained them from dealing with the alleged offence as breach of privilege should have been dealt with, it should have restrained their deputies from representing it as even of a graver character than the House in its statement had ventured to assert, and as having made them liable to the penalty of d. prcemunire. It was not till the 30th April that the deputies of the House of Commons appeared in the Assembly to fulfil their mission, and if one may judge of the tenor of their addresses from the fragmentary notes of their speeches jotted down by the scribe of the Assembly, and from the references made to them in the memorable speech delivered by Johnston of Warriston on the following day, he can hardly avoid coming to the conclusion that they displayed more annoyance and irritation than became so grave an occasion, and the whole action less fore- 3o8 Debates on the thought and caution than might have been expected from men so well versed in the management of affairs. Sir John Evelyn spoke first, and apparently with most temper. After enlarging on the offence which the contents of their petition had given, and stating how it might warrantably have been dealt with had it come from any other quarter, he passed on to speak of the queries which he hints they had heard it said were sent to retard the settlement of church-government. That, he as- sured them, was not their object in sending them. The matters to which they related were worthy of serious consideration, and the opinions of the Assembly would be received by the House with due respect. But in coming to a decision they must be allowed the freedom of their reason, and liberty of judgment. ' The House of Commons,' he continued, * is very sensible of the faithful and useful endeavours of yourselves, and though they had not been so often reminded of it they would not have forgotten it.' In conclusion he seems to have expressed a hope that these services were not now to be discontinued, or a breach made between them, and warned them that if there should, they would give occasion to all the world to say that as they had been willing to serve the Parliament for a while, so they wished the Parliament to serve them for ever after. The Parliament were not un- willing to submit their necks to the yoke of Christ, Autonomy of the Church, etc. 309 for that was an easy yoke, and what proved to be a galHng yoke was none of His. Mr. Fiennes, who made the next and what was probably intended to be the principal speech, showed more tact, while he expressed himself with no less decision. This address has been more fully recorded by the scribe, and I can find room for only a single extract. ' If an Assembly,' he says, ' so soon as a law is made, set a brand upon it as contrary to the will of God and mind of Jesus Christ and our Covenant, what can more stifle it in the birth, and make it of none effect ? Can any man call that to be an advice, and not rather a controlling and contradiction of what was already done? Did the Houses of Parliament give any colour of power to this Assembly to give any interpretation of the national Covenant especially in relation to the making of laws ? Not a particular member may speak against a vote without leave, and shall [you claim] not only to debate, but to arraign and condemn it, nay, to pass the highest doom upon it, that it is contrary to the will of God and the national Covenant . . . For any without authority to inter- pose their advice is to encroach upon that which is proper to the great council of the kingdom. How much more to set up judgment against judgment, at tare contra atiare, tie them up to a particular sense, and that under pain of breaking God's law and incurring the censure of breach 3IO Debates on the of Covenant/ Then, forgetting that what the Assembly had done was known only to themselves and the Houses, he proceeds : *To arm the hands of the subjects against the authority and power of the Parliament every one knoweth what it is, and to arm the hearts and consciences against it is the next of kin to it, and the one but the high road to the other.' 'These things,' he says in conclusion, ' are not the ways of Englishmen, Christians, and ministers of Christ ' (and here probably may have dropped out that reference to those of another nation to which we shall find Johnston alluding). ' We come to speak plainly to you and plain English. It is not in the thoughts of the House to disgrace or discourage you in your ministry.' Mr. Browne, who spoke next, enlarged on legal precedents as to such offences, and the penalty of prcemunire which the House had not explicitly mentioned, and reminded them not only how the Pope had abused spiritual power, but how they had smarted from the abuse of it by others, forgetting apparently that all the worst acts of these others were done by them as Ecclesiastical Commissioners acting under the sanction of those statutes which gave ecclesiastical authority to the Head of the State. Sir Benjamin Rudyard spoke briefly upon the queries regarding the jus divinnm of church- government, and the mode in which the House expected them to be answered, ' not by far-fetched Autonomy of the Church, etc. 3 1 1 arguments which are commonly cold before you come to the matter,' but in plain and express terms. He had heard much spoken of ' the pattern in the mount,' but could never for his part find it in the New Testament. They had been threatened with 2i prcemunire by the king before they began their work. They were now told by the deputies of that House whom they had risked so much to serve that they had incurred that penalty. They must have listened with pain to the speeches, but they listened in silence. No angry word escaped them. No course of action was hastily resolved on. They read the paper which the deputies had left, and quietly ad- journed for the day. Friends as well as opponents of the policy of the House of Commons have asserted that the queries were proposed animo tentandi 7ion cedificandi. But the deputies pro- tested the contrary. The Assembly took them at their word, and next day calmly proceeded to make arrangements for the work devolved on them.^ It 1 The queries left by the deputies, and the order of the House of Commons regarding them, are to be found at pp. 225 and 226 of the printed volume of the Minutes of the Assembly, the formal statement of their case against the Assembly at pp. 456, 457, and the speeches at pp. 448-456. The queries are subjoined. ' Whereas it is resolved by the House of Commons, that all persons guilty of notorious and scandalous offences shall be sus- pended fron the sacrament of the Lord's Supper : The House of Commons desires to be satisfied by the Assembly of Divines in these Questions following : • I. Whether the Parochial and Congregational Elderships 3 1 2 Debates on the was proposed that as the cause was God's they should begin by seeking His guidance with fasting and prayer. The suggestion was agreed to, and Wednesday in the following week was appointed to be observed as a day of humiliation, Messrs. Palmer, Whitaker, and Case being named to lead their devotions, and Messrs. Cawdry and Arrow- smith to preach. As I am not to make further appointed by Ordinance of Parliament, or any other Congrega- tional or Presbyterial Elderships, are jure diviiio and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ, and whether any particular church-government "he. jure divino ; and what that government is ? 'II. Whether all the members of the said Elderships, as members thereof, or which of them, are jure divino and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? ' III. Whether the superior Assemblies or Elderships, viz., the Classical, Provincial, and National, whether all or any of them axz jure divino and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? ' IV. Whether appeals from Congregational Elderships to the Classical, Provincial, and National Assemblies, or to any of them, and to which of them, arey'wr^" divino and by the will and appoint- ment of Jesus Christ ; and are their powers upon such appealsy'wrif divino and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? 'V. Whether QEcumenical Assemblies are jure divino; and whether there be appeals from any of the former Assemblies to the said CEcumenical jure divifto and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? ' VI. Whether by the Word of God the power of judging and declaring what are such notorious and scandalous offences for which persons guilty thereof are to be kept from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and of conventing before them, trying, and actually suspending from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper such offenders accordingly, is either in the Congregational Eldership or Presbytery, or in any other Eldership, Congregation, or Persons ; and whether such powers are in them only, or in any of them, and in which of them, jure divino and by the will and appointment of Jesii'; Christ ? •VII. Whether there be any certain and particular rules ex- Autonomy of the CJiurch, etc. 313 reference to the work of that day I niust not omit to mention here that the notes taken by the scribe of Arrovvsmith's sermon show it especially to have been worthy of the occasion and of his reputation as a preacher and a devoted Christian. It had probably been intended that this proposal should be made by Lord Warriston to give the bold Scottish lawyer an opportunity of replying to the speeches of the previous day, but coming in late and finding it already made, he seems to have pressed in the Word of God to direct the Elderships or Presbyteries, Congregations or Persons, or any of them, in the exercise and execution of the powers aforesaid ; and what are those rules? 'VIII. Is there anything contained in the Word of God, that the supreme Magistracy in a Christian State may not judge and determine what are the aforesaid notorious and scandalous offences, and the manner of suspension for the same : and in what particulars concerning the premises is the said supreme Magistracy by the Word of God excluded ? ' IX. Whether the provision of Commissioners to judge of scandals not enumerated (as they are authorised by the Ordinance of Parliament) be contrary to that way of government which Christ hath appointed in His Church, and wherein are they so contrary ? ' In answer to these particulars, the House of Commons desires of the Assembly of Divines their proofs from Scripture ; and to set down the several texts of Scripture in the express words of the same. It is Ordered that every particular minister of the Assembly of Divines, that is or shall be at the debate of any of these Questions, do, upon every Resolution which shall be presented to this House concerning the same, subscribe his respective name, either with the affirmative or negative, as he gives his vote : And that those that do dissent from the major part shall set down their positive opinions, with the express texts of Scripture upon which their opinions are grounded.' — jfotiifials of House of Commons, vol. iv. pp. 519, 520. 3 1 4 Debates on the delivered as two speeches what he had written out and afterwards sent down to the Commissioners of the Assembly as one. This has been inserted - in the records of the Commission of the Scotch Assembly, but has never been published save among the reports given in to the General Assem- bly of the Church of Scotland in 1879, and as it gives a much clearer view of his argument than the desultory jottings of the scribe of the Assembly I subjoin it in a slightly abridged form : — • 'Mr. Prolocutor/— I am a stranger. I will not meddle with Parliament priviledges of another nation nor the breach thereof ; but as a Christian under one common Lord, a ruHng elder in another Church, and a Parliament man in another kingdome, having a commission both from that Church and State, and at the desire of this kingdome, assist- ing to your debates, I entreat for your favour and patience (seeing at all tymes I cannot attend this reverend meeting according to my desire) to express my thoughts of what is before you. In my judgment that is before you w^'' con- cerns Christ and these kingdoms most, and above all, and w<:'' will be the chiefest mean to end or continew these troubles. ... I can never be persuaded they were raised or will be calmed upon the settling of civil rights and privi- ledges either of King or Parliaments, whatsoever may seeme to be our present successe. But I am convinced they have a higher rise from above, for the highest end — the settling the crown of Christ in this island to be propagat[edJ from island to continent. Untill King Jesus be set down on his throne with his sceptre in his hand I do not expect God's peace, and so no solid peace from men in these kingdomes ; ^ It is entitled in the records of the Commission ' Lord Warristoun's Speech to the Assembly of Divines in England in Answer to Sir John Evelyn and Nath[aniel] Fiennes, concerning the Breach of Priviledge. ' A tit OHO my of the C/nirch, etc. 315 but that soveraigne truth being established a durable peace will be found to follow y'upon.' 'I was glade to hear the Parliament professe their willing- nesse to receive and observe whatsoever shall be shewne from the Word of God to be Christ or his Church their right and due ; albeit I wes sorrie to see any in the delyverie of [their message] to intermix any of y"" own personall asperity, any aspersion upon this assembly or reflection upon another nation ; so I believe in this day of law for Christ in which justice is offered, if ye get not right it will be counted your fault, in not shewing His patent from His Father and His Church's patent from him. [Now they have laid it on your shoulders, it lies at your door.] 'Sir, all Christians are bound to give a testimony to everie truth when they ar called to it ; but ye ar the immediat ser- vants of the Most High — -Christ's precones and heralds, whose propper function is to proclaim his name, preserve his offices, and assert his rights. Christ has had many testi- monies given to his prophetical and priestly office by the pleading and suffering of his saincts ; and in thir latter dayes he seems to require the samyne unto his kingly office. A king loves a testimony to his crowne best of any, as that w"^'' is tenderest to him ; and confessors or martyres for Christ's crowne ar the most royal and most stately of any state mar- tyrs ; for although Christ's kingdome be not of this world, and his servants did not fight therefor when he wes to suffer ; yet it is in this world, and for this end was he born. And to this end that we may give a testimony to this truth amongst others were wee born ; nor should we be ashamed of it or deny it but confesse and avouche it by pleading, doing and suffering for it, even in this generation, w'^'^ seems most to oppose it and y''by recjuire a seasonable testimony, liut in a peculiar way it lyeth upon you, sir, who hes both your calling from Christ for it and at this time a particular calling from man. It is that w<^'' the hon^'= houses requires and expects from you especially at such a time when the settlement of religion depends y'upon, and when it is the veric controversie of the tyme ro Kf)iv6\i.(^vov. And the civil magistrates not only call you before them to averre the truth 2) {6 Debates on the therein, but also to give you good examples, comes befor yow out of the tendernes of y"" civil trust and dutie to maintain the priviledge of Parliament by the covenant, and for respect to yow to give a testimony asserting of y"^ civil ryghts and priviledge, and to forewarn you least yee break the samen and incurre civil premoniries. Sir, this should teach us to be as tender, zealous, and carefuU to assert Christ and his Church their priviledge and right, and to forewarn all least they endanger y"' souls by incrotching y''upon, . . . that Christ lives and reigns alone over and in his Church, and will have all done therein according to his word and will, and that he hes given no supreme headship over his Church io any pope, king, or parliament whatsoever. 'Sir, ye are often desired to remember the bounds of your commission from man and not to exceed the samen ; I am confident you will make as much conscience not to be defi- cient in the discharge of your commission from Christ. But now. Sir, ye have a commission from God and man (for the w^** ye have reason to thank God and the Parlia- ment) to discuss the truth that Christ is a king and hes a kingdome in the externall government of his church, and that he hes set doun the lawes and offices and other substantialls y'of. Wee must not now before men mince, hold up, conceal, prudentially waive anything necessary for this testimony, . . . nor quit a hoofe, or edge away an hemme of Christ's robe royal. These would seem effects of desertions, tokens of being ashamed, affrayed, or politikly diverted, yea gradus denegationis Christi, and all these and everie degree of them, sir, I am confident, will be verie farre from the thoughts of everie one heir, who already by their votes and petitions, according to y protestation at y"" entry, have shewn themselves so zealous and forward to give their testi- mony, albeit they did easily foresee it would not be verie acceptable to powers on the earth. . . . 'Truely, sir, I am confident ye will never be so in love with a peaceable and external possession of anything that may be granted to the Church as to conceale, disclaime, or intervert your Master's right. That were to lose the substance for the circumstance, to disserve and dethrone Christ to serve i AutonoDiy of the Church, etc. 317 yourselves and enthrone others in his place. A tennent doing so to his overlord forfaults all. Who speaks for civil liberties would never so undo them ; ye ar commandit to be faithful in little ; but now ye ar commandit to be faithful in much. For albeit the salvation of soules be called cura curarutn, the wellfare and happiness of the Church made up of these is farre more. But the kingdome of Christ est quid optimu7n maxtmum, and to have it now under your debate, as it is the greatest honour God can bestow upon an assem- bly, so is it the greatest danger, for, according now as God shall assist you or desert you, ye may and will be the instru- ments of the greatest good or evil on earth. . . . ' Sir, some may think ye have had a designe in abstaining so long to assert the divine right of church-government, and now to come in with it. Truely, Sir, I look on this check as from ane good providence for your great sparingnes and absteinensies in that poynt, and must beare witness to many passages of God's good hand in not suffering us to make a stand of our desires concerning religion, either in Scotland or heir, albeit we have oft set downe measure to ourselves. But he hes as often moved us step for step to trace back our defections, and made the last innovation a besom to sweepe out the former, and the king's refusall to be a mean to engage us in covenant with himself and others. ... By this good hand of God and for this end I hope these queries ar brought to you at this time. 'Sir, your serving the Parliament a while, I am confi- dent hes bene and will be still, not that they may serve yow who hes viinisteriinn, a quo absii dominatus, sed cui adsit author it as, as over us in the Lord, but to serve the Lord Jesus Christ ; and that Parliament will glorie more in y sub- ordination and subservience to him nor in their empire or command over the world. ' Sir, we may heare much of breache of priviledge and covenant in relation to civile rights. Let us remember in the covenant the three ends in the title and preface, three mainc duties in the body, and the thric effects in the close. The covenant begins with the advancement and ends with the enlarircmcnt of the kingdome of Christ as the sub- 3 1 8 Debates on the stantiall and overword of the whole. The first article of the sevin is Christ's article, lyke dies dominica in the week, all the rest ar in Domino, and subordinat y'unto, and subordin- ata non pu^nant. And certainlie so judicious and happy, so protesting, covenanting, declaring, so doing and suffering a Parliament, for reformation will never claime anything as a civile priviledge or right w'^'' ye will demonstrat to be proper to Christ's kingdome as distinct from the kingdomes of the earth. Christ's throne is highest, and his priviledge supreme as only head and king of his Church, albeit kings and magistrates may be members in it. There is no author- ity to be ballanced with his, nor post to be set up against his post, nor the altar of Damascus against his altar, nor strange fire against his fire, nor Corahs to be allowed against his Aarons, nor Uzziahs against his Azariahs. Is it so small a thing to have the sworde that they must have the keyes also ? Qua: Deus sejunxit homo ne jungat. [And truely, sir, I am confident that parliament, citty, country, both nations will acknowledge themselves engaged under and to this authority, and as they would not be drawn from it, so ye will never endeavour to draw us to any other authority ; and whatsoever reflection to the contrary wes insinuat by the delyA'erer of the message, I cannot butimput it to personall passion, w'^'' long ago is knowne to the world. But we will never beleeve the hon^'* house would allow therof, as farre beneath their wisdome and contrare to your merite. 'And now, sir, seeing the quaeries ar before you, I am con- fident that whatsoever diversity of opinions may be amongst you in any particular, yee will all look to and hold out the maine, Christ's kingdome distinct from the kingdomes of this earth, and that he hes and might appoint the govern- ment of his own house and should rule the samen ; and that none of this Assembly, even for the gaining their desires in all the poynts of difference, would by y"" silence, concealment, and connivance weaken, communicat, or sell any part of this fundamentall truth, this sovereign interest of Christ, and that ye will all concurre to demonstrate the samen by clear passages of Scripture, necessarie consequences y'^fra, w"^"" can Autonomy of the Church, etc. 319 no more be denyed or esteemed cold nor the letter itself, and by the universal! constant practice of the Apostles, w'^'' ar as cleare rules unto us as any human lawes, inferences, and practises ar or can be brought for any civile priviledges. ' Sir, I will only close this by reminding yow of two passages of your letter, sent by order of the House of Com- mons to the Generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland, that ye will sett out such a discipline as to the utmost of your power ye may exalt Christ, the only Lord over the Church his own house, in all his offices, and present this church as a chast virgine to Christ. And for this end that ye were not restrained by the Houses in your votes and resolutions, nor bound up to the sense of others, nor to carry on privat designes in ane servile way ; but by your oath new formed against all fettering of your judgments, and engaged y'by according to the Houses' desire, to use all free- dome becoming the integrity of your conscience, weight of the cause, and the gravity and honour of such an Assembly.' Heartened and cheered by the speech of Lord Warriston, and feeling they had a noble cause to maintain, the Assembly resolutely set themselves to their Herculean task, and for eight weeks they laboured at it zealously and uncomplainingly. Most of the replies had passed through the com- mittees, and a considerable part through the Assem- bly, but, as had been anticipated by many, it proved to be a very tedious business and threatened to divert them too long from more pressing work. So when, through the mediation of the City, a better understanding had been restored between the House of Commons on the one side and the As- sembly and the Scottish Commissioners on the other, and a third ordinance had been passed by 320 Debates on the Parliament withdrawing the obnoxious Provincial Commissioners, and substituting in their room the Parliament itself or a grand committee of the two Houses, the London ministers, though not fully satisfied, consented to act under the Ordinance, and ^ the Scotch Commissioners, while urging yet further concessions, agreed to refrain from insisting on them as a condition of continued amity. The House of Commons, whose members had all along protested that they were not opposed to godly discipline, but only wished it to be 'rightly jointed with the laws of the kingdom,' issued an order for hastening the Confession and Catechism, which was regarded as a warrant for postponing the other work. This work, however, there is reason to believe, was not lost, but supplemented and expanded by some of the London ministers, it made its appearance before the close of the year^ in certain parts of the Jus Divinuni Regiminis Ecdesiastici^ much to the indignation of several members of the House of Commons. The answers to the queries were, with consent of the House, resumed by the Assembly in 1648 after it had finished its Confession and Catechisms, and had no other special work to do. But the minutes after that date are so brief that only a few entries are made on the subject, and we do not know if the work was ever formally com- pleted. The final Ordinance of Parliament on ' Answers to the queries had appeared in June 1646. Autonomy of the Church, etc. 321 church-government, embodying and supplementing or making permanent the former ones, still con- tained the clause authorising appeals from the Church courts to Parliament, but I have found no evidence that any such appeal was ever made. The London ministers in fact, in agreeing to organise under the Ordinances of 6th June 1646, had published their resolution ' to practise in all things according to the rule of the Word, and according to these Ordinances so far as they con- ceive them to correspond to it, and in so doing they trust they shall not grieve the spirit of the truly godly, nor give any just occasion to them, that are contrary minded to blame ' their pro- ceedings.^ It was during these anxious months in the spring and early summer of 1646 that those far- famed debates on the independent government of the Church took place which are recorded at con- siderable length in the Minutes of the Assembly.'^ The proposition ' That Jesus Christ as King and Head of His Church, hath appointed an ecclesias- tical government in His Church distinct from the civil government,' was first tabled for discussion on Friday 6th March 1645-6, while the Ordinance for Provincial Commissioners was being elaborated in the Houses. It does not seem to have formed ' Considerations and Cautions from Zion College, 19 June 1646. ' See Minutes of the Assembly, pp. 193-203, 424-432. X 2,2 2 Debates on the part of the original report on the Church, as it had been brought up on Thursday, and Coleman, before opening the discussion on the following Monday, ' moved to pass the proposition brought in by the Committee which would pass without any question,' and once again in the course of the debate he re- newed his proposal. But it was not agreed to by the Assembly. So with all the zest of a keen and practised debater he set himself to the discussion of the proofs adduced in support of the proposition, and for several days bore the brunt of the battle almost single-handed. The arguments were based chiefly on Matt, xviii. and I Cor. v., and were pro- posed in syllogistic form, and long and tough were the encounters between him on the one side and^' Rutherfurd and Gillespie on the other. Others spoke occasionally and briefly, but these were the combatants in chief, and on them all eyes were fixed. At length, on the i8th, when the Assembly called to the order of the day, Mr. Coleman was not present to continue the debate, but some members of the House of Commons, who were desirous to elicit further explanations from the Divines, continued it for a time, and it was again adjourned. Next day it was reported that Mr. Coleman was ill, and two of the members were deputed to visit him. The following day one of these reported that he had fulfilled his commission, and found that Mr. Coleman was very ill, but Atdonomy of the Church, etc. 323 returned his thanks to the Assembly for their kind inquiries, and expressed his desire to be further heard in the argument, and to have the debate ad- journed till he was able to return. They complied so far with the request of their dying brother, and it was not till, on 30th of March, they had followed his body to the grave that they resumed the debate. It was carried on more languidly by Lightfoot and some members of the House of Commons throughout the month of April, and then was merged in the wider debate raised by the queries of the Commons. After further discussion, the proposition was on 7th July passed as part of the answer to the first query, fifty-two voting for it, and Lightfoot alone against it. On 26th Septem- ber it was with some slight verbal changes passed as the first section of chapter xxx. of their Confes- sion. That chapter was not passed by the House of Commons, nor does it have a place in the Independent or the Baptist recension of the Con- fession. But it is retained by all the Presbyterian churches which receive the Confession as it came from the Assembly, and is held in honour by them. Thus, through calm and storm, in sunshine and in shade, the Divines held on the even tenor of their way, and whatever may have been intended by some ' who were not overloving of any, least of all of these clergymen,' they were not in point of fact brought into disgrace or discredit at the time, 324 Debates on the AutoJiomy of the Church. nor have they been so subsequently on account of their firm but dignified and respectful protest against the Erastianism of so large a section of the House of Commons. Before these debates came to a close, the first civil war had virtually ended. The relief of Gloucester (p. 178) was, according to Mr. Green, the turning-point in the struggle, and, though after that occasional blinks of sunshine came to raise the sinking spirits of the Cavaliers, things on the whole went steadily if slowly against them. The victory of Marston Moor broke their power in Yorkshire, that of Philiphaugh crushed Montrose in Scotland, and that of Naseby did the same for the King and Prince Rupert in the heart of England. As the Parliamentary forces prepared to close round Oxford, the king escaped to the Scottish army before Newark, and on the sur- render of that place retired with them to New- castle. There one more earnest and prolonged attempt was made to bring him to term.s. Hen- derson wore out his sinking strength in the thankless service. He and Blair, with the nobles and officers, besought the infatuated monarch, with tears, to yield to the wishes of his people. But all was in vain, and with sore hearts and sad misgivings they left him in the hands of the English Commissioners, and took their departure from a land where they were no longer welcome guests. LECTURE X. THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH OR ARTICLES OF CHRISTIAN RELIGION. Part /. — Introductory history of doctrine, and detailed account of the preparation of the Confession. In my last Lecture I gave you a full account of the controversies on the autonomy of the Church, which engaged the attention of the Assembly in 1646, and interrupted for a time the preparation of its doctrinal standards. In to-day's Lecture I shall endeavour to give a succinct account of the preparation of that Confession of Faith which is regarded in most Presbyterian Churches as the principal, and in some as the sole doctrinal standard. As I promised in a former lecture (p. 54), however, I must first advert to the previous history of doctrine in the British Churches. I have already explained that the differences between the Puritans^ and their opponents at first seemed ' * Albeit the Puritans disquieted our Church about their conceived discipline, yet they never moved any quarrel against the doctrine of our Church. . . It was then the open confession, both of the 326 The Westminster Confession of Faith. to be few in number, and of minor importance, just because so much of what afterwards came to be named puritanic was then accepted and valued by almost all who favoured the principles of the Reformation. I stated that this was especially the case with respect to that system of doctrine known as Augustinian or Calvinistic, the holders of which, by the time of Archbishop Laud, had come to be nicknamed doctrinal Puritans. As the movement which culminated in the Westminster Assembly was designed above all to be a protest against the misrepresentation this involved, and if possible to restore Augustinianism and the theology of the English reformation to its old place of honour in the Church, I must now revert to this subject, and give at least a brief out- line of the history of this theology in the British Churches. There was perhaps no branch of the mediaeval Church where the system of doctrine developed by Augustine had so unquestionably retained its old supremacy to the last as the Anglo-Norman. The system of its greatest theologians, Anselm and Bradwardine, appropriated by Wyclif and the Lollards, continued or revived by Tyndale, Frith, Barnes, and their coadjutors, may be said to Bishops and of the Puritans, that both parties embraced a mutual consent in doctrine.' — Bishop Carleton's Examination of Bishop ATontague's Appeal, p. 5. Introductory History of Doctrine. 