iA^, 'm( '•■ ■•■ : I [■' , , , ',". ' ■ '•' ' 1 [ J :' '; : n- ,M FROM THE LIBRARY OF REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON. D. D. BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY /0/CO A HISTORY FREE CHURCHES OF ENGL A N D. /j^v OF PRi)i;^ (^ JAN ;.;:> ^932 ''^ A HISTORY %oc,un^€> OF THE FREE CHURCHES OF ENGLAND, FROM A.D. 1688— A.D. 1851. HERBEET S. S KEATS. ^fconb (BVitian. LONDON : ARTHUR MIALL, PUBLISHER, 18, Bouverie Street, E.C. 1869. PEEFACE TO THE FIEST EDITION. When I resolved upon ^vriting this History I had two purposes in view. I wished to give some information to the members of the various Free Churches of certain details in the ecclesiastical life of England, to which, in my judgment, a sufficiently prominent importance had not hitherto been assigned, and I wished to convey, to persons who stood outside the pale of every Free Church, a correct impression of the part which English Dissent has played in the history of England. With regard to the latter subject, there has seemed, to me, to be a great ignorance in most political circles. I think that England could never have been a country of which Englishmen of the present day could be proud but for the existence and action of Dissent. I think that the best — and those that are universally acknowledged to be the best — features in its political and social constitution, and in its mental as well as its religious life, can be traced to the direct or indirect influence of the principles of Dissent upon the course of legislation. I shall be satisfied to have written this work if I shall have excited or increased a disposition to study this subject as it should be studied by English public writers and English states- men. Vi PREFACE. With regard to the separate Free Churches, I have endeavoured neither to exaggerate nor to diminish the facts of their history. I could have little reason for doing so, for I attach comparatively small importance to any of the distinctions which separate the Free Churches from each other. The history of the last forty years is intentionally given mth less detail than is that of the previous period. It cannot well be written until more of its lines are completed. Having completed my labour, I now feel that " The field was spacious I designed to sow, With oxen far unfit to draw the plough." Herbert S. Skeats. London^ December^ 1867. PEEFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. It is naturally a source of gratification to me that a Second Edition of this work should be called for. I have revised the text, but have found it to be im- possible, within the time allotted to me, to add to it. My thanks are due to several correspondents who have suggested verbal alterations. London^ April, 1869. H. S; S. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. INTRODTJCTOE.Y. Review of Ecclesiastical history from Reformation to Revolution, 2. — Changes in government, doctrine, and ceremonies of Church of England during that period, 2.— Henry VIII. " Supreme Head" of the Church, 3. — The Six Articles, 5.— Persecution of dissentients, 6. — Edward VI. and the First Book of Common Prayer, 7. — Revised, and use of enforced by second Act of Uniformity, 8 — John Hooper, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, asserts the spirituality of Christ's kingdom, 8. — Further reformation of the Chm'ch arrested after Edward's reign, 12. — Queen Elizabeth " Supreme Governor" of the Church, 13.— Third Act of Uniformity, 14, rigidly enforced by Parker, 14.— Thomas Cartwright, leader of the Puritans, 15, opposed by Whitgift, 15.— Character of the Puritan struggle, 16.— The first "silenced" conventicle at Wandsworth, 1572,, 21.— Early churches of Baptists, Independents, and Brownists, 22.— Baptists, the " proto Evangelists" of the voluntary principle, 24. — Barrowe, Greenwood, and Penry, 26.— Committed to the gallows, 27.— Hooker, his " Eccle- siastical polity," 29.— Whitgift's "Lambeth Articles," 31.— Cal- vinistic and Arminian Controversy, 32. — Banishment of Brownists and Anabaptists to the Continent by Queen Elizabeth, and consequent formation of Independent Churches in Holland, 33. — James I.'s new translation of Scriptures, and framing of Canons by Hampton Court Conference Convocation, 37.— James's treatment of Puritans, and exiled Brownists and Anabaptists. Second migration of the latter to Holland ; among them John Robinson, Brewster, Smyth and Helwys, 39. — Dissensions among these, causing divisions of Pa^do-Baptists, and Anti-Psedo-Baptists, 41.— Smyth and Helwys and the Baptists on the limits of civil authority, 41.— Robinson's church in Leyden, 42 ; Henry Jacob's church in London, the first in that period (a.d. 1616% 45. — Discussions raised by the Puritans; Selden's tithes; Bound's obHgations of the Sabbath. The Book of Sports, 45— 48.— Particular VIH CONTENTS. Baptists, 48. — Growth of the sects, 49. — Progress of Free Christianity after death of Charles I., 51. — The Westminster Assembly, 52. — Comprehension of Independents refused by Presbyterians, 53. — The proposal resisted by a few Independents, 52 — 44. — Liberty of Con- science saved by the Parliamentary Army ; "Pride's Purge," 56, — Religious liberty enjoyed under the Commonwealth ; Triers ; im- provement in character of the clergy, 57. — Views on toleration ; Cromwell and Milton in advance of the clergy, 60 — 62. — The religious leaders of this period men of learning, 63. — Popular errors as to man- ners of the Puritans of the Commonwealth, 63 — 66. — Religious zeal among the Baptists ; Vavasour Powell ; William Kiffin, 66. — Inde- pendents the founders of the " Society for the Propagation of the Gospel," 67. — Rise of the Quakers ; Fox, 67 — 70 ; persecuted during the Protectorate, chiefly by Presbyterians and Independents, 70. — Charles II. ; the Savoy Conference, 72. — Ejectment of two thousand clergymen (1662), and rapid increase of Nonconformists, 74. — Legis- lative enactments to check their influence, 75. — Their sufferings;, savage persecution of the Quakers, 75 — 77. — Attempts at comprehen- sion, 78 — 80. — James II., 80. — Penn unjustly accused of servility, 81 — 83. — The Seven Bishops and the "Declaration;" Dissenters sympathize with them, 83, 85. — With James II. ended the despotic rule of the Church of England, 85. CHAPTER II. THE REVOLUTION TO THE COMPREHENSION BILL. A.D. 1688-89. Death of eminent Nonconformists previous to 1688-89. — Feeling^ of Bishops towards Dissenters, 90. — Condition and numerical strength of Dissent at this period, 91. — Character of Nonconformist preaching, 93 ; patronized by eminent persons, 94, 95. — Academies of learning for Dissenting ministers, 96. — Comparative piety of clergy and Nonconformists, 97. — Declaration of the Prince of Orange con- cerning toleration, 98 ; his reception by the clergy and Dissenters, 99 — 103. — Twelve bishops out of fourteen vote against his taking the Crown, 105 ; William's religious views an obstacle to his friendly reception by the bishops and clergy, 105 — 108. — Debate on Coronation Oath, 109. — Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance and Corporation Act, 110, 111. — The nonjuriug bishops and clergy, 112; their position analogous to that of Anglo-Catholics of recent times, 114. — Proposal to introduce a clause abolishing the sacramental Tests into the Bill of Settlement defeated, 116. — This decision affected by Whig votes ; the Whig families now the rulers of the nation, 118 — 121. — Bishop- Burnet, 122; his views on toleration and comprehension, 123. — CONTENTS, IX Tillotson, Tenison, and Stillingfleet, and tlieir feelings towards Non- conformists, 124, 125. — Religious liberty supported by the highest in- tellectual power in House of Commons, 125. — Dissenters themselves- mainly indifferent to Test and Corporation Acts, because they ex- pected a comprehension scheme, 127. — Toleration Act passed, 128. — Howe on Toleration, 129. — Provisions of Toleration Act, 130. — ^The Quakers dissatisfied with it, and thenceforth denounced all compul- sory exactions, 132. — John Locke also dissatisfied with it, 132; his " Letters on Toleration" strike at the root of all State Churches, 134 — 138. — A Bill for "Comprehension" introduced into tlie House of Lords by Earl of Nottingham, 140 ; nomination of a commission, 144 ; proposed alteration in services, kc, 146 ; prorogued and dissolved without result, 147. — Different opinions on the failure of the scheme, 148—150. CHAPTER in. TUE COMPREHENSION BILL TO THE SCHISM BJLL, A.D. 1689—1741. Numerical strength of Dissent, 151. — The Quakers ; Fox, Barclay,. Penn, Whitehead, 151 — 153. — The Baptists; KifRn, Knollys, Keach, Gifford, 154; Assembly of Baptist Churches, 157; their resolutions as to maintenance of and preparation for the ministry, 158 — 160. — General Baptists ; Russel and Caffin ; Assembly of and Confession of Faith; declaration against civil establishments, 161 — 164; declen- sion, as a denomination dm-ing William's reign, 164. — The Indepen- dents; Mead, Chaunccy, and Lobb, 167 — 168. — The Presbj-terians,. Baxter, Bates, Howe, Annesley, Sylvester, Dr. Williams, and others, 169 — 172. — Proposals for union of Congregationalists and Presbyte- rians, 172 ; terms or '• Heads of Agreement" framed by Committee, 172 — 174. — Laymen not consulted, 174. — The new union imperilled and virtually dissolved by the Rothwcll and Antinomian Controver- sies, 175 — 180. — Presbj-terians charged with Socinianism, 183. — Act passed, prohibiting the publication of Socinian opinions, 185. — De Foe on the sin of occasional conformity, 188. — Howe's reply. 190. — Dis- cussion on the rights of Convocation between Binkes, Wake, Atterbury, Burnet, and others, 191 — 194. — Convocation summoned in 1701, 193. — Disputes of Upper and Lower House, 194, 195 ; in abeyance after the death of William, 196. — The High Church sympathies of Queen Anne, and her contemptuous treatment of Dissenters, 198. — Accession o? Godolphin and Marlborough to power, 199. — Sachcverell and Samuel Wesley stir up a war against Dissent, 200 — 202. — Replied to by Palmer, Owen, and De Foe, 203 — 205. — De Foe's " Shortest Way •X CONTENTS. with Dissenters," 206 — 210 ; his prosecution and punishment, 211 ; forsaken and reproached by Dissenters, 211. — Conference between Lords and Commons on occasional Conformity, 215 ; the Bill of the Commons against " Occasional Conformity " rejected by Lords, and ultimately dropped, 217. — Similar fate of a second Bill; this result chiefly owing to influence of Tenison and Burnet, 220 — The contro- versy transferred to the people, 221. — De Foe's denunciation of the conformity of Dissenters, 222. — A further attempt and failure to pass the Bill, 224. — Controversy on Church and Dissent ; publication of a "Collection of Cases," 226.— Hoadly and Calamy, 227—229.— Calamy's character, position, and writings, 229 — 230. — Dr. Drake raises the " Church in danger" cry, 231 ; his " memorial" burned in public, 233. — Resolution of the Lords and Commons on the " Church in Danger" question, 235, 236. — Proposals for legislative union with Scotland, 237 ; resisted by elergy ; encom-aged by Dissenters ; passed, 238. — Sacheverell's sermon and impeachment, 240 ; his popularity, 242 ; condemned to three years' suspension, 243 ; triumphant progress through the country, 244. — Diminishing influence and isolation of Dissenters about this time, 248. — The Presbyterians and their clergy, 249, 250 ; Matthew Henry, 251 ; Lady Hewley's Charity, 251. — The Congregationalists, 252. — Isaac Watts, 252—254 ; his hymns eagerly used, 254 ; the link between Puritanism and Methodism, 257. — Neal, Burgess, Bradbury, Clarke, Earle, and Jollie, 259— 260.— The Bap- tists ; Stennett, Pigott, Collins, Gale, Mitchel, Crossly, 262 ; position of the denomination, 263. — The Quakers ; their suflerings for church- rates ; the founders of home missionary enterprise, 263, 264. — All the sects unaggressive in relation to their civil and political position, 264. — Queen Anne's Bounty, 266. — Occasional Conformity Act again introduced and passed,267. — Viscount Bolingbroke introduceda Schism BiU, to curtail the power of Dissenters, 269 ; passed and received royal assent, 273 ; death of Anne before it became law, 274. — Acces- sion of George I., 274. — Withdrawal of De Foe from political labours, 275, 276. CHAPTER IV. FROM THE SCHISM ACT TO THE ORGANIZATION OF DISSENTING DEPUTIES. A.D. 1714 — 1732. POPULAK outbreak against Dissenters, and the Govcrament of George I., 277 — 279.— Neal's Census of the Free Churches in 1715, 180 ; analyzed and results, 282. — Agitation for religious liberty, 284. The King favourable to it, 285.— BiU for strengthening the Protestant interest, 286—288 ; carried, 288. — Test and Corporation Act un- CONTENTS. XI repealed, 290. — Bishop Hoadly's sermon on tlie Nature of the King- dom or Church of Christ, or the Bangorian Controversy, 291 — 293. — Condemned by Convocation, 294. — Growth of Unitarianism, 295— 298.— Dr. Samuel Clarke, 297.— Thomas EmljTi, 299 ; fined for advocating Unitarian views, 300. — Unitarianism among Noncon- formists, 302. — Peirce, 302 ; charged with Heresy ; The Exeter disputes, 303— 305.— The Salters' Hall Controversy, 306.— Sub- scribing and non-subscribing ministers, 307. — Spread of Unitarianism, 310. — LFnitarians a distinct body, 311. — Abandonment of creeds, 313. — Intensity of faith supplanted by breadth, 315. — Agitation of Quakers for substituting affirmations for oaths, 315. — Bill introduced and passed, 316 — 318. — Origin of the English " Regium Donum," 319; a bribe to Dissenting ministers, 319; its demoralizing effects, 321. — Fund for relief of widows of Baptist ministers, 322. — Thomas and John Hollis, 323. — The Deistical Controversy, 326.— Blount, Shaftesbury, Collins, Woolston, and Tindal, 325— 327.— Liberal views and conciliatory temper of defenders of revealed religion, 328. — Lardner, Sherlock, and others, 329— 332.— Dr. James Foster, 331.— Warburton's " Divine Legation," and Butler's " Analogy," 332. — Deterioration of spiritual life the result of controversy, 332. — Decline of Dissent, 335. — Philip Doddridge, 336 ; defends Dissenting cause, 337. — Proposed renewed agitation on Test and Corporation Acts, and formation of Dissenting deputies, 339. CHAPTER V. FROM THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSENTING DEPUTIES TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF METHODISM. A.D. 1732 — 1744. Test Bill introduced and lost, 341. — Better success of the Quakers in reference to tithes, 341. — Defeated in the House of Lords, and mortification of Walpole, 343. — Renewed efibrts of the Deputies, 345. — Their success and vigour owing largely to Dr. Benjamin Avery, their chairman, 346. — Mr. Baskerville, and occasional conformity among the Baptists, 347 John "Wesley, 348 ; nurtured as a Church- man, 349 ; goes to Oxford, 351 ; holy life there of himself, 349 ; and his brother Charles, 351. — Greorge Whitefield, 351; joins Wesley's " Holy Club," 352.— Wesley and the Moravians, 353.— Whitefield's preaching, and the opposition of clergy, 355. — Churches closed against him, 356. — Field preaching in the West of England, and intense religious fervour, 357. — Visits America, 359. — Wesley and revivals, 360. — Wesley determined by lot and Bibliomancy to join Whitefield in Bristol, 351. — Methodist societies established, 363. — XH CONTENTS. Separation of Whitefield and Wesley, 365. — Friendship soon re- newed, 366. — Whitefield again in England, and great revival of religion, 367. — Persecution and danger, 368. — Continued labours and persecution of the Wesleys, 369 — 371. — Establishment of ClasseSr and rise of lay preachers, 372. — Maxwell and Nelson, 373. — Organi- zation of Methodism, 374. — Wesley denies that he is a Dissenter,. 375. — Defines his difierencc of doctrine from the Church of England, 376— 379.— Causes of opposition to Methodism, 376 — 380. — Attitude of Dissenters, 381. — Caiises of success of Methodism; Whitefield's personal character and qualifications, 383 — 384. — Wesley, the real leader of the new movement, 385. — The Wesleys and Whitefield com- pared, 386. — Religious liberalism of early Methodists, 388. — Metho- dism and the aristocracy, and the Countess of Huntingdon, 388. — Countess of Huntingdon ; her character ; foimds Chcshunt and Trevecca Colleges, 390. — Revival of religious life the source of poKtical freedom, 391. CHAPTER VI. THE EEVIVAIi OF RELIGION IN WALES. The History of religion in Wales as in Ireland one of oppression, 393. — Penry's description of the clergy, 393. — Rev. Rees Pritchard and Thomas Charles on the same, 394. — Wroth and Cradock, godly clergymen, 395.— Pritchard, the Welsh Watts, 396.— Cradock's laboiirs, 397. — The aforesaid clergymen, the forerunners of Welsh Dissent ; the causes of their success, 398 — 399. — Griffith Jones, 400 ; the originator of education in Wales ; statistics of education, 400 — 401. — Howel Harris, the Wesley of Wales, 401. — Dissenting denomi- nations in Wales, 402. — Vile treatment of Howel Harris, 404 ; his attachment to the Church of England, 405. — Daniel Rowlands ; his extraordinary qualifications, 406 — 407. — Growth of Welsh Methodism, 408—410. CHAPTER VII. FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF METHODISM TO THE SECOND AGITATION FOR THE REPEAL OF THE TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS. A.D. 1744—1793. Dr. Watts on the advantages and responsibilities of Dissenters, 412; on the question of Civil Establishments of religion, 413. — The first formal statement and defence of Anti-State Church pi-inciples by a Congregationalist minister, 414. — Doddridge's views on the same. CONTENTS. 415. — The State Church principle defended by Churchmen on ne^r grounds. — Warburton's treatise, 417. — Examination of "Warburton's theory, 418. — Rev. John White's "Letters," assailing Watts's work; Micaiah Towgood's reply, 419. — The latter, a standard work; its character examined, 419 — 421. — Towgood's death, 411. — Loyalty of Dissenters in the rebellion of 1745, 422— 423.— Death of Watts, 424. — Character of his writings and labours, 425. — Intervention of George II. for liberty of conscience to Doddridge, 426. — Writings, labours, and death of Doddridge, 427— 429.— Robert Grosvenor cited before Court of Queen's Bench for refusing to qualify for Sheriff, 429. — This and other similar cases defended by the Committee of Deputies, 430. — Decision of the Lords given by Lord Mansfield, 431.— Lord Mansfield on religious liberty, 433.— Firmness of Mr. Evans, 433. — George III., 434. — Characterized, 434 — 435. — Prominent Clergy of this period : Bishops Butler, Warburton, Lowth, and Seeker, and Ai-chdeacon Blackburne, 435— 437.— Blackburne writes against the Church, 487. — The Methodist clergy, founders of the Evangelical party : Fletcher, Venn, Grimshaw, Berridge, 439. — The relations of the Methodists to the Established Church considered in Conference, 440. — Wesley's views on the same, his hostility to the Baptists,441. — The Congregationalists : Drs. Gibbons, Fleming, Guise, Stafibrd, Savage, Jennings, 442— 443.— Joseph Hart, Longford, Pal- mer, 444. — Names of eminent country ministers, Orton and others, 444. — ^The Baptists ; scholarship of Dr. Gill, 445. — Thomas Crosby, the first historian of the Baptists, 446. — Samuel Stennett, Dr. Gifford, 447._Robert Robinson and his works, 447, 448. — Daniel Taylor. William Thompson, and others, and the New General Baptist Asso- ciation, 448 — 449. — Unitarian Presbyterians, Lardner, Priestly, Richard Price, 450. — Dr. Kippis and his literary labours, 451. — Dr. Ferneaux, Dr. Chandler, their literary and public labours, 451 — 453. Dr. Amory, 453. — The Sandemanians and Swedenborgians, 451. — Clerical subscription, 454. —Clerical subscription led by Blackburne and Lindsey, 454. — Meredith's motion in the House of Commons, 455. Opposed by Edmund Burke, 456.— Able speech of Sir George Saville, 456. — Bill rejected, 456. — Agitation for Dissenters relief from subscription defeated, 459. — Memorable speech of Earl of Chatham, 460.— Continued agitation and appeal to the people, 461.— Robert Robinson's defence of principles of religious liberty, 462.— Joshua Toulmin, 461.— A modified bill carried, 465.— The Arminian Contro- versy, 466. — Toplady, 467. — Unscrupulous in controversy, 469. — The American War for Independence, 469.— Sympathy of Dissenters with the Colonists, 471.— Agitation led by Priestly and Price, 471— 473. — Testimony of Benjamin Franklin, 474.— Wesley and the clergy side with the Government, 475.— Fletcher's defence of Wesley's conduct XIV CONTENTS. 477. — Revival of religion, 479. — John Howard, 479. — Robert Raikes, and the origin of Sunday Schools, 479 — Hannah More's schools, 481. — Slave Trade agitation led chiefly by the Quakers, 483. — Fox, Granville Sharpe, Clarkson, Sansom, and others, 484. — Joined by other denominations, including bishops and Churchmen, 485. — Renewed agitation of dissenting deputies on Test and Corporation Acts, 486 ; Pitt and Fox in the Debate, 488. — Motion rejected, 489. — Continued agitation amongst the people, 490 — 493. — Again brought before Parliament by Mr. Beaufoy, 494. — Again rejected, 494. — Redoubled efiForts of committee of deputies, 494. — Fox's remarkable speech,. 495 ; opposed by Pitt and others, 496. — Motion defeated, 497. — Causes of that defeat, 497 — 499.— The French Revolution, and the English Revolutionary Society, and the Dissenters, 499 — 501. — For- mation of an association in defence of the Church, 502. — Birmingham Riots, attacks on Priestley, and sympathy of Dissenters, 502 — 505.