327 have formed the substratum of the Reformed teaching, even while it was least affected by in- fluences from abroad. Such influences, however, were early brought to bear on that teaching, and it has long seemed to me that the effect of these upon it, and their ready assimilation, were largely due to the hold Augustinianism had already gained, that it was through the teaching of Anselm, Brad- wardine, Wyclif, and Tyndale, rather than from * fascination of the f aim, clear intellect of Calvin,' they were first attracted towards him and the later predestinarian school. With the full sanction of Cranmer and the Privy Council of Edward VI., Martin Bucer and Peter Martyr were in 1548 in- vited to England, and soon after their arrival were installed as professors or lecturers in divinity in the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford, to imbue with the theology of the Reformation the future ministers of the English Church. Their published commentaries on the Ephesians and the Romans embody the substance of the lectures they delivered in the years 1550 and 1551, and show clearly that their teaching on predestination and other related subjects was in thorough accordance with that of Augustine and Anselm, as well as with that of Calvin. The following is Bucer's definition of election : — ' Est itaque electio destinatio et certa Dei miseratio ab aeterno ante mundum constitutum, qua Deus eos, quorum vult 328 The Westminster Confession of Faith. misereri, ex universe perditorum hominum genere ad vitam aeternam secernit, ex plane liberali misericordia, priusquam quicquam possint boni aut mali facere. Certa, inquam, est et immutabilis, per Jesum Christum unigenitum filium Dei et nostrum mediatorem, ab aeterno destinatum caput ecclesise ac reconciliatorem, secundum aeternum et immutabile propositum suum, ut nos adoptaret in filios et haredes et in novam vitam regeneraret, ut sancti essemus et irreprehensibiles coram ipso ad gloriam gratise suae.'^ Martyr's definition is : — ' Dico igitur praedestinationem esse sapientissimum propositum Dei, quo ante omnem aeternitatem decrevit constanter, eos, quos dilexit in Christo, vocare ad adoptionem filiorum, ad justificationem ex fide et tandem ad gloriam per bona opera, quo conformes fiant imagini Filii Dei, utque in illis declaretur gloria et misericordia Creatoris.'^ Note- worthy as these definitions are when viewed by themselves, they are still more noteworthy when we view them in connection with the xvilth of the Edwardian Articles which were drawn up about the same time. Had we known no more * Praelectiones. . . D. Martini Buceri habitre Cantabridgias in Anglia, anno 1550 et 1551, pp. 22, 23. ' In Epistolam S. Pauli Apostoli ad Romanos D. Petri Martyris commentarii, p. 41 1, folio edition, 1558. The work was not published till after he left England, but we learn from the preface that it had been written out by 1552, and the schedce circulated among his friends there, and from his letters we learn it was ready for publication when he left in 1553. Introductory History of Doctrine. 329 than that these two divines were held in high regard by Cranmer and the advisers of the king, and were consulted by them on the revision of the liturgy, we would have known enough to warrant us carefully to compare their teaching with that of this Article, to ascertain whether the one was not , to a certain extent reflected in the other, and calculated to aid us in tracing its sources and character. But we know further, that after the death of Bucer, Martyr continued to be consulted and cherished by the Primate, and have positive testimony that he was one of those associated with him, not only in the commission of thirty- two for the reformation of the ecclesiastical laws, but also in some smaller committee^ (of that com- mission, or of Convocation) which was occupied especially with purity of doctrine. He paid repeated and lengthened visits to Lambeth in the fall of the year 1551 and the spring of 1552, on tile business of that committee, and his friend and amanuensis, John ab Ulmis, had in 1550 translated from German into Latin, for the 1 'The Convocation began to be lield ... on the 12th of De- cember by most excellent and learned men who are to deliberate and consult about a proper moral discipline, and the purity of lioctrinc. The Archbishop of Canterbury, and Peter Martyr, the Archbishop of York, and the Bishop of London, together with the newly appointed Chancellor of England . . . Bishop of Ely and our friend Skinner . . . are to form a select committee on these points.' — John ab Ulmis to Bullinger, in Original Letters relating to the Reformation, Parker Society edition, pp. 444, 503. 330 The Westminster Confession of Faith. Primate, the Confession of Strasburg.^ He was named by Cranmer in 1553 in his Purgatio?i' as one with whose help he would be ready to defend ' all the doctrine ' set forth in the reign of Edward VI. ; and still later he seems to be referred to by the Archbishop in his final examination as one whose advice he had taken about the Articles.^ We feel, therefore, not merely warranted, but even bound to compare them with his doctrinal teaching ere we venture, with any approach to confidence, to pronounce on the sources from which they have been taken, or the exact shade of meaning they were meant to convey. I have given above the definition of predestination by Martyr as it is 'John ab Ulmis, Original Letters, Parker Soc. ed., p. 404. ' ' I with the said Master Peter Martyr and other four or five, which I shall choose, will by God's grace take upon us to defend not only the common prayers of the Church, the ministration of the sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies, but also all the doctrine and religion set out by our sovereign lord King Edward the Sixth.' — Foxe's Acts and Monujuents, vol. vi. p. 539. ^ Foxe (viii. p. 58) represents Cranmer as saying that ' as for the catechism and the book of articles ... he granted the same to be his doings,' but the formal Processus contra Tkot?iam Crantner (Works, Parker Society's edition, vol. ii. p. 545), gives a very different representation : ' Ad septimum fatetur se edidisse librum . . . A defence of the true and Catholic faith, etc. — et negat se edidisse librum, in eodem articulo etiam mentionatum, vocatum — A discourse of Peter Martyr — et quoad tertium librum vocatum, A discourse of the Lord^s Supper [by Peter Martyr] negat se ilium edidisse, tamen credit hujusmodi liber est bonus et catholicus, et quoad catechismum et articulos in eodem fatetur se adhibuisse ejus consilium circa editionem ejusdem.' The word ejus can refer only to Martyr. Archdeacon Hardwick, by quoting merely the last clause, has failed to bring out this, though correcting Foxe. IntrodMctory History of Doctrine. 3 3 1 exhibited on p. 411 of the folio edition of his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Let me now place this opposite to the first part of the Edwardian Article, inserting here and there within brackets the analogous phrases which Martyr uses when more fully explaining his definition, that it may be seen how very closely his ideas and modes of expression appear to be reproduced in the Latin form of that Article : — Martyr's Definition. Dico igitur prtedestinatio- ncm esse sapientissimumpro- positum Dei, quo ante omnem ;L'tcrnitatem {a?ite jactafiin- damenta ifuifuli,^i i) decrevit constanter {suo consilio licet nobis occult o^ 459) eos quos dilexit in Christo {a calami- tale liberare, 431 [atque ut] 7'asa in honorevi facta, 428) ad felicitatem {crternam salu- Av;/, 433) per Christum addu- cere, 431. {tanto Dei benejicio, 344, dofialos, 343) vocare ad adoptionem filiorum {justo tempore, 473) {vocalione, quam Augustinus ex Paul! phrasi vocat, secundutn pro- positutn, 426) ad justificatio- ncm ex fide {gratis per Christum justijicare ut effi- ciantur conformes imagini Latin Article of 1553. Prsedestinatio ad vitam est seternum Dei propositum, quo ante jacta mundi funda- menta, suo consiHo, nobis quidem occulto, constanter decrevit eos quos [ ] elegit ex hominum genere, a maledicto et exitio Hberare, atque ut vasa in honorem efficta, per Christum ad jeter- nam salutem adducere. U nde qui tarn praeclaro bene- ficio sunt donati, illi Spiritu ejus opportune tempore oper- ante, secundum propositum ejus vocantur, vocationi per gratiam parent (credunt A) justificantur gratis, adoptan- tur in filios unigeniti Jesu Christi imagini efficiuntur cunformes, in bonis operibus 332 The Westminstei' Confession of Faith. filii Dei, . . . utque atnbulent sancte ambulant, et demum in bonis operibus^ 421, utque ex Dei misericordia pertin- in illis declaretur gloria et gunt ad sempitemam felici- misericordia Creatoris, {ad tatem. vitam ceternaj/i {ceternam felicitatem, 431) elect os ad- ducit, 434.) The definition of Martyr is more brief than that of the Articles, but even so it contains the words in Christo, which were only inserted in the Article in 1563, and are generally to be found in the Reformed Confessions. It is only when we take account of the analogous phrases in which Martyr explains his definition, that the full coincidence in meaning and phraseology between him and the Article is brought out. In fact, there are but two phrases wanting to make the verbal parallel com- plete, and they are both found in the definition of Bucer : ex imiverso perditorunt hominuni genere, and unigeniti filii. The parallel, therefore, so far as the positive statement of doctrine is concerned, is complete, and whatever wider meaning we may deem our- selves warranted to read into the Article, we can never surely be warranted to exclude that which Martyr held and meant to teach. Even the subsequent part of the Article is far more nearly in verbal agreement with his teaching than with that of any other. There is no such resemblance to the phraseology and teaching of Melanchthon Introductory History of Doctrine. 333 after he ceased to be an Augustinian and became a Synergist. There is in a few instances, as Dr. Burton (Bishop Short's History, p. 487) had pointed out, a verbal coincidence with the phraseology and teaching of Luther in his treatise on the Epistle to the Romans. But that treatise was written while both Luther and Melanchthon were Augustinians, and teaches distinctly Augustinian doctrine ; and as it was never formally disavowed by Luther, there was considerable temptation to those who maintained that doctrine to use the testimony of the master against his disciples. Still, however, in this second part of the Article, as in the first, the resemblance to the teaching of Martyr is closer. I insert below these further coincidences, as also a few between the phraseology of Calvin in the 1543 edition of his Institutions, and the concluding part of the Article, because it comes so close to that of the Article and of Luther. Some suppose that part was inconsistent with his doctrine, but if so, neither he nor the Westminster divines seem to have been aware of the inconsistency : — Non igitur ad despera- Quemadmodum prjedes- tionem adigimur hac doctrina tinationis et electionis nostra.- sed multo potius magnam ex in Christo pia consideratio, ea consolationem accipim- dulcis, suavis et ineffabilis us (407). De perseverantia consolationis plena est vere nullo modo dubitandum est, piis, et his qui sentiunt in se et pra.'sertim cum in cordibus vim Spiritus Christi facta nostris habemus Spiritum carnis et membra quae adhuc Sanctum nobis ferentem pra?- sunt super terram, mortifi- v30 4 The Westminster Confession of Faith. clarum de ea testimonium (124). Habentenim Spiritum Christi quo et vivunt et . . . mortificant facta carnis {in prcefatiotie). Dei Spiritus qui datur piis . . . miram consolationem his affert quos afflaverit (electis in inargine) (476). Cum scribit de prsedestina- tione eo semper spectat ut nostram fiduciam confirmet (419) (ad stabiliendam fidu- ciam Cal. 361). Qui in animo vere sentiat se gratis a Deo electum esse prop- ter Christum . . . mirabiliter haud dubie accendetur ad Deum redamandum (419). CuriosuH illi habenis coer- cendi sunt qui antequam Christum . . . discant abys- sum illam prasdestinationis scrutantur, et num prsedes- tinati sint necne frustra in- vestigant. Nam hi haud dubie in confusionem con- scientiae aut desperationem sua hac inepta curiositate ducent et praecipitabunt seipsos. — Lutherus iti Ep. ad Romanos. Traduntur Sa- tanae decipiendi et praecipi- tandi (475).— Martyr. Quemadmodum in exitialem abyssum se ingurgitant, (in ultimum mortis praecipitium ruunt, (364) in majorem hebe- tudinem truduntur, (366) solutam carnis securitatem, (363) cantem, animumque ad celestia et superna rapientem, tum quia fidem nostram de aeterna salute consequenda per Christum, plurimum stabilit atque confirmat, tum quia amorem nostrum in Deum vehementer accendit. — ARTICULUS XVII. Ubi crucem et tribulation- em expertus fueris ; tum primum dulcescet necessitas hsc prjedestinationis, tum primum senties . . . quam plena consolationis sit prse- destinatio. — Lutherus in Ep. ad Rottianos. Ita hominibus curiosis, carnalibus et Spiritu Christi destitutis, ob oculos perpetuo versari praedestinationis Dei sententiam, perniciosissimum est praecipitium, unde illos diabolus protrudit vel in desperationem vel in aeque perniciosam impurissimae vitae securitatem. — Art. xvii. • Inti'oductory His lory of Doctrine. 335 quasi desperata nequitia volutabuntur in flagitia (365) qui ut de sua electione fiant certiores, a^ternum Dei consilium, sine verbo, percontantur : ita qui recta atque ordine earn investigant, qualiter in verbo continetur eximium inde re- ferunt consolationis fructum (Calv. Inst. 361). Hie docere oportet, fide- Deinde, licet praidestina- lium esse promissiones Dei tionis decreta sunt nobis generaliter accipere, ut nobis ignota, promissiones tamen in sacris Uteris a Spiritu divinas sic amplecti oportet, Sancto traditfe sunt, neque ut nobis in sacris Uteris oportere de arcana Dei volun- generaliter propositce sunt ; tate esse solicitos (Martyr, et Dei voluntas in nostris p. 194). Ut cum aliquid actionibus ea sequenda est, velint suscipere, consilium quam in verbo Dei habemus . . . ex voluntate Dei revelata, revelatam. — Art. xvii. i.e. e sacra scriptura petant, non autem ex arcano divinae pra;destinationis (p. 422). In rebus agendis ea est nobis perspicienda voluntas quam verbo suo declarat. Id requirit unum Deus a nobis quod praecipit (Calv. 370). The resemblances between the AngHcan formu- lary and the Augsburg and Wurtemberg Con- fessions arose in part out of earlier historical relations. But all of them, as a matter of fact, occur in Articles which were held in common by the Lutherans and the Reformed. Martyr had signed the Augsburg Confession when at Stras- burg, and was ready to do so on his return, while some of his colleagues who remained did not object to sign the Confession of Wiirtemberg. But neither of these, nor any other of the early 336 The Westminster Confession of Faith. Lutheran Confessions, as Dorner admits, has an Article on Predestination. By the insertion of such an Article, as well as by the terms in which they expressed it, the English Reformers must be regarded as indicating their leaning towards the Reformed rather than the Lutheran Churches. The same leaning is clearly apparent in the group of Articles on the sacraments, and especially in the one on the Lord's Supper. This last, in the form in which it was set forth in 1553, shows verbal coincidences not only with Martyr's writings but also with the Formula Consensus Tigurini} copies of which had been sent into England by Bullinger soon after it was framed. Few Continental authors were during the long reign of Elizabeth more highly esteemed or more widely read in England than Calvin, Bullinger, and Martyr. The Institutions of Calvin were used as a text-book in the universities, and they and several of his commentaries were translated into English. The Decades or sermons of Bullinger were commended by Convocation to the .study of the clergy, and were also translated. The volu- minous Loci Communes of Martyr were published in London as well as on the Continent, and he was repeatedly and earnestly invited to return to his former chair. In a word, the leading bishops and theologians of that reign drew more closely to the ' For particulars see Appendix, Note M. Introductory History of Doctrine. 337 Reformed than to the Lutheran Churches.^ Even those of them who, like Cranmcr and Ridley in the earlier time, were very mild Augustinians them- selves agreed more with the teaching of the Reformed than of the Lutheran doctors on the few subjects on which there was difference between them, though the distinct testimony against the ubiquity of Christ's human nature was withdrawn from the Articles of 1563. Becon, Jewel, Nowell, Sandys, Pilkington, as well as Humphreys, Sampson, and Foxe, were certainly more pro- nounced Augustinians, and, notwithstanding asser- tions to the contrary, did mention election for other purposes than to warn people against trusting in it;^ and their teaching supplies us with the first and perhaps fairest commentary on the meaning of the XVllth Article ere differences of opinion had arisen respecting it. Whitgift, Hutton, Overall, Cartwright, Whitaker, Reynolds, and many of the bishops and theologians in the reign of Elizabeth's successor, held and taught the same Augustinian doctrines. It was towards the close of her reign, about the year 1595, that we first hear • ' I am well assured that the learned bishops who were in the reformation of our Church in the beginning of Queen EHzabeth's reign did so much honour St. Augustine that in the collecting of the Articles and Homilies and other things in that reformation, they had an especial respect unto St. Augustine's doctrines.' — Bishop Carleton's Examination, p. 49. ' See especially Sandys' Sermons, p. 190 ; Pilkington's IVorAs, p. 673 ; and Jewel's Commentary on I Thess. i. 4, 5 and ii. 13. Y 33^ The Westminster Confession of Faith. of the distinct enunciation of opposite views in the University of Cambridge by Barret, a Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, who is said soon after to have turned Papist, and Dr. Baro, a Frenchman who had long been Margaret Professor of Divinity, and had previously given utterance to sentiments on other topics which were deemed not to be in strict harmony with the predominant opinions. To quiet the disturbances thus occasioned Arch- bishop Whitgift, wath the approval of the Arch- bishop of York and some other prelates, drew up (or accepted, with a few changes as drawn up by another), and sent down to the University a series of Articles, henceforth to be known as the Lambeth Articles, which were not only predestinarian in tendency but more strongly so than would be relished by moderate Calvinists still. The Articles were not indeed confirmed by royal authority, but they were acted on by the authorities of the University, and at any rate they are of value as a distinct testimony to the views of their framers and as a clear indication of the opinions on these abstruse subjects which were then widely prevalent in the Church. Dr. Reynolds asked at the Hamp- ton Court Conference that these ' orthodoxal assertions ' should be added to the Articles not as altering their meaning but simply as more clearly expressing it. This was not granted, his Majesty deeming it better ' not to stuff the book [of the Introductory History of Doctrine. 339 Articles] with all conclusions theological,' but 'to punish the broachers of false doctrine as occasion should be offered, for were the Articles never so many and sound, who can prevent the contrary opinions of men till they be heard ?' Overall, the Dean of St. Paul's, expressed himself in substantial agreement with Dr. Reynolds as to the meaning of the xvith and xviith Articles, and the King also made more than one ' speech of predestination and reprobation,' in the course of which he ad- mitted that predestination and election depended * not upon any qualities, actions, or works of man which be intctablc, but upon God's eternal and immutable deo'ee and purpose' So much we learn from Barlow's Snni of the Conference (p. 43). From Bishop Carleton's Examination of Bishop Mon- tague's notorious Appeal unto Ccusar (p. 94.), we further learn : ' The plain truth is that Dr. Reynolds repeated the Article, and professed that the mean- ing of the Article was sound.' He only desired that to the end of the clause ' we may depart from grace ' the words ' yet not totally nor finally ' might be added. 'Against this no man spake then ; but for it. . . . Dr. Overall did speak so much as directly confirmed that which Dr. Reynolds had moved, . . . adding hereunto that those who w^ere called and justified according to the purpose of God's election, however they might and did fall into grievous sins, . . . yet did never 340 The Westminster Confession of Faith. fall either totally from all graces of God to be utterly destitute of all the parts and seed thereof, nor finally from justification.' What had been refused to the Puritans in 1603 was granted to the Irish Convocation in 161 5. It was allowed to incorporate the Lambeth Articles among those fuller Augustinian Articles, which, with the sanction of the Viceroy, it then adopted and enjoined to be subscribed by all preachers as articles not to be contradicted by them in their public teaching. In 161 8, when deputies were, with the approval of Archbishop Abbot, sent by King James to the Synod of Dort, it is said that they took these Lambeth Articles with them to the Synod as evidence of the faith professed in England. The deputies, who were all men of high standing^ in the Church, took an active part in the proceedings of the Synod, acquiesced in the condemnation of the Arminians, and in the various papers drafted by them gave representations of the doctrine of their Church which would have been quite unwarrantable if the prevailing interpretation of her Articles down to that date had not been decidedly Augustinian. The most notable of the divines who in the later years of Queen Elizabeth's reign defended the constitution of the English Church so resolutely against the assaults of the 1 Bishop Caileton, Drs. Goad, Ward, Davenant, and Hall, with Dr. Balcanquhal for Scotland. Introductory History of Doctrine. 341 more decided Puritans, held to the Augustinian system of doctrine, as Archbishop Whitgift, Richard Hooker, and Thomas Rogers. The last named was chaplain to Whitgift's successor, and, so far as I know, the first to publish a formal exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, under the title of TJic Catholic Doctjdne of the Church of England. This treatise, dedicated first to Whitgift and then to Bancroft, was well known to Toplady, though ignored by recent expositors. It passed unchallenged through several editions, and affords conclusive evidence that, till near the close of James's reign, the Augustinian interpretation of them was the prevailing one. Even in 1626 Bishop Carleton resolutely claimed that it had been so, and reproved Bishop Montague for reviving the doctrines of Barret and Baro, and venturing to speak of those who maintained the doc- trines of the Lambeth Articles as Puritans. Ussher, Downame, Davenant, and Hall were all in accord with Carleton. But the fashion then begun soon spread rapidly. Nominally to hold the balance even between the contending parties, but really, as was alleged by the predestinarian school, to impede and silence them while almost openly favouring their opponents, a royal declaration was prefixed to the Articles prohibiting the imposing any other than the grammatical sense on them, or preaching on the controverted topics. ' Then began 342 The Westminster Confession of Faith. that wonderful decade which, regard it as we may, was in truth a period almost equally exceptional with that which followed under the Commonwealth. It was not indeed a government without church and king, but it was a government of a king without a parliament, and of a church in which all doctrines except those of the dominant party were proscribed and silenced by the strong hand — a virtual tyranny under honoured forms and names.' ' The system made its way very rapidly among University men and with a section of the upper classes generally ; two of its most prominent tenets, viz., the divine right of kings and the divine right of bishops, expressed concurrently and with every conceivable form of argument, forcibly commended the rest of the doctrine to the pedant king and his courtiers, and it came to be identified almost from its commencement with the political repression of the popular liberties, the suspension of Parliaments, and the disgrace of the country at home and abroad.'^ In the eyes of its supporters it was a revulsion from what their successors in our own time have nicknamed Ultra-Protestant- ism— not an exchange of modern Calvinism for the more modern Arminianism, but a return to the theology of the Greek Fathers in preference to that of Augustine, the great doctor of the West. 1 Introduction to Register of Visitors of the University of Oxford, from A.D. 1647 to A.u. 1658, pp. XX., xxiv. Inti'odiutory History of Docti'ine. 343 Down to the time of Archbishop Laud there had been almost a continuous succession of Augus- tinian Professors of Divinity in the Universities^ — Humphrey, Holland, Wahvard, Reynolds, Abbot, Prideaux, at Oxford ; Whitgift, Cartwright, Hutton, Overall, Whitakcr, Davenant, and Ward at Cam- bridge ; and Travers, Ussher, and Hoyle at Dublin. Besides these there was a whole host of men who preached the same theology from the pulpits or expounded it through the press. Foreign theolo- gians, even of extensive learning and high repute, almost, with the single exception of Heppe, seem to think that through all this time the divines of Britain were doing nothing for their science, either in their own country or on the Continent. There could not be a greater mistake. Just because it was a time of considerable restraint, it was a time of earnest study and of great literary activity, and was singularly fruitful not only in catechisms and other popular works intended to convey much prized truth to the humblest who could read, but also in more learned treatises, which, though now much forgotten, were in their own day highl}'- ' ' Calvin's enormous influence was felt quite as much within the Church as without it, and indeed the idea of separation was not as yet entertained by any large body of men. It was not till the fatal violence of the Laudian School had been fully developed, that separation began to present itself as a serious duty to masses of churchmen, and nonconformity or dissent, as we now know it, to have a history.' — Introduction to Register of Visitors of the University of Oxford, p. xvii. 344 '^^i^ Westminster Confession of Faith. valued by the learned in Holland as well as in England — quite as much so perhaps as the writings of any contemporary continental authors. Ques- tions in controversy with the Romanists were discussed by Fulke, Whitaker, Cartwright, and Reynolds with a thoroughness and learning which were not excelled, perhaps not equalled, abroad. Commentaries on separate books of Scripture, both more systematic and more practical, were issued in great abundance, and some of them were even translated into Latin and printed on the Continent. The doctrine of the Covenants was developed in this country quite as much as in Holland, parti- cularly in its historical aspect as bearing on the progress of God's revelation to mankind, and it was generally combined with the more liberal Augustinian views of Davenant. Learned and exhaustive treatises were written in defence of the great Protestant doctrines of the supremacy of Scripture and of justification by faith, the formal and material principles of the Reformation, while the writings of Perkins, Davenant, Ussher, Amesius, and Twisse, on the more abstruse doctrines of the Augustinian system, were not less thorough nor less highly valued abroad than at home. Twisse as well as Amesius was invited to occupy a chair in Holland, and for his defence of the Augustinian and reformed teaching against the scientia media of the Jesuits, Bishop Hall characterised him as 'a Introductory History of Doctrine. 345 man so eminent in school divinity that the Jesuits have felt, and for aught I see, shrunk under his strength.' Hoyle, Tuckney, and Arrowsmith, who, after the reformation of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, became Professors of Divinity there, served themselves heirs to their Augustinian pre- decessors, and professed their determination to teach on the same lines, so that, as a modern historian has expressed it, 'they deemed their mission to be to restore and confirm, not to revolu- tionise.' To a large proportion of those university men into whose hands the task was committed, we are told by the present Chichele Professor of History, in his able and impartial introduction to The Register of the Parlianicntary Visitation, lately printed for the Camden Society, 'this government on so-called Puritanical principles appeared very much in the light of a return to better days which had passed away not so very long before, ... a natural reaction, though perhaps carried too far, from an extreme direction into which the course of their beloved University had been betrayed, a recovery from a disease which, during the process of recovery, must necessarily exhibit some abnormal symptoms.' As Dr. Arrowsmith, in his introductory lecture at Cambridge, professed himself an ad- miring pupil of Davenant, and sought to link on his teaching to that of his great predecessors, so 346 The Westminster Confession of Faith. Dr. Hoyle ' devoted a large part of his inaugural lecture at Oxford to the earnest commendation of Bishop Prideaux, and Dr. Conant, who succeeded him, was avowedly of Prideaux's school on all essential points ' (pp. xxix., xxx.). Turning now to our own part of Britain, let me endeavour as succinctly as possible to trace the development of theology in Scotland. So far as we had a theology before the Reformation, it was probably less pronouncedly Augustinian than that of the southern division of the island. No doubt there were in the Augustinian and Dominican monasteries not a few who clung to the teaching of the great doctor of the West, and ultimately found a congenial home in the Reformed Church. There are not wanting some traces of the same teaching in the one catechism the pre-reformation Church of Scotland ventured to issue. The works of St. Thomas Aquinas were, by the Council of 1549, recommended to the students and teachers of speculative theology, but it could not be that those of his rival should be altogether neglected in the land of his birth. John Major, its most distinguished theological teacher in the first half of the sixteenth century, if one may venture to express an opinion from a cursory examination of his commentaries on the Gospels, appears to have far more in common with Scotus than with Aquinas or Augustine. But among those who Introductory History of Doctrine. 347 favoured the Reformation, the tendency was decid- edly in the opposite direction. It has been said, indeed, that our earhest Protestant theology was 'of the milder Lutheran type.' But at the time when Patrick Hamilton was brought into contact with it, Lutheranism was not yet of the milder type it ultimately assumed. Luther and Melanchthon were at that date predestinarians and pronounced Augustinians ; and Tyndale, Frith, and Lambert, with whom during his stay at Marburg, Hamilton had held familiar intercourse, were also decided adherents of the same school of theological thought. Those with whom Wishart was brought into con- tact in Switzerland and Strasburg belonged to the same school, and he told his countrymen, when he translated for their use the earlier Helvetic Confession, that it was in the Church of Switzer- land that ' all godliness is received, and the word had in most reverence.' The position of Knox, Winram, and their coadjutors is sufficiently deter- mined by^the fact that the several confessions they composed or sanctioned were all of the Calvinistic type, and in part were borrowed from the earlier editions of the Institutes of Calvin, or from the confessions drawn up by him.^ It is also con- clusively determined by the fact that in 1566, at the request of Beza, they gave their approbation to the later Helvetic Confession, to testify their 1 British and Foreign Evangelical Revicii' for 1872, pp. 92-95. 