— Priestley goes to America, 505. — General hostility of Chxirchmen to Dissenters, and cessation of agitation, 506. CHAPTER Vni. FROM THE SECOND AGITATION FOE THE EEPEAL OF THE TEST AND COEPORATION LAWS, TO THEIE EEPEAL. A.D. 1792—1828. Origin of the Baptist Missionary Society : Carey, Fuller, Marsh- man, and Ward, 509. — Ultra-Calvinistic View of the Baptists, 509. — London Missionary Society formed of various denominations, 511. — David Bogue, Haweis, and others, 512. — Becomes a Congregationalist Society in consequence of formation of Church Missionary Society, and Wesleyan Society, 513. — Opposition of Bishop Horsley, 513 — 515. — Formation of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 516. — Fierce clerical opposition, favoured by Duke of Kent, 517. — Chief opponents : Dr. Herbert Marsh, Dr. Wordsworth, Maltby, and others, 519. — Joseph Lancaster, and the British and Foreign School Society, 521. — Opposition of the bishops and clergy, note, testimony of the Edinburgh Review, 523. — Mrs. Trimmer and Dr. Bell, 524 — 525. — Coimter scheme of National School Society, 526. — Reasons for oppo- sition of the clergy to education in the character of the clergy, 527. — Increase of Dissenters, 527. — Leading ministers, 530. — Toul- min's "History of Dissent," 531.— Leading Con grcgationalists : Bogue, Palmer, Burder, Collyer, "William Bull, Thomas Toller, 533 — 535.— John Clayton, sen., 535— 536.— The Baptists : Booth, Rippon, Ryland, Fawcett, James Hinton, Joseph KiDghorn, 536 CONTENTS. XT —539. — Robert Hall, characterized, 537 — 541. — Jolm Foster, cha- racterized, 541 — 543. — Secession of Methodists and establishment of Methodist New Connexion, 544. — Leading Methodist preachers after Wesley's death, 545. — Thomas Charles, and the second gene- ration of the Methodists in Wales, 546. — CaUed " Exhorters," 548 Morris, Charles and Richard, leading preachers in South Wales, 549. — Unaggressive character of Dissent at this period, 550 — 552. Its tone strengthened by William Graham, John Foster, and others, 553. — Roused from comparative apathy by Lord Sidmouth's pro- posed religious census, 555. — Organized opposition of Dissenters in this movement, 556. — Raffles, Pye Smith, Matthew Wilks and others,. 556. — Lord Sidmouth's bill defeated, 558. — Formation of Protestant Society for Protection of Religious Liberty led by John Wilks,. 558 — Its success in remo%dng reKgious disabilities, 560 — 562. — Aug- mentation of Church livings and Church building commission, 563 — 565. — Opposition of Dissenters to Brougham's Education Bill, 566. — The Protestant Society supported by Duke of Sussex, Lord Holland, Sir James Mackintosh, and Lord John Russell, 567. — Test and Cor- poration agitation, 568—570. — Vigorously prosecuted, 570. — Bill for their repeal introduced by Lord John Russell, 571. — Carried in the House of Commons, 575. — Lord Holland's bill in the Lords, 576 ; passed and receives Royal Assent, 577. — Friendly attitude of Church- men during this struggle, 578 — 580. CHAPTER IX. TROM THE EEPEAL OF THE TEST AND COEPORATION ACTS TO THE CENSTJS OF EEMGIOUS WOESHIP. A.D. 1828—1851. Catholic Emancipation promoted by Protestant Dissenters, 582. — Movements to re-establish Free Church principles ; Ecclesiastical' Knowledge Society, 582 — 584. — Reform Agitation, 585. — Rev. Andrew Marshall and the Volimtaries of Scotland, 588. — Voluntary Church Associations established, 589. — Organization of Congregational Union, 590 ; Affirmation of the spiritual character of Christian Church, 591. — Dr. Baldwin Brown's resolutions, 591. — Rev. T. Binney's estimate of the influence of the Church of England, 592. — Church- rate contests and Parliamentary bills, 593. — Convention of Dissenters, attended by John Angell James, Dr. Baldwin Brown, Josiah Conder, John Howard Hinton, and others, 594. — Registration and Marriage Acts passed, 596. — Church Rate Abolition Society, 596. — Introduction and defeat of Church Rate Abolition Bills, 598. — Church Reform,, XVI CONTENTS. 599 — 601. — Anti-Slavery Movement, divides the interest of Dissenters 601. — Divisions of Dissenters, 602. — Religious Freedom Society, 603. — Failure of the same, 604. — Evangelical Voluntary Church Associa- tion, failure of the same, 605. — Establishment of the Nonconformist newspaper by Mr. Edward Miall, 604. Dissenters roused by Sir James Graham's Factory Bill, 606 — 608. Formation of an Anti-State Church Association urged by the Nonconformist, 608. First Confer- ence held ; discouraged by Dissenters, 609. — British Anti-State Church Association formed, 611. — The Wolverhampton and Lady Hewley's charities before Parliament, 613. — Effect of their decision upon Unitarians, 615. — The Regium Donum and the Anti-State Church Association, 617. — The Maynooth Bill, 618. — Diverse action in regard to it of Evangelical Chui'chmen, and Evangelical Dis- senters, 620. — The support of Dissenters given to Free Trade, 621. — Division among Methodists, 622. — Result of the Religious Census of 1851, 623. A HISTORY OF THE FEEE CHURCHES OF ENGLAND. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. The struggles of English Nonconformists up to the time of the Revolution have been so often and so ably described, that it may seem to be unnecessary to add one more page to that painful yet honourable history. No Englishman can look back upon that history with- out shame, but no Nonconformist can look back upon it without pride. The conduct of the State and the con- duct of the Church of that period are now uniformly condemned both by Statesmen and by Churchmen ; and if it is necessary, for the purposes of this History, that I should pass it in review, I wish it to be understood that I hold neither the State nor the Church of the present day responsible for acts then committed. It might seem superfluous, if not absurd, to make this remark, were it not the case that, when the facts of those times are re- vived, they are often treated as though the j)i'6sent historical descendants of the old ecclesiastical parties were, in some manner, accountable for them. No per- son of common sense dreams of taunting the ministry of Queen Victoria with the acts of the ministry of Charles 1 2 THE REFORMATION. [a.d. 1534 the Second; but many persons, who are possessed of strong common sense in other matters, esteem it to be a natural thing to taunt the Established Church of the present day with the acts of the Established Church of three hundred years ago. And so, on the other side, men in whom high literary culture and ordinary com- mon sense are often combined, seem to imagine that they have turned the flank of their opponents' position if they have proved that the Independents of the Com- monwealth were persecutors, and that they not only had no objection to tithes and Church-rates, but that they held firmly by the theory of a State-established religion. In so far as I may find occasion to repeat the history of religious persecution I shall do it with no such purposes as these. Men may be responsible, in no small degree, foi the character and the acts of their descendants, but cannot be held responsil^le for the character or the acts of their forefathers. In reviewing the ecclesiastical history of England, from the Reformation to the Revolution, the changes in government, doctrine, and service which the Established Church successively underwent naturally claim the first attention. What is most remarkable in connection with these changes is the comparative readiness with which the more important were received, and the strenuous opposition by which the less important were, after a time, encountered. When Henry the Eighth founded a new Church* in England, he met, excepting from those * I use tliis expression advisedly, and I imagine that none but eager controversialists will dispute its accuracy. " The existence of the Church of England," says the present Bishop of St, Asaph, " as a distinct body, and her final separation from Rome, may be dated from the period of the divorce." Short's " History of Ch, of England," p. 102. —1547.] ROYAL 8VFBEMACY. 3 who adhered to their fidelity to the Romish communion, no opposition to his claim to be the " supreme head " of that Church. The explanation of this fact is natural enough, although it has not been recognized by the historians of that period. The doctrine of the regal supremacy in ecclesiastical matters had been famihar to Englishmen for many generations. It had been suc- cessfully maintained, up to a certain pomt, by the greatest of the Plantagenet kings, and had been ably vindicated by Wycliflfe, one of whose cardinal "here- sies " consisted m the denial of the supremacy of the Pope.'"" All that Henry did was to apply and extend a doctrine that had lono^ been filterino; throug-h the minds both of the aristocracy and of the commonalty. Hence the otherwise inexplicable circumstance thai: his as- sumption of unhmited supremacy excited only what may be described as a professional opposition. Most of the bishops voted against the Actf vesting the sole ecclesiastical prerogative in the Crown ; but only Gardi- ner resisted the exercise of the utmost stretch of that ^prerogative, Avhen the King suspended all the bishops from the exercise of their episcopal authority, and, of his own sovereign Avill, afterwards restored it to them. The gallows and the stake made short work of those of the inferior clergy who resisted the new law; and long- before the death of Henry, his spiritual headship was effectually established. In that age, indeed, there seemed to be no alternative between the supremacy of the Pope and the supremacy of the King. The minds of the best of men, as is the case with some, even in * Vaiighan's " Wycliffe," p. 211. t 25Henry VIIL, cap. 21. 4 DOCTRINES OF THE [a.p. 1534 these days, were so warped by the influence of ancient ecclesiastical precedents, that none dreamed of an ulti- mate appeal to Holy Scripture. St. Paul, if he were consulted, was to be interpreted by Augustine, St. John by Jerome, and St. Peter by the Popes ; and to the in- terpreters, as a matter of course, was given the principal authority. A Church of Christ, independent, as such, of human control, and existing apart from state-craft, was an idea almost impossible to that age.* If enter- tained at all, it could only have been by men as humble in life as in spirit, such as afterwards rose to assert the spiritual character of the kingdom of Christ upon earth. It was not more difficult to compel obedience to the theological doctrines of the new Church, for they differed but little from those of Rome. The King him- self undertook to settle what the people should believe, and, with this view, drew up a set of articles of religion. These articles, while they enjoined the belief of the "whole Bible" and the three Creeds, also declared that Baptism was necessary to salvation, that the opinions of all "Anabaptists" were detestable heresies, and that Auricular Confession and Priestly Absolution were com- mendable. The doctrine of Transubstantiation was set forth mthout reserve, as also was the doctrine of Pur- gatory, and Prayers to the Saints were commended. On the other hand, the doctrine of Justification by Faith * Cardinal Pole came near to the right doctrine in liis reply to TimstaL "Those aiithors," he says, "who -write in defence of the King's supremacy, proceed upon this false ground, that the Cliurclx and State are one society. Now this is a capital mistake, for these two bodies are instituted for different ends, and governed by independent authorities." Cited in Collier, vol. ii., p. 137. —1547.] NEW CHURCH. 5 was acknowledged. The decision of the dignitaries of the Church on these points was what the decision of State functionaries customarily is. Expressed in ver- nacular English, it was — " We believe whatsoever we are commanded to believe." The new articles might have secured a much wider acceptance than it befel them to receive but for a step altogether fatal to many of their doctrines, and almost equally fatal to the doc- trine of the Royal supremacy. The King not only authorized a translation of the Bible into English, but ordered a copy of it to be set up in each of the Churches. This act, however, was soon felt to be, what it undoubtedly was, a political blunder, and, after seven years, was substantially recalled. Before furnishing his subjects with such a weapon of almighty power agamst the system which he had deter- mined to establish, the King issued the " Injunctions." He, who was the slave of his own lusts, enjoined the clergy to exhort the people to " keep God's command- ments," and to give themselves to the " study of the Scriptures, and a good life." In the "Institution of a Christian Man," the bishops laid down, at greater length, the creed of the Reformed Church, which was further vindicated in the " Necessary Doctrine." Having thus explained, and apparently demonstrated the absolute truth of the new theological system, it only remained to enforce it. Some denied the corporal presence, and were accordingly sent to Smithfield. In order to strengthen his power, the King allowed his Parliament to assume the functions of a Convocation, and debate for eleven days the doctrines of the Christian religion. This debate issued iu the adoption of the law of the " Six 6 UNIFOBMITY UNFOSCEB. [a.d. 1534 Articles," which set forth, in the strongest language, the presence of the natural body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, sanctioned Com- munion in one kind only, denied the right of Marriage to the priesthood, enforced vows of Chastity, allowed Private Masses, and declared Auricular Confession to be both expedient and necessary. The most fearful penal- ties were attached to any opposition to these doctrines. The least was loss of goods ; the greatest, burmng at the stake, which was the punishment for denying the first of the Articles. The law was now let loose against both Protestant and Catholics, but with peculiar ven- geance against the former. The English State and Church have generally made a distinction in their treatment of the two classes of Dissenters. There is, to this day, an hereditary tenderness of feeling in the Church towards the members of the Roman Catholic communion, and an hereditary antipathy towards Pro- testant Dissent. Separation from Rome is looked at ■\\dth mournful regret ; separation from Protestant Dis- sent with holy pride. Nor has the State been wholly destitute of similar partiality. From the reign of Henry the Eighth down to the thirtieth year of the reign of Queen Victoria, the government of the day has almost invariably relaxed offensive or insulting laws against Roman Catholics before it has relaxed similar laws against Protestant Dissenters. In the reign of Queen Victoria this feeling is exhibited by mmisters of the Crown fighting the battle of the Roman Catholics, and leaving Protestant Dissenters to fight theirs' as best the}' can ; in the reign of Henry the Eighth it took a grosser form. CathoHcs were only hanged, Protestants were —1547.] CHUBCR SEE VICES. 7 burned ; Fisher was sent to the gallows, Anne Askew to the stake. And so the new Church was founded. The work begun by one royal profligate was, a hundred and thirty years later, fittmgly finished by another. Henrj' the Eighth's natural successor in ecclesiastical politics is Charles the Second. The two great pillars of the English political Church are the author of the first " Act of Supremacy," and the author of the last " Act of Uniformity." No change took place in the ceremonies of the Church in the reign of Henry. A Commission had been appointed in 1540 to examine into them, but no action was taken upon its proceedings. The Services in use were of several kinds, and varied according to ancient custom. York had its custom distinct from Exeter, and Hereford and Lincoln from Bangor and Sarum. The first step in the direction of uniformity was made in the second year of Edward the Sixth, when an Order of Communion was published. The word " Mass " was now dropped, and the cup was restored to the laity. In the same year appeared the first book of Conunon Prayer, which was adopted by Parliament, and ordered to be used, without having been submitted to Convocation. It was compiled, Avith a few important alterations, from the old Missals. The compilers had, however, left some questions open, and there was doubt as to what was meant in certain portions. The book, therefore, was ordered to be revised. On this revision the German Reformers exercised some influence, which appears in the omission, in the second book, of Prayers for the Dead, and the doctrine of Transubstantiation, and in the adoption of simpler ecclesiastical vestments — the second rubric forbidding the use of any vestments 8 mSHOP HOOPEB. [a.d. 1550.] excepting the rochet and the surplice.""' For the second tinie Convocation was not consulted, and the ngw order of worship was published mthout havuig been submitted to its decision. Those who, in later days, have expa- tiated on the claims of this body seem to have forgotten history. In the settlement of the Protestant religion in England it was altogether ignored by the State. The use of the second book was enforced by a second Act of Uniformity. The State having, in two years, changed its opinions, required all the people to do the same. The greater simplicity of the second Service-book was probably, in some measure, due to the bold position assumed by the first Nonconformist, John Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester. History, while it has done justice to the character and the abilities of this eminent man, has not done similar justice to his opinions. He appears on its pages as a conscientious opponent of all ecclesiastical ceremonies and habits that are not expressly Avarranted by Scripture, as a sufferer for his opinions on this subject, and as a martyr for the Protestant religion; but he was more than this. All Protestants and Puri- tans have been accustomed to hold his name in re- verence, but it belongs in a more especial manner to the Enghsh Nonconformists of the nineteenth century. It was his voice which first publicly proclaimed the principles of religious freedom. He stood alone amongst the Enghsh Protestants of his age in denying the right of the State to interfere with religion. While the young Kinof, actincr under the advice of his council, was sub- mitting to Parliament Acts of Uniformity, and compel- * See Cardwell's " Two Prayer Books of Edward VI. compared." [a.d. 1550.] BISHOP HOOPER. 9 ling assent to new Articles of Religion,* Hooper was publicly denying the right of any king to interfere in the government of the Church. " Touching," he says, " the superior powers of the earth, it is not unknown to all them that hath read and marked the Scripture that it appertaineth nothing unto their office to make any law to govern the conscience of their subjects in religion, "f " Christ's Kingdom," he adds, " is a spiritual one. In this neither Pope nor King may govern. Christ alone is the governor of his Church, and the onty lawgiver." He told the people, in words proclaimed to thousands at Paul's Cross and throughout various parts of the king- dom, that their consciences were bound only by the Word of God, and that they might, with it, judge "bishop, doctor, preacher, and curate." "The laws of the civil magistrate," he elsewhere says, "are not to be admitted in the Church." J Preaching before the King, he called for the restoration of the primitive Church, and demanded the abolition of all vestments, crosses, and altars. It is a wonder that such a man should have been asked to accept a bishopric ; but, next to Latimer, he was the greatest and most popular preacher of his day ; and his zeal not only for the Reformation, but for a further reformation, knew no bounds. And the Kmg liked him. Hooper was a man peculiarly calculated to fascinate such an open, frank, and tender nature as that of Edward. He was one of the few ecclesiastics of his age who was more than an ecclesiastic. He had a * Tlie forty-two Articles of Religion of this reign, which are suLstantially the same as those now in force, were issued without consulting either Par- liament or Convocation, Burnet, vol. iii., p. 210. t " A Declaration of the Ten Commandments." Early Writings, p. 280. J " A Declaration concerning Christ and his Offices." lb., p. 82. 10 BISHOP SOOPEB. [a.d. 1550.] generous human nature. He did not imagine that in assuming the office of a preacher of the Gospel he was bound to quench all the natural instincts of humanity. He loved children. Of a candid and truthful moral dis- position, generous in his sympathies, just in his desires, an ardent and eloquent preacher, he was a man who seemed to be, above all his contemporaries, born to be the apostle of the new religion. Had the King and he lived, the Eeformation would probably have been com- pleted, and the Church of England would not have been the daughter only of Tudor pride and lust, and the mother chiefly of those whom she denounces as heretical schismatics. For Hooper to be offered a bishopric under the first Act of Uniformity, Avas for him to refuse it. He de- clined to take the oath of supremacy, and he " scrupled the vestments." The oath Avas altered by the King, and large personal liberty in wearing the " garments of Popery" was, it must be said, generously offered him ; but he loved his conscience more than any honours, and esteemed the cause of the Reformation of more value than many bishoprics. The King, Cranmer, and Ridley remonstrated with him. He took advice of the German and Swiss Reformers, and they, while holding his opinions of the habits, advised him, for the sake of religion, to take the office, but he still declined. Then he wi'ote against them, and was committed to the Fleet, from whence he came forth giving up a little but holding much, and was consecrated Bishop of Gloucester. Here, for four years, he visited and preached as bishop had never done in England before, and seldom, if ever since, and so won the crown of a martyr. Such was the man [a.d. 1551.] STATE OF MORALITY. 