34^ The Westminster Co7ifession of Faith. agreement in doctrine and polity with the Reformed Churches on the Continent who adhered to the teaching of Calvin and Bullinger. From the pen of our great Reformer we have a treatise ' Of Pre- destination,' and a preface to a treatise by his friend Balnaves on justification, and both treatises are in harmony with the teaching of the Genevan school. The most eminent of the early theological teachers of the Reformed Church of Scotland was undoubtedly Andrew Melville, who was succes- sively Principal of the College of Glasgow and of St. Mary's College, St. Andrews. From his known temperament, it might have been supposed that he would have taken up an extreme position in regard to the distinctive teaching of the school to which he belonged. But from his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, it appears that his views on the mysterious subject of predestination were, like his views on justification, of a more moderate type than those of Beza. He seems to have imbued his more distinguished pupils to a large extent with his own infralapsarian views. Robert Bruce, to whom the more zealous section of them looked up wnth reverence and affection, certainly held and taught the same type of doc- trine as his teacher. Principal Rollock, of Edin- burgh, the leader of the more compliant section, did the same. His commentaries were published, some of them repeatedly, on the Continent as well Introductory History of Doctrine. 349 as in his own country, and his views on the subject of the covenants and of justification appear to agree generally with those of the Herborne school. Robert Howie, who succeeded Andrew Melville in St. Mary's College, as his early and close connections with the liberal theologians of Her- borne and Basle leads one to expect, belonged to the same infralapsarian school. Several of his theological tractates were published at Basle — the most important being that De recoiiciliatione Jioniinis cinn Deo. He was largely consulted in the preparation of that Confession of Faith by which, in 161 6, it appears to have been intended to supersede both the Confession of 1560, and the so-called negative Confession of 1581. Melville, before he was translated to St. Andrews, taught theology in Glasgow, and was succeeded in his office there by Principal Smeton, a man almost as learned and quite as moderate in his views — to whom we are indebted for a brief but able defence of the Protestant idea of the Church and a vindication of the personal character of Knox, in reply to the bitter and one-sided treatise of Archibald Hamilton, De confusione Calviniance Sectce. Smeton was succeeded in 1585 by Patrick Scharpe, and he, in 161 5, by Robert Boyd, who had taught in France, and was the author of a learned commentary on the Epistle to the Ephe- sians, in which predestinarian views are clearly 350 The Westminster Confession of Faith. enunciated, and Augustine, Ambrose, Prosper, Fulgentius, and Bernard are more frequently ap- pealed to than Calvin and the Reformers. Boyd, on his translation to Edinburgh, was succeeded by John Cameron, the Camero of the Continent, who was born in the Saltmarket ; was first a regent at Glasgow, then at Sedan ; then, along with his countryman Primrose, pastor of the Church at Bordeaux ; after that a Professor of Theology at Saumur, then Principal in Glasgow College. In little more than a year he returned to France, and died there at the age of forty-six. He was greatly esteemed both in England and France. He was one of the earliest defenders of that theory of the will which was afterwards espoused by Jonathan Edwards, and, after Bullinger, he was the most active assertor of that milder system of predes- tinarianism which early in the seventeenth century found considerable acceptance both in France and in England. It was earnestly advocated in the former by Amyraut (with whose name it has been associated), and in the latter by Overall, Davenant, Ussher, and many others. Several of his treatises were published separately ; one at least, in defence of the Protestant idea of the Church against the Romish, was translated into English and published at Oxford. At the request of a synod of the French Reformed Church, his works were collected and edited by Capellus Introductory History of Doctrine. 351 and Amyraut, and passed through three editions. Principal Strang seems to have followed somewhat in the Avake of Cameron ; at least he was charged with ' withdrawing from the divine decree the act and entity of sin ;' but even the cautious Baillie, who thought ' he swayed too much to one side,' prized the man's ' ingyne and learning,' and was disposed to regard him as one of the best scholars in the Reformed Church. Dr. John Forbes, the learned Professor of Theology in King's College, Aberdeen, almost continuously, from 1620 to 1643, taught the same system of moderate predestin- arianism, and, like Boyd, appealed to Augustine and Prosper quite as much as to Calvin. His doctrinal teaching was very highly approved in Holland, and, so far as I know, was never called in question in his own country, but he was ultimately deposed for refusing to take the Covenant. Dr. John Sharp, or Scharpius, who in 1606 had been banished for taking part in the Assembly at Aberdeen, taught theology for a number of years at Die in Dauphine. In 1610 he published a treatise on justification, and, in 161 8, a system of theology under the title of Cursus Theologicns. It was dedicated to King James, and, having made his peace with him or with Charles, he was in 1630 appointed Professor of Theology in the University of Edinburgh, in suc- cession to James Fairley, afterwards Bishop of 352 The Westminster Confession of Faith. Argyll, and was in all probability the chief theological teacher of Robert Leighton, whose father's opinions in his early life he had shared. Dr. Sharp continued to hold his office through these unquiet times up to 1647, when he died. He seems to have taken a keen interest in the changes which took place on the restoration of Presbytery, and to have contributed largely towards the support of the Scotch army in England. His Ciirsns TJieologicits passed through at least three editions, all of which were published on the Continent. His SympJionia PropJietariun et Apostolorum was also published abroad, and passed through two or more editions. In their revulsion from the Arminianism and sacerdotalism of the younger bishops who had been so zealously patronised by Laud, the Coven- anting ministers of Scotland generally favoured a more decided Calvinism than that of Cameron, Forbes, and Strang, or than that of Davenant, Ussher, and their Puritan disciples in the south. Some of them, like Rutherfurd, even favoured the supralapsarian view, and resolutely defended it, though they granted that the questions in which they differed from their brethren were questions to be discussed in the schools rather than to be determined in a Confession of Faith.^ A very ^ Baillie's Letters, vol. iii. p. 6 ; Minutes of Westminster Assembly^ p. Iv. Introductory History of Doctrine. 353 remarkable discussion on Arminianism occurred in the Glasgow Assembly in 1638.^ The ablest and most fully reported speech was that of Mr. David Dick or Dickson, afterwards Professor of Divinity, first at Glasgow and then at Edinburgh. If any one comes to the conclusion that there is a wide difference between the tone and temper in which the controversy is treated in the works of the theologians above referred to and in the speech of Mr. Andrew Ramsay, he may be asked to bear in mind that he as well as they had been a professor under the episcopal regime, and re- mained to the last but an indifferent Covenanter. Besides the contributions of these scholars to the illustration and defence of the doctrines of grace and to the exposition of the Scriptures in ac- cordance with the principles of Augustine and Calvin, there were several Scotch divines who distinguished themselves by their works in the department of Church history and Church con- stitution. I mention first the family of the Symsons, five of whom were ministers of the Church, one of whom, while a minister in France, published a brief but interesting tractate on the spuriousness of the so-called Clementine Epistle to James ; another, larger treatises on the in- ternal and external history of the Church, the latter of which was recast and republished in ' Peterkin's Records of the A'irk, pp. 156-159. Z 354 ^'^^ Westminster Confession of Faith. London ; a third, besides other works, compiled a chronicle on the ecclesiastical history of Scot- land, which has never yet seen the light. These Symsons were the nephews, and the church historian was also the name-son, of Patrick Adamson, of St. Andrews, the accomplished scholar whose sad story is one of the most mourn- ful episodes in the history of the Scottish Church. Even one who regards his policy as a blunder and his compliance with the humour of the Court as a huge mistake, cannot but feel sorry for the great scholar, who had given to the Church an elegant Latin prose version of the Confession of 1560, and a much-lauded metrical Latin version of Calvin's catechism, and who in old age was so heartlessly abandoned by the sovereign he had sacrificed so much to serve. In the department of Church constitution, David Calderwood stands decidedly pre-eminent. His Altare Damascenuvi — the great armoury from which the Presbyterians after 1637 — Gillespie, Rutherfurd, and Baillie — drew their weapons for the conflict with prelatists and sectaries, is by far the most exhaustive and learned defence of Presbytery which Scotland has produced, and is said, by its massive learning and calm reasoning, to have drawn a tribute of reluc- tant admiration from King James himself The first draft of it was published in English in 1621, but it was carefully revised and very greatly Introductory History of Doctrine. 355 enlarged, and published in Latin in Holland, in 1623. A second edition of it was published in 1708, and it was not less valued by the learned divines of Holland than by his own countrymen. Most of the works previously referred to, it will be observed, were also published in Latin, and so, while accessible to the educated in their own country, they appealed to a far wider public, and circulated in all the Reformed Churches of the period. The native Scottish dialect, as it had prevailed before the Reformation, received a rude shock by that event. The long residence of Knox in England, and with a congregation of English exiles on the Continent, had necessitated to a considerable extent his adoption of the * southern tongue,' and the influence of this was apparent in all the formularies he prepared for the Scottish Church. The circulation of the English Bible tended still more than these formularies to give a certain currency to southern forms of speech. Southern influence had told on Willock and some others of the early Reformed teachers, and though somewhat later there was a reaction for a time, and, under the Melvilles especially, a purer Scot- tish dialect was fostered, yet with the accession of James to the English throne disintegrating influences were revived and intensified. The native Scottish, though then and for long after used as the vehicle of oral instruction, was not 356 The Westminster Confession of Faith. cultivated as a fit vehicle for literary work, and Scottish divines who wished to appeal to an educated public in literary form preferred to make use of the Latin tongue. Many of these divines besides, by their long residence abroad, had, like Buchanan, become more at home in it than in the unsettled native dialect. During the i6th and 17th centuries, as Professor Veitch has lately told us, ' there was hardly a University on the continent of Europe which did not contain, we might almost say was not made famous by, the Scottish regent, or Professor of Philosophy, who had learned his dialectic in his native University.' Not a few of these, in Protestant Universities, rose from being regents in philosophy to be professors of theology, and naturally published in the Latin, in which they were first composed, their theses, cursus, and commentaries. Several of them ulti- mately returned to adorn the theological chairs in the Universities of Scotland, as Melville, Smeton, Johnston, Howie, Boyd, Sharp, Weemse, and the Colvilles, though they still continued to main- tain friendly intercourse with the theologians of the various schools where they had studied or taught, on the Continent, and to solicit their counsel and aid in the publication of their works. To restore the faith held by both Churches in common at the era of the Reformation, and to replace Augustinianism in its old post of honour. N Account of its Preparation. 357 was the main object intended to be effected by the Westminster Assembly — first in revising the English Articles, and then in preparing those new , doctrinal standards of its own — the Confession and Catechisms — with which the future of Presby- terianism was to be so closely linked. And I shall now proceed to lay before you the historical details regarding the preparation of the Westminster Confession of Faith. It was on 20th August 1644, that a committee was ap- pointed by the Assembly ' to prepare matter for a joint Confession of Faith.' This committee consisted of Drs. Gouge, Temple, and Hoyle, Messrs. Gataker, Arrowsmith, Burroughs, Burgess, Vines, and Goodwin, together with the Scotch Commissioners. A fortnight later. Dr. Smith and Messrs. Palmer, Newcomen, Herle, Reynolds, Wilson, Tuckney, Young, Ley, and Sedgewick were added to the committee, or constituted an additional committee. Probably the subjects of some of the chapters, or part of the matter which was ultimately embodied in the Confession, was selected or prepared by these committees.^ But the digesting of the material collected into more formal shape — a draft, as it was technically ^ Under date of 25th April, Baillie writes, ' The Catechise and Confession of Faith are put in the hands of several committees,' some reports are made to the Assembly concerning both, and on 4th May he adds, * upon both which we have already made some entrance.' 358 The Weshninster Confession of Faith. termed — was on 12th May 1645 intrusted to a smaller committee, consisting apparently of Drs. Temple and Hoyle, Messrs. Gataker, Harris, Burgess, Reynolds, Herle, and the Scotch Com- missioners. On the 7th July, ' Dr. Temple made report of that part of the Confession of Faith touching the Scriptures. It was read and de- bated,' and the debate was continued in several subsequent sessions of the Assembly. On the following day Messrs. Reynolds, Herle, and New- comen (to whom, on December 8th, were joined Messrs. Tuckney and Whitaker, and, on 17th July 1646, Mr. Arrowsmith)! were appointed a com- mittee, ' to take care of the wording of the Con- fession,' as its Articles should be voted in the several sessions of the Assembly, but according to understood rule they were to communicate with the Scotch Commissioners and to report to the Assembly any changes in the wording of the sentences which they deemed necessary, as new propositions were added on to those previously passed. On the nth July it was ordered that the body of the Confession, as it is then termed, the heads of the Confession as it is subsequently en- titled, should be divided among the three com- mittees— that is, as I suppose, that the material prepared by the previous small committee should be handed over to these larger committees, and '^ Minutes of Assembly, pp. no, 168, 470. Account of its Preparation. 359 further discussed and elaborated by them before being brought into the Assembly. This order was carried out on the i6th. To the first committee were referred the materials on the heads, ' God and the Holy Trinity ; God's decrees, predestina- tion, election, etc. ; the works of creation and providence ; and man's fall.' To the second com- mittee were referred the materials on the heads of ' Sin and the punishment thereof; free will, the covenant of grace, and Christ our Mediator.' To the third committee were assigned the materials on the heads of ' Effectual vocation, justification, adoption, and sanctification.' The committees were directed, if they saw fit to leave out any of these heads or to add any other, to report the matter to the Assembly.^ A further distribution of heads or materials was made on i8th Novem- ber 1645, on the motion of Mr. Whitaker. To the first committee were referred the heads on per- severance [of the saints], Christian liberty, the Church, and the communion of saints ; to the second those on the officers and censures of the Church, on councils or synods, the sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper ; and to the third, those on the law of God, on religion, and worship. A final distribution was made on 23d February 1645-6, when there were referred to the first com- mittee the heads on the Christian Sabbath, the * Minutes of the Assembly, pp. 112, 114. o 60 The Westminster Confession of Faith. civil magistrate, marriage and divorce ; to the second those on the certainty of salvation, lies and equivocation,^ and the state of the soul after death ; and to the third, those on the resurrection, the last judgment, and life eternal. The report on the draft of the committee con- cerning God was brought in and debated on the i8th and 23d July 1645. On the latter day the report on the subject of the Trinity was also brought in. On 29th August, the first committee brought in their report ' of God's decree ' and the second theirs ' of Christ the Mediator.' The dis- cussion on the former began at once, and was prosecuted at intervals afterwards very fully."^ The latter was taken up on 2d September, and at a number of the subsequent sessions. On 8th September, the quorum of each of the three com- mittees was reduced to six, as difficulty had been experienced in securing a larger attendance at their meetings. The next day Mr. Prophet brought in the report of the third committee of effectual calling, and the discussions on that and the two previous reports extended through the month of September. Before the close of Novem- ber reports appear to have been given in from 1 This was probably merged in § 4 of the chapter of lawful oaths and vows. 2 See the notes of these memorable debates from 20th to 24th October in the printed Minutes of the Assembly, pp. 150 to 160, and remarks on these in Introduction, p. liii., etc. Account of its Preparation. 361 the first Committee 'of creation and providence,' from the second ' of the fall of man, of sin and the punishment thereof,' and from the third 'of adoption and sanctification.' In the beginning of December, Mr. Cheynell brought in the report of justification, and Dr, Stanton and the second com- mittee those on the sacraments in general, and on baptism and the Lord's supper in particular, and these were debated and adjusted during that month and the one following. On 15th December, Dr. Gouge brought in the report * of free will,' and, probably on the 19th, from the same committee, that 'of perseverance.' A notable debate about the 'grace of baptism' took place on the 5 th and 6th January. The report from the third com- mittee ' of the law of God ' was given in by Dr. Wincop on ist January 1645-6, and was discussed at several sessions in the course of that month. The reports ' of lawful oaths and vows, of Christian liberty, and of church officers ' were all brought in before the close of January. That on Christian liberty formed the main subject of discussion during February. During that month the report ' of the communion of saints ' was also brought in. That and the article 'of the Church,' and especially the paragraph on the headship of Christ and the autonomy of his Church, formed the main subject of debate throughout the months of March and April. The 362 The West7ninster Confession of Faith. reports ' of religious worship, and the Sabbath day,' and * of the civil magistrate ' were given in and discussed during the same months, and the article on Christian liberty was also made the subject of further debate. During the whole of the summer and autumn of 1646, the completion of the Confession had been retarded by the differences which had arisen between the Houses of Parliament and the Assembly, regarding the right of the office-bearers of the Church to keep back from the communion those whom they deemed ignorant or scandalous, and by the differences which arose among them- selves on matters of detail, when they set them- selves to prepare full answers to the Queries of the House of Commons respecting the jus divinuni of church-government. The greater part of their time during the month of May, and the first half of the months of June and July, was devoted to the preparation of these answers. On 17th June, they resolved to go over the Confession again, as it had now been digested and arranged by the com- mittee appointed to methodise the several articles, and to revise and perfect the wording of them. That their review might be the more thorough it was resolved that it should be made, not by attempting to read the whole over at once, but by reading it again ' in parts.' To do this formed the main work of the Assembly till 4th December Account of its Preparation. ■y^d'i^ 1646. With respect to most of the heads or articles thus reviewed, the minutes simply bear that they were ' debated and ordered, and are as follows,' though in the MS. minutes the words as finally adjusted do not follow. But in regard to the heads of marriage, the civil magistrate, faith, repentance, good works, certainty of salvation, synods and councils, the resurrection, judgment, and life eternal, which in all probability had only been elaborated and brought in for the first time after the review began, pretty full details are embodied in the minutes. So far as appears from the minutes, the various articles of the Confession were passed by the Assembly all but unanimously. On some occasions, when dissent was indicated even by one or two of the members, the wording of the article they objected to was so modified as to satisfy them. The main occasions on which this policy was not followed were on 4th September 1645, with regard to Dr. Burgess's dissent from the resolution of the Assembly to leave out the word ' Blessed,' retained both in the English and Irish Articles, before the name of the Virgin mother of our Lord ; on 23d September 1646, with regard to Mr. Whitaker's dissent from the words 'fore- ordained to everlasting death;' and on 21st October 1646, with regard to the dissent of several of the Independents from the insertion in a Confession of Faith of certain parts of § 3, chap, xxiii. In 364 The Westminster Confession of Faith. regard to matters of detail, some close divisions seem to have taken place. Three such divisions appear to have taken place in the single session of 20th November 1646. The only one, how- ever, of the slightest importance was the first, in which, by 21 votes against 17, an addition con- cerning praises and thanksgiving, proposed by Dr. Burgess, and probably intended to be intro- duced after § 4 of chap, xxi., was peremptorily rejected. At the final reading of the Confes- sion, before it was sent up to the Houses, at the urgent request of Gillespie, the word ' God ' was substituted for ' Christ ' in three places in the chapter on the civil magistrate, which otherwise might have been said incidentally to determine the question that he held his office from Christ as Mediator. Dr. Burgess, who maintained that view, dissented from the change, and a special inenioraiidum was entered in their minutes that the Assembly did not mean by the change ' to deter- mine the controversy about the subordination of the civil magistrate to Christ as Mediator,'^ but simply to leave it open and both parties free to hold their respective opinions upon it. On 17th August, on the other hand, the following proposi- tion had been affirmed to be true, though it was resolved it should not be inserted in the Confession of Faith : ' Synods or councils, made up of ministers ^ Minittes, p. 308. Account of its Preparation. 365 and other ruling officers of the Church, have not only a directive power in things ecclesiastical, but a corrective power also, and may rescind an evil sentence if adhered unto in any inferior Assembly, and excommunicate such persons as are otherwise incorrigible.'^ While this review of the Confession was going on, various Orders were sent down from the Houses for hastening the completion of it, and particularly one on 22nd July 1646, 'desiring the Assembly to hasten the perfecting of the Confession of Faith and the Catechism, because of the great use there may be of them in the Kingdom, both for the suppressing of errors and heresies and for inform- ing the ignorance of the people.' This Order was accepted by the Assembly as an indirect release from the task of preparing elaborate answers to the queries of the House of Commons, and, leaving that work meantime to be unofficially done by the authors of the/«j Divimim Regiminis Ecclesiastici^ they returned with promptitude to the preparation of the Confession of Faith. On i8th September there came a further Order from the House to send to them the Confession of Faith, or so much thereof as they have perfected. Accordingly, by the 25th September, after the 15th, i6th, 17th, 1 8th, and 19th chapters had been finally passed, it was resolved that the first nineteen heads or ^ Minutes, p. 269. 366 The Westminster Confession of Faith. chapters,^ as ultimately passed, be sent up to the House of Commons. This was done by a small committee the same day, and on ist October a duplicate was sent to the House of Lords.- On 9th October the House of Commons had what had been sent up read over, and ordered 500 copies of it to be printed for the use of the Houses, and of the Assembly. In the following month the House of Lords had not only read over but passed, apparently without debate, what had been sent up to them, and urged the House of Commons to do the same, 'that the Protestant Churches abroad as well as the people at home may have knowledge how that the Parliament did never intend to innovate in matters of faith '—in other words, they looked on the new Confession as in sub- stantial harmony with the old Articles. By the 4th December 1646 the Confession of Faith was finished,^ and on that day it was presented by the whole Assembly to the House of Commons, and on the 7th in the same way to the House of Lords. Thanks were returned by both Houses to the Assembly ' for their great pains ' in the matter, ^ On the 2ist it was resolved that ' the several heads of the Confession of Faith shall be called by the name of chapters, and that the several sections be distinguished by figures only.' — Minutes, p. 286. ^ Ibid., p. 291; Commons' yo!ir)ials, vol. iv. p. 677; Lords' Jow-nals, vol. viii. p. 505. ^ It was deemed so on 26tli Nov., but changes were made after. Account of its Preparation. 2>^'j and authority was given to them to print 600 copies of the whole treatise for the service of the two Houses and of the Assembly. Shortly after, a new Order was made by the House of Commons that ' Scripture proofs should be added ; '^ and, on 29th April 1647, a committee of the Assembly further presented to both the Houses the Con- fession of Faith with the Scripture proofs inserted in the margin ; and of this also 600 copies were ordered to be printed. These three impressions were printed, not published, as — ' The HUMBLE ADVICE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF DiVINES NOW BY AUTHORITY OF PARLIAMENT SITTING AT WEST- MINSTER ' (with the additions respectively follow- ing) ' Concerning a paj't of a Confessioti of Faith ' — 1 The inserting of these proofs, which contributed so much to give the doctrinal standards of the Assembly such a firm hold on the minds of the lay members of the Church, was urged by the House of Commons. Their motives, however, were suspected, and the Order was complied with by the divines somewhat reluctantly. The following copy of their Petition to the House of Commons, in answer to their Order, is preserved in a recently recovered volume of the records of the Commission of the Scottish Assembly : — ' The Assemblie of Divines having received an Order from this hon'^''^ house, bearing date the 9th of October, that five hundred copies of the advice of the Assemblie of Divines, concerning part of a Confession of Faith brought into this house and no more, be forthwith printed for the use of the members of both houses only, and that the Divines be desired to put in the margent the proofs out of Scripture, to confirme what they have offered to the house in such places as they shall think most necessarie, Do humblie represent that they are willing and ready to obey that Order. Nevertheless, they humblie desire this hon^''^ house to consider that the reason why the Assembly have not annexed any texts of 368 The Westminster Confession of Faith. ' Concerning a Confession of Faith' — and ' Concerning a Confession of Faith, with the quotations and texts of Scripture annexed' It was in Scotland, in the autumn or before the close of the year 1647, that the first edition of the Confession, bearing the title by which it has continued to be known, was issued to the public, and attempts seem to have been made to reprint this in England. It was not till the summer of the following year that the Confession, with the exceptions of chapters XXX. and XXXI. and certain portions of chapters XX. and XXIV., was approved by the English Parliament, and was published in London with the title, ^Articles of Christian Religion approved and passed Scripture to the several branches of the Confession w'^'^ are sent up, wer not only because the former Articles of the Church of England have not any, but principally because the Confession being large, and, as we conceive, requisite so to be, to settle the orthodox doctrine according to the word of God, and the confes- sions of the best reformed churches, so as to meet with common errors, if the Scriptures should have bene alleadged, it would have required a volume. As also because most of the particulars, being received truths among all churches, there was seldome any debate about the truth or falsehood of any article or clause, but rather about the manner of expression or the fitness to have it put into the Confession. Whereupon q" Y wer any texts debated in the Assembly, they were never put to the vote. And therefor everie text now to be annexed must be not only debated, but also voted in the Assembly ; and it is free for everie one to offer what texts he thinks fitt to be debated, and to urge the annexing of Scriptures to such or such a branch, as he thinks necessary w*^** is lyke to be a work of great length. So that we humblie conceive, if it be the pleasure of this honourable House tliat we should annexe Scriptures, it is not possible that we should forthwith proceed to the printing of the Confession.' Account of its P^'eparation. 369 by both Houses of Parliainent after advice had with the Assembly of Divines! This title was adopted because it was in nearer agreement with that of the Thirty-nine Articles, and also because the treatise was not in the direct form of a Confession, i.e. with the words ' I confess,' or some similar expression, at the beginning of the several chapters or sections, as in the old Scotch and several of the Continental Confessions.^ Before the debates on the Confession came to a close, Twisse and Henderson, who had been able to take but little part in them, were called to join the general assembly and church of the first-born above. The former died on the morning of Sunday, 19th July, and was buried in Westminster Abbey on the 24th, but his body was removed from its place of honourable sepulture at the Restoration. The latter died on the 19th August, worn out with anxieties and incessant labours more than by old age ; as glad, he said, to be released as ever school- boy was to return from school to his father's house. He had done a work which his countrymen were not to let die. But his departure left them for the time * dark, feeble, and deploring.' ^ Further details respecting the Confession and the proceedings of the English and Scottish Parliaments on it will be found in the notes appended to various passages of the printed volume of the Minutes of the Assembly, and particularly in that on pp. 412-423. 2 A LECTURE XI. THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH OR ARTICLES OF CHRISTIAN RELIGION. Part II, — Its sources a?id type of doctrine : atiswers to objections brought against it. In my last Lecture I gave you a brief sketch of the development of doctrine in the British Churches before the meeting of the Westminster Assembly, and a pretty full account of the proceedings of the divines in preparing their Confession of Faith. To-day I am to speak to you of the sources and character of that Confession, and briefly to advert to certain charges made against it. It was long the received opinion that the As- sembly's Confession was derived in a great mea- sure from foreign sources, either Swiss or Dutch. The fact was overlooked that in Reynolds, Perkins, Whitaker, Carleton, Downame, the Abbots, Daven- ant. Overall, Prideaux, Ussher, Hall, Twisse, Ames, Ball, Featley, and Gataker, England for half a cen- tury had had a school of native theologians devel- oping an Augustinian or moderately Calvinistic type of doctrine, without slavish dependence on the divines of any Continental school — a system Westminster Confession of Faith. 371 perhaps quite as largely drawn from Augustine and other early western doctors, as from any of the Reformers. Mr. Marsden, who has done so much by his writings to vindicate the character and teaching of the Puritans, has ventured (p. ^6) to say of the Confession of the Assembly that ' it is in many respects an admirable summary of Christian faith and practice,' 'pure in style, the subjects well distributed and sufficiently compre- hensive to form at least the outline of a perfect system of divinity.' But he has failed to light on its sources, and expressed regret that Ussher and the leaders of the native English school were not present in greater force to check undue deference to the views of Calvin and Bullinger. The younger Dr. M'Crie again, in his Annals of Presbytery in England, has confidently affirmed that ' it bears unmistakeably the stamp of the Dutch theology in the sharp distinctions, logical forms, and juridical terms into which the Reformed doctrine had gradually moulded itself under the red heat of the Arminian and Socinian contro- versies.'^ Others, with greater want of caution still, have ventured to single out Cocceius ^ or ^ Annals of English Presbytery, p. 177. * Hallam says somewhat equivocally of him, — ' He was remark- able for having viewed, more than any preceding writer, all the relations between God and man under the form of covenants, and introduced the technical language of jurisprudence into theology. . . . This became a very usual mode of treating the subject in Holland, and afterwards in England.' 372 The Westminstei" Confession of Faith. Turretine as the true and immediate prototype of the teaching of the Confession. But the West- minster divines had done their work before either of these men had become known as influential factors in the development of the Reformed theo- logy. And there is abundant evidence that in its general plan, as well as in the tenor and wording of its more important Articles, the Assembly's Confession is derived immediately, not from foreign, but from native sources, and that it embodies,. not conclusions adopted slavishly from any continental school, but the results of the matured thought and speculation of the native British school,^ which led quite as much as it followed in the wake of others, both in reviving the life of the Churches and in systematising their doctrines. The Confession may confidently, and I may now say confessedly,^ be ^ Irish Articles. — Of the Holy Scriptures and the three Creeds, of Faith in the Holy Trinity, of God's Eternal Decree and Predestina- tion, of the Creation and Government of all things, of the Fall of Man, Original Sin, and the State of Man before Justification (including article on Free Will), of Christ the Mediator, of the Second Covenant, of the Communicating of the Grace of Christ, of Justification and Faith etc. Westminster Coiifession. — i. Of the Holy Scripture. II. Of God and of the Holy Trinity. III. Of God's Eternal Decree, iv. Of Creation, v. Of Providence. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin and of the Punishment thereof. IX. Of Free Will. vii. Of God's Covenant with Man. viii. Of Christ the Mediator. X. Of Effectual Calling. Xi. Of Justifica- tion. XIV. Of Saving Faith, etc. For fuller statement of this and other correspondences, see the works referred to on pp. 374, 376. - Schaff s Creeds of Christendom, vol. i. p. 761 ; Killen's Eccle- siastical History of Ireland, vol. i. pp. 494, 495. Its sources and type of Doctri7ie. 373 traced up to those unquestionably Augustinian Articles^ of the Irish Church, which are believed to have been prepared by Ussher when Professor of Divinity in Trinity College, Dublin, and which in 161 5 were adopted by the Irish Convocation, with the assent of the Viceroy or the King, as ' Articles to be subscribed by all ministers,' and at least not to be contradicted by them in their public teaching. This, I hardly need to remind you, was before the Synod of Dort had met, or the intense heats, which the agitation of the Arminian and Socinian controversies occasioned there, had extended to Britain ; while the more important of the juridical terms were already in use both on the Continent and in Britain, and ^ These Articles were held in high repute by almost all the sound Protestant ministers in Britain as well as in Ireland. They embodied the mature opinions of Ussher and of several other learned and orthodox divines, who scrupled at no ceremony required in the Service Book, shrunk from no submission required to the absolute will of the King in things indifferent, and were in no sense liable to the charge of following Puritanism, if that was anything else than a nickname extended to the opinions of all who did not favour the views of Laud and his school. In these articles we have certainly the main source of the Westminster Confession, and almost its exact prototype in the enunciation of all the more important doctrines of the Christian system. In the order and titles of most of the articles or chapters, as well as in the language of many sections or subdivisions of chapters, and in a large number of separate phrases or voces signalce, occurring throughout their Con- fession, the Westminster divines appear to me to have followed very closely in the footsteps of Ussher and the Irish Convocation. There are not wanting indeed proofs that other Reformed Con- fessions, particularly those of the French and Belgian or Dutch 374 '^^^^ Westminster Confession of Faith. several of them, in fact, in the Roman CathoHc as well as in the Protestant Church.^ ' This elaborate formulary,' Dr. Killen tells us, 'when adopted, was signed by Jones, Archbishop of Dublin, Speaker of the House of Bishops in Convocation and Lord Chancellor of Ireland ; by the Prolocutor of the other House of the clergy, in their names ; and by the Lord Deputy Chichester, in the name of the Sovereign. It has indeed been questioned whether it was ever submitted to the Irish legislature ; and on the presumption that such an oversight occurred its authority has been challenged ; but as Parlia- ment was sitting it is quite possible that even this form was not neglected, though we have no positive proof of its observance. It is certain that at the time the Articles were understood to possess the highest sanction which the State could confer on them.' Ussher at least did not regard them as superseded by the adoption of the English Articles in 1634, and continued to require subscription to them as well as to the latter while he remained in Churches were also kept in view by them. But if the order of the chapters in these other confessions be compared with that of the Irish and Westminster formularies, it will at once be perceived that these last two have a special affinity in that respect, as well as in regard to the exact titles of the chapters and the language in which many of the sections are expressed. For particulars, see Introduction to the Minutes of Westminster Assembly, pp. xlvii. xlviii., and my lecture on The Westminster Confession, pp. 8-12, and 33-42. * Paper by Prof. A. A. Hodge, p. 366 of Report of the Proceed- ings of the Second General Council of the Presbyterian Alliance. Its sources and type of Doctrine. 375 Ireland. The adoption of these Articles induced a number of Puritan ministers from England, as well as from Scotland/ to settle among the colonists of Ulster, among whom, till the time of Strafford, they enjoyed a generous toleration, and more than repaid it by the good service they did to these motley immigrants. Perhaps equally with the similar efforts in Scotland the following year, to unite both parties in drawing up a new Confession and formularies, they are indications of a nobler policy on the part of Abbot to emphasise the great matters on which moderate Puritans and Churchmen of his own school agreed, and to cast into the shade or allow a large toleration on the minor matters on which they differed, — a policy for which the times were not ripe, or to which the King himself proved fickle. In a lecture on the Confession of Faith pub- lished in 1866,^ I exhibited in detail the corre- spondence between these Irish Articles and the Westminster Confession, both in general arrange- ments and the wording of many sections. The more important of the correspondencies have been reprinted in that great work of Dr. Schaff on the Creeds of Christendom, for which we owe ^ 'All of them enjoyed the churches and tithes though they remained Presbyterian and used not the liturgy.' — Neal. * Epis- copacy existed, but only in a very modified form.' — Perry. * Westminster Confession of Faith: A Contribution to the Study of its History, and to the Defence of its Teaching. Edinburgh, 1866. 376 The Westminster Confession of Faith. him such a debt of gratitude. The subject has been treated more succinctly but very satis- factorily since, by Dr. Briggs of New York, in his paper in the P^^esbyterian Review for January 1880. I do not venture to assert that the Assem- bly have in no case determined questions which Ussher and the Irish Convocation had left un- decided ; but I do say that these questions are neither many nor important, and are rather de- tails than principles of their system, which they did not mean thereby to elevate to a factitious importance. Besides, when occasion called they took the greatest pains to express their senti- ments in such a way as to obviate or minimise objections which had been taken or might fairly have been taken to the words or matter of the English and the Irish Articles.^ Dean Stanley has on various occasions admitted that this, in several important instances, has been fully made out." The volume of their minutes which has been published clearly shows that more than one ' While the terms predestinate and predestination are used in the same sense as in the Enghsh and Irish Articles, the term reprobated, which had been admitted into the Lambeth and Irish Articles, is exchanged for the vfoxd. foreordained. The expression, ' to reconcile His Father unto us,' retained both in the English and Irish Articles, is also changed. See notes in Mimites, pp. xlviii., etc. ■ In his paper in the Contemporary for March 1866, p. 547, also in the paper written by him just before his death, and inserted in Macmillan'' s Magazine for August 1881, this is admitted in regard to several very important particulars. Its sources and type of Doctrine. 377 attempt made to persuade them to determine questions wisely left undecided by the Irish Convocation and the Synod of Dort, was stren- uously resisted^ by a number of the English members, who were true successors of the great English divines who had attended that Synod, and claimed in various respects to have moderated its conclusions. With respect to the doctrine of the Covenants, which some assert to have been derived from Holland, I think myself now, after careful in- vestigation, entitled to maintain thatthere is nothing taught in the Confession which had not been long before in substance taught by Rollock and Howie in Scotland, and by Cartwright, Preston, Perkins, Ames, and Ball in his two catechisms in England, while there is a perceptible advance beyond what is exhibited as the general teaching of the Dutch divines in the Synopsis PiLvioris TJieologice as late as 1642. The later and most remarkable treatise of Ball, on the * Covenant of Grace,' was published with recommendatory notices by Reynolds, Caw- drey, Calamy, Hill, Ashe, and Burgess at the very time the Assembly began to frame its Confession, and it contains all that has been admitted into the Westminster standards, or generally received on this head among British Calvinists.^ The ^ Minutes of Westminster Assernbly, pp. 150, 151, 152, etc. ^ See the account given of it in my paper in the Report of the Proceedings of the Second General Council ef the Presbyterian Alliance, pp. 478, 479 ; also Appendix, Note N. 378 The Westminster Confession of Faith. work of Cocceius, even in its earliest form, was not given to the world till after the Confession had been completed and published ; nor was it brought substantially into the shape in which we now have it till 1654, by which date several other treatises on the subject of the Covenants had issued from the English press. Some have forgotten these patent facts ; many more have overlooked the less patent but not less important ones that Cocceius was the pupil of Ames or Amesius,^ the well- known English Puritan who was called to teach theology in Holland. He, as well as Cloppenburg his colleague, taught and published views as to the Covenants, similar in character to those of Ball already referred to. Cocceius, it is true, does not directly acknowledge his obligations to the English divines as he does his obligations to Olevianus. Still, there are resemblances in his work to theirs, and there are more marked resemblances to Ball's, especially to its historical sections, in the great work of Witsius De CEcoiiomia Fcederuin. Had the Dutch writers really preceded the English these resemblances would no doubt have been confidently appealed to as proof that the English had borrowed from or followed in the wake of the Dutch. * ' Amesius the Puritan insisted upon piety of heart and life, and Amama his friend specially enforced the study of the original text of Scripture. The two latter obtained great influence over the mind of the piously educated young student.' — Doxner's History of Protestant Theology, vol. ii. p. 31. Its sources and type of Doctrine. 3 79 In regard to the important chapters of the Confession on the Holy Scriptures, God and the Holy Trinity, God's Eternal Decree, Christ the Mediator, the Covenant of Grace, and the Lord's Supper, which so largely determine its character as a whole, the resemblance to the Irish Articles both in expression and general arrangement is so close, that not the slightest doubt can be entertained about the main source from which the materials for these chapters have been derived.^ As little doubt can be entertained in regard to the design of the framers in following so closely in the foot- steps of Ussher and his Irish brethren. They meant to show him and others like him, who had not had the courage to take their place among them, that though absent they were not forgotten nor their work disregarded. They meant their Confession to be in harmony with the consensus of the Reformed Churches, and especially of the British Reformed Churches, as that had been expressed in their most matured symbol. They desired it to be a bond of union, not a cause of strife and division, among those who were resolutely determined to hold fast by 'the sum and substance of the doctrine' of the Reformed Churches — the ' See my paper on the bibliology of the Westminster Confession in the Appendix to The Proceedings of the First General Presby- terian Council (Edinburgh, 1877) ; Introduction to the Minutes of the Westminster Assembly, pp. xlix. to Ixix. ; and Lecture on the Westminster Co7ifession of Faith, pp. 8-12. 380 The Westminster Co7tfession of Faith. Augustinianism so widely accepted in the times of Elizabeth and James. In that logical and system- loving age, it was thought that they had been wonderfully successful in their efforts to carry out their desires and intentions, so that Baillie could boast of their work being 'cried up by many of their greatest opposites as the best Confession yet extant,' and Baxter could concede that it was ' the most excellent for fulness and exactness he had evfer read from any Church,' and, with all his individualism, could pitch on nothing in it as con- trary to his judgment save a few minor matters which he did not venture to deny were capable of a benign interpretation. The Independents both in England and New England, and the Baptists in England, expressed their substantial approval of it, so far as it had been accepted by the English Parliament. In our own day a different view has often been taken of the Confession, and many hard things have been said of it, some by professed friends, more by avowed opponents of its teaching. I have endeavoured, in the Introduction to the published volume of the Mimites of the Assembly already referred to, to vindicate it from the more serious charges which have been brought against it, and to claim for it and its authors that the justice be done them to read it in the light of the writings and known sentiments of the men who drew it up, and less exclusively than has long been done in the light of the teaching and traditions of later and narrower Its sources arid type of Doctrine. 381 times — to strip it as far as possible of the accretions which in the lapse of time have gathered round it, and marred in greater or lesser measure its goodly form and true proportions.^ I must refer any of you who wish to go thoroughly into this matter to what I have there advanced and still abide by, as to the inspiration and consequent canonicity and authority of Holy Scripture, the doctrines of the Blessed Trinity, of the creation and the fall of man, of Christ the Mediator, of redemption and justification through his obedience unto death, of the Christian Sabbath and the Lord's Supper, and above all, of the mysterious doctrine of predestina- tion, in the exposition of which the Irish Articles are most closely adhered to.^ On this last it has been again grievously misrepresented by some, of ^ We have several excellent commentaries on it, but they are mostly expository or dogmatic, and have made comparatively little use of the vast mass of materials we possess in the writings of those who framed it, to illustrate its spirit and expound the'more delicate shades of its teaching. Quotations from Owen and later men are not without their use, nor those from Hooker and Pearson ; but more use must be made of the writings of the members of the Assembly, and of the writings of that great divine from whose Articles and Catechisms they drew so largely. '^ I place the two once more in opposite columns, that it may be seen how closely the later has followed the earlier, and how faithfully, in regard to this important head, the terms of pacifica- tion agreed to by the Irish Convocation in 1615 were adhered to : WESTMINSTER CONFESSION. IRISH ARTICLES. Chapter III.-Of God's Article III. -Of God's Eternal Decree and Eternal Decree. Predestination. I. God from all eternity did, 11. God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy coun- by his unchangeable counsel, 382 The Westminster Confession of Faith. whom better things might have been expected, and the fairness at least have been shown to deal with its teaching on this mysterious subject as it was explained in the writings of the great English sel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass : yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed condi- tions ; yet hath he not decreed anything because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such con- ditions. III. By the decree of God, "^ for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are pre- destinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to ever- lasting death. IV. These angels and men, j- thus predestinated and fore- ordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed ; and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished. ^ V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, ordain whatsoever in time should come to pass : yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the wills of the reasonable creatures, and neither the liberty nor the con- tingency of the second causes is taken away, but established rather. 12. By the same eternal coun- sel, God hath predestinated some unto life, and reprobated some unto death : of both which there is a certain number known only to God, which can neither be in- creased nor diminished. 13. Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby, before the foundations of the world were laid, he hath constantly decreed in his secret Its sources and type of Doctrine. 383 scholars anddivines from whom mainly it came, and as it has been guarded by the authors of the Con- fession themselves, and not as it has been exagger- ated by the representations of any later or narrower and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perse- verance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto ; and all to the praise of his glorious grace. VI. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, fore-ordained all the means thereunto. Where- fore they who are elected being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ ; are effectually called to faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effec- tually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. counsel to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ unto everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. 14. The cause moving God to predestinate unto life, is not the foreseeing of faith, or persever- ance or good works, or of any- thing which is in the person predestinated, but only the good pleasure of God himself. 15. Such as are predestinated unto life, be called according unto God's purpose (his Spirit working in due season), and through grace they obey the calling, they be justified freely, they be made sons of God by adoption, they be made like the image of his only. begotten Son Jesus Christ, they walk religious- ly in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity. 32. None can come unto Christ unless it be given unto him, and unless the Father draw him. And all men are not so drawn by the Father that they may come unto the Son. Neither is there such a sufficient mea- sure of grace vouchsafed unto every man whereby he is enabled to come imto everlasting life. 384 The Westminster Confession of Faith. school, or as it may be distorted by questionable inferences of their own. In regard to the doc- trine actually taught in the Confession I cannot compress into shorter space what I have already said, but must content myself with referring to the But such as are not predestin- ated to salvation shall finally be condemned for their sins. VII. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his crea- tures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. 14. For all things being or- dained for the manifestation of his glory, and his glory being to appear both in the works of his mercy and of his justice ; it seemed good to his heavenly wisdom to choose out a certain number towards whom he would extend his undeserved mercy, leaving the rest to be spectacles of his justice. 17. We must receive God's promises in such wise as they be generally set forth unto us in Holy Scripture ; and in our doings, that will of God is to be followed, which we have ex- pressly declared unto us in the Word of God. VIII. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending to the will of God revealed in his Word, and yield- ing obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effec- tual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel. The only section of this chapter of the Westminster Confession which has not a correspondent paragraph in the Irish Article is the second. This simply negatives the Jesuit theory of a predesti- nation based on scientia media, and that was the least that could be expected from an Assembly over which Twisse presided. Answers to Objections. 385 pretty full statement I have given in the Introduc- tion to the Minutes of the Westminster Assembly, pp. lii. to Ixiv. I subjoin, however, a brief reply- to some of the objections brought against it. In reply to the reckless assertion, that those who hold this doctrine as it is set forth in the Westmin- ster Standards cannot preach to their perishing fellow-sinners the love of God and the freeness of Christ's salvation, I deem it sufficient to point to the fact that they have never ceased to preach these truths fully and faithfully. They believe them in their inmost hearts, and allow their belief to influence their conduct and mould their teach- ing, and none have ever set forth these precious truths with more winning tenderness or more marked success, than the men who embraced their system of doctrine, and had a firm grasp of their principles as Leighton, Rutherfurd, Sedgewick, Arrowsmith, Tuckney, Calamy, and Bunyan, in the seventeenth century, Willison, Boston, Whit- field, and the Erskines in the eighteenth, and Chalmers, M'Cheyne, the Bonars, Nicolson, and Crawford in the nineteenth century. By none in recent times has the general Fatherhood of God been more resolutely defended than by the last named of these divines, who was fully persuaded that, in that as well as in the other distinctive articles of his creed, he was following faithfully^ in ^ See the views of Harris and Ball in Mmtiies, pp. Ix., Ixiii. 2B 386 The Westminster Confession of Faith. the footsteps of the Westminster divines. Even the so-called 'grim' Synod of Dort denounced it as a calumny against the Reformed Churches to assert that they held ' that God of his own absolute or arbitrary will, and without any respect of sin, hath foreordained or created the greater part or any part of mankind to be damned, or that his decree is in any such sense the cause of sin or of final unbelief as it is the cause of faith and good works.' And as to the atonement of Christ they say, * This death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sins, of infinite price and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world.' ' Further- more, it is the promise of the gospel, that whosoever believes in Christ crucified should not perish but have everlasting life ; which promise, together with the injunction of repentance and faith, ought pro- miscuously and without distinction to be declared and published to all people to whom God in his good pleasure sends the gospel. But forasmuch as many being called by the gospel do not repent nor believe in Christ, but perish in their infidelity, this comes not to pass through any defect or insufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ offered upon the cross, but by their own proper fault.' And again they say, ' This default is not in the gospel, nor in Christ offered by the gospel, nor in God who calleth them by his gospel, and moreover bestoweth Answers to Objections. 387 diverse special gifts upon them, but in themselves who are called ; of whom some are so careless that they give no entrance at all to the word of life ; others entertain it, but suffer it not to sink into their hearts, and so . . . afterwards become revolters.' Even this much misrepresented Synod, no less than many Calvinists in our own day, appears to represent God our Father as having done as much for all to whom the gospel is sent, as the opposite system represents Him as having done for any. As Dr. Crawford has so well put it : * It is only with reference to the non-elect that the Fatherly love of God can be deemed to be obscured by Calvinists. And hence the question comes to be. Wherein does the atonement present a less gracious aspect to those who are not eventually saved, according to our view of its special destination, than according to the views entertained by those who differ from us ? The atonement/^r se, accord- ing to the Arminian view, does nothing more for all men than, according to the Calvinistic view, it does even for the non-elect. It does not per se secure their actual salvation, but merely renders salvation attainable by them on condition of their repenting and believing the gospel. Now certainly it cannot be said to do less than this according to the doctrine of the most decided Calvinists, who hold, in the words of Owen, that " Christ's oblation of himself was every way suffi- 388 The Westminster Confession of Faith. cient to redeem and save all the sinners in the world, and to satisfy the justice of God for all the sins of all mankind," and that if there were a thousand worlds the gospel of Christ might on this ground be preached to them all — there being enough in Christ for the salvation of them all, if so be they will derive virtue from him by faith.' In reply to the not less reckless charge some have preferred, that they who hold this doctrine teach ' that scarcely anybody can be saved,' and so drive many into the opposite error of universal- ism, I say that Calvinists have good cause to feel amazed that any one having claims to scholarship and candour should ever have preferred it. In none of the authorised formularies of the Calvin- istic Churches with which I am acquainted is any foundation given for such a caricature of the system or for putting a narrower meaning on the 'some' who are to be saved than on the ' others ' who are not. The nearest approach to it I remember occurs in the Confession of Lord Bacon, who was free from any taint of Presbyterianism or Puritan- ism, and he merely uses, to describe the elect, the scriptural epithet ' little flock.' It is not from among them only that occasional discourses have come on the fewness of the saved. They are quite as much entitled as the representatives of any other school to speak of those who shall ultimately Answers to Objections. 389 be gathered into one, under Christ their head, as a great multitude which no man could number, of all nations and kindreds and people and tongues, and to hold, as some of the most pronounced of them in our own day have avowed they do, that the number of the saved will at last far exceed that of the lost. With respect to the charge that Calvinism has tended greatly to foster Rationalism and Socinianism, one might at once admit that these have been the errors to which Protestantism in every form has been most liable, just as credulity and superstition have been the besetting sins of the Roman and Anglo-catholic schools. And yet such an one need not hesitate to affirm that it is not the case that Calvinism has been in any special sense chargeable with or responsible for these erroneous tendencies. In the age of the Reforma- tion their chief advocates were found among the Spaniards and Italians who had joined the Re- formers, and Spain and Italywere just the twocoun- tries in which the theology of Augustine was least in reputeand living power. In the following century it was not among the Calvinists of France, Switzer- land, or Britain, but among the Remonstrants of Holland, that the tendency to rationalising and Socinianising modes of thought first markedly showed itself. It spread to many of the Lutheran Churches of Germany before it seriously injured the Calvinistic Churches. It affected the Church 390 The Westminster Confession of Faith. of England herself before it touched the Non- conformist Churches. In our own day no one not utterly blinded by prejudice will venture to deny that the tendency in question is to be found in Lutheran and Arminian Churches quite as much as in the Calvinistic, in the Church of England herself quite as markedly as in any communion of Scottish or American Presbyterians. Further, it is asserted that Calvinism has been unfavourable to literature. It may be admitted at once that many of the eminent literary men of the present age are unfavourable to the doctrinal system of Augustine and Calvin, but it must be admitted also that the greater part of them are not more friendly to many of the doctrines which used to be held firmly by Arminians, and in par- ticular to that view of the atonement which has been current among Lutherans and Arminians as well as Calvinists. But literature did not take its origin in the nineteenth century, and Calvinism has contributed its fair share to the cultivation of it. It is admitted that it has had quite its due propor- tion, and even more than its due proportion of the great preachers who have adorned the Christian Church from the age of Augustine to that of Whitfield, and some of the greatest preachers since Whitfield's time have held and taught its principles. It is admitted also that it has had a few poets and hymn-writers. The father of English poetry has Answers to Objections. 