11 Avho sounded the first note of that controversy which was afterwards to test the English Church, and who laid the foundation of English Puritanism. All times of persecution, and all ages which have been distinguished by an intemperate zeal for external unifor- mity, have been characterized b}^ the prevalence of notorious immorality. The age of Edward the Sixth, as were the succeeding ages of Elizabeth and Charles, was no exception to this rule. While the King's council was framing theological propositions and compelling, for the first time in the history of England, " subscription " to them, enforcing laws for wearing red habits by some on some days, and white and black habits by others on other days, changing the laws themselves within two years, and burning, hanging, or imprisoning all those who could not change theii- consciences as fast as theh- rulers could theirs, immorality flourished like a green bay-tree. " Lying, cheating, theft, perjury, and whoredom," says Bucer, in his letter to Hooper,* " are the complaints of the times." Bishop Latimer said that the English nation were " infamous for whoredom " beyond any other part of the world.f " Profaneness and immorality," says a Church historian Avho is not given to exaggeration in the use of language, " had now an unlimited range.":|: " The courtiers and great men," writes another historian, " indulged themselves in a dissolute and licentious life, and the clergy were not without blemish," § But trine immersion was a more important question than the state of morality, and it did not matter if people lived in adultery so long as the clergy wore albs and rochets. * Collier, vol. ii., p. 294. f lb., p. 295. t IIj. § Neal, vol. i., p. 78. 12 ELIZABETH'S SUPBEMAOY. [a.d. 155S.] The reformation of the English Church never passed beyond the line drawn by the death of Edward the Sixth. It has, on the contrary, rather receded from it. There can be no doubt concerning the intentions of the reformers of that reign.* They wished for a further reformation. Had they lived the royal supremacy would probably have been relinquished ; the idea of enforcing uniformity by legal pains and penalties would have been surrendered ; the theory of episcopacy, as it is now held and stated, would have been consigned to the pages of history only, and the Reformation would have been as complete in England as it was in the German States. It might have been expected that the persecutions endured in the reign of Mary would have been succeeded by a rebound, and that there would have been a sudden leap from Romanism to a more extreme Protestantism, and under a monarch of any character but Elizabeth's this might have been the course of history; but the Queen had inherited too much of the disposition of her father, for her to surrender the smallest of her royal prerogatives. Her unwillingness to assume the title of " Supreme Head " of the Church, while she retained the whole prerogative of headship, and her willingness to take the title of " Supreme Governor " only, have been much commented upon, but it requires an intellect of peculiar character to detect any real difference between the two titles. The English legislature certainly has never recognized that difference, f and Elizabeth acted * The testimony on tliis point is indisputable. See Neal, vol. i., p. 79. f In tlie Act relating to First Fruits and Tenths (2 and 3 Anne, cap. 11), the two Houses addressed Queen Anne in the following terms : — " Inasmuch as your Majesty, taking into your friendly and serious consideration the mean and inefficient maintenance belonging to the Clergy in divers parts of [a.d. 1559.J IVEW ACT OF VNIFOBMITT. 13 with all the supremacy of headship and all the authority of governing rule. From the reign of the second Tudor to the reign of the last Stuart, the sole object of the crown was to retain its supremacy over all the actions of the subject. In the reign of the last of the Tudors, and the first of the Stuarts, the opposition to the regal claim assumed an ecclesiastical, afterwards a civil form. It succeeded in the latter rather than in the former, partly because the majority of mankind care more for their political than they do for their religious rights. During the forty-four years of the reign of Elizabeth the whole power of the crown was exercised, in regard to ecclesiastical matters, with two distinct purposes. The first was to subject the Church to its " governor," the second to suppress all opinions difi'ering from those which had received a special patent of protection. The first wholly succeeded ; the second wholly failed. The Prayer Book and Articles of EKzabeth do not materially differ from those of Edward. The only difference of any importance relates to the vestments, which were ordered to be the same as those in use in the second year of Edward. This change was against a further reformation, and it was confirmed by a third Act of this your kingdom, has been most graciously pleased out of your most religious and tender concern of the Church of England (whereof your Majesty is the 'Supreme Head' on earth)." On May 3rd, 1717, the Lower House of Convocation made a representation to the Upper House relating to Bishop Hoadly's Sermon on " The Nature of the Kingdom and Church of Christ," — a sermon, the doctrine of which was that Christ alone was Head of His Church. The Lower House, on this occasion, condemned Bishop Hoadly's sermon, because its tendency was to "impugn and impeach the regal supre- macy in causes ecclesiastical," in maintenance of which, said the House, " we offer the following particulars :— That whereas His Majesty is, and by the statutes of this realm, is declared to be ' Supreme Head ' of the Church." Palin's " History of the Church of England," cap. 17. 14 ARCHBISHOP PARKEB. [a.p. 1559 Uniformity. The Queen soon let it be known that this Act was not to be a dead letter. She heard of some who did not wear the habits, and who even preached against them, and Parker was at once ordered to enforce the law. Then the exiles who had returned from the Continent, flushed with hope, and ardent in the cause of the gospel, found the paw of the lion's cub as heavy as that of the royal beast himself. The Primates of the English Church have always been selected for their willingness to be the passive instruments of the government. The dignity of their office has, in their judgment, culminated in obedience to the policy and the passions of the Sovereign. Cranmer's chief work had been to celebrate and then to undo royal marriages, to carry out the law of the Six Articles, to publish the Bible, when it pleased the king that his subjects should read it, and to recall that Book when the king found that its circulation was becoming dangerous to his pre- tensions ; Parker's office was to carry into execution the law which made it criminal not to conform to the Prayer Book, and high treason itself to refuse to take the oath of spiritual supremacy. A hot-headed, intole- rant, arbitrary, and vindictive man, he was the model of an Elizabethan archbishop. So zealously did he set about his work, that he shocked the statesmen of his asre,* and at last shocked even Elizabeth herself. Not being an ecclesiastic, there was a limit to the Queen's capacity of creating and afterwards enjoying the sight of human suffering. There was no such limit in Parker. The jackal's appetite was, for once, stronger even than that of the lioness. * Burleigh's Letter to Grindal in Strype's " Grindal," p. 281. —1570.] CAET WEIGHT AND WHIIGIFT. 15 The attempt to enforce the Act of Uniformity excited instant resistance, and the Church was " turned into a great shambles."'"' Those who, soon afterwards, came to be denominated " Puritans " were the first to suffer; but at Oxford one rose whose character, genius, controversial ability and persistency of purpose made the Puritan controversy famous throughout Europe. Thomas Cart- wright, the leader of the Puritans m the reign of Eliza- beth, had preached the doctrines of Puritanism with boldness and vigour for some time before he was silenced. Thousands in the University town and its neigh- bourhood crowded to hear him, for he united in an equal degree the finest qualities of the scholar and the preacher. " The sun," said Beza, " doth not see a more learned man."f The Church historian Fuller does not hesitate to bear similar testimony to his high character and his great abilities.J Whitgift, an almost equally able disputant, attempted to answer him, and failing to convince either the preacher or his hearers, used his power as Yice-Chancellor to dismiss him from the University. Cartwright, indeed, held doctrines more dangerous to the established order than many of the Puritans. He seems to have attached no importance to the controversy respectmg the habits, and had avoided speaking on that subject; but he objected to the whole order of Church government and patronage. He de- nounced the hierarchical system, and demanded that the people should have liberty to choose their own minis- ters. On other subjects he anticipated most of the * Sherlock on " Judgment," p. 1 19. t " Clark's Lives, p. 19. X " Church History," b. x., p. 3. 16 DOCTRINES OF THE PURITANS, [a.d. 1570. views and practices which were afterwards enforced by the Presbyterian party in the time of the Common- wealth. The controversy between Cartwright and Whit- gift was carried on with equal vigour on both sides; but Whitgift had one advantage, — he was in power. It does not come within the scope of this work to review at any length the progress of the Puritan struggle. It was characteristically a struggle against all that was Romish in orio^in in the Protestant church. Every doctrme and ceremony which could not be authenticated by reference to the Scriptures was as- sailed. Diocesan episcopacy was the question of first magnitude; then came the baptismal ceremonies, the churching of women, church discipline, episcopal or- dination, the use of the cross in baptism, of caps and surplices in preaching, of the ring in marriage, and of organs in church music. It may be a matter of won- der at the present time how some of these questions could have been debated with such excitement; but there lay at the bottom of all of them the greater ques- tion of the ultimate supremacy of the Divine or of human law. And, besides, the Puritans knew, or thought they knew, that each and every one of the doc- trines and practices which they condemned was a side portal back to the Church of Rome. Hence they felt that they were fighting both for their God and for their country ; for what greater curse could fall upon England than a revival of Papal rule, and what greater sin could a Christian commit than to add to the inspired Word of God? The greatest struggles took place on two questions — that of episcopacy and that of the habits, and on both — 1585.J BOCIBINE OF EPISCOPACY. 17 these questions the persecuted had the private sympa- thies of the men who persecuted them. The doctrine of Episcopacy had not then become hardened into an absolute theory. The present theory of the Church of England on this subject was held, at that time, only by members of the Roman Catholic Church. Cranmer held Wycliffe's doctrine that bishops Avere not a distinct order. In the " Necessary Erudition " — a book drawn up by a Committee of Bishops and Clergy, and published by Royal command, as an authoritative exposition of the doctrmes of the Church, it is stated that there are only two orders of the Christian ministry, — presbyters and deacons, and that the episcopal character is included in the former. Archbishops and bishops were declared to be of human appointment only.* Whitgift treated the whole question of the form of Church government as a matter of indifference, maintaining, in reply to Cart- wright, who advocated the exclusive authority of the presbyterian system, that Christ had left the external polity of His Church an open question. f It was not until near the close of Elizabeth's reign that the theory of Episcopacy which now prevails in the Established Church was even mooted. It was in a.d. 1588, when all the fathers of the Reformation were dead, that Ban- croft, then chaplain to Whitgift, first maintained that bishops were an order distinct from presbyters, or as he called them priests, and were superior to them by Divine law, and that it was heresy to deny the doctrine. J * Records of the Reformation in Burnet. t Yv^liitgift's "Answer"' (a.d, 1572); and '-'Defence of the Answer," (a.d. 1^4.) t Neal, vol. i., i?. 494. 2 18 VESTMENT CONTBOVEBSY. [a.d. 1570 Whitgift acutely said that he wished this were true, but could not believe it. A theory so flattering to human vanity was not, however, likely to remain unrecognized by those whose position it would most favourably affect ; and accordingly, in another generation. Diocesan Episco- pacy was claimed to be of divine institution, and the only Scriptural form of Church government. The Puritans denied not merely the expediency but the lawfulness of this form. They preached and wrote against it with the same vigour that they preached and wrote agamst the " Popish garments." The difference between the two parties was not so ■^vide then as it after- wards became, but Episcopacy was part of the system estabhshed by law, and no mercy was shown to any man who dared to oppose the smallest part of that system. It was the same with respect to the habits. Neither the bishops nor the clergy were very zealous for them ; they would have given them up as willingly as the}' would have retained them, but they wore and there- fore defended them. Latimer, Ridley, and Cranmer derided them ; Jewel could compare them only to actors' dresses; Grindal tried to get them abolished; Parker gloried in not having worn them at his consecra- tion; Sandys, Bishop of Worcester, said that they '* came from hell ;" the laity hated them, and, says Whitgift, Avould " spit in the faces " of the men who wore them, but they, too, were part of the system estab- lished under the Act of Uniformity, and, although Parker himself disapproved of them, he hunted to banish- ment, to prison, or to death, all who openly did the same. The question of the habits has, since that timSj under- gone a change somevfhat similar to that which has come — 1585.] CHARACTER OF PURITANS. la over the question of Episcopacy. An " ultra-ritualist " could not have been met with either in court or church in Queen Elizabeth's clays, but in the clays of Queen Victoria, Ritualism is a gospel in itself. Public opinion was thus clearly on the side of the Puritans, and yet they failed to do more than to create a party. They did not shake, for one moment, the foundations of the Church, or the smallest of its orna- ments. Not a single concession was made to them. Looking at their controversy, from this distance of time — for distance does not lend enchantment to con- troversy— it would be harsh and ungenerous to say that they did not deserve success. They were men of the noblest intellectual attainments, the greatest scholars of their age, and of the loftiest piety. Like their successors, also, a hundred years later, they must have been aware that for them to be suspended from preaching, was for the best preachers to be silenced, and that at a time when preaching was never so much needed. For, thousands of the pulpits were empty, and in many parts of the country a sermon could not be heard within a distance of twenty miles, or from one six months in the year to another. They must have reckoned on this amongst other deprivations, or did they, knowing the extent ot public sympathy with their views — having repeated evidence that the House of Commons ao-reed with them, and aware that all the foreign reformers were pleading their cause — expect a relaxation of the laws ? There is no evidence to this effect. There is not a sentence in all their writings expressing the assurance of ultimate victory. They do not seem, at any time, to have had a gleam of certain hope. They acted as they ,7 * 20 CIIABACTEE OF PURITANS. [a.d. 1570 did, Avitli a forlorn courage, knowing that there was no issue for them but punishment or death, yet meeting both when they came v,'ith an abounding happiness which was certainly denied to all their persecutors. Probably not one of these, Henry, Elizabeth, Parker, or Whitgift, but would gladly have exchanged his death-bed for that of the commonest Puritan that was dymg in the Gate prison or the Compter. There must be a reason, apart from the character of the governing power, why Puritans within the Church have never succeeded. The reason is probably to be found in the fact that they never essentially differed from the dominant party. Both were almost equally in- tolerant. Parker and Whitgift persecuted the Puritans ; but if Cartwright had been in Whitgift 's place he would have dealt out equal persecution to Baptists and Inde- pendents. They, who had suffered imprisonment on account of their opinions, actually remonstrated with statesmen for releasing Roman Catholics from confine- ment. They held a purer doctrine that their opponents held, but none the less did they require it to be enforced by the " authority of the magistrate." It seems strange that men who devoted so much time to the study of the Scriptui'cs, and whose knowledge of them was as ex- tensive as it was profound, should have missed the one study which, to a Christian, would seem to be the most obvious, the life and character of the Founder of their religion and the nature of His mission. But, habits of thought are more tyrannical than habits of action; and the habit of theological thought was then, as for genera- tions afterwards, essentially dogmatical. The best of the Puritans looked to the Scriptures for rules rather —1585.] GIIABACTEB OF PURITANS. 21 than for principles, for propositions rather than for ex- amples. Christianity was, with them, merely an histori- cal development of Jnclaism ; and , therefore, while they believed in the sacrifice of Christ they equally believed in the laws of Moses. The Sacred Writings were rough materials out of which they might hew their own systems. The stones were taken in equal parts out of the books of the Old Testament and the New, the latter being dug for doctrine and the former for precept. Amongst all the works of the early Puritans, there is not one on the character or life of Christ, nor one which gives any indication that they had even an imagination of the wholly spiritual nature of His kingdom. What- ever that kingdom might be in the place Heaven, on the place Earth it was to be fenced and extended by pains and penalties, threatenings, and slaughter. They denied the supremacy of the civil magistrate in religion, but it was only in order to assert their own supremacy. They pleaded with tears for liberty of conscience, and would have denied it io the first "Anabaptist" whom they met. It was no wonder that they did not gain their end, and no wonder that they scarcely hoped to gain it. It would seem that the English race required to be transplanted before it could bear a more perfect flower and fruit than any of which Puritanism only was capable. That service was effected by Elizabeth. For, there were men who were esteemed guilty of a greater crime than Puritanism. A Presbyterian church had been formed at Wandsworth in 1572, and it had the honour of beino; the first silenced " conventicle." Wandsworth was then a quieter and a pleasanter place than it is now, and those who went there may have gone 22 I2iDEPENDENT8 AND BAPTISTS, [a.d. 1570 for rural retirement as well as for personal safety ; but Parker's hounds of law had tracked them and they were dispersed. No greater punishment, at that time, awaited them, for they were not " Anabaptists," or " Bro^vnists." Dutch Anabaptists* had been caught and burned in Henry the Eighth's time, and had perished in the same Avay under Elizabeth, but the English Baptists and Independents had not hitherto attracted much public notice. It has been asserted that a Baptist Church ex- isted in England in a.d. 1417. f There were certainly Baptist "Churches" in England as early as the year 1589,+ and there could scarcely have been several or- ganized communities without the corresponding opmions having been held by individuals, and some Churches established for years pre"sdous to this date. With respect to the Independents, certain " Congregations " are spoken of by Foxe,§ as established in London in A.D. 1555, and it is possible that they were Independent, but more probable that they were Puritan. It is now clearly established that an Independent Church, of which Richard Fitz was pastor, existed in a.d. 15G8.|| In A.D. 1580, Sir Walter Raleigh spoke of the Brownists as existing by "thousands." In a.d. 1583, Brownists and Anabaptists are freely classed together.^ Which * The Dutch Anabaptists of this period had little iu common with English Baptists, excepting an objection to infant baptism. These and the Miinster Baptists are no more to be confounded with English Baptists, than are Greek with English or Armenian Episcopalians. It served an obvious purpose, however, in Elizabeth's reign, to do so. t Eobinson's " Claude," vol. ii., p. 54. X Dr. Somers' Reply to Barrowe, (quoted in Ivimey's History, vol. i., p. 10i>. § Vol. iii., p. 114. li " Congregational Martyrs."' Art., Richard Fitz, 2>nss. T Strype's "Annals," iii., p. 2G4. —1585.] ROBERT BROWNE. 23 really appeared first in point of time can be only a matter of conjecture. But although Richard Fitz was the first pastor of the first Independent Church in England, to Robert Browne belongs the honour of founding the denomination. This man's character has been assailed with almost equal virulence by Church and Nonconformist writers ; but, although he is proved to have been naturally of a passionate, dogmatic, and weak nature, no charge against his piety has been successfully established.* His moral courage and his willingness to bear suffering in testimony of his sincerity, were amply shown by his life. If, like Cartwright, he eventually returned to the Church, he did what ought not to excite surprise. The wonder is, not that human nature was so weak in him, but that it was so strong in others. With one exception Browne held all the views which distinguish modern Independents. It Avas many years before this body adopted the principles of religious freedom in their widest application. Browne himself, who was extravagant in many of his views, believed that the power of the civil magistrates ought to be exercised in favour of a Scriptural rehgion. Barrowe and Greenwood, next to Penry, the noblest martyrs of Independency, fully acknowledged, together, the supre- macy of the crown in Ecclesiastical matters. Barrowe's opinion separately expressed, was that the magistrates' sword only wanted " an eye to guide it."t Greenwood maintained that " both the magistrates ought to compel * The best estimate of the character of Browne, is to be found iti Fletcher's " History of Independency." Vol. ii., cap. 3. t " Plain Refutation," p. Ul. 24 DOCTEINJES OF [a.d. 1591.] the infidels to hear the doctrine of the Church, and also, vnth. the approbation of the Church, to send forth men with gifts and graces to instruct the infidels, being as yet no ministers or ofl5.cers unto them." It is the singular and distinguished honour of the Baptists to have repudiated, from their earliest history, all coercive power over the consciences and the actions of men mth reference to religion. No sentence is to be found in all their writings inconsistent with those principles of Christian liberty and willinghood which are now equally dear to all the free Congregational Churches of England. They were the proto-evangelists of the voluntary principle.* On Independents and Baptists the hand of the Jefireys of the Episcopal bench. Archbishop Whitgift, feU with double vengeance. He choked the prisons with them, and from prison hailed their most eminent leaders to the scaffold. None of these can be said to have committed a very grave off'ence. The greatest crime of which they were guilty was that of denying the supremacy of the Crown as it was then exercised. In the eyes of Churchmen, however, the IndejDendents and Baptists were heretics bej^ond any of their age. The one party denied the Scriptural warrant, and even the priestly efficacy of Infant Baptism. The doctrine of these men cut at the roots of Priestism, and was fatal to the very idea of a National Church. For, how could there be a National Church, if only " believers " were to be baptized ; and if priests did not, by the * The Author is not connected with the Baptist denomination ; and has therefore, perhaps, greater pleasure in bearing this testimony to imdoixbted liistorical fact. [A.D. 1591.] INDEPENDENTS AND BAPTISTS. 25 magic of baptism, make all infants Christians, was not their principal function gone? The frantic opposition of the clergy to these revolutionists can be easily un- derstood. Even the best of the Puritans could not endure them, and employed their pens to revile both their characters and their opinions. With scarcely less violence were the " Brownists " attacked. The charac- teristic creed of the Baptists was adult believers' baptism. They were as thorough Independents as were the Brownists, but Independency was not the most pro- minent feature of their belief. Browne, however, had given such conspicuousness to this distinctive doctrine that those who accepted it were publicly marked off, both from Puritans and from Episcopalians. It was, as even then taught, a doctrine which was fatal to an order as distmct from an office in the Christian ministry. The Puritan system was one of a mixed ecclesiastical oligarchy, in which the clergy held life-peerages, and were the superiors in rank, as well as in work, to the people. The Independents denied the scripturalness of any such distinction. A man, with them, was a minister no longer than he had the care of a separate congregation. The sole authority for his office was his spiritual fitness and the consent of the people to whom he ministered. Other ministers and churches had nothing to do either with him or with them, but they gladly, and from the first, welcomed the co-operation and approved of similar organizations in their choice and work. They differed therefore, as much or more from the Puritan clergy as the Puritan clergy differed from the Episcopalians, and the Puritans took pains to let it be known that they had as little sympathy with the " schism " of the 26 BARROWE, GREENWOOD, [a.d. 159LJ Brownists as they had with the " heresy " of the Ana- baptists. The doctrines of these men were set forth mth great clearness in their defences before the ecclesiastical authorities as well as in their works. Their mode of stating them, if sometimes offensive,* was generally, from its extreme simplicity, exceedingly winning. Jeered at and browbeaten in Com'ts of High Commission and Star Chamber by archbishops and bishops, they defended themselves with a humility which became as well as adorned their belief. " And what office," inquired Fanshawe, of Penry, "had you in your Church, which met in woods and I know not where ?" " I have no office," replied Penry, "in that poor congregation; and as for our meeting in woods, or anywhere else, we have the ex- amples of our Sa^'iour Jesus Christ, and of His Church and servants in all ages, for our warrant. It is against our mil that we go into woods or secret places ; as we are not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, so our desire is to profess the same openly ; we are ready before men and angels to show and justify our meetings, and our behaviour in them, desiring earnestly that we may have peace and quietness to serve our God, even before all men, that the}-" may be witness of our upright walking towards God and all the world, especially towards our prince and country. We know that meeting in woods, in caves and mountains, is a part of the Cross and base- ness of the Gospel, whereat it is easy for the natural man to stumble, but we are partly partakers of this * Barrowe, when before the Commission, called Whitgift a "beast" and a " monster," to his face. It was true ; but the words, probably, cost him his life. [a.d. 1591.] AND FEKBY. 2T mean estate for the Lord's sacred verity ; and the ques- tion should not be so much Avhere we meet, as what we do m our meeting ? "* These were the men whom the civil and ecclesiastical authorities of the latter part of Queen Elizabeth's reign judged to be not fit to live. The laity, generally, cared little for them, and the Queen suffered herself to listen to the promptings of her clerical advisers. t They were therefore imprisoned for months and years in the foulest gaols — fouler even than those which John Howard, two centuries later, exposed to the shame and indigna- tion of the world — beaten with cudgels, some left to die of fever and sores, while others were committed to the gallows. Barrowe, Greenwood, and l*enry, the three great witnesses for Independency, met the latter fate. They were all just and holy men, but the character of Penry was of an order which only times of the fiercest persecution apparently can produce ; for, only at such times are certain characters tested to their utmost. Penry seems to have stood that test imtil his soul was purified from all the dross of human nature. He was a man of a Johamiine disposition, yet of a most indomitable energy ; a scholar, but also an evangelist ; of as intense reflective faculty as a mystic, yet as active as a pioneer ; overflowing with domestic affections, but absorbed with * " E.xaiiiiiiatioii of Barrowe, Greemvood, ami Penry," p. C. 4. t " The Queen hearkened to the suggestions of the clergy, who repre- sented the Puritans as seditious persons who rebelled against the laws, and by their disobedience shook the foundation of the Government. There is scarcely a Christian state where the prevailing sect will suffer the least division or the lea.st swervin.^; from the established opinion ; no, not even in private. Shall I venture to say, it is the dcnjn chiefly who support this strange principle of non-toleration, so little agreeable to Christian charity V — "Eapin," vol. ii., p. 141. 28 PENHY. [a.d. 1585.] the love of the souls of his countrymen, and serving his Divme Master, as though that Master had no other ser- vant to do His work. He was the Christian apostle of "Wales, a country then, although four bishops had charge of it, and " livings " abounded, in a state of worse than heathen barbarism, for the clergy set an example of the grossest vices and of the foulest living.* Better that Penry should be hanged and the people left to perish in their ignorance, than that their self-indulgent lives should be exposed and disturbed, — a feeling, un- happily, not confined to that age or country. Penry was hanged, and Whitgift was the first to put his sig- nature to the warrant for his execution. The Independents and the Baptists took up the weapons against the Established Church as the Puritans were dropping them. The vestment controversy had worn itself out. The old leaders of it were dead or had conformed. What law failed to do with many others, the ])ower of a master intellect had accomplished. Jewel had, in the early part of this reign, in an " Apology " for the Church of England, built a barrier of reason and Scripture against the pretensions of the Church of Rome ; Hooker now undertook a similar work in behalf of the prmciples of an Established Protestant Episcopalian relifi-ion. Most churches have been fortunate enough to possess one man of commanding intellectual ability to do its needed intellectual work, but no Church has been more fortunate in this respect than the Church of England. Jewel, Hooker, Burnet, and Pearson have probably done more to hold that Church together than * Kees' *' History of Nonconfonnity in Wales." Int. cliap. [a.d. 1585.] HOOKER'S POLITY. 29 all its Acts of Uniformity. Hooker was, to the com- munion to which he belonged, what Bellarmine was to the Papacy, and what Owen, in a subsequent age, became to the Independents. Like Bellarmine, however, he required his first principles to be granted. That done, and his work is a masterpiece of reason ; as it is, it must be acknowledged to be, in compass of thought and dignity of style, one of the greatest of all the works in Christian literature. In an age when nearly all learning and culture were on the side of the Puritans, Independents, and Baptists; when most of the ministers of the Estab- lished Church "Avere the basest of the people," and had been taken from the lowest occupations,* Hooker must have seemed an ecclesiastical Ajax, and it is no slight testimony to his greatness to say, that time has not diminished his proportions. It is unfortunate for Hooker's reputation, that in the controversy which occasioned the writing of the " Polity," he should have so closely imitated his archdiocesan Whitgift, in his controversy with Cart- wright. Not being able to silence Cartwright by argu- ment, Whitgift had silenced him by authority. Travers was as learned a man as Hooker, and as great a scholar. He was predecessor to Hooker in point of time, as a Temple lecturer, although inferior to him m position. It might be an unseemly thing, and it was illegal, for the same pulpit to be used in the morning by Hooker to preach Conformity, and in the evening by Travers to preach Puritanism, and it was unseemly that they * " Sui^plication of the Puritans to Parliament." Neal, vol. i., p. 483 : and " SiuTey of the State of Religion." lb., pp. 477-78. 30 HOOKER'S POLITY. [a.d. 1585.] should attack each other. But wars of oral disputation Avere at that time as common as pamphlet wars have since become. They were arranged beforehand -with all the formality of a tournament. Luther had engaged in one such war ; Bucer in another. Tliey were still more common a century later, when Poedobaptism and anti-Peedobaptism divided the Nonconformist body, and pubHc disputes were invited on both sides. But Hooker became annoyed. Travers was a man of quicker if not profounder intellect than he, readier at attack and more adroit in fence. Hooker moved slowly. His thought might be, as it was, majestic in its march and grand in its sweep, but it was deficient in celerity of action. He complained to the authorities, and Travers was silenced and ejected, but afterwards Hooker seems to have become ashamed of the course which he then took. His "Polity" occupied the whole of his sub- sequent life, and those who, since then, have maintained the power and authority of the Church to command human obedience, and to enforce penalties for the non- observance of her laws, have always drawn the best of their arguments from the great armoury of the " Eccle- siastical Polity." The foundations, rites, and ceremonies of the Church bemg settled against Roman Catholics on the one hand, and Puritans, Independents, and Baptists on the other, and the press and pulpit closed against any rephes, an attempt was next made definitely to settle her parti- cular system of theological doctrine. Whether, as has been supposed, the language of the Articles was so chosen as purposely to leave them open to different interpretations, is, and always will be, a matter of dis- [a.d. 1595.] LAMBETR ARTICLES. , 31 pute. Like the Catechism, they are of Lutheran origin,* and are therefore not essentially Calvinistic. As far as they go they will bear a Calvinistic interpretation better than they will bear any other ; but where Calvin's system, as on the doctrines of Predestination, the Atonement, and Inspiration, is particularly explicit, the Articles are particularly vague. The presumption is that, like every thing else connected mth the new Establishment, they were intended to be a compromise. But theological compromises, however they might have suited Cranmer, did not suit Whitgift. A preacher of the University of Cambridge, sympathizmg with the doctrines of the lately- risen Arminius, had ridiculed Calvin's theory of Predes- tination and Perseverance. Whitgift, to settle the contro- versy, issued the nine propositions known as the " Lambeth Articles," in which the doctrine of Predestination is stated with a naked repulsiveness of language only since surpassed by Toplady. " God," said Whitgift, " has, of his own good will and pleasure, from all eternity, reprobated some men to death ; men caimot be saved if they will, and a j^erson predestinated to life, whatever his sins and relapses, shall inherit that life." Whitgift, however, was not supreme head of the English Church, and he had no sooner published his dogmatic decisions as to the coun- sels of the Almighty from eternity, and which he de- clared to be " already established by the laws of the land," than Elizabeth commanded them to be recalled. The Queen might, or might not, have been a " hyper- Calvinist." She was, on the whole, likely to be one. Her government was based upon the Calvinistic prin- * This is conclusively sliown in Archbishop Lawrence's " Bampton Lec- tures." 32 CALVINISTIC CONTROVERSY. [a.d. 1595.] ciple of politics. She predestinated sound Churchmen, whatever might be their personal profligacy, to a heaven of place and profit, and Puritans and Anabap- tists, whatever might be their personal piety, to human hells. She might naturally, therefore, be supposed to approve of Whitgift's Articles, but they raised painful and troublesome questions. Perhaps they made her ask herself whether she was a "justified person," having, as such, " full assurance and certainty " of the remission of her sins, and, doubting it, may have decided that a system which doomed herself to a worse punishment than she had been able to inflict on all the heretics m her kingdom — ^from Wiel-macker and Ter Voort, the unhappy Anabaptists whom she had burned at the stake, to Penry, the last Bro^vnist Avhom she had hanged — however true it might be, should not be declared to be the doctrine of the Church of which she herself was the supreme head. The controversy between Calvinists and Arminians, although never entirely ceasing, and never likely now to cease, did not again attract prominent notice until the Arminian Laud succeeded the Calvinistic Whitgift, when an Irish Episcopalian Synod framed articles in exact accordance with Whitgift's, a House of Commons decided in favour of Calvinism, and the question was so debated at solemn pubhc conferences that no one, Ave are informed, left them as Arminians, who had not gone thither in the same opinion,* which is not at all un- likely. But from Whitgift's time the Puritans were distinguished by their rigid creed as well as their rigid * Neal, vol. ii., p. 170. [A.D. 1596.] BANHSHMENT OF PURITANS. 33 life, and the Archbishop, who had spent his most vigorous years in rooting out that party, must have found, just before he died, that in his last attempt at enforcing uniformity, he had given greater unity to his own adversaries. Calvinistic Puritans afterwards brouo-ht to the block an archbishop whose Arminianism was, in their eyes, one of his greatest sins, and Whitgift was one of their authorities. It was just previous to this controversy that Eliza- beth took the step to which reference has already been made. She cleared the gaols, and, by substituting banishment in place of imprisonment for non-attendance at Church, drove both Brownists and Anabaptists from her kingdom. No event has had a greater influence on the human government of the world and the success of the Christian religion than the transplantation of the English race which then commenced. What Elizabeth intended to do, and no doubt thought she had done, was to secure her dominions, for all time to come, from being troubled by Separatists. But absolutism in a State is as short-sighted as intolerance in a Church, and in the Tudor Queen absolutism and intolerance were combined. What, therefore, she did do was to plant nurseries of freedom, destined, in a future period, to be fatal to the very principles of political and ecclesiastical government whose permanency she had thought to secure. Amongst those who went forth to find new homes in the free cities of the Continent were Francis Johnson and Henry Ainsworth, who, in a.d. 1596, published " A Confession of Faith of certain English people living in the Low Countries, exiled." The Church at Amster- 34 VIEWS OF THE INDEFENDENTS. [a.d. 1596.] dam, of whicli these men were joint pastors, was apparently the first English Independent Church founded on the Continent ; and was the first which issued a public confession of its faith. This document, which consists of forty-five articles, contains an elaborate ex- planation of the views of the English Independents at that period. It commences with a protest against the constitution and worship of the Established Church, and the means by which that Church was upheld. It then goes on to expound the nature and. constitution of a Christian Church, the exposition being supported by numerous Scripture proofs. The articles on this subject differ materially, on only two points, from the principles and practices of most modern Congregationalists. All infants, it is stated, should be baptized or received into the Church, " that are of the seed of the faithful by one of the parents, or under their education and govern- ment."* On this subject great difference of opinion afterwards arose, but the first Independents held the creed of the Presbyterians, both of that and of the present age. They also adhered to the doctrine that it was the official duty of princes and magistrates to " sup- press and root out, by their authority, all false ministries, voluntary religions, and counterfeit Avorship of God. Yea, to enforce all their subjects, Avhether ecclesiastical or civil, to do their duties to God and men."f Wor- shipping in a back lane m Amsterdam, and having had experience beyond most men of what was meant by the " suppressing " and " rooting out " of religious opmions, * Articles xxxv. and xxxvii. Hanbury's " Hist. Memo." Vol. i., pp. 96, 97. + Art. xxxiv., lb. [a.d. 1601.] JAMES THE FIRST. 35 this Church was yet as intolerant as that which it so fiercely assailed. If Ainsworth and Johnson had been entrusted -with power they would, in all probability, have been the Whitgifts and Bancrofts of Independency. Happily, they were not the persecutors but the per- secuted, and their reputations are stamed by their doctrines, but not by blood. What influence it was which, for a time, stayed the more active persecution of the Nonconformists towards the end of the reign of Elizabeth can only be conjectured ; but there is evidence that as the Queen grew older her disposition became more tender. She had endured much pain and remorse, and had not the old hard courage to inflict pain on others. With Parker and Whitgift to carry out her behests and find new victims to the law, she had left Fox and Coverdale to linger out their lives in misery and die in poverty. She had silenced the best preachers of Christian truth ; and she had filled all the prisons in England -with the men of most eminent piety and learning. Then, until her death, there was a limited toleration. There was reason to expect that, when James came to the throne, this toleration would be continued, or perhaps extended, but none as yet knew the character of Elizabeth's successor. James the First has to be considered, in these pages, only as the head of the Established Church. That Church had already enjoyed the honour of having the grossest of voluptuaries for its supreme head; it was now to enjoy the honour of having the greatest liar and one of the greatest drunkards of his age in the same position. The prelates accepted him with devout grati- tude. The more his character became revealed to them 3* 86 PURITAN DEMANDS OF JAMES, [a.d. 1602.] the greater was their satisfaction. When he ahnost swore at the Puritans, Whits^ift declared that his Majesty spake by the especial assistance of God's spirit, and Bancroft, that he was melted with joy, for that since Christ's time such a King had not been. When he drivelled they held up their hands in amaze at his msdom. The two parties fully understood each other. James had quite sufficient cunning to detect the am- bitious designs of the prelates, and the prelates had sufficient learning, and sufficient knowledge of the theory of morals, to know that they were dealing with a dissembler and a fool. But it served their pur^ poses to play into each other's hands. The king could put down Puritanism in the Church and " harry " all Brownists and Anabaptists out of the land, and the bishops, in their turn, could exalt the supremacy of the monarch. The Puritans of James's reign were a different order of men from those of Elizabeth's. They were more numerous, but they were more moderate, and very few of them went as far as Cartwright had gone. The grievances complained of in the " Millenary " petition from the Hampton Court Conference, included, certainl}^, the cap and surplice, and the ring in marriage, but they did not touch on the regal supremacy or on episcopacy. They objected to portions of the baptismal service and to confirmation ; they wished the Lord's-day to be kept more holy; they asked for a more godly ministry and for a restoration of Church discipline ; for pluralities to be abolished, and lastly, that the Calvinistic Articles of Whitmft mio-ht be declared to be the creed of the Church of England, and that uniformity of doctrine [a.d. 1604.] THE CANONS. 