391 at least spoken of it more respectfully than some modern divines : — ' But I can ne bolt it to the bren, As can the holy doctor St. Austen, Or Boece or the bishop Bradwardin.' But in his day perhaps it was still a half truth, though in ours it is said to have become wholly false. Then, should he be left out who wrote : ' Some I have chosen of peculiar grace. Elect above the rest ; so is my will :' and should not the names of Doddridge, Newton, Cowper, and Bonar be added to those of Toplady and Watts, if what it has done for hymnology is to be fairly weighed ? It is admitted it has given us one religious allegory ; it might have been admitted that it had given us two at least, for the Holy War of Bunyan is only inferior in pathos and spiritual power to his Pilgrim's Progress. And before it is urged to its disparagement that it has not given us more books of this class, let any other school be named which has given as many of equal merit, and which have been as richly blessed. In practical divinity and treatises which appeal to the heart and conscience as well as to the intellect it is admitted that Calvinism is rich, and in our own language there are no treatises can be named which, in their power of rousing the careless, encouraging the doubting, and cheering the de- sponding, deserve to be set alongside of Baxter's 392 The Westminste)' Confession of Faith. Call to the Unconverted diUd his Saints Everlasting Rest, and Bunyan's Jernsalem Sinner Saved ; and notwithstanding all his individualism, the former as well as the latter sides with Calvin in regard to the doctrine of predestination and many of the other articles of his creed. Then, as has been already hinted, Lord Bacon, Hooker, Ussher, Hall, Leighton, and Sibbes were Calvinists, and it is so far from being true that Calvinism has been un- favourable to literature in Britain that on the con- trary it may be affirmed that if the names of all who were Calvinists were struck out of the list of her worthies, the Church of England herself would find the number of the great names which adorn her annals seriously curtailed. What has been asserted by some of Calvinism in general has been affirmed by others of Scottish Calvinism in particular. The account I have already given of the works of its theologians in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries will I hope suffice to show that during these ages it held its own among the Reformed Churches, and in pro- portion to its size contributed its fair share, and somewhat more, to the elucidation and defence of a moderate Calvinism, and bore the heaviest share of the contest for the autonomy of the Church, the Presbyterian constitution of its governing coun- cils, and the rights of its ordinary members in the choice of their pastors. Leighton, the only one of Answers to Objections. 393 its prelates in the seventeenth century who gained a name and fame for himself as a theologian, passed his happiest days as a minister of its Pres- byterian Church ; and most of those discourses which .charm us still, and which were treasured in many a humble Presbyterian household ere yet they had come to be so generally valued elsewhere, were preached from the pulpits or delivered from the chair of Divinity in our Covenanting Church. In the eighteenth century the literary fame of the leaders, lay as well as clerical, of the national Church of Scotland is universally acknowledged, and the contributions made to theological litera- ture in an untheological age by a single Scottish divine — Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen — by his Disser- tation on Miracles, his Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, and his opus magmnn on the Gospels, were such as many larger Churches in that century might have been proud of Then in the same century there arose or came to maturity a school of history and philosophy which added greatly to our country's fame. Its chief ornaments were ministers, preachers or elders of the national Church, and Sir William Hamilton, the greatest ornament of that school in our own times, expressed himself far more respectfully regarding its Calvin- istic theology than many have the assurance to do who have not a tithe of his learning, insight, and speculative power. He had been alienated not 394 '^^^^ Westminster Confession of Faith. from Calvinism but from what he held was a misrepresentation of it. ' He regarded Calvinism,' his biographer tells us, * as the more philosophical system,' and spoke 'with the highest respect of its author,' but 'he protested against its alliance with [Edwards's system of] philosophical necessity — a protest in some measure shared by his strenuous antagonist Principal Cunningham.' At present Biblical and historical studies show quite as decided a tendency to revive in Scotland as in England. A Scottish publisher, by naturalising among us the best products of German thought, has done more to promote such studies than any of his brethren in Britain. Scottish scholars have held their own in the Jerusalem Chamber in the revision of our venerable translation of the Scriptures, and especially of the Old Testament. Dr. Pusey himself did not disdain, for the elucidation of the Chaldee of Daniel, to call in the aid of a Scottish scholar, whose untimely removal from the chair he was so peculiarly fitted to adorn we all deeply regret. The charges I have still to mention are of minor importance.^ The first of them is the assertion, so often and confidently propounded of late, that the Confession represents the creation of the world as having taken place in six ' natural or literal days,' which almost all orthodox divines now grant that ' This, somewhat abridged, appears in paper named, p. 377. Answers to Objections. 395 it did not. But the whole ground for the assertion is furnished by the words * natural or literal ' which the objectors themselves insert or assume. The authors of the Confession, as Dr. A. A. Hodge has well observed/ simply repeat the statements of Scripture in almost identical terms, and any interpretation that is fairly applicable to such passages of Scripture as Gen. ii. 3 and Exodus XX. II, is equally applicable to the words of the Confession. It is quite true, as he has shown, that since the Confession was composed, many facts of science previously unknown have been brought to light respecting the changes through which our globe and probably the stellar universe had passed before the establishment of the present order of things, and that new arguments have thus been furnished against interpreting the days mentioned in the above passages of Scripture as literal days. But it is a mistake to suppose that this method of interpreting the days in these passages originated in modern times, and was altogether unknown to the men who framed our Confession, To prove it a mistake it is not necessary to have recourse to the ingenious conjecture, that some of the Cam- bridge men in the Assembly may have been acquainted with the manuscript work of Dean Colet, preserved in their archives, and only given to the public in our own time, in which the figura- ^ Commentary on the Confession of Faith, p. 82. 396 The Westminster Confession of Faith. tive interpretation of the days of creation is main- tained.^ There is no lack of evidence, in works published before the meeting of the Assembly, and familiar to several of its members, to show that the figurative interpretation had long before Dean Colet's time commended itself to several eminent scholars and divines with whose works members of the Assembly were acquainted. If there was one Jewish scholar with whose writings such men as Lightfoot, Selden, Gataker, Seaman, and Coleman were more familiar than another, it was Philo of Alexandria ; and Philo has not hesitated to characterise it as ' rustic simplicity, to imagine that the world was created in six days, or, indeed, in any clearly defined space of time,' Augustine," the great Latin doctor, with whose works several of the Westminster divines were far better acquainted than most of their successors, in his literal Commentary on Genesis, maintains that the days of the creation-week were far different from {longe dispares), and again, very unlike to {}}iultiuu hnpares) those that now are in the earth. Procopius, a Greek writer not unknown to some of the Westminster divines, teaches that the number of six days was assumed not as a mark of actual time, but as a manner of teaching the order 1 Colet's Letters to Radulpluis oit the Mosaic Account of the Creation, with translation and notes by J. H. Lupton. 1876. - Migne's edition of Augustine, De Genesi ad literam, iv. 27. Answers to Objectio7is. 397 of creation ; while in certain commentaries in that age, attributed to the Venerable Bede, and largely- read in England, though now deemed spurious, a similar opinion is said to be found.^ The figura- tive interpretation therefore of the six days of creation is no make-shift of hard-pressed theo- logians in the nineteenth century. It was held by respectable scholars and divines, from early times, and was known to the framers of our Confession ; and had they meant deliberately to exclude it they would have written not six days, but six natural or literal days. The next topic to which I advert is the charge made against the Confession of teaching that not all infants dying in infancy, but only an elect portion of them, are saved. Here again scrimp justice has been dealt out to it. Its exact words are, * Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit.' This statement, it has been averred, necessarily implies that there are non-elect infants dying in infancy who are not ' regenerated and saved.' It does not seem to me when fairly interpreted to imply any such thing. It might have been susceptible of such an interpretation had it been allowed to stand in the form which it appears to have borne in the ^ Most of these testimonies are referred to, and the opinion they express is admitted to be probabilis, in the sense his sect used that term, by Sixtus Senensis in his Biblioiheca Sancta, p. 422. 39^ The Westminster Confession of Faith. draft first brought in to the Assembly — ' elect OF infants,'^ not elect infants. But the very fact that the form of expression was changed shows how anxious the divines intrusted with the methodising of the Confession were to guard against pronounc- ing dogmatically on questions on which neither Scripture nor the Reformed Churches had defi- nitely pronounced. The statement occurs, it is im- portant to notice, not in the chapter treating of pre- destination, but in the chapter treating of effectual calling ; and is meant, not to define the proportion of infants dying in infancy who shall be saved, but to assert the great truths, that even they are not exempt from the consequences of the fall, but are by nature every one of them in the massa perditionis ; that they can only be separated from it, and saved, by the electing love of the Father, the atoning work of the Son, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost ; and that they, however as yet incapable of the exercise of reason and faith, may by the Holy Spirit be regenerated and made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light. As Dr. Hodge has briefly and clearly expressed it •} ' The phrase " elect infants " is precise and fit for its purpose. It is certainly revealed that none either adult or infant is saved except on the ground of sovereign election — that is, all salvation for the ^ Minutes of Westminster Assembly, p. 162, Sess. 534. * Hodge on the Confession of Faith, pp. 174, 175. Answers to Objections. 399 human race is pure grace. It is not positively revealed that all infants are elect, but we are left for many reasons to indulge a highly probable hope that such is the fact. The Confession affirms what is certainly revealed, and leaves that which revelation has not decided to remain without the suggestion of a positive opinion upon one side or the other.' In historical vindication of this inter- pretation of their meaning, I deem it only necessary to refer to the judgment of Davenant and the other English divines at the Synod of Dort, who were the precursors and teachers of the leading English divines of the Assembly. The Arminians had maintained that, as all infants dying in infancy were undoubtedly saved, there could not be said to be any election, so far as they were concerned. The English, though personally not much in advance of their brethren on the Conti- nent, gave special prominence in their reply to the statement that, even granting the premises of the Arminians, the conclusions drawn from them were by no means legitimate or necessary. Election and preterition, they said, had respect to the whole mass of fallen humanity, not to certain separate divisions of it according to age or circumstances, and that though a certain number of infants dying in infancy might not be separated from or elected out of a certain number also dying in infancy and not elected, yet if all were separated from the 400 The Westminster Confession of Faith. common mass of mankind sinners, and bound up in the bundle of life with Christ, that was quite sufficient to constitute an election of them, and to warrant such an expression as elect infants dying in infancy. Ad rationem electionis divines sive ponendam sive tollendam circumstantia (Etatis est qiiiddam impertinens. . . . Fac, i^itur, omnes infantes servari ne 7ino qiiideni pr(2terito, tamen qtiia electio et preterit io respicit massam non cetatein, licet non e numero infantinni, tamen e commnni massa homimim peccatorum segregati snnt qnod ad electionis rationem constitnendam siifficit} Few of these divines, or of their successors at Westminster, had probably, in personal opinion, advanced as far as good Bishop Hooper, who, as I told you in a previous Lecture, said, ' It is ill-done to condemn the infants of Christians that die without baptism, of whose salvation by the Scriptures we be assured. ... I would likewise judge well of the infants of the infidels who have none other sin in them but original. . . It is not against the faith of a Chris- tian man to say that Christ's death and passion extendeth as far for the salvation of innocents, as Adam's sin made all his posterity liable to con- demnation.' But the best of them had cometo adopt the first part of his opinion (which was more than many high churchmen had then done), and from reverence for him and others whom they loved, to ^ Acta Synodi DordrechtaiKe, p. 499, 4(0 editio. Answers to Objections. 401 refrain from pronouncing positively against the second. The last topic to which I shall advert as having been quite as much misunderstood as either of the preceding, is the concluding statement in the same chapter : ' Much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way, be they ever so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of the religion they do profess ; and to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious and to be detested.' This is a slight softening down of a statement made in more extreme form in the English Articles,^ and in some of the other Reformed Confessions, and perhaps the Baptists somewhat improved it in 1677 when, under the guidance of Bunyan, they changed the words * not professing the Christian religion ' into ' not receiving the Christian religion,' to make it more clear that they meant the statement to be limited to those who had had the Christian religion tendered to them, but had refused to receive it, and continued obs- tinately to live by the light of nature and the law of the religion they professed. That, I think, was what the Westminster divines also had chiefly in view (I will notjin remembrance of certain questions * * They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, ' etc. — Article XVIII. 'We utterly abhoi; the blasphemy oi them that affirm,' etc. — Scottish Confession of 1560. 'Abominamur impiissi- mam vesaniam.' — Conf, Helv. Post. 2 C 402 The Westminster Confession of Faith. in the larger Catechism, say exclusively in view), to bear their testimony, in common with other Reformed Churches, against the Spiritualists or the Pantheists of the school of Servetus, as well as against the Deists and Free-thinkers among them- selves, who, living in the full blaze of the light of revelation, preferred nature's twilight, and despised the riches of God's goodness and forbearance and long-suffering. They who hold that the words of the Confession were meant to have a wider application should at least do its framers the justice to remember that all they do absolutely define is, that the persons spoken of cannot be saved by the light of nature, or the law of the religion they profess ; and that when they go on in a subsequent chapter to define the Church of visible professors and outward ordinances, all that they venture to afifirm is, that out of it there is no ' ordinary possibility of salvation,' not that the salvation-bringing grace of God is never mani- fested outside the portals of ' the house of his continual residence,' or otherwise than through its ordinances. Even a Scottish divine, more than half a century before, in a catechism which cir- culated in England as well as in Scotland, had in answer to the question, Hozv is a man frajiied and made able to serve God? inserted the following statement : ' By the effectual working of God's Spirit in him, extraordinarily and witJiont ordinary means, howbcit but seldom in a Reformed Church, Answers to Objections, 403 and ordinarily by ordinary means at all times in a Reformed Church.'^ That is, I suppose, where a church had been planted, and brought into harmony with the requirements of the word of God, the influences of the Spirit were ordinarily (though not even then exclusively) communicated through the channel of its ordinances ; but where a church had not been set up or had fallen from pristine purity, the Spirit of the Lord was not restrained from working extraordinarily and with- out ordinary means. Ball, whose treatise on the Covenant of Grace was published in 1645, and recommended by several members of the Assembly, affirms (p. 47) : ' We know God is not tied to the means, nor do we absolutely exclude every par- ticular man from the grace of the covenant who is excluded from the covenant outwardly ad- ministered, but we cannot think they shall uni- versally be partakers of the grace of the covenant' Yet once more, let me repeat, that all I contend for is that the Westminster divines have not pro- nounced against the more liberal views on such subjects which modern Calvinists have commonly adopted ; not that they themselves generally held them, but that they knew of them, and knew them to be tolerated or favoured by several whom they loved and honoured for the good service they had done in their day and generation, and that they were content to give forth no binding determina- ^ Galloivay's Catechism, 404 The Westminster Confession of Faith. tion in regard to them. Their main object, as I said in the outset, was to set forth in their Con- fession the great principles of the faith common to the Reformed or Calvinistic Churches, without exalting into principles points on which these Churches had not thought fit to decide. And I believe that in adherence to their creed and method lies our only hope of a United Anglo-Saxon Presbyterianism — Calvinistic yet comprehensive, strong yet forbearing in the use of its strength, earnest and untiring in self-sacrificing Christian work, orderly yet free in its worship. It is hardly possible for a minister of the national Church to conclude a lecture on this subject without reference to the very remarkable paper on it which appeared in Macmillan^s Maga- zine for August 1 88 1, and was the last literary labour of one whom even those who most differed from him had learned to love and esteem. Dean Stanley, more than any Englishman of our day, had striven to understand our ways and to reci- procate the warm regard in which we held him, and in this the last paper which proceeded from his pen we havC; with all its defects, a generous and valuable testimony to the merits of that Confes- sion to which the Presbyterian Churches, under scorn and obloquy and misrepresentation, have so resolutely clung. While others who have never managed to rid themselves of early idola specus Answers to Objections. 405 about it, can hardly speak with patience of the re- presentation it gives of the character and purposes of God, this 'eirenic' divine does not hesitate to vindicate its teaching on the latter as in substantial accord with that of his own (and he might have added still more of the Irish) Church, and not unreasonable in itself; while of its teaching on the former subject he affirms that the glowing words it adds to the definition of God ^ in the English (he might have said too in the Irish) Article ' have no parallel ' in those or ' any of the earlier creeds.' He speaks in terms of like admiration of the chapter relating to Christ the Mediator and his mediatorial work, and of ' the much larger and no- bler description of the sacred volume ' in Chapter I. 'than is to be found in the Tridentine or the Anglican Confession.' And from a different point of view from that I have thought fit to take, he finds something to say for the language it uses in speaking of elect infants and of those who do not profess the Christian religion. The three ques- tionable statements to which he is disposed to take objection are, as himself admits, of inferior moment, and will not generally in Scotland be regarded as very questionable by those who are ^ ' Most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin ; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him, and withal most just and terrible in His judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.' 4o6 The Westminster Confession of Faith. not inclined to question much more. The first refers to the assertion of the autonomy of the Church, which he admits is made in moderate terms, and in regard to which Scotchmen generally still think that England has more to learn than they have. The second relates to the passage which by implication condemns marriage with a deceased wife's sister. And if there is nothing in the English Articles on that subject, the principle on which the condemnation is based is as firmly rooted in English as in Scottish law, and far more closely bound up with certain prominent events in the history of its Reformation. The third state- ment to which he takes objection is that which affirms the Pope to be the ' man of sin.' This however is taken from the Irish Articles of 1615, and if it is not in the English Articles there is no doubt it is in the Homilies^ to which the Articles refer, so that not even in regard to these is there material difference between the position of the clergy in the two Churches save in the matter of the autonomy of the Church, and in regard to that many of the clergy of the Church he adorned, as they think of the freedom we enjoy in the meeting of our courts and the exercise of our discipline, would be much more ready to say, ' Happy is the people that is in such a case ' than ' God, I thank thee that I am not as this Presbyterian.* ^ On Peril of Idolatry, pt. 3; against Wilful Rebellion, pt. 6. LECTURE XII. THE assembly's CATECHISMS, LARGER AND SHORTER. My last Lecture was devoted to an account of the Confession of Faith which was prepared by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, and is still accepted by almost all orthodox Presbyterians of the Anglo-Saxon race as their confession or chief doctrinal symbol. I showed you how carefully it was framed on the lines already laid down by the best British divines, and especially by that prince of theologians, Ussher of Armagh, — to whom his fellow-churchmen of subsequent times have failed to render the homage he deserves for his great learning and his firm attachment to Augustin- ianism and our common Protestantism. It now only remains that before concluding these historical sketches I should give you some account of the Catechisms of the Assembly, and especially of the Shorter Catechism, which, with Baxter, I regard as, in several respects, the most remarkable of their symbolical books, the matured fruit of all their consultations and debates, the quintessence 4o8 The Assembly s Catechisms^ of that system of truth in which they desired to train English-speaking youth, and faithful training in which, I believe, has done more to keep alive on both sides of the Atlantic reverence for the old theology than all other human instrumentalities whatever. Attention is only now beginning to be given in somewhat like adequate measure to the structure and composition of these catechisms. The com- position of the Confession of Faith has been minutely examined, and something like general agreement as to the sources from which it has been taken has been arrived at. But no similar service has yet been rendered in regard to the catechisms, and I do not see how I can more appropriately bring these Lectures to a close than by bringing a humble contribution to supply this desideratum. It may fairly be said of the catechisms framed on the system of the doctrinal Puritans, and pub- lished in England between the years 1600 and 1645, that their name is legion. Perhaps no other so convincing proof can be cited of the great influence they were exercising throughout these years of trial and oppression, and also of the manner in which they came to acquire, retain, and increase it, as that which is furnished by the floods of different catechisms and different editions of the same catechism, — often five or six, in several Larger and Shorter. 409 cases ten or twelve, and in some cases from twenty to thirty editions being poured forth from the London press in rapid succession. Among the members of the Assembly there were at least twelve or fourteen who had prepared and published catechisms of their own years before the Assembly met, as Twisse, White, Gataker, Gouge, Wilkinson, Wilson, Walker, Palmer, Cawdrey, Sedgewick, Byfield, and probably Newcomen, Lyford, Hodges, and Foxcroft, to say nothing of Cartwright, Perkins, Ussher, Rogers, and Ball, who somewhat earlier had prepared the way for them, and whom several of them can be shown to have more or less followed in their plan or in details. The first step towards the preparation of a catechism may be said to have been taken in December 1643,^ when Messrs. Marshall, Palmer, Goodwin, Young, and Herle, with the Scottish Commissioners, were appointed a committee to draw up a directory for public worship. That was intended to include a directory for catechising, if not a catechism, and the preparation of that paper was intrusted to Mr. Herbert Palmer.^ Notwith- standing his great reputation as a catechist, his paper, as first presented, does not appear to have come up to the expectation of the Scottish Commissioners. Their chronicler tells us, ' Mr. ^ Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. Ii8. ^ Ibid. vol. ii. p. 140. 4IO The Assembly s Catechisms y Marshall's part anent preaching, and Mr. Palmer's about catechising, though the one be the best preacher, and the other the best catechist in England, yet we no ways like it ; so their papers are passed in {i.e. into) our hands to frame them according to our mind.'^ This was written on 2d April 1644, and on 21st November of the same year it is briefly recorded that ' the catechise is drawn up, and I think shall not take up much time,' and again, on 26th December, that * we have near[ly] also agreed in private on a draught of catechism, whereupon, when it comes into public, we expect little debate.' The natural inference from these notices seems to be that this catechism was either some one which had been drafted by themselves in terms of the remit made to them — the catechism published in 1644 for the benefit of both kingdoms, or that of Rutherfurd, still extant in MS. — and which they were prematurely counting on getting the committee and the Assembly to accept without much discussion, or else some modification of Mr. Palmer's directory or catechism, such as we shall find reason to believe they were willing, after consultation with their friends in the north, to accept, at least in its method and principles. Before this date the printed Minutes^ of the Assembly show that * Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 148. * Page 12, 2d December 1644. Larger and Shorter. 411 Messrs. Marshall, Tuckney, Newcomen, and Hill had been added to Mr. Palmer ' for hastening the catechism,' and that on 7th February 1644-5 Messrs. Reynolds and Delme were added, — of course in conjunction with the Scotch Commis- sioners, who claimed the right to be on all com- mittees appointed to carry out any part of the uniformity covenanted for between the Churches. Among the catechisms which I examined cur- sorily in 1866 in the British Museum and in Sion College Library was one bearing the title, An Endeavour of making Christian Religion easie, and published at Cambridge in 1640 without the author's name, but which, from Dr. Wallis' preface to his Expla7iation of the Shorter Catechism, I concluded was probably Palmer's. In it each of the principal answers is, by repetition of part of the question, made a complete andindependentproposi- tion, and these principal answers are broken down in a peculiar way in a series of subordinate ques- tions, all capable of being answered by the mono- syllables Aye or No. It did not then strike me as so similar to the Westminster Catechisms in their ultimate form as it does now, and not know- ing then what we know (now that the Minutes have been transcribed from the almost illegible original) of the successive stages by which this ultimate form was reached, I had almost forgotten all about it, till five years ago, when, as I ruminated 4 1 2 The Assembly's Catechisms, over the notes of a very unintelligible debate in the Minutes, this fact came back to my remem- brance as one which might enable me to cast light on it. It was not my good fortune, however, to get back to the British Museum till November 1879, and before that time my attention, as well as that of others, had been called by an Edinburgh book- seller to what is said by Dr. Belfrage on the history of the Shorter Catechism prefixed to the second edition of his Practical Exposition of the Assembly's Shorter Catechism. This history was not contained in the earlier edition of the book. Dr. Belfrage appears to have seen Palmer's Cate- chism, and to have compared it with the Assem- bly's, but his conclusion regarding it coincided rather with my first impressions. He states, how- ever, that M'Crie, on the ground of the passage quoted above from Baillie, was disposed to come to the conclusion that ' Mr. Palmer was concerned in the first draft of the Catechism.' My friend Dr. Briggs, who also saw Palmer's treatise when in London in 1879, early in the following year gave an interesting account of its relations to the Shorter Catechism in the paper to which I referred in a former lecture.^ I have preferred to wait till I had leisure to make a further study of all the contemporary Puritan catechisms, and might venture to speak of them with fuller knowledge. * In Presbyterian Review, for January 1880. Larg er and Shorter. 413 I have little doubt that the paper which Palmer gave in to the Committee and to the Assembly in 1645, a^^d which occasioned the debate to which I have referred, was substantially the same with the preface to his catechism. It details the method which he had himself made use of in his catechis- ings, and which many modern keys (as they are called) to the Shorter Catechism have borrowed from him or from Dr. John Wallis, who, without loss of time, applied the system of his revered master to the new catechism which the Assembly ultimately agreed on. The Scotch Commissioners, when they first heard this paper, were not satisfied with it ; and their impartiality therefore is the more highly to be commended in regard to it. They had themselves in the meantime brought out ' the New Catechism according to the form of the Kirk of Scotland, published for the benefit of both King- doms,' and perhaps in the hope that it might be adopted as the common catechism. Yet when they had had time to consider the subject more deliber- ately, and advise with their friends in Scotland regarding it, they proved in the debate to which I have referred, if not the only, certainly the most prominent advocates of Palmer's method and peculiar form of catechism. This debate occurred on the 13th of May 1645, probably just after the fifth edition of Palmer's little treatise had appeared. His efforts on that occasion were directed mainly 414 1^^^^ Assembly s Catechisms, to securing the Assembly's approval of his inetJiod of catechising rather than of the detailed contents of his catechism. Yet, as I read the brief minutes of the debate, his efforts were not crowned with success. The Scotch Commissioners Rutherfurd and Gillespie spoke warmly in favour of his method of catechising, and of the practice he adopted of making each principal answer a dis- tinct and complete proposition, and breaking down the principal answers by subordinate questions which could all be answered by Aye or No. His personal friend Delme gave the plan a sort of gen- eral support, but all the other speakers, and among them Messrs. Marshall and Reynolds, two of the most prominent members of his committee, while frankly acknowledging his great skill and success as a catechist and the good that might come from ministers in their catechisings availing themselves of his method, resolutely objected to have these subordinate questions and answers reduced to rigid form and inserted in the public catechism.