37 might be prescribed. The King answered them at the Conference with denial and abuse. Church writers, in deaUng with this subject, have felt compelled to employ language of shame and indignation at the conduct of the King and the bishops at this period which a Non- conformist would almost hesitate to use * It is obvious from the whole proceedings, that the Conference was summoned for a purpose opposed to its ostensible aim. It was not intended to bring the two parties in the Church in harmony, but to give occasion for casting out one of them. It led, however, to results which none probably had anticipated. Reynolds, the Puritan, had suggested a new translation of the Bible, by His Majesty's special sanction and authorit}^ The vanity of the King was touched, and the great work was executed. If the knowledge of the Gospel was extended, and prac- tical religion was strengthened by this act, the next step had a contrary tendency and effect. In the year after the Hampton Court Conference, Convocation met to frame a new set of Canons. These laws — laws so far as the clergy are concerned — still deface the constitution and character of the English Episcopalian Church. Most of them are obsolete, for they have been virtually repealed by the Legislature, and only those which can be brought to bear against Dissenters are observed by the clergy, who have sworn to obey them all. They are now little else than monuments of a past age of intolerance, and of the combined immobility and timidity -of the ecclesiastical establishments of the present day. Old bloodhounds of the Church, with their teeth drawn * Marsden's " Early Puritans," chap. x. Hallam's " Const. Hist." i., 404. 38 LAST EXECUTIONS. [a.d. 1612. \ and the force exhausted, they are gazed at with as much contempt as they once excited fear. The exiles also addressed a humble supplication to the King, in which, in admirably chosen words, they stated their faith and asked for toleration. One article of this statement relates to the maintenance of the Christian ministry, and is decisive as to the opinions of the earliest Independents in favour of the voluntar}^ support of religious worship. They declare their doc- trine to be, " That the due maintenance of Christian ministry should be of the free and voluntary contribu- tions of the Church; that, according to Christ's ordi- nance, they which preach the Gospel may live of the Gospel, and not by Popish lordships and livings or Jewish tithes and offerings." * This doctrine, as will be seen, was subsequently re-affirmed, while unlimited religious freedom Avas still unrecognized. In the course of their history during the next hundred years this position of the Independents was reversed. They allowed the lawfulness of tithes, and of a compulsory support of the Christian religion, but claimed a more perfect liberty of worship. The King did not consider this petition worth his notice. Once more, therefore, uniformity was rigidly exacted, and once more, but for the last time, the fires of Smithfield were lighted. Bartholomew Legget, who had been convicted of Arianism, was the last to suffer in this place, and a month later, in May 1612, Edward Wightman met the same death at Lichfield. He had been convicted of a multitude of mysterious heresies, the: * Fletcher, vol. ii., p. 23a. [a.b. 1612.] THE AMSTERDAM CRUBCR. 39 23rincipal of which were Anabaptism and Arianism. After this, imprisonment was substituted for death, and books instead of bodies were burned. The change marks one step towards increased religious liberty, Puritans were now tolerated, but to Brownists and Ana- baptists a severer measure was dealt out. Archbishop Bancroft was to James what Parker had been to Ehza- beth, and those Separatists who could not be im- prisoned were compelled to banishment. " Things in a manner recovered to the first settlement under Elizabeth."* It was under this new reign of terror that a second exodus took place to Holland from inhabitants princi- pally of London and Lincolnshire. Amongst them and their followers were some whose names are written in many histories, — John Eobmson, the scholar and pastor,* whose figure so often adorns the annals of Independency, and stands so prominent in the history of the Pilgrim Fathers, William Brewster, the future governor of the new colony, and John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, the most prominent of the Baptists of this period. A historian of the Free Churches of England, in referring to some of these names, approaches questions Avhich have afibrded matter of controversial debate between the writers of the Inde- pendent and the writers of the Baptist denominations. When Smyth joined the Church at Amsterdam, it was already torn with dissension, and the course which he took added to its divided state. He declared him- self to be a Baptist, and because the Church allowed * Collier, vol ii,, p. 687. 40 CREED OF THE EARLY BAPTISTS, [a.d. 1612.] infant baptism denounced it as participating in spiritual adultery. The Independents, in their turn, denounced Smyth and his party as " heretics," and excommunicated them. * This act has been reprobated in strong language, but it is impossible to say how it could have been avoided. If the whole controversy on both sides is read, most persons will come to the conclusion that the blame of this first and fatal division of the Independent body into Psedobaptists, and Antipa3dobaptists, ought to be equally divided amongst both parties. If one more than another should be condemned, it is Smyth, whose violent language alone would have justified the violent measure by which he was expelled. Then followed the usual pamphlet war, and the two parties of exiles employed their pens to attack each other, with more or less of sound argument, but with unlimited abuse. Smyth and Hehvys at once formed a Baptist Church, Smyth baptizing himself in order to commence it.-j* The members of this Church, forty- two in number, drew up a confession of their faith, which is remarkable for two points — its Anti- Calvinism, and its Anti- State Churchism. The former is exhibited in treating of Original Sin, Predestination, and Free Will, on which subjects the Arminian view was taken; the latter in the declaration that the ofiice of the magistracy is not ordained in the * Francis Johnson writes: — '•About tliirteen years since, this Cliurcli, through i^ersecution in England, was driven to come into these countries. Awhile after they were come hither, clivers of them fell into the heresies of the Anabaptists, Avhich are too common in these countries ; and so persist- ing, were excommunicated by the rest." Hanbury, vol. i., p, 110. t Whether Smyth did or did not baptize himself has been the subject of much controversy. The most satisfactory statement of the case is to be found in Dr. Evans's "Early English Ba]jtists," vol. i., pp. 203 — 218. [a.d. 1612.] OFFICE OF ^RE 3IAG1STBATF. 41 Church. Smyth and his followers held, also, some doc- trines nearly approachmg to those afterwards affirmed by the Society of Friends. " Christ," they said, " hath called his servants to their own 'unarmed and un- weaponed life.' " In one respect they went beyond this ; they denied the right of a Christian to assume the office of the magistracy in any rank. On the subject of the rela- tion of the magistrate to the Church, as on other subjects, Smyth himself afterwards published a fuller confession, in which he writes, " That the magistrate, by virtue of his office, is not to meddle with religion or matters of conscience, nor to compel men to this or that form of rehgion or doctruie, but to leave the Christian reli- gion to the free conscience of every one, and to meddle only with political matters, namely, mjustice and wrong of one against another, such as murder, adultery, theft, and the like; because Christ alone is the Kino- and lawgiver of the Church and of the conscience."* The contrast between this doctrine, where the line, beyond which the magistrate, as such, may not step, is drawn as dearly as it is by all the Free Congregational Churches of the present day, and the doctrine of Johnson and Amsworth is decisive as to the more advanced opinions ■on this subject of the Early Baptists.f Helwys returned * Evans, vol. i., p. 270. Art. xxxvi. t In writing this, I have not overlooked tlie Humble Supplication for 'Toleration, attributed to Jacob, published on behalf of the Independents in 1609 ; nor the Pamphlet entitled " Keligion's Peace ; or a Plea for Liberty of Conscience," by Leonard Busher, a Baptist, and published in 1614. Mr. Hanbury ridicules Dr. Price for having, in his History of Non- conformity (vol. i., pp. 522-23), taken credit to the Baptists for being the first, as shown in Busher's Pamphlet, to bring forth to public view, the principles of religious liberty, and refers to the " Humble Supplication," published five years before, as proof that the Independents were the first 42 JOHN ROBfNSON. [a.d. 1612.] to Endand about 1612, and formed in London the first General or Anti-Calvinistic Baptist Church. All Bap- tists at that period apparently held the sentiments of Smyth and Helwys on the subjects which divide the Calvinistic and Arminian sections of the Christian world. John Robinson had joined the Church at Amsterdam, but soon afterwards left it to found in Leyden a new Independent Church, the mother Church of the Pilgrim Fathers of New England. No name in the history of Independency shines with greater lustre that his. To him the Churches of that communion were in- debted, until the time of Owen, for the ablest vindi- cation of their principles, both as against the Church of England on the one hand, and Baptists on the other. He was a man of profound scholarship, high culture, and of a largeness of heart which was, at that time, less common amongst the Separatists than many other qualities. As a theological disputant he was quick and vigorous. None of the Separatists lacked moral courage, but Robinson had a higher courage than most, if not any, of his brethren. The most conspicuous, fault of the Separatists was excessive dogmatism. It was impossible for any of them to err ; impossible for any who differed from them to hold the truth. They to do this ; but Mr. Hanbury does not distinguisli between even toleration and liberty, much less between toleration and equality. The " Humble Supplication" acknowledges the power of the Sovereign in " overseeiug, ruling, and censuring particular Churches," and requests that subordinate civil officers may be appointed to demand and receive of each Church, accounts of their proceedings. This is not asking for, or dreaming of religious liberty, and only for toleration in a most limited and degraded sense. The doctrine of " Religion's Peace," un the other hand, is as une- quivocal as is that of Smyth. Ta^d. 1612.] JOHN BOBmSOm 4S were all infallible in their judgments, and none knew the whole counsel of God but they. When this failing did not become a vice, as it sometimes did, it was not without its service. It was the almost inevitable result of the circumstances in which the Separatists were placed. They were in constant conflict with a supreme authority, which was not exercised in favour of what they judged to be the truth. They were pressed down, limited and restrained by it on all sides. Against it they could oppose only their faith and confidence in their oavii convictions. If they had not been doubly sure that they, and they alone, held the truth, they could never have withstood the power which was arrayed agamst them. If that faith and confidence often, or, in- deed, generally, degenerated to dogmatism, was it not natural that it should do so ? To doubt was, with them, to be lost ; to entertain a single suspicion that, after all they might be wrong, would have paralysed them in con- flict with such foes as the ecclesiastical law-makers and laws of the Tudors and the Stuarts. Just when it might be necessary for them to strike a blow on behalf of their principles or their rights they would have been dropping their weapons, or striking with a faltering purpose and a weakened arm. Dogmatism was their early shield of faith hammered into what it had become by the blows of opponents. There was little of art in their contro- versies. They did not fight with the measured pace and nice rules of courtier duellists, but Agag "was hewed in pieces," and the Christian Hector was dragged round the applauding field by the Christian Achilles who had slain him. Robinson was a man of finer mould and higher temper. 44! JOHN ROBINSON. [a.d. 1G12.] He could strike with equal swiftness, and general^ with surer accuracy than most of his rivals ; but his courage resembled less that of a common soldier than did most men's. He is unworthy of himself in his controversy with the Baptists,* but who has been worthy of himself in that controversy ? In most of his controversial, and in all his ethical writings, there is an equal breadth and purpose. He could assail, the Church of England without reviling her in language coarse enough — save the gentle Abbott — for even a prelate of the Stuart dynasty. He could treat of morality and philosophy with a learning, a wisdom, and a calmness second only to Bacon's. His faith was perhaps more assured than that of some who used more assertion, but it was further removed from dogma- tism. He could write — a great thing in those days to do — " If in anything we err, advise us brotherly. Err we may, alas ! too easily, but heretics, by the grace of God, we will not be." And when he bade the Pilgrim Fathers God speed, his memorable last words were — " I charge you, before God and His blessed Angels, that you follow me no further than you have seen me follow the Lord Jesus Christ. If God reveal anything to you by any other instrument of His, be as ready to receive it as you were to receive any truth by my ministry, for I am verily persuaded the Lord hath more truth yet to break forth out of His holy word. For my part, I can- not sufficiently bewail the condition of those reformed Churches which are come to a period in religion and will o-o, at present, no further than the instruments of their reformation. The Lutherans cannot be drawn to go * He denounced all Anabaptists as " Vile lieretics and scliismatics " [a.d. 1616.] THE SABBATH QUESTION. 45 beyond what Luther saw. Whatever part of His ^vill our God has revealed to Calvin, they will rather die than embrace it ; and the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This is a misery much to be lamented." No man, probably, but Eobinson could have given expression to thoughts such as these, for no other man possessed his spirit. He was honoured to be the Pastor of the Pilgrim Fathers, and from his Church went forth those also who founded anew in England the Indepen- dent denomination. From John Robinson's congregation at Leyden came Henry Jacob, to form in London in A.D. 1616 what, at one time, was termed the first Inde- pendent Church. Probably it was the only Church at that period, those that went before having been rooted out by James and his prelates. We now see two, but only two, Free Churches cer- tainly established and existing in England in the latter part of the reign of James the First. And at this period we see two questions rising into prominence, the dis- cussion of which served, in no small degree, to aid in the development of a freer thought, and a more devout reli- gious life. The first of these questions was the history and origin of tithes. Selden had written his book, proving the purely human authority for this imposition, which so exasperated the prelates, that the author was compelled to apologize for its publication. Yet his work is now the highest authority on its subject, and its prin- cipal doctrine has been accepted by the greatest jurists and statesmen of England. In the same year another question w^as forced before the people. One of the petitions of the Puritans had been for abetter observance 46 THE SABBATH QUESTION. [a.d. 1G16.] of the Sabbath. This question had begun to excite attention in Elizabeth's reign by the pubHcation of Dr. Bound's work on the obligations of the Sabbath-day. Bound was inclined to Jewish Sabbatarianism, but so were the Puritans, and his work had, for that age, an extraordinary circulation. There was certamly a ne- cessity for the moral obligations of the Christian day of rest bemg explained and enforced. Sunday, in England under Elizabeth, was what Sunday is in France under Napoleon the Third. It was the gala day of the week, a day for sport and pleasure, dancing and theatrical entertainments, riot and debauchery. Bound's work was exercising great influence, but it was an influence which tended in favour of Puritan doctrine and life. This was enough for Whitgift, and it was at once prohibited. The Archbishop declared that the doctrine of the Sab- bath did not agree with that of the Church ; every copy of the book was called in, and the author was ordered not to reprint it. Bound's work holds the same position in this controversy that Hooker's holds in the controversy relating to Church Establishments. It gave an impetus to what have been denominated Sabbatarian views, which has never ceased, and it was the text book of the Puritans in the next and succeeding reigns. The author's views, as was likely to be the case — for one extreme causes another — would, by most persons, now be considered somewhat too Judaical, and the contrast between them and those set forth in the most recent work on this subject* is a fair measure of the gap which lies between the style of Puritan thought in the sixteenth *Dr. Hessey's "Bampton Lectures.'* IA.D. 1624.] CHARLES THE FIRST. 47 .and seventeenth centuries and the style of religious thought in the nineteenth century. Bound's book was reprinted in a.d. 1606, and it largely influenced the Puritanical observance of the Sunday. It appears to have been some time before James saw this, but when he saw it he determined to counteract it. The " Book of Sports " was issued, and the peojDle were informed by Toyal authority that Sunday was not to be a day mainly of religious rest and worship, but of games and revels. What there was, however, of religious sentiment and feeling in the nation, revolted at the order to publish, from the pulpits of England, this indulgence, and even Whitgift's successor. Archbishop Abbott, himself forbade it. The Puritans now, for the first time, defeated the King, and, for the first time, royal authority was set at nought. Elizabeth would have kno^vn how to deal Avith such subjects. She would have "unfrocked" Abbott, dispossessed the clergy of their benefices, and tried the whole of them before the Star Chamber, but James was cowed. In conquering him the Puritans first became conscious of their real strength and power, and learned that resistance to a monarch might, after all, be suc- cessful. The events of no period of English history have been more fully described than those of the reign of Charles the Eirst and the Commonwealth. Charles prepared the way for his OAvn defeat and execution by his lofty pretensions and his habitual perjury. It has been said that lying is the jDeculiar vice of the lower classes ; but history indicates that it has been the more peculiar vice of monarchs. The fountains of what is termed "honour" have been usually the fountains, at the same time, of all 48 PABTICULAB BAPTISTS. [a.d. 1633.] vice and uncleanness. In three centuries, until the reign of Queen Victoria, ^ only three supreme rulers appeared in England of a character calculated to com- mand even common respect. Elizabeth was one of these, and the respect accorded to her has its foundation solely in the strength of her will and her courageous patriotism. In the virgin purity of her character no one now believes^ and her ordinary language was such as would, at the present time, disgrace a betting room. Of Cromwell and William the Third we shall have soon to speak : no others can be named. Charles the First lied on system ; other Stuarts liked lying, but he approved of it, and the vice cost him his crown and his life. At the same time the way was prepared for the sacri- fice of the Established Church. The " Book of Sports '' was again issued, " out," said the King, " of a pious care for the service of God," Scotland was excited to re- bellion by the imposition of Episcopacy, and Convoca- tion was invested with unlimited power to make eccle- siastical laws. All " sectaries " were again brought under the extreme penalty of law, and the doctrine of the divine right of Kings and of passive obedience assented to without reservation. There was some occa- sion, apparently, for new laws against the sectaries, if toleration was not to be allowed. The Independent Church formed by Jacob, but now presided over by another pastor, was still in existence. From it, in 1633,* a separation of Baptists took place, who formed the first Particular or Calvinistic Baptist Church in England, and who were the first to practise baptism by immersion, for, * Wilson's " Dissenting Clmrclies," vol. i., p. 41. [a.d. 1640.] GROWTR OF THE SECTS. 49 hitherto, the controversy between Baptists and Indepen- dents had had relation to the subjects only of baptism, and not to the mode. There Avere, at this period, four other Baptist Churches m England, one at Lmcoln, one at SaUsbury, one at Coventry, and one at Tiverton,* and probably also one at Olchen in Wales.f A little later Laud notices vmdictively the existence of "several Anabaptists and other sectaries " at Ashford, in Kent,t while Bishop Hall, in 1641, called attention, m the House of Lords, to the existence m London and the suburbs of "no fewer than four score congregations of several sectaries, as " he says, " I have been too credibly mformed, instructed by cobblers, tailors, felt makers, and such like trash."§ Hall was alarmed at such a state of things, and prophesied the rise of Jack Cades, Jack Straws, and Wat Tylers, if such people were not put doAvn.|| But it was not the "sectaries" who rose against Charles. The House of Commons, which declared war against him, was a house of Churchmen only,^ gentlemen of rank, wealth, and territorial position. The bishops, and afterwards the clergy, suffered with him, for the reason that they had identified themselves mth his cause, and that then- pretensions were as opposed to the preservation of liberty as were the King's. There can be no doubt that the Episcopal form of Church govern- * Evans' " Early Baptists," vol. ii., p. 26. t " Thomas's History," p. 3. % Collier, vol. ii., p. 791. § Works, vol. X., p. 65. II lb., p. 66. 1 The testimonies of Clarendon and Baxter, on this point are too well kno-vvn to be cited. 4 50 EPISCOPALIANISM. [a.d. 1640 ment is more consistent with a civil tyranny than any other form. Wherever it has existed its adherents have cast the weight of their influence into the scale of despo- tism. It would not be difficult to explain the reason of this. It consists in the fact that the Episcopal form of government demands a greater surrender of personal liberty in religion than any other system. It exalts authority at the expense of right. Its chief officers are a superior order of men, invested, according to their own theory, with functions belonging to no other men on earth. They, too, are "fountains of honour," and their will is supreme, and their judgment final concerning some of the highest interests of mankind. A spiritual oligarchy, though sprung from the people, or, rather, be- cause sprung from the people, they have never associated the people's interests, either civil or religious, with their own. Hence the Episcopal system has flourished best where religion has flourished least, and has found most favour Avherever Christianity has been least removed from heathenism. Nothing of this is necessary to the system. It would be possible to imagme a Bishop as an active, humble, and zealous co-worker with other Christians, identifying himself with all their interests, and, seeking to advance rather than to retard them, to be the wise guide of the people rather than their bigoted opponent. But, excepting in a few rare instances, this has not been the character or the work of the English Episcopacy; and in Charles's time, as often since, it sought the apparent interests of its order, and of its order only. If self-preservation be a law of human nature, and self- abnegation a law of Christian nature, the bishops of the English Church have been intensely human and intensely —1658.] THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 51 heathen. What wonder that, mth their recent history in ^dew, the people should have determuied, while they held the King in check, at the same time to suppress the Episcopalian religion and all connected mth it ? The progress of Free Christianity can be clearly traced through the period which followed, but it was far more apparent than real. The religion partially estab- hshed by Parliament and the Westminster Assembly of Divines was simpler, more strict in form, and finer in essence than that which had been overthro^vn, but this is the best that can be said of it. Politically, its establishment was expedient, for the symjmthy and aid of the Scots could scarcely, at that time, have been dispensed with, but religiously it was a blunder. The Presbyterian State Church, where, as in London and Lancashire, it enjoyed coercive power, proved to be quite as intolerant as, and, to the majority of the people, less pleasant than the Episcopalian had been. Assemblies of Divines have never been celebrated for practical wis- dom, moderation, or charity, and of all assemblies, that of Westminster, which sat for six years, and held one thousand one hundred and sixty-three sittings, showed the least of these qualities. The imposition on the nation of the Solemn League and Covenant was a more odious infraction of religious liberty than the imposition of the whole of the Prayer Book and thirty-nine Articles, for it was enforced on laymen as well as on the clergy. The longer and shorter Catechisms are admirable sum- maries of the doctrines of ultra- Calvinism, and the Con- fession of Faith is a work of masterly theological exposi- tion; but what is to be said of ih^ proposed enforcement of these on a whole nation? 4* 52 TRE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY [a.d. 1640 The Baptists took no part in this Assembly, for it was tacitly decided that their doctrine concerning Infant Bap- tism excluded them from sitting m it. The position taken by the few Independents, five or six in number, who were nominated to it, has only lately been thoroughly under- stood.* It was not favourable to a very extensive degree of religious liberty. How could it be, when, at their entrance, they had signed the Solemn League and Covenant, by which they engaged to extirpate all " heresy and schism " from the land ? And they let it be distinctly understood that they were not in favour of complete toleration. A petition was presented to the Assembly by " an old Anabaptist at Amsterdam" against the Covenant, and in favour of "full liberty ofconsience to all sects," It contained, no doubt, some wild senti- ments, but not so wild as the Covenant must have appeared to the majorit}'" of Episcopalians. Nye and Thomas Goodwin, the leaders of the Independent party, were the most vehement in their denunciations of it. The Independents also praye fact that they were asking for more than their brethrei. * See Fletcher's "History of Independency," vol. iv., cap. 1. . —1658.] AND THE INDEPENDENTS. 53 in ]S[ew England were willing to permit.* The noblest words uttered by the Independents in this assembly were by Jeremiah Burroughes, in reply to the refusal of the Presbyterians to grant even this concession. " If," he said, " their congregations might not be exempted from that coercive power of the classes, if they might not have liberty to govern themselves in their own way, as long as they behaved peaceably towards the civil magis- trates, they were resolved to suffer, and to go to some other place in the world where they might enjoy their liberty. But while men think that there is no way of peace but by forcing all to be of the same mind ; while they think the civil sword is an ordmance of God to determine all controversies of divinity, and that it must needs be attended with fines and imprisonment to the disobedient; while they apprehend that there is no medium between a strict uniformity and a general con- fusion of all things ; while these sentiments prevail there must be a Imse subjection of men's consciences to slavery, a suppression of mornl truth, and great distur- bances in the Christian world."f With these words the endeavour to comprehend Independents in the proposed new national church came to an end. Few though they were in number, the Independents probably pre- vented this establishment. They were incessant in * Tliere are many niisunderstandings concerning the persecution of the sects by the New England Independents arising from the confusion between the Pilgrim Fathers and the Puritans. The former never persecuted. The latter, as in England, were avowed State Churclmien. The distinction is pointed out in Palfrey's " History of New England ;" and in a Tract en- titled, "The Pilgrim Fathers not Persecutors." By B. Scott, F.S.A. London, 1866. t Neal, vol. iii., p. 309. 54 WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY CLOSED, [a.d. 1640 exposing the evils of a coercive Presbyterianism, and in this they succeeded. AYhen it is said that this is all that they did, more is said than can now be realized. Before the nation they were the sole advocates of greater liberty of conscience. They stood in the breach against the advance of a new State Church, which, if better in many respects than the old, would have been worse in other respects. For the Puritans contended for a stricter uniformity of life, if not of belief, than the Episcopalians had ever demanded. The effect of the old system was to make martyrs; the effect of the new would have been to make hypocrites. The final result was, that while uniformity of external worship by the imposition of the "Directory," was enforced, no system of Church government was established. Epis- copalianism was made impossible; but neither the bishops nor the ministers of the old persuasion were rooted out, as the sectaries had been under all previous governments. The attempt at comprehension had thus signally failed. Almost as soon as this was evident, both the Parliament and the Assembly were dispensed with. The latter had long lost all moral influence. The wit of Selden had made it ridiculous, and the denunciations of Milton had exposed its tyrannical tendency. And there was growing a public distrust of Puritanism. The instruc- tion to the Assembly to frame, if possible, a scheme of comprehension which should allow full liberty of con- science, had been moved in the House of Commons by Oliver Cromwell, and its failure was certainly one of the leading causes of his assuming the reins of government. With the liberty then allowed to them ]w. law the Non- —1658.] THE ABMY AND BELIGIOTIS LIBERTY. 55 conformists had recently increased both in numbers and in influence. They had what they had never before enjoyed — a clear stage. The greatest statesmen were Independents ; the army was filled by members of the same body, Fairfax's regiment especially, being almost entirely composed of them. Led by Cromwell, St. John and Vane in Parliament, with Milton as their literary champion, they had nothing more to fear. It the Baptists were not so well represented in the legis- lature, they had large influence in the army. The Lord Deputy Fleetwood, Oliver Cromwell's son-in-law, Major- General Harrison, Major- General Ludlow, and Colonel Hutchinson were Baptists. It is scarcely to be wondered at that an army so composed should resent the proceed- ings of the Parliament and the Assembly. At the time, therefore, that the power of both these bodies seemed to be at their height, the army made complaint and de- manded a general indulgence for tender consciences. They asked that the taking of the Covenant be not imposed, and that all orders and ordinances tending in that direction should be repealed. They protested against any "compulsory" religion, stating that "the ways of God's worship are not all entrusted to us by any human power." The Presbyterians on the other hand insisted on the estabhshment of their own religion only, upon " a covenanted uniformity," and upon the ex- tirpation of the sects. A third party was represented by the King, who, after two years' treaty, consented to most of the views of the Presbyterians. It was at this period that the army, seemg that everything for which they had fought, including liberty of conscience, was about to be wrested from them, sent in a remonstrance to the legis- 56 FEESBYTEEIAN INTOLERANCE, [a.d. 1640 lature. It was not attended to; Fairfax at once marched on London, and on December 6th, 1648, Pride "pm'ged" the House of Commons. From this time Cromwell and the Independents held the reins of govern- ment.* If the Presbyterians protested against one thing more vehemently than another in the prospect which was now before the nation, it was against toleration. The army had asked for a conference on the subject of the coercive power of the magistrate in matters of religion. The Presbyterians, instead of granting the request, drew up two formal documents, warning them of the consequences of men being guided by the " impulses of the Spirit." "We will not," said the army, "have any restraint laid on the consciences of men for religious differences." The Presbyterians replied that this would but make way for the " toleration of all heresies and blasphemies." It is significant to notice amongst the names of those who o-ave their assent to these views some of the most emi- nent of the men, who, with the two thousand ejected ministers were, fourteen years later, thrust from the Established Church because the toleration which they had denied to others was now denied to them. William Gouge and Thomas Manton, Edmund Calamy, William Spurston, Edmund Stanton, and Andrew Janeway be- lieved, at that time, that toleration was a doctrine born of hell. * It is remarkable that so few modern writers sliould have drawn atten- tion to the intimate connection of the question of religious liberty with the events which led to Pride's "purge," the execution of Charles, and the establishment of the Commonwealth. Eushworth, and Neal following him, have clearly pointed it out. —1658.] TOLJEEATION FBOCLAIMEB. 57 The establishment of the Commonwealth was an era in religious liberty, and England, under Cromwell's government, experienced a degree of freedom which had hitherto been unknown. A-11 who petitioned for liberty of conscience received it. Considering the pohtical position which they occupied, the Episcopalians were, on ■ the whole, tenderly treated — much more tenderly, indeed, than they had ever treated those who differed from them. In many parts of the kmgdom the reading of the Book of Common Prayer, although contrary to law, was suf- fered. The few who left the Church were mercifully dealt with. They were not deprived of all means of living, and Usher and Pearson were still allowed to preach. Political Presbyterianism had received its death blow at the battle of Dunbar, but although its adherents were the worst enemies of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, they were allowed freely to dis- seminate their views, and to defend the " Solemn League and Covenant." They were associated with Independents and Baptists, as " Triers " of ihQ qualities of ministers, and by their " trials " they purged the pulpit of the vicious, the profane, and the ignorant, — in other words, of men who were ordinarily found to be the possessors of the old livings. Presbyterians and Independents, and a few Baptists, took the places of these men, and Chris- tianity was preached throughout the land with a zeal and an energy which had never before been known. The doctrine of the State on the subject of religious toleration was indicated in the declaration of the Council of State in 1653, the thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh articles of which provided " that none be compelled to conform to the public religion by penalties or otherwise ; but that 58 TRE INDEPENDENTS AND TOLERATION, [a.d. 1640 endeavours be used to mn them by sound doctrine, and the example of a good conversation," and that " such as profess faith in God by Jesus Christ, though differing in judgment from the doctrine, worship, or discipline pub- licly held forth, shall not be restrained from, but shall be protected in, the profession of their faith and exercise of their religion, so as they abuse not this liberty to the civil injury of others, and to the actual disturbance of the public peace on their part, provided this liberty be not extended to Popery or Prelacy, or to such as, under a profession of Christianity, hold forth and practise licentiousness." Tithes also were proposed to be abol- ished, in order that " a provision less subject to scruple and contention " mio;ht be made.* The views of the State on this subject were unquestionably in advance of those of the nation, and it is probable that they were in advance even of the opinions of most of the Indepen- dents of that period. For Burroughes thought that if the magistrate should choose to interfere, it was lawful to assist and second the sentence of subverters of the faith. Owen, in his sermon on " Toleration," went no farther than the title of his discourse, affirming in it his adherence to the principle of a State Church, while the * I cannot refrain from quoting tlie words of a Church historian, the Rev. J. B. Marsden, on these declarations : — " Wise men," he says, " musing in their closets, had for sometime questioned the wisdom, if not the' justice, of compelling the dissatisfied to embrace the religion of the greater number, and making their dissent a crime. But Cromwell was the first who dared, not merely to give expression to the doubt, but to enrol the principle itself with the fundamental laws of England. Received with hesitation at the time, denounced by Presbyterians as little short of blasphemy, spurned by the Parliament of Charles II. with the same indiscriminate contempt with which all Cromwell's legislation was trampled under their feet, it still sur- vived. The plant grew, for it was watered l>y the rains of heaven, and tens of thousands have reposed beneath its quiet shade." —1658.] THi: INBEPENBENTS AND TOLERATION-. 5S« Savoy Conference of 1658, which was attended by more than two hundred ministerial and other delegates from a hundred Independent Churches established throughout England and Wales, and of which Owen, Goodwin, Kye, and Caryl were members, said, only, that " professing Christians, with their errors, which are purely spiritual and internal, and overthrow not civil society, are to be borne Avith, and permitted to enjoy all ordinances and privileges, according to their light, as fully as any of their brethren who pretend to the purest orthodoxy." They further declared that " if they had the power which any of their brethren of dijfferent opmions had desired to have over them, or others, they would freely grant this liberty to them all." * This seems to be unexception- able, and, as far as toleration only is concerned, it is so ; but when Dr. Thomas Goodwin delivered this declaration to Richard Cromwell, he said, on behalf of the Savoy Assembly, " We look at the magistrates as custos utriusque tabulge, and so commit it [the Gospel] to your trust, as our chief magistrate, to countenance and propagate." f It was such sentiments which drew down upon the Independents the scornful rebukes of Milton. The laymen, in fact, as has generally been the case, were m advance of the clergy on this subject. Yane, one of the greatest of the Independent statesmen, had said, "The province of the magistrate is this world and man's body; not his conscience or the con- cerns of eternity." j: Cromwell probably only waited for time in order to apply this prhiciple to the practical government of the nation. * Orme's " Owen," p. 180. t lb., pp. 182-183. % "Meditations," a.d. 1655. GO OLIVER CROMWELL. [a.d. 1640 No just estimate of this period of ecclesiastical history can be formed without taking into consideration, first, the characters of the principal actors in it and their intentions, and, secondly, the results of their work. The figure of Cromwell stands in the foreground. No man's character Avas better indicated than his by his features and his attitude. He was notably a rugged, firm, enthusiastic, sincere, and affectionate man. That he was not a hypocrite, as some have judged, is proved by the fact that his feeliners retained their natural force and fresh- ness to the last moment of his life, and this can be the case -with no hypocrite. Of all his qualities his will was the strongest, and, next, his family affections. Occasionally, his enthusiasm seemed to overbalance his judgment, but this was not really the case ; for although it appeared to excess in his words, it never influenced him to' a rash act. What is remarkable in such a character, considering his ecclesiastical relationships, is, that while he imposed, from temporary necessity, his own form of civil polity on the nation, he never cared to impose upon it his OAvn form of ecclesiastical polity. The explanation is that he was not, in any sense, a theorist. The breadth of his intellect was equal to its strength, and though not a cul- tured man, he had all the essential qualities of cultured men. He could bear with differences of opinion, and although he had power to suppress, he chose to tolerate and encourage them. Politically, he was a monarchist both by tradition and feeling, and would have restored Charles if he could have done so with safety to the nation. He became a dictator from necessity. There is no evidence, however, that he cared for power as such, and he never used it but for what he judged— with a larger judgment — 165S.] JOHN MILTON. g^ than any man who had gone before him was capable of exercising— to be for the good of the nation. Ecclesi- astically he was an Independent, but he never forced Independency on the nation. He was mlling to tolerate even Jews— a thing at that time almost unheard of in Christendom; and he allowed Usher to preach almost within a stone's throw of Whitehall. With a sagacity which would have been justified by events had he lived longer, or had his son been competent for government, he used his influence mainly for the better political education of the nation. He cast off even his oldest friends for this, and made enemies equally amono-st pure republicans, democratic levellers, and army leaders. It was the same with respect to religion. He would not impose Presbyterianism, and the Presbyterians therefore hated him. Many of the Baptists were " red republicans," and they, in their turn, were estranged. He, himself, kept in the way which he judged would be for the permanent advantage of his country, actuated in his work by a strong patriotism and a fervent religious feeling. Such a man, dying before half his task was accomplished, was not likely to be well reported of by many, either of his contemporaries or his successors. What he hoped to have done was to change the character of the nation, and he lived only long enough to disturb it. As soon as he was dead " the sow went back to her wallowing in the mire." As Cromwell was at the head of the government of his age, so Milton was at the head of its literature. One remark applies to both,— they stood, from the great- ness of their genius, comparatively alone. Milton appears to have been an Independent in Church govern- <32 BjELIGIOUS LEADERS. [a.d. 1G40 ment, a Baptist so far as the distinctive creed of the Baptists was concerned, with theological beliefs inclined to Arianism. He cannot be identified with any of the de- nominations, and in the latter years of his life he attended no place of public worship. He was above the sects, and appears to have loathed their mutual jarrmgs. Of his con- troversial works the utmost that can be said is that he defended the Commonwealth with his pen as successfully as Cromwell defended it with his sword. He gave to the Government the services of the loftiest genius and the most varied scholarship, adorned by all the manners of a courtier. What is most pertinent to remark in con- nection -with his support of Cromwell and Cromwell's government is, that they could not have been of the cha- racter which it was once the fashion to ascribe to them, or Milton would not have identified himself with their cause. The names and labours of the religious leaders of this age belong to the Christianity of the English nation. Foremost amongst them were the disputatious but zealous Baxter, the scholarly Owen, the gentle Howe, the liberal Goodmn, the solid Manton, and the active Powell. The Church of Christ never possessed abler or purer ministers than those of the Commonwealth, or men who gave them- selves up with greater ardour to the work to which they had consecrated themselves. They gave a new character to the religious life of their country. Much has been written of the vulgar and hypo- critical character of the religion of this period. No doubt religious affectation prevailed to a great extent ; but the representations which have come do^vn to us from Tory writers are charged Avith the grossest exagge- —1658.] THE COMMONWEALTH AND LEARNING. 