^ * Minutes of Westminster Assembly, pp. 91-94 — Mr. Marshall : ' I confess that the pains which that brother that brought in the Report [hath taken] is both accepted with God and hath been blessed by him. . , . But I crave leave to give a few dissenting thoughts to the method propounded.' These were in substance that people would come to get up the subordinate answers by rote as well as the principal ones, that good might come of the catechiser himself breaking up the principal answers in the method proposed, but not from their being inserted into the catechism and learned by rote. He approved, however, of commending all this iu the preface to the catechism. Mr. Reynolds : ' We all L a rger and Shorter. 415 One can hardly contemplate without a shudder how near we were to missing the most concise, nervous, and severely logical catechism in our language had Mr. Palmer and the Scotch Com- missioners at that time carried their point and got these subordinate questions and answers inserted in the catechism. I do not think that was further pressed on the Assembly after this date,^ but Mr. Palmer continued to be so persuaded of its excel- lence and importance that he determined with himself that he would print upon his own method the catechism which the Assembly should ulti- mately adopt, and, departing to his rest ere that had been completed, he left his purpose, as a sacred legacy, to be executed by his young friend Wallis. He accordingly in 1648 published that explanation of the Shorter Catechism on the model of Palmer's agree that way which is most for ingenerating knowledge is most to be used. But that this way before you is the best way I cannot discern. [If] you resolve it shall be but a directory, then how shall those Ayes or Noes be of use ? . . . You will obtain your end as well by setting it down in the preface to the catechism.' Seaman says there were two questions before them, the one relating to a catechism, the other to the method of catechising, and that the two should be kept distinct, and the minister not too strictly tied up as to the latter. Palmer was somewhat dissatisfied with the result of the debate, and said that if he had not a peculiar in- terest In the matter he would have spoken more upon it. ^ Baillie, however, says at a later date : ' We had passed a quar- ter of the catechise and thought to have made short work with the rest ; but they are fallen into such mistakes and endless janglings about both the method and the matter that all think it will be long- some work.' — Letters, vol. ii. p. 416. 41 6 The Assembly s Catechisms, treatise, on which several so-called keys to it have in our own day been based. It was on 1st August 1645 that a further report was presented by the committee to the Assembly. The interval may possibly have been employed in trying to put the materials of Palmer's Catechism into more acceptable shape, or to bring it nearer to the Scotch one (which, though more brief, is framed on the same plan), and to disencumber it of all the subordinate questions to the formal insertion of which objection had been taken. The only hints which the Minutes supply are that there was a debate as to whether the Creed should be expressed and probably made, as it was both in the Scotch and in Palmer's, and several contemporary catechisms, the basis of the exposi- tion of the Articles of Faith, or whether these articles should be taken up in the systematic order more usually adopted in strictly Puritan catechisms. There was also a debate concerning God, which was one of the first articles in all the catechisms of the period, whether they were framed on the basis of the Apostles' Creed or of the commonly received system of theology. But I conclude that even yet the committee was not altogether of one mind,^ and that it was on this account that, after debate on 20th August, it was reconstituted, and Mr. Palmer, Dr. Stanton, and ^ Minutes, p. 124, 125, Larger and SJiorter. 4 1 7 Mr. Young were appointed to draw up the whole draft of the catechism with all convenient speed. Either, however, they did not proceed very speedily or they met with unexpected difficulties in their undertaking, and, on 22d July 1646, Mr. Ward was adjoined to them. It was not till nth September 1646 that their report was called for, nor till the afternoon of Monday 14th Sep- tember that it was presented ; and from that date on to the 4th January 1646-7 it was from time to time taken up, and passed as far as the fourth commandment.^ On ist December, however, before much of it had passed, a large addition was again made to the committee, viz., Messrs. Whitaker, Nye, and Byfield, and ' the brethren who had been intrusted with the methodising of the Confession of Faith,' viz., Messrs. Reynolds, Herle, Newcomen, Arrowsmith, and Tuckney ; and pro- bably it was in consequence of these changes on the committee that on the 14th of January, on a motion by Mr. Vines, it was ordered 'that the committee for the catechism do prepare a draught of two catechisms, one more large and another more brief, in the preparation of which they are to have an eye to the Confession of Faith and the matter of the catechism already begun, '^ or, as the Scotch Commissioners report it in a letter to the 1 Minutes, pp. 281-318. * Minutes, p. 321 ; also Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 379. 2 D 41 8 The Assembly s Catechisms^ Commission of their own Assembly, which bears unmistakeable evidence of being from the hand of Rutherfurd : ' The Assembly of Divines, after they had made some progress in the catechism Avhich was brought in to them from their committee, and having found it very difficult to satisfy themselves or the world with one form of catechism or to dress up milk and meat both in one dish, have, after second thoughts, recommitted the work that two forms of catechism may be prepared, one more exact and comprehensive ; another more easie and short for new beginners.'^ The cate- chism which had already been so far passed was unquestionably still on the basis of Palmer's, but a large portion of the detailed historical explana- tions of the second part of the creed, relating to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of our Lord, was omitted, and in the exposition of the com- mandments another basis is already plainly discernible, while a more pronounced Calvinistic character is given to the doctrinal teaching. The variations from and additions to individual answers can in general be still traced to other contempor- ^ MS. Minutes of Commission. To the same effect, Gillespie says to the Assembly in Edinburgh in August 1647, that the divines have found great difficulty how to make it full, such as might be expected from an Assembly, and, upon the other part, how to condescend to the cajiacity of the common and unlearned. Therefore they are a-making two distinct catechisms — a short and plain one for these, and a larger one for those of understanding.' Appendix to Baillie's Letters, vol. iii. p. 452. Larger and Shorter. 4 1 9 ary catechisms, and the more important of them to those of Ussher, on whose catechetical manuals, as previously on his Articles of Religion, they seem to me to take pleasure in falling back, especially on all cardinal questions. Even this partially passed recension of a catechism follows his and more strictly Puritan treatises ra«ther than Palmer's, in placing in the forefront the question and answer as to the rule of faith, and in inserting another as to the decrees of God ; and it is to the same source we have to trace the questions and answers as to the covenants of works and grace, the prophetical, priestly, and kingly offices of the Redeemer, and the effectual calling, justification, adoption, and sanctification and perseverance of those who have been made partakers of redemption, and even the detailed and specific statements as to the sinfulness of the estate into which man fell. All these, which make the Westminster Catechisms what they ultimately became, are to be sought outside of Palmer's Endeavour of making Chris- tian Religion easie, which the more they tried to adapt it to their purpose, the more they had to alter or supplement it ; and all these are to be found in the distinctively Calvinistic catechisms of Ezekiel Rogers, John Ball, William Gouge, M[atthew] N[ewcomen], and, to a considerable extent, in those of Henry Wilkinson and Adon- jram Byfield, as well as of Archbishop Ussher. 420 The Assembly's CatecJiisms, Of this I deem myself entitled to speak with some confidence, having had the opportunity of carefully comparing the answers in their manuals as well as in Palmer's with the definitions ultimately inserted by the Assembly in one or other of its catechisms. It was not till after the Scripture proofs for the Confession of Faith were completed that the result of the labours of the reconstituted com- mittee in preparing a Larger Catechism were called for. But, on 15th April 1647, the first portion of them was presented to the Assembly and further portions were from time to time presented and discussed till, on 15th October of the same year, the Larger Catechism was finished, substantially in the shape in which we still have it. The doctrinal part of this manual, as every one wdio has carefully studied it knows, and as the resolution reconstituting the committee prepares us to expect, is taken to a large extent from the Confession of Faith. The explanation of the ten commandments, and of the duties required and the sins forbidden under each, is largely derived from Ussher's Body of Divinity^ Newcomen's and Ball's catechisms, and perhaps also from Cartwright's Body of Divinity and some of the larger practical treatises of Perkins. The exposi- tion of the Lord's Prayer has been got in part from the same sources, in part also from Attersoll'.s, Larger and SJiorter. 42 1 or some other catechism based on Perkins' treatise on the Lord's Prayer, and like it, supplying matter for confession of sin, as well as for prayer more strictly so called, under each of the petitions of the Lord's Prayer. I can enter into particulars as to this derivation or correspondence only in the most cursory way. The first question or interrogation, which does not seem to have appeared in the former draft of the committee, is taken from the old English translation of Calvin's Catechism, What is the principal and chief end of man's life .'' The answer to this question may be said to combine the an- swers to Question 3rd in the Catechisms of Calvin and Ames, ' To have his glory showed forth in us,' and ' in the enjoying of God,' and it may have been taken from them ; or the first part may have been taken from Rogers, Ball, or Palmer, and the second from an Italian catechism of the sixteenth century.^ The second question is one found in several contemporary catechisms, and the answer to it is substantially taken from the Confession of Faith. The third question, which in the former draft had stood apparently at the head,^ is put here in a somewhat altered shape, and the clause which had there been principal, and again becomes so in the Shorter Catechism, is brought in as subsidiary and thrown to the end of the answer. The next ^ ' Coder' eternamente Dio.' ^ Minutes, p. 281. 42 2 The Assembly s Catechisms, question, relating to the proofs showing that the Scriptures arc the word of God, is found in many- Puritan catechisms, and the answer is abridged from the Confession of Faith. The question as to what the Scriptures principally or especially teach is found both in Paget's and in Ball's Catechism, and the answer in Ussher's Principles of Christian Religion. The next question. What do the Scriptures make known of God ? and the answer, are found in analogous forms in Rutherfurd's and some other contemporary manuals. The answer to the question, What is God f^ had in the former draft been taken from Palmer's work, with the ex- ception that ' perfection,' in the singular, had been changed into ' perfections,' in the plural, as it had been in another catechism published anonymousl}- in the previous year. Here the former description is exchanged for one abridged apparently from Ussher's Body of Diviiiity} The next answer, respecting the properties or attributes of God, was at first distinct from the previous one. Dr. Briggs supposes it may have been got by crush- ing into one the answers to more than a score of questions in Palmer's treatise and Dr. Matthews' by a somewhat similar condensation of various answers in Ball's larger catechism. But it is simply an abridgment of a paragraph in Chapter II. of the * 'God is a most glorious being, infinite in all perfections.' ^ 'God is a spirit, infinite in being and perfection.' Larger and Shorter. 423 Confession of Faith ; and the ultimate answer of the Larger Catechism to the question, What is God ? was got by joining these two answers into one. The answer to the same question in the Shorter Catechism is composed of the scriptural definition, ' God is a Spirit,' with the incom- municable attributes arranged in the same order as they were by Rogers, but in adjectival form, and the communicable in substantive form almost exactly as they had been given by Egerton. But time will not admit of my prosecuting this minute comparison further. The doctrinal defi- nitions in the Larger Catechism are, as I have said, in a great measure abridged from the Con- fession of Faith, and so far as they are not so they may generally be found in a shorter form in Ball's and Newcomen's catechisms, in more diffuse form in Ussher's Body of Divinity. The same may be said even more unreservedly of the exposition of the ten commandments and of the Lord's Prayer as concerns Newcomen and Ussher. But one of the most singular and unexpected disclosures brought to light in the recently published Minutes of the Assembly is that, while the first draft of a catechism in 1645 treated first of credenda, then of the ten commandments, and so left to the last the means of grace and the Lord's Prayer, and while the Larger Catechism as finally adjusted followed the same order, yet, as 424 The Assembly s Catechisms, first entered on the Minutes of the Assembly in 1647, it treats of the means of grace or the word, sacraments, and prayer, before it expounds the commandments, in this following the plan of Ball's and some other catechisms, and showing that, if not in details, yet in outline and method, the divines followed some previous manual on the same plan as his — possibly that small one of date 1 542, attributed to Calvin, — which, after being long lost, has been brought to light recently by M. Douen, and printed as an appendix to the second volume of his Huguenot Psalter. At least they follow its plan more exactly than that of Ball ; and the statement of Baillie, given on page 415, is sufficient to show that the question of method con- tinued long to divide them. Their detailed and elaborate answers in the several parts of this catechism are, even when founded on previous treatises, carefully matured expansions of the given answers in these. I shall try to find room in the Appendix (O) for one specimen of this, furnished by the rules they have provided for the exposition of the commandments, on the principles set forth in our Lord's Sermon on the Mount. These rules had been more and more elaborated in the larger Puritan catechisms from the days of Whitaker and Cart Wright to those of Ball and Ussher, and were finalh' brought as near to perfection as they could well be by Dr. Gouge and ]\Ir. Walker — the sub- Larger and Shorter, 425 committee appointed to prepare them — probably with the help of Dr. Tuckney, who by that time was acting as chairman of the Committee on the Catechism, and is supposed to have taken a very special charge of the exposition of the ten com- mandments. The Larger Catechism was completed on 15th October 1647, read over in the Assembly on 20th by Dr. Burgess, and on the 22d was carried up to the two Houses^ by the Prolocutor and the whole Assembly, when thanks were returned to them ' for their great labour and pains in compiling this Long Catechism.' It appears to have been presented in manuscript to the Scottish Assembly in July 1647, so far as it was then com- pleted, and on the 17th September certain alterations desired by their Commission were made at Westminster. It was approved by the General Assembly on 20th July 1648.^ It was presented with the proofs on 14th April 1648. The Shorter Catechism was not composed till after the Larger one had been virtually completed, though it perhaps embodies somewhat more of the materials of the earlier manual, which had partially passed the Assembly in 1646. Drs. Belfrage, Hetherington, and the younger M'Crie, relying on Neal's account, have stated that the shorter one was first completed and presented to ' Lords' yournals, ix. p. 488 ; Commons' yoiirnals, v. p. 340. - Peterkin's Records of Kirk, p. 496. 426 TJie Assembly s Catechisms, Parliament. But Neal has fallen into the error of overlooking the fact, that the Larger Catechism, without proofs, was presented to Parliament on 22nd October 1647, as well as with proofs on 14th April 1648, while the Shorter Catechism, without proofs, was only sent up on 25th November 1647, and again with proofs on 14th April 1648.^ The following are the brief notices respecting it found in the Minutes of the Assembly. On 5th August 1647, it was resolved (p. 408) * that the Shorter Catechism shall be gone in hand with presently, by a committee now to be chosen,' and ordered that ' the Prolocutor, Mr, Palmer, Dr. Temple, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Greene, Mr. Delmy, shall be this committee.' It was to meet the same afternoon, and Mr. Palmer to take care of it, or be its convener. On August 9th, 'a report of the Short Catechism was made by Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Calamy and Mr. Cower were added to the committee.' ^ This is the last occasion in which the Minutes notice the presence of Mr. Palmer in the Assembly, and shortly after this he fell into a serious illness and died. The exact date of his death has not been ascertained even by Dr. Grosart, who has so carefully investi- gated his history ; but by 28th September a suc- cessor had been presented to one of the charges held by him. On August loth ' Dr. Temple made ' Minutes, pp. 4S5, 492, 511. - Ibid. pp. 408-410. Larger and Shorter. 427 report of the Lesser Catechism.' On September 8th, Mr. Wilson was added to the committee for the catechism, and the same day Mr. Wilson made report of the catechism. On September 1 6th, a further order was given to proceed with the little catechism. It was not, however, till 19th October 1647, when the Larger Catechism was ready to be presented to the two Houses of Parliament, that orders were given to Messrs. Tuckney,^ Marshall, and Ward finally to adjust the Shorter one ; but no doubt preparation was being made for it during the interval by the com- mittee previously appointed, probably along with Wallis, who ultimately attended the committee as its secretary, and who in all likelihood had been privately assisting his friend Palmer with it during the last weeks of his life.2 On 2 1 st October the first report from this new committee was brought in by Tuckney, and discussed. Some debate arose as to whether the word ' substance,' or rather the expression ' one in substance,' in the answer to the question. How many persons are there in the Godhead } should be left out. This, we know, was not done, but ' one in substance ' was changed into ' the same in substance,' a closer rendering of the Nicene 6iJboovcno, October 1882. NOTE F, p. 102. The following specimen of their barbarities has been recently brought under my notice : — ' Thomas Murray, minister of the Episcopal Church of Killelagh, was brutally massacred in the Irish Rebellion of 1641. It appears, by a petition presented by his widow to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland at St. Andrews, in 1642, that he was actually crucified on a tree ; her two sons killed, and cut to pieces before her eyes ; her own body frightfully cut and maimed in sundry parts ; her tongue half cut out, and that she was kept in prison and inhumanly used by the rebels, from whom, at last, by God's merciful providence, she escaped, all which \\as testified 4S6 Appendix. under tlie hands of llie best nobles and councillors of the kingdom ; and humbly ]jraying them to extend their charity to her, which was granted. — Tlie Hamilton Manvscripts, edited by Dr. Lowry, 1S67, ji. 35, note. See also, E 112, No. 24. Description OF THE Assembly.^ — Pp. 170, 171, 172. The question is often asked, Is there any trustworthy engraving of the Assembly in session? and I am afraid it must be answered in the negative. Portraits of a number of the divines, arrayed as they were wont to appear in the pulpit, are still preserved, and there is a modern engraving professing to represent the Assembly in that stormy session when Nye made his famous speech against Presbytery. But it does not rest on any sure historical basis, nor give an accurate idea of the conclave as it really sat. It represents the divines as arrayed in gowns and as generally bareheaded, and in both these respects I think it is incorrect. Fuller tells us that Bishop Westfield and the episcopal divines, who appeared in their gowns and canonical habits, seemed the only nonconformists. Neal says that the most of the divines 'came not in their canonical habits, but chiefly in black coats [or cloaks] and bands, in imitation of the foreign Protestants.' The best aid therefore to a correct idea of the Assembly in session is probably furnished by the engrav- ing of the French Synod prefixed to Vol. i. of Quick's Synodicou Gallia- RcformatiC, and by that prefixed to the account of the Dissenting Synod of Salter's Hall in 1719. In both, the divines .nre represented as wearing not the academic gown or the modern so-calicil Geneva one, but the old CJeneva cloak, and as retaining not only their skull-caps, but their high-crowned hats when seated in the Assembly. I think it was so also at Westminster, in regard to the hat as well as the cloak, both because that was the practice of the House of Commons, to which in most things they conformed, and also because Neal expressly includes among their earliest rules the following : ' That all the members of the Assembly have liberty to be coz'ered except the scribes.' To these some time after the same indulgence was granted, and on 17th June 1645 ^^^ following additional rule was adopted : ' That in case any member have occasion to be out of his place, that then he be uncovered'^ 1 It was on 2ist September that the Assembly w.is authorised to remove to and at its last session in the following week that it 'adjourned to Hierusalem chamber Monday morning (2d October) 10 o'clock." - Miuutes 0/ the Assembly, p. 105. Appendix. 48 7 — that is undoubtedly, take off his hat, not his skull-cap. In the satirical pamphlets of the period, there are various references to the dress of the Puritan ministers, especially (with a portrait) in that entitled The Assembly Man : ' His hands are not in his gloves, but his gloves in his hands. . . . His gown (I mean his cloak) reaches but his pockets. . . . His doublet and hose are of dark blue, a gram deeper than pure Coventry; but of late he's in black.' Their hair was generally cut close, according to a fashion now in vogue again, and the beard and moustache were often retained and carefully trimmed. The description applies chiefly to the younger men. The older members, I suppose, continued to have longer cloaks, and more flowing locks, and to wear the Elizabethan ruff rather than the broad band or falling collar. In E 95, No. 3, the following description is given of the Reformed minister : 'His habit shall be a high-crowned hat, a black leather [skull] cap, a sad medley cloak, and jerkin of the same, violet hose, and russet stockings.' NOTE G, p. 191. Besides the extracts from the Minutes given in the te.xt, the following are the authorities which seem to me to warrant this view of the Assembly's attitude towards this question : — 1. yus Divinum Reginiinis Ecclesiasiici, by sundry ministers of Christ within the City of London. ' The third argument for the divine right of the mere ruling elder shall be drawn from I Tim. V. 17 : " Let the elders that mle well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they that labour in the word and doctrine."' From which words we may thus argue for the divine right of the ruling elder: ^T/izycr— Whatsoever officers in the church are, ac- cording to the word of Christ, styled elders, invested with rule in the church, approved of God in their rule, and yet distinct from all them that labour in the word and doctrine, they are the ruling elders in the church (which we inquire after), and that/«r^ divino. Minor — But the officers mentioned in i Tim. v. 17 are, according to the word of Christ, styled elders, [are] invested with rule in the church, approved of God in their rule and yet distinct from all them that labour in the word and doctrine.' The detailed proofs and answers to exceptions extend to more than twenty pages. 2. A Vindication of the Presbyterial Goz'errtment and Ministry, published by the ministers and elders met together in a Provincial 438 Appendix. Assembly, November 2, 1649, ' The third text for the divine right of the ruling elder is I Tim. v. 17 : " Let the elders that rule well," etc. , . . Now according to the grammatical construction, here are plainly held forth two sorts of elders, the one only nding, and the other also labouring in word and doctrine. Give us leave to give you the true analysis of the words. I. Here is a genus, a general, and that is elders. 2. Two distinct species or kinds of elders, those that ride loell, and those that labour in word and doctrine. ... 3. Here we have two participles, expressing these two kinds of elders — i-iding and labouring ; the first do only i-ule, the second do also labour in word and doctrine. 4. Here are two distinct articles distinctly annexed to these two participles ol irpoec- Twres, 06 KoTTiQvTes, they that rnh\ they that labour. 5. Here is an eminent discretive particle set between these two kinds of elders, these two participles, these two articles evidently distinguishing the one from the other, viz., /itdXicrra, especially.'' The heads of the argument as well as the illustrations of the several heads, closely resemble some of the speeches made in the Assembly in 1643-4. 3. A Model of Church Government, by John Dury, one of the Assembly of Divines. ' I. That ruling elders are officers in the church of God may be clearly gathered from Rom. xii. 8, i Tim. V. 17, and I Cor. xii. 28. 2. That they are officers distinct from other officers is also plain from the same places ; chiefly from that of I Tim. V. 17, . . . for in [it] he doth mention two sorts of elders ' (p. 19). See also y^ Model of Chutrh Government under the Gospel, by a minister of London, approved by divers of his learned brethren : ' All elderships, consisting of preaching presbyters and other elders who do rule well, . . . zxq jure diviiio, I Tim. v. 17.' 4. A Treatise of Ruling Elders, by a minister of the Church of Scotland [James Guthrie, of Stirling], Edinburgh, 1652, reprinted 1699. 'The officers in the House of God, who in the Scriptures are called by the name of elders, are of several sorts. Preaching elders or ministers, leaching elders or doctors, and ruling or governing elders ; all these three are oftentimes in the New Tes- tament comprised under the general name of elder' (pp. 21, 22). Then, after reference to the mistake of those ' who, either out of ignorance or disdain, do call them lay elders, as if they were a part of the people only, and not to be reckoned among the officers of the Lord's House, whom the Popish church in their pride, and others following them, call the clergy' (p. 23), the author pro- ceeds to treat of the institution of ruling elders, in which chapter. Appendix. 489 after adducing other texts, he says : ' The third place of Scripture is I Tim. V. 1 7, . . . which text doth hold forth and distinguish two sorts of elders in the church, to whom the Lord Jesus hath com- mitted the power of ruling ; one sort who do also labour in the word and doctrine, to wit pastors and teachers ; another sort who do only rule, . . . and these are the ruling elders of whom we speak ' (p. 29). 5. Dickson's Expositio Analytica omniu7n AposiolicaTum Epi- siolarmn, Glasguae, 1645. His comment on i Tim. v. 17 is : * Horum presbyterorum duos facit ordines : alterum eorum qui laborant in sermone et doctrina quales sunt pastores et doctores, alterum eorum qui bene quidem prcesunt, i.e. gubernandse ecclesiiie in vita et moribus incumbunt et non laborant in sermone et doc- trina, quales sunt seniores qui gubernatores vocantur, i Cor. xii. 2 ; Rom. xii. 8 ' (p. 534). This work was published in 1647, with recommendatory notices by the Prolocutor and Assessors, and the Scotch Commissioners to the Westminster Assembly. 6. Wylie^s Abridgment of Rutherfurd's Catechism. ' Q. How is Christ's Kirk ruled at this time under the gospel ? By his office- bearers, doctors that opens up the word, pastors that presses it upon the hearers, elders that rutes in discipline, and deacons that cares for the poor.' 7. Rutherturd's Due Rig/it of Presbyteries, 'i Tim. v. 17. The elders who rule well are worthy of double honour, etc. This place speaketh clear for ruling elders ' (p. 142). On p. 145 he gives, as he had done in one of his speeches in the Assembly, the same five reasons as are given above in No. 2 for so expounding this text, and enters into a long argument in defence of the last of these reasons. In his later work on the Divine Right of Excom- mu7tication and Church Gove^-nment, he again (pp. 432, 434) expresses his adherence to this interpretation of the text, and refers to what he had previously said in support of it. 8. CXI. Propositions concerning the Ministry and Government of the Church, by George Gillespie. ' This ecclesiastical government, distinct from the civil, is from God committed, not to the whole body of the Church or congregation of the faithful, or to be exer- cised both by officers and people, but to the ministers of God's word, together with the elders which are joined with them for the care and government of the church. — i Tim. v. 17.' 9. Christian Concord or Agreement of the Associated Chujrhes and Pastors of Worcestershire. Baxter's own opinions are well known ; 490 Appendix. nnd therefore it is the stronger proof that there were those even in that district who held the presbyter theory of the elder's office, that he should have found it necessary to express himself in the follow- ing tolerant terms : — ' It having been the custom of the church in the Apostles' day to have ordinarily many officers in a church, . . . we therefore judge it needful to use all lawful means to procure more ministers or elders than one in each church, even proportion- ally to the number of souls, and if not learned men and supported by the public maintenance, then less learned labouring at their callings, and taking private duties of the pastorate, and as long as 1VC agree that these ciders are ordained church officers, and what shall be their work there need be no breach among us, though we determine not of their poiver in sacraments, and whether their office be the same -i'ith the teaching elders. Whilst we agree in practice, we may leave men's several principles in such a difficult controverted point to their own judgment.' See also Hatch's Bamp. Led., pp. 54, 76. NOTE H, p. 195. ' That the magistrate is not obliged to execute the decrees of the church without further examination, whether they be right or wrong, as the Papists teach that the magistrate is to execute the decrees of their Popish councils with a blind obedience. . . is clear. 1st.* Because if, in hearing the word, all should follow the example of the men of Berea, . . . try whether that which concerneth their conscience be agreeable to the Scriptures or no, and accordingly receive or reject ; so in all things of discipline, the magistrate is to try by the word whether he ought to add his sanction to those decrees which the church gives out for edification. . . . 2d. The magistrate and all men have a command to try all things, er^s^o, to try the decrees of the church. . . . 3d. We behoved [otherwise] to lay down this Popish ground, that the church cannot err in their decrees. . . . Whoever impute this to us who have suffered for nonconformity, and, upon this ground that synods can err, refused the ceremonies, are to consult with their own conscience whether this be not to make us appear disloyal and odious to magistracy in that which we never thought, far less presumed to teach and profess it to the world.' — Rutherfurd's Divine Ris^ht of Church Goa.iernment and Excommunication, pp. 596, 597- Even more note- worthy are the utterances of Gillespie, when striving to vindicate Appendix. 