03 rations. The religious leaders of the Commonwealth have been stigmatized as a company of ignorant and canting fanatics. Ignorant they were not, canting some of them probably were, and they were not more fanatical than the Hio^h Churchmen of their ao;e. Their learnino; alone has made their time as illustrious as any in the history of their country. No man was a greater patron of letters than the Protector. Oxford and Cambridge became, under his auspices, seats of study more profound and exalted than had been known since their foundation. " The love of deep learning was now, for the first time, widely diffused." * Under Owen's Vice- Chancellorship at Oxford, Wilkins and Boyle were pursuing their philo- sophical studies, and Locke and South were being educated. Goddard the physician. Gale the philologist, Seth Ward the mathematician, Pococke, the greatest Oriental scholar in Europe, with John Howe and Stephen Charnock, were in the same University. Some of these men were Independents, some were Presbyterians, and some were Episcopalians, for Cromwell never sacrificed the interests of learning to the prejudices of the sects. At Cambridge, Cudworth was teaching, and Poole, Stillingfleet, and Tillotson obtaining that learning with which they were subsequently to adorn their Church. If a comparison of times be made, it will be found that no time was more fruitful in the most exalted genius and the most profound scholarship than the time of the English Commonwealth. Nor were the manners of the age as destitute of dignity and grace as is generally supposed. The Non- * Marsden's " Later Puritans," p. 386. 64 MANNERS OF THE COMMONWEALTH, [a.d. 1640 conformists were not the melancholy and sour-visaged race that historians have delighted to portray. Addison has handed down to us* a picture of Puritan manners in the person of a " very famous Independent minister " who lived in funereal state, and exhibited nothing but " religious horror " in his countenance. The genial humourist describes a saint of that age as abstaining from all appearance of " mirth and pleasantry," and as "eaten up with spleen and melancholy ;" but no such impression as this is to be obtained either from their portraits, their writings, or the memoirs of their lives. Gravity Avas certainly a characteristic of their manners ; but it was not unmixed with pleasantry and humour. Some, like the leaders and followers of the highest fashion in the present day, chose to wear their hair cropped, but the majority of those whose portraits have come down to us were remarkable for their flowing ring- lets. Milton, Colonel Hutchinson, Selden, and Owen are fair representative men, and they were all distin- guished by their graceful dress, their curling hair, and their polished manners.! In their own times, indeed, they were abused for their gaiety. " Yea," said Bast- wick of the Independents, " you shall find them with * " Spectator," 494. The divine is supposed to be Dr. Thomas Goodwin. ■j- The following is Mrs. Hutchinson's portrait of her husband : — "He could dance admirably well, but neither in youth nor riper years made any practice of it ; he had a skill in fencing, such as became a gentleman ; he had great love to music, and often diverted himself with a viol, on which he played masterly ; had an exact ear and judgment in other music ; he shot excellently in bows and guns, and nmch used them for exercise ; he had great judgment in paintings, graving, sculpture, and all liberal arts, and had many curiosities of value in all kinds. . . He took much pleasure in improvement of ponds, in planting groves, and walks, and fruit trees, in opening springs and making fish ponds." " Memoirs," p. 23. Col. Hut- chinson was an " Anabaptist." — A.D. 1658.] MANNEBS OF THE COMMONWEALTH. 65 cuffs, and those great ones, at their very heels, and with more silver and gold upon their clothes and at their heels (for these upstarts must now have silver spurs) than many great and honourable personages have in their purses."* Anthony Wood brings a charge against Owen that, instead of being a good example to the Uni- versity, he scorned all formality, and describes him as " like a young scholar, with powdered hair, snake-bone band-strings, or band-strings with very large tassels ; a large set of ribands pointed at his knees, and Spanish leather boots, "svith large lawn tops, and his hat mostly cocked, "t Cromwell himself, when "Whitelocke told him, on his return from Sweden, how he had amused the members of his Embassy with music and dancing in the long winter nights, expressed his emphatic approval of "such very good diversions," J The sermons of some of the most popular preachers of the Commonwealth abound like Latimer's, in broad English humour. Milton, who appears to have thought that his works would be read only by the Puritan section of his countrymen, wrote for them not only the " Para* dise Lost," but " L'AUegro " and " Comus."§ The controversial writings of the age are distinguished by * " The Utter Routing of the Independents." Preface. t " Athen." Oxon. ii. 556. % " Whitelocke's Embassy," ii. 438. § " Eaten up with spleen and melancholy," and " abstaining from all appearance of mirth and pleasantry : " this is the popular picture of the Puritan. For such men Milton wrote : "Hence loathed Melancholy — But come, thou goddess fair and free, In heaven yclep'd Euphrosyne, And Ly men heart easing Mirth — G6 THE BAPTISTS. [a.d. 1640 their quickness of wit and their felicity of classical illustration. It is true that some sanctioned laws for the suppression of certain pastimes, revels, and theatrical entertainments ; but those amusements had been conducted in a manner which no decent man would now tolerate. The difference m morals and manners between the Nonconformists and the Cavaliers was, that while the former anticipated the pure and refined life of the English gentleman of the nineteenth century, the latter were as dissolute and licentious as the ancient heathens. The Baptists of this period were inferior as a sect to others in learning, but their activity in preaching the Gospel, and their zeal in defence of religious freedom, were probably superior. The mantle of Penry had fallen on Yavasour Powell, who was evangelizing Wales and forming Churches, most of which appear to have been of an unsectarian character, m various parts.* William Kiffin, a wealthy London merchant, was their chief pastor in the metropolis, and had great influence with Cromwell, as well as, afterwards, with the two Stuarts. John Canne and Hanserd Knollys were using their pens with vigour and success in favour of a free Nonconformity, and " Haste thee, nymph, and l3ring with thee Jest and youthful Jollity — • Sports that wrinkled Care derides, And Laughter holding both her sides ; And, if I give thee honor due, Mirtli admit me of thy crew." * This was the case Avith many of the early Nonconformist Churches. The Pilgrim Fathers' Church, at Southwark, was originally an unsectarian Church, and had Baptist ministers, Wilson's " Dissenting Churches," vol. iv. p. 122, and " Crosby," vol. iii. p. 40. _1658.] THE QUAKERS. 67 Tombes, a man of leai-ning and great controversial ability, was defending Baptist views against Baxter, and preach- ins: with vio^our in the Midland Counties. All through England the activity of reUgious effort was unsurpassed, and it was adorned, for the most part, by such human graces as commonly attend profound scholarship and unaffected piety. Nor ought it to be forgotten, in justice to the Independents of the Commonwealth, that it was they who first conceived the duty of foreign missionary effort. It was on July 27th, 1648, that an ordinance was passed in Parliament,* constituting a corporation under the title of " The President and Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New England." The pre- amble of this ordinance recites " that the Commons of England assembled in Parliament, having received intelli- gence that the heathens of New England were beginning to call on the name of the Lord, felt bound to assist in such a work." They therefore gave power for the form- ation of a special corporation for the propagation of the Gospel, and ordered that the Act might be read in churches and collections thereafter made. This Society was the first Missionary Society formed in England, and was the parent of the present Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. A new faith, however, now appeared. It had the reception usually accorded to new faiths, and its leaders appeared even to court persecution. The Society of Friends dates its origin from this period. No religious community ever had ■ more vigorous or consistent founders. George Fox, to whom it owes its origin, was * ScobeU's "Acts," cap. 45. 68 THE QUAKERS. [a.d. 1640 no doubt an indiscreet man ; but such indiscretion as his may well be overlooked, in comparison with the purity the enthusiasm, and the piety of his life. No man was more maligned than he ; and the creed of no sect was so grossly caricatured and misrepresented as the creed of the " Quakers." The doctrines of the Baptists had only lately been tolerated ; but here were doctrines that went far beyond those, which, to many, had once appeared to be utterly inconsistent with Christianity. The demand made upon the charity of Christians of all sects was greater than they could bear, and there was, for once, unanimity in denunciation. Baxter, not for the first time in his life, became the bell-wether of theo- logical detraction. He was always ready for contro- versy ; but in controversy with the Quakers he was not merely ready, but eager. He had some hope of the ultimate salvation of Baptists, but he doomed all Quakers, without reserve, to utter damnation. " I had rather," he wrote, " that men continued Separatists and AnabajDtists than turned Quakers or plain apostates, and therefore would do all that I can to hinder such an emptying of their Churches as tendeth to the more certain filling of hell. It is better to stop them in a condition where we may have some hope of their salvation than to let them run into certain perdition."* Owen, also, used his authority as Vice-Chancellor at Oxford to sanction the whipping of two Quaker women for speaking in church, denouncing them, at the same time, as blasphemers and abusers of the Holy Spirit."]* Much of this language was sim^^ly * Preface to the " Quaker's Catecliism." t Sewell's " History," p. 90—91. —1658.] THE QUAKERS. 69 retaliative, for George Fox and those who became his discq^les denounced all the forms of worship then in practice, and "bore testimony" against them in a manner which was calculated to excite both anger and revenge. " Steeple houses," as they termed the Churches, were an abomination ; a paid ministry was unscriptural ; tithes were without warrant either from religion or from justice ; * the Sacraments were done away with, and, above all, they declared that men had not merely the light of Scripture, but an " inward light " communicated by God's spirit, whereby they might discern the truth. Allied to these opitiions were some that were not less impalatable to those who heard them. Such was the doctrine that all oaths are sinful ; that priests should have nothing to do with marriage ; that no extravagant respect should be paid to rank; and that it was un- lawful for a Christian to take up arms, or even to make use of physical force, for his own or his country's pro- tection. The characteristic doctrines, however, of Qua- kerism resolved themselves into two, — those of the " in- ward light " and of the essential spirituality of religion. Religion, they maintained, had its origin in the commu- nion of the Spirit of man with the Spirit of God, and therefore neither needed, nor could properly be expressed by, forms and ceremonies. They abjured all that was traditional, and all that was merely external in worship. Had they abstained from attacking other sects they would probably, in the time of the Commonwealth, not * The Quakers were the first people who assailed with anything like power or persistency the injustice of tithes and Church-rates. They did this from their first origin. In their early tracts all the modern arguments on these subjects are anticipated. 70 THE QVAKJEBS. [a.d. 1640 have been attacked ; but when they attended places of worship, and pubHcly assailed both the preachers and their doctrines, they excited an animosity which fell little short of fury. They were whipped and imprisoned, put in stocks, pilloried, and made subject to every per- sonal indignity, but they still increased in numbers with an unexampled rapidity. Durino; the Protectorate three thousand one hundred and seventy three persons of this denommation were imprisoned, thirty- two of whom died in confinement. Their persecutors were, for the most part, Presbyterians and Independents. Whenever their sufferings were brought officially before Cromwell he appears to have given orders for their relief. It was at the time of one of Fox's numerous imprisonments that he first met the Protector. The two men, each equally remarkable, and each capable of appreciating the peculiar greatness of the other, talked largely of God's ways, and Pox was dismissed and set at liberty with an expression of Cromwell's personal good-will. All Quakers were then ordered to be set free, and men were forbidden to harm them. Liberty of public meeting was, however, denied them, but Quakers were the least likely of all men to obey such a law. They defied the law, met and preached, and from the Baptists especially, gathered large numbers of converts. So they laid the foundation of one of the most respected and useful of all the Christian communi- ties. Those who will be at the trouble of reading their 0"syn expositions of their own faith Avill hardly fail to acknowledge that the Quakers obtained a firmer grasp than others of one or two central Christian truths, and that their "testimony" was necessary to the complete exhibition of the Christian religion. Much of their dis- —1658.] CHARLES THE SECOND. 71 tinctive theology has unconsciously been absorbed into the theology of the present day. Their appearance was a test of the degree of religious liberty enjoyed under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate. Fox, Burrouo-hes, and their co-adjutors, whatever might have been theb peculiarities, were men in whose character and work any society of Christians might rejoice. One duty they had certainly learned long before others had dreamed of it, namely, to tolerate the intolerant. No one can doubt that the Restoration under Charles the Second was popular mth the nation, and especially popular with the Presbyterians, to whom, indeed, he owed his return. Cromwell had offended this body,, beyond forgiveness, by frustrating their schemes for ecclesiastical domination. They had hated the tolerant character of his government, and they now, with all his debauched habits, welcomed the Stuart. They again looked forward to a modified National Church, in which they might retam their livings and probably regain their coveted ascendancy. They were assured not merely of toleration, but of indulgence for tender consciences. Had not the King given his word ? Had he not said it in the Declaration from Breda, which was signed with his own hand? Their joy was great when ten of their number were aj^pointed Court chaplains, and greater when they knew that five bishoprics were kept open for them. Although the old Liturgy and all the old clergy had been restored, they were sanguine enough to wait upon the King, and ask his interposition for removing the differences in the Church— that is to say, the differ- ences between the Episcopalians and themselves. They obtained, in reply, a second Declaration, in which a 72 THE SAVOY CONFEBENCK [a.d. 1660.] modified and temporary liberty of Nonconformity was granted, which the House of Commons refused to sanction. There can be little doubt that Charles would have consented to a large degree of religious freedom. Like most men of his class, he had a generous and easy nature, and preferred not to be troubled with eccle- siastical matters. This, however, was not Clarendon's disposition, nor was it Sheldon's. While the King sported with his mistresses, the statesmen and the eccle- siastics ruled the people, and there was no intention on their part to allow the smallest indulgence to the most tender conscience. It was probably only to save the public honour of the King that the Savoy Conference was held. This Con- ference was a repetition of that at Hampton Court, and its object was the same, namely, to keep all Puritans and Presbyterians out of the Church. The presence of Baxter, with his argumentative disposition, would have prevented the success of any such assembly ; but had Baxter not been a member, and the most conspicuous member, of the Conference, its issue, while it might have been delayed, could scarcely have been of a different character. His demands were not dissimilar from those of the earlier Puritans,* and their reception was the same. The Book of Common Prayer was made less, rather than more, palatable. The ecclesiastical authorities decided, with expressions of hatred and contempt for those who were suing to them, that there should be no alteration in the formularies of the Church, which would * See " Documents relating to the Settlement of the Church of England under the Act of Uniformity," edited by the Rev. George Gould, 1862. [A.D. 1662.] THE EJECTMENT. 