491 against the reasonings and gibes of the Erastians, that more free and independent government of the church from which they feared so many evils and oppressions. 'I dare confidently say,' he affirms, 'that, if comparisons be rightly made, presbyterial government is the most limited and least arbitrary government of any in the world.' And after entering into details to make good this affirmation as regards the Papal and Prelatical forms of government, he proceeds to maintain that Independents must needs be supposed to exercise much more arbitrary and un- limited power than the Presbyterians do, because they exempt individual congregations from all control and correction by superior courts, and because one of their three grand principles ' disclaivieth that bmding of themselves for the future, tinto their pi-esent judgvieiit and practice, and avojicheth the keeping of this reserve to alter and retract. By which it appeareth that their way will not suffer them to be so far . . . bounded within certain particular rules (I say not with others but even among themselves) as the Presbyterian way will admit of. ' He denies that, in claiming a distinct government for the church, the Presbyterians meant to deprive the Christian magistrate of that power and authority in matters of religion which the word of God and the Confessions of the Reformed Churches recognised as belonging to him. On the contrary, he maintains that not only in extraordinary cases, ' when church-government doth degenerate into tyranny, ambition, and avarice,' or those who manage it make defection from the truth, the Christian magistrate may, and ought to ' do divers things in and for religion, and interpose his authority divers ways, so as doth not properly belong to his cognisance, decision, and admini- stration ordinarily,' and in a well-constituted church ; but also that in ordinary cases he is free to act as his own conscience directs, in giving or refusing his sanction to the discipline of the church, and that if he is offended at any sentence given by its courts, they ought to be ready to give him an account of their proceedings, and by all means to endeavour to satisfy his conscience, or otherwise to be warned or rectified if themselves have erred. — Gillespie's Aaron'' s Rod Blossoming, etc., Bk. ii,, ch. iii. NOTE I, p. 211. Professor Masson has frankly admitted that the Church of England was more tolerant than the Church of Rome, and Scottish 492 Appendix. I'resbyterianism or Scottish Puritanism was more tolerant (though the reverse is usually asserted) than the Church of England prior to 1640 ; he might have added, prior to 1688, whatever may have been the theorciual sentiments of Jeremy Taylor. The ordinance against blasphemies and heresies, harsh and cruel as it seems to us, was not a tiglitening, but a relaxation, of the old law, and the restraint without law formerly practised, but put in temporary abeyance, by the abolition of the Court of High Commission, and of the office of bishop. Offenders were no longer to be punishable for opinions held, but for opinions deliberately expressed. They were not obliged to clear themselves by oath as in the Court of High Commission, but must be convicted by the testimony of two credible witnesses, or by their own voluntary confession. The charge must be prosecuted and proved in the civil courts within a limited time, and, as I take it, at least in graver cases, before a jury. Cromwell himself, when at the height of his power, deemed it necessary to set limits to toleration and the freedom of church courts ; and even when the Toleration Act was passed at the Revolution it was so, not in general or latitudinarian terms, but to the definite and limited extent required to meet the cases of the Puritans, the Baptists, and the Quakers. King William iii., though probably as wise a monarch as ever sat on the throne Of Britain, gave his assent to an Act for suppressing blasphemy and profaneness, by which it was provided that if any persons having been educated in, or at any time having made profession of, the Christian religion within this realm, should by writing, print- ing, teaching, or advised speaking, deny any one of the Persons in the Holy Trinity to be God, or sliould assert or maintain there are more Gods than one, or should deny the Christian religion to be true, or the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be of divine authority, he should the first time be subject to severe legal disabilities, and the second should sulTer imprisonment for three years. Tillotson's successor in the see of Canterbury wrote in support of these Acts and the king's injunctions. The melancholy words of Rutherfurd so often quoted, were but the echo of those of the judicious Hooker (Bk. viii. ) that in matters of faith, 'law should set down a certainty which no man afterwards is to gainsay.' The more melancholy words of the Lancashire ministers, that such a toleration as the sectaries then demanded ' would be the putting of a sword into a madman's hand, a cup of poison into the hand of a child, a letting loose of madmen with firebrands Appendix. 493 in their hands ; an appointing of a city of refuge in men's consciences for the devil to fly to, a laying of a stumbling- block before the blind, a proclaiming liberty to the wolves to come into Christ's fold to prey upon the lambs,' etc., were but the rhetorical concentration of various utterances of the gentle Burroughs, cropping up here and there in his treatise on Heart Divisions : ' If there were a company of madmen running up and down the streets with knives and swords in their hands, . . . must we do nothing to restrain them ? The devil must not be let alone though he get into men's consciences. God hath appointed no city of refuge for him ; if he flee to men's consciences as ]oab to the horns of the altar, he must be fetched from thence, or fallen upon there.' Nay, the more clear-headed Owen, in a sermon preached before Cromwell's Parliament in 1652, is found thus indoctrinating them : ' Know that error and falsehood have no right or title from God or man unto any privilege, protection, advantage, liberty, or any good thing you are entrusted withal : to dispose that unto a lie, which is the right of and due to truth, is to deal treacherously with Him by whom you are employed ; all the ten- derness and forbearance unto such persons as are infected with such abominations is solely upon a civil account, and that plea which they have for tranquillity whilst neither directly nor morally they are a disturbance unto others,' — that is, as even the Lancashire ministers admitted, they are not to be disturbed so long as they keep their opinions to themselves, but they have no right to propagate them at their pleasure.' So much of matters of opinion 1 According to Baxter, Owen, Goodwin, Simpson, and Nye were chiefly con- cerned in drawing up the list of Fundamentals which the Parliament of 1654 wished to impose on all who claimed toleration. Neal (vol. iv. pp. g8-ioo) gives sixteen of them. The Journal of the House of Commons speaks of twenty, but inserts only the first— on Holy Scripture — which alone had been passed when Cromwell dissolved the Parliament, and in considerably longer form than the Committee had proposed : — That the Holy Scriptures of the Old That the Holy Scripture is that rule and New Testaments are the Word of of knowing God and living unto Him, God and the only rule of knowing him which whoso does not believe cannot be savingly and living unto him in all saved, holiness and righteousness in which we must rest ; which Scriptures whoso doth not believe, but, rejecting them, doth, instead thereof, betake himself to any other way of discovering the mind of God, cannot be saved. 494 Appendix. or belief. As to matters of practice, he continues : ' Know that in things of practice as of persuasion, that are impious and wicked either in themselves or in their natural and unconstrained con- sequences, the plea of conscience is an aggravation of the crime ; if men's consciences are seared and themselves given up to a reprobate mind to do those things that are not convenient, there is no doubt but they ought to suffer such things as to such practices are assigned and appointed.' But perhaps the strangest of all the strange utterances on this subject is that contained in a pamphlet published at London in 1652, and entitled The Key of True Policy or a Free Dispute concerning the conservation of lately obtained liberty. It professes to be the production of a Scotchman, but apparently of one who had espoused Republican principles, who boldly adopts the line of argument which an able reviewer in our own day has attributed to the Presbyterians and the majority of the Long Parliament. It is thus he argues (p. 9) : 'It is an old maxim in philosophy, Sublata causa tollitur effcctus. And con- sequently such unprofitable and noisome members being put aside one way or other, it removeth the non-security and danger obtained liberty is exposed to. Will you tell me, is he not a desperate and unskilful physician who will take it on him to cure the body and not remove the cause of the disease ? That verily is to build without a foundation. What madness is it to go about to secure purchased liberty, and not remove the cause of its non-security? Truly it is so much, as to keep fire in the bosom, and not to be burned, to touch pilch and not be defiled, to keep the thief in the house and the throat not to be cut, and to keep a viper in the bosom and not to be stinged. Oh ! shall liberty be preserved as long as its enemies are free ? No, verily. They will be still con- spiring and taking crafty counsel against it. So long as the son of Jesse liveth they will never think themselves secure, and that their kingdom shall be established. And therefore, Saul-like, they will still fall a-persecuting David. Nay, let me tell you, those become dcccssory to their ozun hurt and ruin, who would not destroy the destroyers of their liberties. Thus they become negative cut-throats and burrios to themselves. But to prevent bondage and slavery, it is good, it is good to root out those who go about to destroy our liberty. Otherwise we abuse the power God and nature have conferred on us to maintain and defend our own liberties against our adversaries.' He then proceeds to offer his judgment in particulars as follows : — ' 1st. All malignant and formal Presby- Appendix. 495 terian incendiaries should one way or other be rooted out if we mind to maintain our own liberties inviolable. This is evident from what is already said, for they are the very enemies by whom the Lord's people in the three nations only stand in hazard. They indeed are the Canaanites whom the Lord hath commissioned to destroy. They verily are the inhabitants of the land, and there- fore must be rooted out. . . . They are bears robbed of their whelps, and therefore they will never be satisfied till they be destroyed. They are Amalek indeed, they lay in wait, while as the Lord's people in Britain came out of the spiritual Egypt from under the Episcopal and Malignant yoke, And therefore their name deserveth to be razed from under heaven. 2. Albeit all such should be rooted out and destroyed, yet not one and the same way. They should be dealt with according to their guilt. Some of them who are prime incendiaries and leading men should be finally cut off. Others again of them who are not so deep in the guilt, deserve not physically but politically to be cut off, i.e. (as Artaxerxes saith, Ezra V. 26) either by banishment or imprisonment, or confiscation of goods, according to their desert.' To the objection that this would make a pretty clean sweep in Scotland where such men were the more numerous party, and where few or none even of the 'godly' were for the English interest, and where their action could not be said to be illegal even when it was hostile, the author replies (p. 21) : 'If the Parliament of England look not more to conscience and duty than quirks and law formality, they will be forced to condemn the best and weightiest of all their proceedings. I wonder if law-quirks taught a handful of godly men in the nation to turn a king off his throne, to cut off his head, to banish his son, to cut off the peers of the land, to turn out betrayers of their trusts and such like? I trow not ; I believe duty only led them on to such things. Oh ! shall not duty as yet lead them on to proceed against their and our implacable enemies? . . . Hath he not rented the kingdom from Saul for sparing Agag, and given it to them? Will they spare him too? No, I hope, as Samuel, they will hew him in pieces. The Lord put it in their hearts so to do.' This is the only pamphlet of the period in which I remember to have met with this famous simile. It proceeded not from sober- minded Puritan in time of peace, nor from^maddened Covenanter in the day of sore distress, but from a fanatic sectary or rabid Protestor in the day of his triumph, and was adduced to encourage harsh measures, not against Papists and Prelatists, but against 49 6 Appe7idix. the Presbyterians, his fellow-countrymen and fellow-covenanters. They, in his eyes, were' the Canaanites, the Amalekites, the Am- monites, the Joab and Shimei, whom King Solomon was to cut off, — nay, apparently the Saul who spared Agag and the Agag who was spared rolled into one. No comment on this production could well be more cutting than that which I find written in an old hand on the copy of it now before me : — ' To hang all Scots, the doom is sad ; Uetter it were to hang the dog that's mad.' NOTE K, p. 257. 1. Act of General Assembly approznyig the Propositions con- ca'ning Kirk Government and Ordinatio7t of Ministers — '. . , And now the Assembly having thrice read and diligently examined the Propositions (hereunto annexed) concerning the officers, assemblies, and government of the Kirk, and concerning the ordination of ministers brought unto us as the results of the long and learned debates of the yVssembly of Divines sitting at Westminster, and of the Treaty of Uniformity with the Commissioners of this Kirk there residing : after mature deliberation, . . . doth agree to and approve the Propositions aforementioned, touching Kirk govern- ment and ordination, and doth hereby authorise the Commis- sioners of this Assembly who are to meet at Edinburgh to agree to and conclude in the name of this Assemblie, an uniformity betwixt the Kirks of both kingdoms in the aforementioned particulars, so soon as the same shall be ratified without any substantial alteration by an Ordinance of the Honourable Houses of the Parliament of England.' The Assembly excepted from their Act, and reserved the liberty of further discussion, respecting the right of the doctor to administer the sacraments and the respective rights of presbyteries and people in the calling of ministers. 2. Extract from Act approving of the Confession of Faith. — ' But lest our intention and meaning be in some particulars mis- understood, it is hereby expressly declared and provided that the not mentioning in this Confession the several sorts of ecclesiastical officers and assemblies shall be no prejudice to the truth of Christ in these particulars to be expressed fully in the Directory of government.' Appendix. 497 3. Ratification of the Propositions for Church Govermnent, Ordiftation of Ministers, and of the Act of Assembly thereanent. — ' The Estates of Parliament now conveened in the second session of this first Triennial Parliament, by virtue of the last Act of the last Parliament, holden by His Majesty and three Estates in Antio 1641, after public reading of the following propositions con- cerning Kirk government and ordination of ministers, together with the Act of General Assembly approving the same, DO unani- mously ratify and approve the said Propositions according to the said Act of General Assembly, to the which Act the Estates do hereby add the authority of Parliament, and ordaine the same to have the strength and force of a law in all time coming.' This Act was not contained in former collections of the Scotch Acts, nor printed till the original register of the Parliament of 1645 was discovered a short time ago, and printed in full in the last edition of vol. vi. of Thomson's Acts of the Scottish Parliament. NOTE M (i), p. 333. — Calvin's Relation to English Reformers. A vast amount of unchristian temper and unseemly bitterness has been expended on the discussion of this question, and the reformer of Geneva in particular has been loaded with an amount of abuse and misrepresentation more than sufficient to save him for ever from the woe denounced against those of whom all men speak well. Sed sis ttca sorte contentits, 0 magne Calvine! One must read the impassioned diatribes which were fashionable sixty or eighty years ago, to be able to understand the noble courage and candour of Bishop Horsley when he uttered the words, ' I hold the memory of Calvin in high veneration ; his works have a place in my library, and in the study of the Scriptures he is one of the commentators I frequently consult.' And one cannot but rejoice that in our own day Dean Perowne has expressed himself in still stronger terms. It would require not a note or even a lecture, but a volume, to deal with these mis- representations in detail, and that may safely be left to some true-hearted successor of Toplady, or Thomas Scott, or Bishop Waldegrave, who still deems it the highest commendation of his Church that she is one of the fairest daughters of the Reformation. All that I feel called to do is to put in a demurrer to such mis- representations, and to state briefly two or three pleas in support of it. It is said the xviith Article caftitot be meant of a decretum 2 I 49 8 Appendix. absobitutu of a predestination in the Augnstinian or in the Calvin- istic sense, but in that of the later Lutherans or Arminians, for it was with the Lutherans that the English Reformers were specially intimate, and from them, or through them, that some of their offices and several of their Articles came to them. One may leave on one side the offices with the remark that, so far as they came from the Nuremberg Liturgy, they came through the Consultaiio of Herman, Archbishop of Cologne. In the prepara- tion of that Bucer was quite as much concerned as Melanchthon, and Bucer was a predestinarian of the Augustinian school, who probably would have considered himself entitled to harmonise his views on baptismal regeneration with his views on predestination in the same way as Bishop Carleton and others did in the next century,^ and Mr, Gorham in the nineteenth. If any parts of the Burial Service came through Lutheran formularies, they came from ancient Western sources, reaching back to a time when Augus- tinianism, which affirmed the perseverance of all the predestinate, but not of all the regenerate, was the prevailing faith of the Western Church, With respect to doctrinal formularies, even if one were to grant all that has been advanced as to the close connection of the English Reformers with the Lutherans and their less close connection with Calvin and the Swiss, it would still remain to be pointed out — \st. That at the time the Augsburg Confession was composed, Melanchthon, as well as Luther, was still Augustinian, and that good authorities in our own day affirm that Luther remained so to the last, as did Flacius Illyricus, Schnepff, Heshusius, and some others of his followers, 2d, That Brentz, who had the chief hand in drawing up the Wiirtemberg Confession (which in several articles seems in 1563 to have been followed by the English), though not a pronounced Augustinian himself, framed it when doing his utmost to preserve a good understanding with the more moderate of the Reformed, especially with Bucer and Martyr, and with others, of their school still remaining at Strasburg ; that his Confession was accepted by that free city, and that it was probably from thence, through Jewell, it found its way into England before 1563. John ab Ulmis had been employed to translate a Strasburg Confession into Latin for Cranmer, 3(/, That it is only in Articles as to which Lutherans and Reformed were agreed, that a real similarity can be traced between the Edwar- dian Articles and the Augsburg or the early German Confessions, 1 Examination of an Appeal to Casar, pp. 96, 97. Appendix. 499 None of these have an article on predestination, nor does any other Lutheran Confession, as Dr. Dorner tells us, have it. Nor can any such marked similarity be traced between this Article and any of the definitions of Melanchthon or of any Lutheran doctor of the Synergistic school. The only resemblance traceable is to certain expressions in the treatise of Luther on the Epistle to the Romans, and that, as already stated, was written while he was still a pronounced Augustinian, and teaches distinctly the Augus- tinian or predestinarian view. But it cannot be granted that the intimacy between the English and the Swiss Reformers was only formed during the later Marian times. Had the English exiles been regarded as Lutherans when driven from their own country, they would have been received with open arms by their co-religionists in Germany. But the very reverse was the fact. The strict Lutherans afforded them no shelter, shewed them but little kindness, and were not appealed to in their differences. We do not find even the gentle Melan- chthon specially exerting himself in their behalf, nor them resorting to him for counsek Nor was it to him that the thoughts of those in prison in England turned. Hooper's recourse was still to his old friend Bullinger, and the one letter Cranmer is known to have written from his prison was addressed to his old and much trusted friend Martyr. Even in 1551-52, it was not to Melanchthon, but to Bullinger, that those who were exercised about predestination, and desired further counsel than the writings of Calvin and the teaching of Martyr supplied, were disposed to turn. Traheron or Trehern, tutor to the young Duke of Suffolk, the intimate friend and associate of Cheke, the young King's tutor, and, like him, a member of the sub-committee of the Ecclesiastical Commission, wrote to Bullinger on the question in the following terms : — * There are certain individuals here who lived among you some time, and who assert that you lean too much to Melanchthon's views. But the greater number among us {plHri/ni), of whom I own myself to be one, embrace the opinion of John Calvi7t as being perspicuous and most agreeable to holy Scripture.' Then after thanking God that Calvin's treatise against Pighius on this question had appeared at the very time when it had begun to be agitated among them, he adds : — ' We confess that he has thrown much light upon the subject, or rather so handled it as that we have never before seen anything more learned or more plain. ' Bullinger, some time before, had concluded with Calvin and the Genevese a 500 Appendix. consensus on the suliject of the sacraments, in the xvith Article of which the topic of election was touched on, but, though it was so in the most guarded terms, its bearing was so obvious that Melan- chthon is said ' coiifodisse cum articjiUim ' in the copy'sent him. In the letter Bullingersent to Traheronhe states, even more decisively than in the consensus, that faith foreseen is not the cause, but the consequence of election, though still refusing to follow Calvin in his teaching on the subject of reprobation : ' Electionis et prce- destinationis causa non est alia quam bona et justa Dei voluntas indebite salvantis electos debite autem damnantis . . reprobos.' ' Interim fidem ceu opus nostrum non constituimus causam electionis quasi propter fidem quam in nobis pntvidit Dens nos elegerit sed grati?e Dei tribuimus electionem et salutem . . . Etenim Paulas non dicit Deum elegisse nos quod credituri eramus sed ut cred- eremus ; unde et Augustinus sumpsisse videtur quod dixit, Non quia credimus ipse nos elegit sed ut credamus ne priores videamus ipsum elegisse.' This letter, written in March 1553, can hardly have arrived in England in time to be used in the framing of the xvilth Article. It was not altogether to the mind of Traheron and those who thought with him, as appears by his reply, which, as well as his previous letter, is given at length among the Parker Society's original letters relating to the English Reformation (pp. 324-328). But it really concedes almost all that is maintained as dogma in the Confessions of the Reformed Churches, even those of them composed or approved by Calvin, though not all that he, Bucer, Beza, Martyr, and Knox deemed themselves warranted as private doctors to inculcate. So much importance was attached to it by BuUinger, that he had copies of it, evidently meant to be shown to others, sent to Hooper and to Martyr, who in reply informed him that, though not agreeing with him altogether, he liad been especially on his guard in treating on that subject, 'lest men should cast all their faults and sins upon God, or derive from the will of God an excuse for their wicked- ness,' as would appear when his commentaries on the Romans were published, as he hoped they would be that same year. ' May God,' he adds, 'grant us all so to feel respecting predestination, that what ought to be the greatest consolation to believers may not become the painful subject of pernicious contention.' Neither was Calvin himself so little known nor so lightly esteemed in England at that time as some have represented. He was in high repute with the young King, the Protector, and several Appeiidix. 501 of the reforming nobles, with Cheke the King's tutor, and Traheron, as well as with Knox, Martyr, a Lasco, and the other foreigners then helping on the work in England. Bishop Coverdale, when in exile, had translated from the Latin his treatise on the Lord's Supper, which had commended his views on that subject to favour and acceptance, just as, we know from Traheron, his treatises on predestination were commending to favour his views on the only other subject then occasioning difference between the Lutherans and the Reformed. The treatise in answer to Pighius, which was published in the very beginning of 1552, is the one specially referred to by him, but that was not the first in which he had handled this subject, nor the first which had reached England. His commentary on the Romans, which was published in 1539, was well known, and in it he had treated on predestination in the same spirit as Martyr subsequently did. His Institutions were not unknown, and in the second edition of that work, issued in 1539, a distinct chapter was assigned to this subject, which in the fifth edition, issued in 1550, was further enlarged, and so much run on that, without the author's consent, it was published separately the same year. It is not unusual yet to represent Cranmer as by no means on the most friendly footing with Calvin, and but half- reluctantly inviting him to that great council of the chief Reformers which he was so desirous to assemble. It is also represented that the main, if not the only object that council was intended to accomplish, was to heal the divisions that had arisen among Pro- testants on the subject of the Lord's Supper. But the letters of the Primate, and none of them more decisively than his letter to Melanchthon himself, show that the Confession, or consensus, was meant to embrace the whole circle of Christian doctrine. Strype expressly includes the question of predestination among others. When obliged reluctantly to abandon or postpone his grander scheme, he intimated his intention to press on without further delay the lesser one of preparing such a confession for his own Church, and strenuously proceeding in the reformation of manners as well as doctrine. This he did in a letter to the much maligned Calvin, who had shown himself more ready to second his efforts for the council, as well as for a closer civil league among Protestant States, than either Bullinger or Melanchthon had ven- tured to do. This letter, so far as I know, has only been recovered in our own day, and printed by the Strasburg theologians who are re-editing the works of Calvin with such loving care. For English- 502 • Appendix. speaking churches, no more valuable addition has for long been made to our knowledge of the esteem in which he was really held by those who were engaged in the noble enterprise of reviving the life and restoring the purity of the English Church. Archbishop Laurence has much to say of his 'bold temerity,' and 'love of hypothesis,' as perhaps exceeding both his piety and his learning, and the entire want of community of spirit between him and the Reformers of the English Church, and what he has said many lesser men since have repeated with still greater bitterness and scorn. Here is how the honoured primate, who, more than any other, detemiined the character of that church, wrote to him in the autumn of 1552. No more noble or brotherly letter ever went to foreign Protestant from Lambeth Palace : — ' Et pietate et eruditione proestanti viro D. Joanni Calvino, amico suo dilecto. — Quod consilium meum laudas de conventu doctissimorum et optimorum virorum in Anglia habendo, ut posteris traderetur de reformats doctrince capitibus, juxta scripturae normam consensus, et studium operamque tuam ad hoc institutum perficiendum alacri animo offers, recte tu quidem mea sententia judicasti, et ad Dei gloriam propagandam voluntatem te habere propensissimam non obscuris argumentis declarasti. Atque utimam daretur facultas ad effectum perducendi hoc quod ecclesias tam utile judicamus. Verum multa sunt qure in animum meum inducunt banc nostram deliberationem irritam fore : turn quod D. Philippus ad meas literas nihil hactenus rescripsit, turn quod D. BuUingerus respondet se vereri ne frustra de convocando con- cilio deliberemus hoc tempore, in quo Germania bello sic divexatur ut neque sibi neque D. Philippo consultum sit ecclesias suas relinquere. Quare hxc consultatio aut prorsus omittenda aut in aliud tempus magis opportunum differenda videtur. Interim nos ecclesiam Anglicam pro virili reformabimus dabimusque operam ut et dogmata et mores juxta sacrarum literarum regulam corri- gantur. Dominus Jesus te gubernet et tueatur ad suam gloriam et ecclesix Kdificationem, Yale. Tuus quantus est.— T, Cant. 'Lambethii, 4 Octobris 1552.' Sir John Cheke's letter, of 22d May 1553, ' Homini doctissimo ac pientissimo et mecum multis de causis conjunctissimo,' is even more laudatory, and speaks of a ' conjunctio doctrinre,' as well as of a 'societas humanitatis et ingenii.' Appenaix. 503 NOTE M Martyr's Statements, etc. Nostra enim [sacratnenta] . . . numero pauciora actu faciliora intellectu augustissima, obser- vatu castissima et significatione prsestantissima. — A ugustinus citatus in commentario Martyris, p. 118. Multi satis habent si contem- plati fuerint, etc. (iit postea). Nemo enim sumendo sacra- menta gratiam uUam recipit quam fide non percipiat . . . neque vi, ut loquuntur, operis operati quicquam ex eis accedat (salutem afferant) Vox ea pere- grina est nee auditur usquam in sacris Uteris (123). — Qui enim sacramenta percipit vel digne vel indigne accedit : si indigne nil habet nisi damnum et jac- turam, si digne, igitur fide viva qua percipit representatam gra- tiam.— 494. Neque tantum sunt signa nostrarum actionum sed etiam promissionis et voluntatis Dei ejusque obsignationes. Et Spiri- tus Sanctus istis utitur ad animos nostros excitandos. — W], Sunt quidem et hi sacramen- torum fines, ut nots sint ac tesserae Christianse professionis et societatis sive fraternitatis . . . vera gratias suje testimonia et sigilla ut per ea nobis gratiam suam testetur Deus, representet atque obsignet. — Formula Con- sensus Tigurini. (2), p. 336. Anglican Articles of 1553. Dominus Noster Jesus Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis observatu facillimis significatione pr:estantissimis societatem novi populi colligavit sicuti est bap- tismus et coena Domini. Sacramenta non instituta sunt a Christo ut spectarentur aut circumferuntur, sed ut rite illis uteremur; et in his duntaxat qui digne percipiunt, salutarem habent effectum, idque non ex opere (ut quidam loquuntur) operato, quae vox ut peregrina est et sacris literis ignota sic parit sensum minime pium, sed admodum superstitiosum : qui vero indigne percipiunt damna- tionem (ut inquit Paulus) sibi ipsis acquirunt. Sacramenta per verbum Dei instituta non tantum sunt not£e professionis Christianorum sed certa qusedam, potius testi- monia et efficacia signa gratise atque bon« in nos voluntatis Dei per quae invisibiliter ipse in nobis operatur nostramque fidem in se non solum excitat verum etiam confirmat. 504 Appendix. Neque illi satis dicunt qui arbitrantur . . . crenam Domini signum tantum esse Christians benevolentiK et officiorum mutuce charitatis . . . caput et summam in hoc ponimus quod obsignet nobis Dei dona et promissiones quas ille offert fide apprehen- dendas (113), ut ibi mors Domini commemoraretur et communi- cantes fructum ejus perciperent et Christo conjungerentur (34) gratiam reconciliationem et re- missionem peccatorum. Fallun- tur ergo illi qui putant transub- stantiationem, etc. [iit postea), ToUenda est qucelibet localis pro-'sentia; imaginatio. Tametsi enim philosophice loquendo supra ccelos locus non est ; quia tamen corpus Christi, ut fert humani corporis natura et modus, finitum est et coslo ut loco continetur necesse est a nobis tanto locorum intervallo distare quanto ccelum abest a terra. — Form. Cons. Tig. Non tamen sentiendam est corpus Christi tam late fundi quam late patet divinitas ejus. Illud enim ut humance naturae conditio requirit, certo ac de- finito loco continetur qui est coelum . . . ut articulus de ascensione fidem facit (350). Falluntur ergo illi qui putant vel transubstantiationem vel pra;sentiam Christi in Euchar- istia quasi ex illius carne quam, ut illi volunt, realiter manduc- amus (realiter et corporaliter percipimus (306), a;ternam vitam hausturi sumus. — 305. Crena Domini non est tantum signum mutuce benevolentice Christianorum inter sese, verum potius est sacramentum nostrce per mortem Christi redemptionis. Atque adeo rite digne et cum fide sumentibus, panis quem frangimus est communicatio cor- poris Christi : similiter poculum benedictionis est communicatio sanguinis Christi. Panis et vini transubstantiatio in Eucharistia ex sacris Uteris probari non potest sed apertis scriptura; verbis adversatur et multarura superstitionum dedit occasionem. Quum natura; humanse Veritas requirat ut unius ejusdemque hominis corpus in multis locis siniul esse non possit sed in uno aliquo et definito loco esse oporteat, idcirco Christi corpus in multis et diversis locis eodem tempore prxsens esse non potest et quoniam ut tradunt sacris literal, Christus in coelum fuit sublatus, et ibi usque ad finem seculi est permansurus non debet quisquam fidelium carnis ejus et sanguinis realem etcorporalem (ut loquuntur) prcesentiam in Eucharistia vel credere vel pro- fiteri. Sacramentum Eucharistioe ex institutione Christi non serva- batur, conferebatur, elevabatur, nee adorabatur. Appendix. 505 Elevatio, etc., non parvam occasionem idololatrice prasbent. {Martyr in Ep. ad Cor. p. 162). Qua in re multum peccatur hodie . . . satisque habent homines si contemplati fuerint genuflexerint atque adoraverint. Ministri malitia non vitiat sacramenta, etc, (p. 118). Sacrificium unicum nostra salutis perfectum est per mortem Christi Jesu servatoris nostri in ara crucis (492), una enim ejus mors satis fuit ad omnia peccata expianda. Sacrifici qui illud sacrificium suis missis et superstitiosis et impiis susurris nobis applicent . . . Christum offerre pro aliis omnino commentum est (296). Sacfamentum Eucharistise ex institutione Christi non serva- batur, circumferebatur, eleva- batur, nee adorabatur. Ministrorum tnalitia non tollit efficaciain institutionum divin- arum, etc. De unica Christi ohlatione in criice perfeda. Oblatio Christi semel facta perfecta est re- demptio pro omnibus peccatis totius mundi turn originalibus quam actualibus : neque prseter illam unicam est ulla alia pro peccatis expiatio. Unde miss- arum sacrificia, quibus vulgo dicebatur, sacerdotem offerre Christum in remissionem psenoe aut culpje pro vivis et defunctis figmenta sunt et perniciosse im- posture. NOTE TO PAGE 369. The first part of the following elegy on the older members of the Assembly is found appended to more than one funeral sermon. I give part of it from the funeral sermon on Vines, contained in E 870 :— ' That venerable Synod, which of late Was made the object of men's scorn and hate, (For want of copes and mitres, not of graces). Are now called up, like Moses ; and their faces, When they return, shall shine. God sees it fit. Such an Assembly should in glory sit. The learned Twisse went first (it was his right), Then holy Palmer, Burroughs, Love, Gouge, White, Hill, Whitaker, grave Gataker, and Strong, Peme, Marshall, Robinson, all gone along. I have not named them half. Their only strife 5o6 Appendix. Hath been (of late) who shall first part with life ; Those few, who yet survive, sick of this age, Long to have done their parts and leave the stage. Our English Luther, Vines, whose death I weep. Stole away (and said nothing) in a sleep. Sweet (like a swan) he preached that day he went, And for his cordial took a sacrament ; Had it but been suspected he would die. His people sure had stopped him with their crj'.' The elegy on Ussher in E 875, almost exceeds the bounds of legitimate laudation. I can find room only for a few lines : — ' This was the man so just, so stout, so sage. The shame and glory of our sinful age. How said I ? Man? That epithet 's too mean. Armagh was more ; the miracle of men. Could he be less, who was both learned and meek ? Could he be less, who self did never seek? Could he be less, who knew no guile, no gall ; Wise as a serpent, yet a dove withal ? Could he be less, who knew no kind of pride. And yet knew more than all the land beside ? His intellect scorned to be confined by Dover, Bravely expatiating the whole world over. Beyond the common ne plus 7iltra, he (Like Drake ambitious of discovery), Sail6d still on, bounded by no degree On this side of universality, Storing his country with more noble prize Than that which in the Western climate lies ; America doth no such mines contain. As those comprised in the Indies of his brain. NOTE N, p. 377, The full title of this remarkable book is, ' A Treatise of the Cove- nant of Grace : wherein the gradual breakings otit of Gospel-grace from Adam to Christ are clearly discovered, the differences betwixt the Old and New Testament are laid open, divers errors of Armin- ians and others are confuted ; the natia-e of uprightttess, and the way of Christ in bringing the soul into communion with Himself: together with many other points, both doctrinally and practically profitable, are solidly hattdled. By that faithful servant of Jesus Christ and minister of the Gospel John Ball . . . London, 1645.' The following is the table of the contents of the several chap- ters : — I. Of the first part. — i. Of the signification of the word Appendix, 507 Covenant ; 2. Of the Covenant God made with man in the state of innocency ; 3. Of the Covenant of Grace in general; 4. Of the Covenajtt of promise ; 5. Of the Covenant of promise made with Adam immediately upon his fall ; 6. Of the Covenant of grace as it was made and manifested to Abraham ; 7. Of the Covenant of grace under Moses till the return of Israel fi-om the Babylonish captivity ; 8. A particular explication of the Covenant that God made with Is7-ael, and what Moses brought to the further expres- sure of the Covenant of grace ; 9. Of the Covenant 'Co.tilX. God made with David ; 10. Of the Covenajtt that God made with Israel z.i\.er the Babylonish captivity ; 11. Of truth and uprightness. II. Of the second part. — Of the New Testament or Covenant, and how God hath revealed Himself herein ; 2. Christ the Mediator of the New Testament, for whom He died and rose again ; 3. How Christ hath fulfilled the office of Mediator, or how He is the Mediator of the New Testament ; 4. How Christ doth bring His people into Covenant or fellowship with Himself ; 5. How Chris- tians answer to the call of Christ, and so come to have fellowship with Him. NOTE, p. 391.— Milton's relation to Calvinism. I have not ventured to do more than put it interrogatively. Some of the older editors of his great poem regard the passage quoted as evidence of the author's leaning to moderate Calvinism. But it is now known that before the end of his days he wrote a large treatise on theology in which he advocated opinions at vari- ance with the sentiments of the great mass of the Puritans on a question of far greater importance. This work was not published till our own day, and its learned editor has not ventured to do more than to say that the opinions maintained in it on the decrees of God are opposed to supralapsarianism on the one hand and to Socinianism on the other. But I find it difficult to resist the conclusion that Milton, by the time he wrote that treatise, had bid adieu not only to supralapsarianism, but even to infralapsarianism in its most moderate form. There is good reason to believe, how- ever, that he had abandoned his earlier creed very slowly and gradually, and before parting with Calvinism altogether, had taken refuge for a time in the more liberal school of Amyraut, Dave- nant, and Howe. It may be fairly questioned if he had finally 5o8 Appendix. left this refuge when he wrote the Paradise Lost. At least in the passage I have quoted, and some others in the poem, there seems to me more affinity to the opinions of that school than of any other. The opinion, that while God has given sufficient grace to all, he gives peculiar grace to some who of His will are elect above the rest, seems akin to their teaching. NOTE O, p. 424. I intended to exhibit at length in this note the correspondences between the rules given in the Larger Catechism for the explica- tion of the Divine Law, and those found in the earlier treatises of Perkins, Attersoll, Ball, and Ussher. I must refrain, however, from inserting these. Any one who will compare the rules as first in- serted in the Alimites of the Assetiil'ly with the form in which they appear in the earlier treatises will see at a glance how closely the "Westminster Divines followed in the wake of their predecessors. NOTE, p. 368.— Early Editions of the Confession OF Faith. The first three impressions of the Confession, as stated on the above page, were meant for the private use of the members of the English Parliament,* and the Assembly of Divines, and copies of them are still to be found in the British Museum (E 366 (?), E368, E 516). From the third impression, but with certain variations preserved in most Scottish editions, 300 copies were reprinted in Edinburgh for the use of the members of the Scottish Assembly of 1647 (St. Andrews University Library, and in other libraries in Scotland). After the Confession was adopted by that Assembly, one edition appears to have been published before the close of 1647 (E 418, No. 12). A copy of this and of the London edition No. 3 is in the Advocates' Library at Edinburgh. In the same year the Confession, in the form approved by the English Houses, was published at London with the title Articles of Christian Re- ligion, etc., as on p. 368. Principal Lee seems to have doubted if it was ever published in this form, but copies exist both in the British Museum (116 f, 19, E 449, T. '^\Y) and in the Bodleian ; and another copy has recently been offered for sale in London. 1 In E 388, No. 6, it is expressly stated that ' the members subscribed their names to the receipt ' of their copies. Appejtdtx. 509 These are all in quarto. Another edition in octavo or i2mo was published at Edinburgh in 1648, with the following title : ' The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines now by authority of Par - liament sitting at Westminster concerning (i) a Confession of Faith, (2) a Larger Catechism, (3) a Shorter Catechism. Presented by them lately to both Houses of Parliament' (3505 bb, Brit. Mus.) It was probably from one of the Scottish editions, that those pub- lished by Bostock at London in the same year were taken. They are — \st, * The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines, etc. [as in No. 3, above], Printed for Robert Bostock at the King's Head, Paul's Churchyard 1648' (116 f, 20). At the end it has ^ Impri- matur Jaines Crawford, Dece?nber 7, 1647.' 2nd, The Confession of Faith, and Catechisfns agreed up07t by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster to be a part of uniformity in religion, between the Churches of Christ in the Three Kingdoms. London, Printed for R. B. etc. [as above], 1648.' This is accounted the first English edition. The copy in the British Museum is from the library of the late Duke of Sussex, and bears the press mark 1412 a, 13. Another copy, bearing the press mark E 1419, has the Propositions concerning Church Government appended, and seems to have been the edition which brought him into trouble with the House of Commons (see their Journals under date 6th August 1649). I suppose it was from the first of these editions of Bostock that a German translation was made in the same year. Its title is : ' Demiithiger Bericht der versainmelten tmd ietztind aus macht und Befehl des Parlaments _ zu Westmiinster sitzenden Lehrern der heilegen Schrifft belangende, ein Glaubens Bekenntniss beyden hdusern des Parlaments neidich iiberreichet, im "Jahr nach Christi Gebiirt 16^8, Zvo.'' A copy of this edition, we learn from the Appendix to Niemeyer's Collectio Confessionum, is preserved in the Royal Library at Berlin. It is remarkable as being the first edition in which the Scripture proofs are inserted at length, instead of being merely indicated in the margin. The preface contains a very notable testimony to the high regard in which the divines of Britain and their work were held by their brethren in Germany, who also had been called to suffer for their faithful attachment to the doctrines of the Reformation. They speak of the Confession as, 'ein Tractatlein reich in alien Stlicken Gottlicher Weisheit und Lehre, fast von Wort zu Wort aus heiliger Schrifft . . abge- fasst, und ist ein kurtzer Begriff des heilsamen Worte an deren Fiirbild dieselbe Englandische Kirche nach abgeworffenen Joche 5 1 o Appendix. Babstischer Menschen-satzungen und Haupt-irrthiimen bis daher bestandig gehalten und annoch halten thut. . . Siehe, so stehet doch der Leuchter dieser so lehr und glauben-reicher Kirchen, durch Gottes guade unbeweglich und leuchtet auf demselben in diesem wollgegriindetem Glaubens-bekenntniss das Licht der Wahiheit . . hell und klar herfiir, glaiibigen hertzen zum Trost und Versichemng. ' Possibly a Dutch edition may have been pub- lished about the same time, and in 1649 a rare and much prized edition in English issued from the Elzevir press. Several editions in i2mo or i8mo were published in London and Edinburgh between 1650 and 1655, (3504 a, B. M. etc.), as were also two Latin editions in small 8vo at Cambridge in 1656 and 1659, and others of smaller size at Glasgow in 1670, and at Edinburgh in 1660, 1680, and 1694.1 In 1658 there issued from the London press what is termed the second English edition of the Confession, a large and neatly printed quarto, with the Scripture proofs inserted at length, and the emphatic parts of them in a different letter. A copy, with the press inark E 757, is in the British Museum, but it is by no means a rare edition. An edition in i2mo was published at London in 1660 (3505 aa, Brit. Mus.). The third (so called) English edition, is a small octavo, published at London in 1688. The fifth, bearing the date of 1717, is a large octavo, and perhaps the most handsomely printed of all these early editions of the Confession. After the Revolution, editions in i2mo, without the proofs printed at length, were published in Scotland in 1688-9 ^"^ 1690, and in the latter year one in folio for the use of churcli courts, which, like the copy engrossed in the records of the Scot- tish Parliament in the same year, does not contain the proofs either in their abbreviated or lengthened form. The editions of later date need not be specified, with the exception of the beautiful octavo forming vol. i. of Dunlop's Collection of Confessions, etc., and published at Edinburgh in 1 719, with a memorable preface in defence of Confessions of Faith. The Independents' recension of the Confession was published in 1659, with the title, A Declaration of the Faith and Order cnuned and practised in the Congregational Churches in England. It does not differ materially from the recension of the Parliament save in the insertion of a chapter (xx. ) on the Gospel and the extent of the grace thereof. This will appear to most Calvinists now-a-days a less happy statement than that sanctioned by the Westminster 1 It was reprinted in Glasgow in 1674. Appendix. 511 Assembly in their Larger Catechism, in answer to the question, • How is the grace of God manifested in the second Covenant ? ' The Baptist recension was pubHshed in 1677, and again in 1688, under the title, A Confession of Faith, put forth by the Elders and Brethren of many congregations of Christians [baptized upo7i profes- sion of their faith) in London and the country, with an Appendix concerning Baptism. It follows mainly the Independent recension, but seems to me to show traces of the moderating influence of Bunyan. The first editions of the Catechism are in E 411, 416. NOTE (Additional), p. 369. — Subscription to the Confession. I have said elsewhere that the Westminster Divines, from their earnest desire to form one comprehensive Church, did not require subscription to their Directories for Public Worship and for Church Government, nor exact conformity to their minute details, as Laud had done to those of the Prayer-Book and Canons. It may be doubted if the English section of them meant to require more for their Confession of Faith than that it should be (like the Irish Articles) the norm of public teaching. They felt with Bax- ter that • there is a singular use for a full body of theology or a profession concluded on by such reverend assemblies, that the younger ministers may be taught by it, and the reverence of it may restrain them from rash contradicting it ; and there is a necessity of exercising power in ministerial assemblies for the actual restraint of such as shall teach things intolerably unsound, and all ministers should be there accountable for their doctrine.' Such a full body of theology in a non-liturgical Church was essential as a guide in prayer as well as in preaching, and its authority as the norm of both was the least restriction that could be imposed if reasonable soundness was to be maintained, and due security given to the congregations that the liberty allowed in the devotional services should not degenerate into licence. Probably this was all that the majority of the English divines were disposed to insist on. At any rate a sentence of Tuckney often quoted, seems to point in that direction. ' In the Assembly I gave my vote with others that the Confession of Faith, put out by authority, should not be either required to be sworn or subscribed to, . . . but only so as not to be publicly preached or written against. ' I have not come on any 512 Appendix. clear trace of this vote in the Minutes of the Assembly, but possibly it occurred on or soon after 26th November 1646, when the Con- fession was completed, and about to be sent up to the Houses, and when it is recorded that ' Mr, Nye, Mr. Carter junior, and Mr. Greenhill enter their dissent to the sending up of the Confession of Faith in order to the Preface,' and is ordered that ' before the Confession of Faith be sent up the Preface shall be debated and prepared to be sent up with it, if any be made.'' But so far as appears from the Minutes none was debated or sent up. The Church of Scotland, while agreeing with the English Divines as to the Directory of Public Worship, and Form of Church Government, has always required her ministers to regard the Confession of Faith as something more than the norm of teaching to which in their public ministrations they were to conform, and by the Act of the Scottish Parliament in 1693 she was sufficiently authorised to require more than this, including at least personal acceptance of its main doctrines, and of the sum and substance of the Reformed faith, as set forth in it. Writing from recollection of an examination of the Minutes of the Kirk-session of St. Andrews twenty years ago, and wishing to err on the safe side, I had said that the celebration of the Lord's Supper was discontinued for more than a year. Within the last few days I have had an opportunity of re-examining the Minutes, which are now in the Register House at Edinburgh, and am sorry to find that, at p. 236, I have so far understated the facts of the case. The Lord's Supper was not administered there between June 1650 and August 1656. Again and again in 1653 and 1654 * the four ministers ' were ' seriously recommended ' and ' ainiestly requeisted ' by the elders to confer together how this might be remedied, and, after it was begun to be again administered in the burghs, they were assured that * the people heir are much greived yt^ they are so long depryved of that comfortable ordinance,' but it was not till August 1 656 that they resumed the dispensation of it. INDEX. The names in Italic are those of members of the Westminster Assembly. The use of the Roman and Arabic numerals immediately following the names has been explained in the note, p. xii. Aarau, Basel, etc., 30. Abbot, Abp., 77-80, 343, 375. Act of Supremacy, 280. Toleration, 471, 492. Uniformity, 37, 455. Acts, Scotch, of 1567, 280; of 1592, 281-2. Adamson, Abp., 354. Alesius, Alexander, 14, 23, 29. Altare Damascenum, 354. America, 87, 470, 484. Amesius, or Ames, 344, 370, 378. Amyraut, 350. Anselm, 326, 327. Apocrypha, 69, 91, 96. Apologetical Narration, 193, 197, 229. Replies to, 194. Aquinas, Thomas, 346. Argyll, Marquis of, xx, 125. Arminians, 340, 342, 352. Arrowsmith, Dr. John, xvi, 58 ; 122, 312, 344. 345> 38s, 417, 431- Articles of Religion, XLil. of Edward vi., 24, 33°-335- XXXIX. of Elizabeth, 5, 143, 146. XXXIX. of Elizabeth, debate on Art. vil. and xi., 146-157. of Westminster Assem- bly, see Confession of Faith. Articles, Lambeth, 338, 339, 340. Irish, 79, 117, 371-376. Ashe, Simeon, xviii, 91. Assembly, General, of Scotland, 93, 106, 218-220, 222, 232, 262, 279, 352, 367, 444, 449- Assembly, Westminster, 105, 106, 108- 112, 115-127, 131, 356, 366, 442, 467. Assembly, Westminster, Baillie's accoun of, 170-172. Debates in, 180, 186, 191, 194, 226, 252, 287, 321, etc. See also Catechisms, Confession of Faith, Directory for Public Worship, do. for Church Government. Augsburg Confession, 335. Augustine, Augustinianism, 326, 327, 333, 342, 346, 380, 389, 397. Autonomy of Church, pp. 269-324. Bacon, Lord, 59, 69, 388, 392. Spedding's Life of, 59, 481. Baillie, Robert, xx, 25, 186, 186, 209, 214, 227, 283, 285, 302, 303, 350, 380, 429. Ball, John, 377, 378, 386, 403, 409, 420- 424, 437- Balmerino, Lord, xx. Bancroft, Abp., 68, 77, 341, 478. Baptism, 219, 361. Baptist.s, 380, 469. Barlow, 339, 479, 481. Baro, 337, 338, 341. Barret, 337, 341. Barrington, Sir Thos., M.P. , xiii. Bartholomew's Day, 57, 456. Bathurst, Tluo., xiv, 29. Baxter, 118, 380, 453, 457. Baylie, Thos., B.D., xvii, 80. Bedford, Earl of , xii. Beza, 278, 348. Bible, 10, II, 12, 13, 34, 69, 217, 279, 405. Genevan translation of, 34, 46. King James's translation, 69. Bishops, 40, 41, 61, 62, 68, 79, 90, 95, 99, 114, 163, 253, 284, 337, 352, 457. Blair, Robert, xx, 236, 324, 442-445. K 5H Index. Bohemian Confession, 274. Bolingbroke, Earl of , xii. Bonar, Dr. H., 385, 391. Bond, John, D.C.L., xix, 129. Book of Common Order, 34, 46, 49, 103, 221, 222, 235, 236. Book of Common Prayer, 24, 25, 37, 59, 99, 102 ,156, 2i8, 224, 226, 235, 299, 455. Books of Discipline, 112, 221. Boston, 385. Boiilion, Sam., B.D., xix, 139. Bourne, Immanuel, 223, 290. Bowles, Oliver, B.D. , xiii, 2; 137, 138. Boyd, Robert, of Trochrig, 349. Bradwardine, 78, 326, 327. Bridge, William, xiv, 10. Brownists, 53, 54. Bro^vnrigge, Bp. , xiv, 19. Bucer, 327, 328. Buchanan, 356. Bulkley, Richd. B.D., xvi, 89. Bullinger, 43, 336, 347, 371. Bunyan, John, 385, 391, 392, 401, 469. Burges, Cornelius, Dr., xiv, 32; 98, 141, 162, 216, 235, 364, 425. Burgess, Dr. John, 73. Burgesse, A tithony, xvii, 85 ; 377, 428. Burnet, Bp., 64. Burroitghes, Jer., xv, 44 ; 124. Burton, Mr., 84. Dr., 333. Byfield, Adoniram, xix; 134, 409, 419. Byfield, Richard, xix, 135. Calavty, Edmund, B.D., xv, 45 ; 98, 121, 385. Calderwood, 74, 220, 236, 354. Calvin, 34, 148, 334, 335, 347, 371, 497. Calvinism, objections against, 385-394. Cambridge, 44, 68, 327, 338, 343, 411, 427. Cameron, John, 349, 350. Campbell, Dr. George, 393. Canons of 1603-4, 7') 72- 1637 (Scotch), 92. 1640, 133, 457. Capel, Richard, xiv, 28. Carleton, Bp., 325, 336, 339, 341. Caryl, Joseph, xv, 47 ; 124, 168. Carter [John], xiv, 25. Carter, Thos., xviii, 105. Carter, IV., xvi, 56. Cartwright, Thos., B.D., 52, 53, 65, 274, 27s. 337, 343. 479- Case, Thos., xiv, 14. Castell on Propagation of Gospel, loi. Cassilis, Earl of, xx. Catechism and Catechising, 239, 291, 357, 407-441. Cawdrey, Daniel, xix, 125 ; 312, 409, 428. Ceremonies, 69, 231, 287. Chadderton, Dr., 68. Chalmers, Dr., 385, 464. Chavibers, Humphrey, B.D., xvi, 73. Charles i., 82, 90, 95, 324, 444, 470. Charles 11., 444, 453, 468. Chaucer, 391. Cheynell, Fran., D.D., xvii, 98; 360. Christ, Head of Church, 182, 183, 314-319, 321-323. Church, 182, 361, 432. censures, 250. government, 180-199, 246-268. officers, 184, 247. Clarendon, in, 453. Clendon. Thos., xviii, 124. Clerk, Peter, xiv, 26. Cleytnn, Rich., xv, 41. Clot'd'orthy, Sir John, M.P., xiii. Cocceius, 371, 378. Coleman, Thos., xv, 38 ; 121, 168, 295, 322, 323- Colet, Dean, 395. Comenius, John Amos, 286, 287. Commissioners, Scottish, to Westminster Assembly, 125, 169, 174, 185, 218, 256, 262, 296. Commissioners to receive .\ppeals, etc., 301-304, 321. Committee of Accommodation, 199-203. on Directory for Public Wor- ship, 214, 227. on Directory for Ordination, on Confession of Faith, 357, 358. on Catechisms, 409, 416, 417, 424, 426, 427. Grand, 96, 214. Committees of Assembly, Three larger, 142-145. Commons, House of, 54, 71, 96, 104, 175, 216, 219, 253, 306-308, 311, 320, 366, 367. Index. 515 Communion, 236, 290, 336, 361, Note M 2. • Kneeling at, 25, 34, 40, 74. Sitting at, 11, ig, 216. Directory for, 234, 235. Conant, Johfi, B.D., xvi, 76. Conference, Hampton Court, 68, 70, 76, 274, 338 ; also Note C, 481. Conference, Savoy, 454, 455. Confession of Faith, Westminster, 325, 357- 3S9- dissents from, 363, 364. _ Confession of Faith, sending up to Houses, 366, 367. title of, 368. sources of, 372-377, • objections to, 385-406. ■ Commentaries on, 381. • Early Editions of. Consensus of Zurich, 333, 497. Convocation of 1562, 40. of 1603-4, 71. of 1640, 94. of 1661, 455. Irish of, 1615, 339, 340, 374. of, 1634, 88, 374. Conway, Earl of, xii. Cooke, Francis, xvi, 67. Cooke, Sir John, M.P,, xiii. Corbet, Edw., xvi, 69. Corbet, Edw., xix, 132. Court of High Commission, 54, 84. of Star Chamber, 54, 84. Covenant, Scottish National, 65, 93, Note E, 484. Covenant, English National, 141, 160. Solemn League and, 160, 166- 168, 176-179, 298, 309, 317. Covenants of Works and Grace, 344, 377, 378. Coverdale, Miles, 12, 13, 48. Cowper, 391. Cranmer, Abp., 20-22, 106, 329, 330, 336. Crawford, Dr., 334, 385, 387. Creed, 148, 157, 416, 428. Cromwell, Oliver, 87, 177, 192, 211, 443, 445-450. Cromwell, Richard, 450. Cross, sign of, 40, 41, 481. Crosse, Robt., B.D., xvi, 60. Davenant, Bp. , 121, 340, 341, 343. Davenport or Sancta Clara, 142. Deacon, an officer of church, 184, 247. Debate, The grand, between Presbytery and Independency, etc., 200, 442. Decree of God, 360, 381-384. Delm^, Philip, xix, 133. Denbigh, Earl of, xii. Dickson, David, 352, 487. Directory for Family Worship, 227. for Public Worship, 212-241. for Church Government, Cart- wright's, 52, 230. , West- minster Assembly's, 257-259, 261-265, 289. Discipline. 221, 258, 293-4. Doctor, officer in church, 184, 185. Doddridge, 391. Dorner, History of Protestant Doctrine, 378, 499- Dort, 80, 142, 340, 373, 399, 400. Douglas, Robert, xx, 126. Downitig, Dr. Calibute, xv, 43. Dumiing, Williatn, xviii, 121. Dtiry, John, xix, 136 ; 191, 287, 488. Edward iii., 270. Edward vi.,273, 276, 299, 327. Elder, ruling officer in church, 186-191, 487. Elizabeth, 34, 36-38, 41, 47, 50, 51, 55-58, 273, 276, 299, 340. Ellis, Edw., B. D., xvii, 99. England, Church of, 3, 15, 37, 40, 86, 91, III, 179, 237, 276, 285, 342, 406, 453, 467. Episcopacy, 97, 114, 162, 287. Erastus and Erastianism, .150, 180, 195 277, 278, 295. Erastian Queries, 140, 196, 311-313. Erie, John, B.D., xviii, 113. Erskine, Sir Chas., xx. Erskines, E. and R., 385. Essex, Earl of, xii, 178. Evelyn, Sir John, M.P., xiii, 308. Excommunication, 181. Exiles, English on Continent, 30-36. Falkland, Viscount, 178. 5i6 Index. Farrar, Bp., 20. Fasts and Fasting, i8i, 312. Featley, Dr. Daniel, xvi, 66 ; 98, 117. ■ Speeches, 146-154. Fiennes, Nathaniel, xiii, 309. Forbes, Dr. John, 351. Ford, Thos., xix, 134. Form of Church Government in Church of England and Ireland, 259-261. Foxe, John, 29, 46. Foxcroft, John, xv, 54 ; 409. Frankfort, 32-34. Fuller, 100. Galloway, Patrick, 403. Gavimon, Hannibal, xiii, 7. Gataker, Thos., B.D., xvii, 93 ; 121, 122, 152, 153, 156, 409. Geneva, 34, 35. Gibbon, John, xviii, 114. Gibbs, George, xv, 42. Gibson, Samuel, xvi, 63. Gillespie, George, xx, 125 ; i8r, 205, 220, 224, 227, 255, 257, 288, 296, 364, 429. Glasgow, Assembly of, 94, 352. Glynn, John, M.P, xiii. Good, li'illiatn, xix, 128. Goodman, Christ., 35, 36. Good7vin, Thos., B.D., xiv, 12; 124, 214. Gouge, IVilliam, D.D., xiv, i8 ; 123, 409, 419. 424. 437- Gower, Stanley, xiv, 34. Green, John, xiv, 33. Greenhill, IF., xvii, 87 ; 124. Grindal, Abp., 41, 50, 51. Guthrie, James, 191, 484. Hacket, Dr. John, xvii, 98 ; 100. Hale, Sir Matthew, 452, 453. Hales, John, 6, 231. Hall, I'p., 114, 118, I20, 341. Hall, Henry, B. D. , xvii, 77. Hallam, 5, 41, 58, 70, 86, ng, 272, 275, 371. Hamilton, Patrick, 346. Sir William, 393. Hammond, Dr. H., xviii, no; 237-240. Hampton Court, see Conference. Hardwick, Humphrey, 131. Harley, Sir Robt., xiii. Harris, Dr. John, xv, 49. Harris, Robt., B.D., xvi, 59; 385, 477. Hazelrig, Sir A., M.P., xiii. Heidelberg, 278. Catechism, 441. Henderson, Alex., xx, 103; 104, 125, 159, 185, 187, 217, 227, 245, 258, 267, 369, 429. Henrietta Maria, 82. Henry vni., 273, 276. Prince of Wales, 80, 81. Heppe, 7, 79, 343. Herle, Charles, xv, 39 ; 214, 288, 418, 426. Herrick, Rich., xv, 40. Herring, J., 244. Hetherington, Dr., 296, 425. Hickes, Gasjiard, xiii, 8. Hildersham, Sam., B. D. , xvi, 70. /////, Dr. Thos. , XV, 52 ; 92, 99, too. Hodge, Dr. A. A., 395, 398. Hodges, Tlios., xviii, 107; 409. Holdsworth, Dr. Richd., xviii, 98 ; 120. Holland, Dr., 343. Holland, Earl of, xii. " Hooker, 53, 63, 340. Hooper, Bp., 15-19, 400. Howard, Lord, xii. Howie or Hoveus, 348, 345. Hoyle, Dr. Joshua, xiii, 9 ; 122, 343, 357, 358. Humphrey, Dr. L., 48, 343, 345. Hutton, Henry, xvi, 78. Idoneous persons, 263. Independents, 198-200, 217, 380. Jackson, John, w, 55. James i. of England, and vi. of Scot- land, 63-81, 155, 282, 341, 354, 355. Jerusalem Chamber, 170, and note, 394, 486. Jewel, Bp. John, 337. Johnston, Sir A., or Lord Warriston, xx, 125, iS9> 307, 313. 314-319- Johnston, Robt., xix, 138. Jurisdiction, ecclesiastical, 274. Jus Diviniim, 312-314, 362. Keys, power of, 276. Knewstub, Mr., 68. Knox, John, 23-25, 44, 279, 347. Lanca.shire, 211, 260. Lance, \Vm., xviii, 106; 162. Lattgley, John, M.A., xv, 71. Lasco, John a, 25-27. Index. 517 Latimer, Bp., 14. Laud, Abp., 83, 91, loi, 138, 228, 239, 241- 245. 342. 352. 460. Leighton, Dr. Alex., 84, 85. Leighton, Abp. Robert, 85, 351, 385, 393, 440, 469. Leslie, Alex. , or Earl of Leven, 446. Leslie, David, 446. Ley, John, xiv, 13. Liberty of Conscience, see Toleration. Lightfoot, Dr. John, xvi, 68 ; 121, 181, 215, 2i5, 224, 323. Liturgy, see Book of Common Prayer. Laud's, 91, 92. London, 290, 301, 303, 321. Lords, House of, 98, 174. 215. 251, 254. Lord's Day, 19, 80, 361. Lord's Supper, 11, 19, 20, 361, 381. Loudon, Earl of , xx. Love, Dr. Rich., xiv, 17. Luther, 277, 333-335. 347- Lyford, Wm., B.D., xviii, 104; 409. M'Cheyne, R., 385. M'Crie, Dr. Thos., Junior, 161, 166, 209, 371. 4251 472- Magistrate, Civil, 277, 289, 361, 364. Maitland, Lord, xx, 126. Manchester, Earl of, xii, 303. Manton, Dr. Thos., xx, note ; 124, 469. March, John de In, xviii, 102. Marprelate Tracts, 54. Marsden, L., 56, 240, 371, 457. Marshall, Stephen, B.D., xiv, 23 ; 98, 124, 214, 232, 303, 409, 414. Marston Moor, 324. Martyr, Peter, 327, 328-334. Mary, Queen of England, 29. Massavi, Sir II''., xiii. Massacre, Irish, loi, 102, 244, 485. Masson, Professor, 115, 243, 286. Maynard, John, M.P., xiii. May7iard, Mr. John, xviii, 123. Melanchthon, 333. Meldrum, Dr. Robert, xviii. Melville, Andrew, 75, 282, 348, 356. Mew, William, B.D., xiv, 27. Mickelthwaite, Thos., xviii, 116. Millenary Petition, 67, 481. Milton, John, 119, 284, 391, 507. Milton's Sonnet, 282, etc., 287. Model, New, 292. Monk, General, 4SI-453. 46i- Montague, Bp., 339. Montrose, Earl of, 324. Moore, Dr. W., 223. Moreton, William, xvii, 88. Morley, Dr. Geo., xv, 50. Naseby, 324. Neal, 163-166, 214, 425. Newark, 324. Newbury, 178. Newcastle, 324. Newcomen, Matthew, B.D., xviii, 103; 139. 295i 304. 4091 419. 420, 423. Nicholson, Wm., xvii, 92. Northumberland, Earl of, xii. Nowell, 337. Nye, Henry, xvii, 82. Nye, Philip, xiv, 30 ; 164, 229, 428. Obedience, Passive, 86. Officers, extraordinary and ordinary, of divine institution in the Church, 184. 6|U00V