73 be likely to keep within its borders any who differed from the old ecclesiastical constitution. Neither the Independents nor the Baptists took any part in the Savoy Conference, They did not ask for, nor apparently, did they desire, any comprehension within the Church. They pleaded only for toleration. The Presbyterian Commissioners took no note of their exist- ence. They do not appear even to have considered what effect their proposed revision of the Prayer Book would have on other Christian communities. No one who has read Baxter's controversial works — the most abusive even of that age — will believe that he would willingly have consented to the toleration of Baptists or Quakers. Had the Church of England been reconstituted in ac- cordance with the desires of the Presbyterian party in this Conference, the result, in all likelihood, would have been such a State Establishment as was contemplated by the Westminster Assembly, which refused to allow of more than a limited toleration, even to Independents. As it is not in the nature of ecclesiastics to become more liberal in proportion as they are invested with power, it is very possible that the Act of Uniformity, which must have been passed to give authority to the revised Prayer Book, would have been followed by other Acts, not very dissimilar in character from those which followed the establishment of the unreformed Book. The Puritans were saved from this disgrace by their own ejectment. The history of this ejectment has been often and eloquently told. Considered as an act of the State Church, it was a fatal blunder ; considered as part of the history of the Free Churches of England, it was the most happy event which could have taken place. For, where 74 THE EJECTED TWO THOUSAND, [a.d. 1662 Nonconformists could formerly be counted only by the score, they could now be told by the thousand. Until the year 1662, the opponents of the State Church were few, and those few were locahzed. They were now •spread throughout every part of the kingdom, and wher- ever there was an ejected pastor there was public sympathy with him. But the lives and the preaching of Howe, and Owen, and Baxter, and Caryl, and Bates, and Manton, with their two thousand brethren, would have counteracted all the external influences which the authority of the State had given to those who had con- formed. Sheldon, in spiritual power, could never have successfully competed with any of the men whom he had aided to cast out of the Church. He, and the majority of his episcopal brethren, were ecclesiastics only — unscrupulous politicians with clerical titles, who, to aid their own ambitious purposes, banded themselves together to uphold the worst of all the Governments of England. It was seen by these men that the Act of Uniformity had not decreased the influence of the ejected ministers. It had, on the contrary, increased it. In many cases, perhaps the majority, the ejected remained where they were, and preached to the same people. The chief difference between their former and their present position was a difference of external circumstance. They did not preach in a certain building, nor had they a fixed mamtenance ; all besides remained as it had been, excepting that the sacrifice which they had made for conscience' sake had increased towards them the respect and aff'ection of the people. It was resolved to break this spiritual power. During the remainder of Charles the Second's reign the aim of -1672.] PROGRESS OF NONCONFORMITY. [15 the ecclesiastical authorities was to effect the extinction of Nonconformity. First, _in a.d. 166 1, had been passed the Corporation Act, after which no Nonconformist could hold office in any municipal body; in a.d. 1662, the Act of Uniformity silenced their ministers; in a.d. 1663, the Conventicle Act was passed, and no Nonconformist could hold a meeting at which more than five persons in addition to the family were present; in a.d. 1665, all Nonconformist ministers were prohibited, by the Five Mile Act, from coming within five miles of any corporate borough; in a.d. 1670, the Conventicle Act was ex- tended, the penalties under it increased, and informers encouraged; in a.d. 1673, the Test Act was passed, after which all employment, civil, naval, or military, under the Government, was denied to Nonconformists. The revival of the Act for the burning of heretics would have been an appropriate addition to these laws, but Sheldon did not suggest it. Long and weary imprisonments, banishment and starvation satisfied the Episcopal bench, and to this moderation England owes the contmued existence of her liberties and her religion. Some hundreds of Free Churches date their existence from this period. It was the period, also, when the distinguishing principles of the various sects may be said to have been finally established in literature. Stilling- fleet, the greatest ecclesiastical lawyer and antiquarian of his age, was begmning to denounce the sin of schism ; Baxter, as though he were a whole college of divines^ poured forth defences and expositions, answers and re- joinders, at the rate of sometimes eight and sometimes ten in one year, on Conformity and Nonconformity, Peace and Schism, Baptism and Popery, Calvinism and Armi- 76 SUFFERINGS OF [a.d. 1662 nianism; David Clarkson, with a mind stored with patristic lore, assailed the theory of diocesan Episcopacy ; and John Owen, with massive and sinewy brain and ex- haustless learning, so built up the principles of Congrega- tionahsm, that if all the works on that subject which have since been written were destroyed, the Congregational Churches of Eno;land could stand behind his treatises as behind an impregnable rampart. Amongst the Baptists, Benjamin Keach did eminent service by the publica- tion, amongst other works, of a Christian Catechism, for which he was sent to the pillory, and from thence to gaol ; Delaune perished in prison for his " Nonconformist's Plea," and John Bunyan arose to expound and defend the principles, if not of a liberal theology, at least of a liberal ecclesiastical rule.* The Quakers were represented with equal abiUty. To this period are owing the Catechism and the "Apology" of Robert Barclay, a man of eminent piety and equally eminent learnmg, and the first treatises of William Penn. Exegetical and devotional theology were cultivated with similar zeal. The " Pilgrim's Pro- gress," the " Saint's Everlasting Rest," the " Redeemer's Tears," the "Living Temple," and" No Cross No Crown," belong to the time of Stuart persecution. The sufferings of ministers and people during this period were unspeakable. Their congregations were scattered; they were fined, pilloried, imprisoned, and banished. Many Presbyterians took refuge in the Church ; others identified themselves more closely with the In- dependents, and the denomination, as such, began to decline. The Independents and Baptists gave up their * Bunyan advocated "mixed communion" principles, and his Church was an unsectarian one. —1672.] NONCONFOBMISTS. 77 meetings or met by stealth, while watchers, stationed on roofs, or as outposts in the streets, were ready to give warning of the approach of informers. The members of one denomination alone continued, by meeting openly and without concealment, to defy and not to evade the law. These were the Quakers. The brutality with which the members of this sect were treated exceeded anything which had been known in the recent history of persecution in England. Their meetings were broken up by the military, and their attendants stunned by bludgeons and hacked by swords. The female members were stripped and flogged Avith shameless indecency. This was almost mild treatment compared with the usage they received at the hands of the Puritans of i^ew England, where, tied to a cart-tail, women were flogged naked for eighty miles; where Quakers' tongues were bored with a red-hot iron, then' ears cut off, and them- selves finally hanged ; but it was more savage treatment than had been experienced in England since Laud was led to the block. In a.d. 1662, more than four thousand of this sect were in prison in England, five hundred of whom were crowded into the prisons of London.* Hundreds died, and many more were banished to the West Indian settlements. In spite of all this, they con- tinued openly to meet and preach, not once reviling their persecutors. And Avhen, in a.d. 1672, an " Indulgence " was granted to Dissenters, and a return ordered of all such prisoners as should be released, George Whitehead, a Quaker, waited on the King, and obtained his promise of pardon to such as were imprisoned. None had bee) * Sewell's " History," vol. ii. p. 2. 78 SCREMES OF [a.h. 1672 more vehement against the Quakers than Bunyan, yet he obtamed his release from gaol through White- head's exertions. " Our being of different judgments," said Whitehead, "did not abate my compassion or charity, even towards those who had been my opposers in some cases. Blessed be the Lord God, who is the Father and fountain of mercies ; whose love and mercies in Christ Jesus to us should oblige us to be merciful and kind one to another."* Bunyan was the first Nonconfor- mist minister licensed to preach in England. It was fit that a man whose genius and pulpit eloquence were of matchless order should occupy such a historical position, and it is a proof that no degree of persecution, short of extermination, will root out religious opinions, that in ten months after the " Indulgence " was issued, three thousand five hundred licenses to preach and to hold meetings were granted, "j* It Avas previous to this that another and probably sincere endeavour towards comprehension was made. The initiative was taken by the Government, and im- mediately responded to by the leaders of the Presbyterian party. Baxter and Manton did not, on this occasion, forget the Independents. Baxter informed the Lord Keeper that it was now possible to include this body and aU sound Christians in the Establishment, but the sugorestion was received with no favour. Terms of com- prehension were however agreed upon, one of which was that ceremonies should be left indiff*erent. All who were not comprehended were to be mdulged, the names of the • Offbr's "Bunyan," Hanserd KnoUys' ed. pp. G2— 65. t lb. p. 62. —1675.] COMFBERENSION. 79 ministers and of every member of their congregations being registered. It is impossible to say whether Howe and Owen gave authority to Baxter to make such concessions, but Baxter in a.d. 1667, was in corresj^ondence with Owen concerning a union between Presbyterians and Inde- pendents. Baxter took the first step towards this object. Christian union may be said to have been his hobby, but no man was less fit to promote it than himself. He was for ever framing concordats, but never yielding either to Episcopalians or to Independents the smallest of his pro- posals. He was mduced to open a correspondence with Owen m consequence of the pubHcation, by the latter, of a Catechism of Church Worship and Discipline, in which Owen laid down the doctrine that Christian Churches have not the "power of the keys," or, in other words, that mmisters of the Gospel do not derive their office to preach and rule from the Churches, but from Christ himself.* Twice before had Baxter made similar pro- posals, and now he was engaged in another scheme of general comprehension. Nothing came of either, and the purity of the Independent Churches, if it was ever endangered, was saved from compromise. In the years a.d. 1673 and 1674 Baxter made new proposals for union with the Church, which he a^ain thought might "take in the Independents," but he must have known, after all, little of their doctrines, if he sup- posed, as he appears to have done, that they would have accepted, in its substance, the Book of Common Prayer, and subjected themselves to the authority of a political * Orme's " Owen." pp. 235—237. 80 JAMES TRE SECOND. [a.d. 1687 hierarchy. It is noticeable that the whole of these pro- posals were made, on behalf of the Church, with the view of " streno^theninc? the Protestant interest," and counter- acting the growth of Popery. The statesmen and bishops. of those days felt, what has been manifest ever since, that the Established Church alone is no preservative against the errors of Roman Catholicism. Baxter's amendments to the Prayer Book would have taken out of that volume all, or nearly all, that is distinctively Roman Catholic in origin and influence. That they were accepted, at the time, by such men as Tillotson, Morley, Stillingfleet, Sir Matthew Hale, the Earl of Orrery, and the Lord Treasurer, is a sufficient indication that the Prayer Book was considered, not by Presbyterians and Independents alone, to encourage the growth of Popery. During the next fifteen years Protestant Dissenters were alternately persecuted and coaxed. James the Second, whatever may have been his vices, was on the whole m favour of religious liberty. It is customary to state that his sole design in the permission of toleration was to gain an ascendancy for his own sect, but there is trustworthy evidence of the general liberality of his opinions. Almost as soon as he ascended the throne he released all who were in prison for conscience' sake ; by this act no fewer than fifteen hundred Quakers alone were set at liberty. When, in a.d. 1687, this body sent a deputation to thank him for his tolerant spirit, the King replied, " Some of you know, I am sure you do, Mr. Penn, that it was always my principle that conscience ought not to be forced, and that all men ought to have- liberty of their consciences, and what I have promised in my declaration I will continue to perform as long as [A.D. 1687.] WILLIAM PEJSN. 8! I live ; and I hope, before I die, to settle it so that after ages shall have no reason to alter it." * Unfortunately the King', while right as to the end he had in view, was wrong as to the means which should be adopted to attain it. He believed in governing mthout a Parlia- ment, and the English people had decided, in the time of the Commonwealth, that the prerogative of the houses of legislation was superior to that of the monarch. The King could pardon offences against the law, but he could not suspend the law. The attitude assumed by some Dissenters towards the Crown at this period has been the subject of severe denunciation, and the conduct of William Penn and the Quakers especially has been held up to the most un- merited opprobrium. The great historian of this and the succeeding reign was not the first who accused Penn of partiality to the Stuarts. The accusation was made in Penn's lifetime, and replied to by him. He acknow- ledged his daily visits to the palace, and states how it was he became so intimate with the monarch. His father had been admiral when the King was lord-high admiral, and had left Penn to James's guardianship, re- ceiving from him a promise to protect the young Quaker as far as possible from the inconveniences to which he would be subjected in consequence of his religious pro- fession. Penn made use of his friendship to promote the progress of religious freedom. Writing of the accu- sations made against him, he says, " I am not without apprehension of the cause of this behaviour towards me ; I mean my constant zeal for an impartial liberty of con- * Sewell, vol. ii. p. 333. 82 WILLIAM FENN. [a.d. 1687.] science."* No man had done more than Penn to prove his faithfuhiess to this principle. Like the Barclays — David and Eobert — he was born a gentleman, and had received the most cultured education which Oxford University could bestow. He was a fellow student with Locke and Yilliers at Christ Church, when John Owen was Dean, He had all the polished manners of a courtier. His father was a favourite with Charles and James, and no man had better prospects of receiving substantial proofs of royal friendship. From a sense of religious conviction, he gave up the whole of this, and attached himself to the most unpopular sect in Christendom. What influence he had he afterwards used to shield the members of his own denomination from the vengeance of the law. As the founder of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, he has made himself a reputation immortal in the history of the world. His wisdom and justice as a legislator gave a new revelation of humanity and reli- gion to the savages by whom he was surrounded. His consistency as a friend of religious equality was made evident by the constitution of his Commonwealth, the first words of which were as follows : — " Li reverence to God, the Father of light and spirits, the author as well as the object of all divine knowledge, faith, and worship, I do, for me and mine, declare and es- tablish, for the first fundamental of the government of this country, that every person that doth or shall reside therein shall have and enjoy the free profession of his or her faith and exercise of worship towards God in such way and manner as every such person * Sewell, vol. ii. . 44. [a.d. 1687.] THE SEVEN BISHOPS. 83 shall in conscience believe is most acceptable to God." The man who could first originate and then impose such a statute was not likely to be a favourite with many of the ecclesiastical parties of James the Second's time. But Penn and the Quakers were not the first to thank the King for his lenity. The Presbyterians, Indepen- dents, and Baptists were before them. When the Decla- ration of A.D. 1687 in favour of liberty of conscience was issued, and the prison doors thrown open, it was natural that there should be a spontaneous burst of gratitude to its author. At first the Dissenters did not see what would be the consequences of recognizing the legality of the Declaration; when they did, notwithstanding the renewed sufferings to which they might be exposed, they took part against it. It was OAving solely to the perse- cuting spirit of the Church that a general toleration had not long before been granted. Yet when the seven bishops refused to read the Declaration, and were sent to the Tower, Independents, Baptists, and Quakers vied with each other in showing them their sympathy. There can be little question but that they acted, at that tune, from mixed motives. None of them — not even Penn — was in favour of the toleration of Roman Catholicism. No man who valued the civil liberties of England dreamed of giving a foothold to the professors of that intolerant creed. Three generations had not sufiiced to -svipe out the memory of its curse on England. Thousands still living could recollect the Vaudois massacres ; and the streets of London were at that moment crowded with sufi*erers from the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Is it a wonder that the most tolerant refused to tolerate tha 6 * 84 BISSEJ^TIJBS AND THE CONSTITUTION, [a.d. 1688.] creed of men who, whenever they were in power, perse- cuted to the utmost hmits of persecution ? It is stranger that the Nonconformists should have dechned to recognize the legality of the Indulgence because its exercise was opposed to the constitution of England. What was the constitution to them, that they should have been willing to make even the smallest, sacrifice for it ? Its history was written with their own blood. They were excluded from its pale. They existed but to be fined, imprisoned, and banished. The law was, to them, a savage tyrant. In place of protecting their rights, it was never exercised excepting to violate them. Yet they freely and almost unanimously resisted any en- croachment upon it, even when that encroachment was made in their o^vn favour. There were, however, reasons for this attitude. The first was a fear that, if the King's claims were not resisted, his prerogative might ultimately be exercised in favour of the restoration of Popery as the established religion. They would not have suffered much more, in such an event, than they had recently suffered from the establishment of Protes- tant Episcopalianism, but they believed that religion would suffer. The second reason was of a political cha- racter. The Dissenters were the brain and muscle of the constitutional party. The right of resistance — passive or active — to despotism had come down to them as their most precious inheritance. All their ecclesiastical orga- nizations were founded on a recognition of the rights of the people, and it was not probable that they should surrender those rights to a Stuart. By their co-opera- tion with the bishops, when their weight might have turned the scale of public opinion in favour of the King, [a.d. 1688.] TOLERATION IN VIEW. 85 they assisted to save the liberties of their couutiy. From the time of the arrest of the seven, James's authority as a monarch was gone, and the temporary union, in a period of common danger, of Conformists and Noncon- formists, for the safety of the State, gave' promise that when a new Government should be instituted, the legal security of toleration would be one of its first works. With the end of the reign of James the Second, the experiment of forcing one form of religion upon the English people ceased. Every means which the despotism of the State and the mtolerance of the favoured sect could devise to secure an entire conformity, had been ISSI:^^TEES AND THE PEOPLE, [a.d. 1689.] liament decided to retain the Test Act, and the other the Corporation Oath ? The opposition of the clergy to all such measures has already been referred to ; but their opposition was not the only cause of this failure. The truth is that neither the people at large nor the majority of the Dissenters cared about them. Dissent, however in certain districts it might and did command respect, in consequence of the high character of its representatives, was not popular. This was sufficiently shown on William's death, when the lower classes all over the country threatened to pull down the meeting-houses. In fact, the people far preferred the €hatty, easy-going careless " parson " to either the severe and scrupulous Presbyterian, the godly and painstaking Independent, the zealous but generally unlettered Bap- tist, or the ardent but strange Quaker. The preacher who allowed them to live as they might choose ; who did not preach too censoriously about sin; who was ready with the absolution at the last moment of life, and who professed to give them, with the sanction of the State and all the bishops, an easy entrance after death to heaven, was the preacher for them. Besides this, the English have, of all people, the strongest feeling of loyalty. The Tudors were popular with them notwith- standing their vices, and the Stuarts notwithstanding their crimes. Of the questions at issue between James and the Constitution, they could have known little or nothing. If the great statesmen, landlords, and mer- chants had decided for James, they too would have decided for him, and on the whole, perhaps, because he belonged to a race of English kings, have preferred him to William. Loyalty is a sentiment which, in England, [A.D. 1689.] DISSI:J^T:EBS and toleration. 127 it is happily difficult to change. It cannot be created by a Parliamentary vote ; it was almost in abeyance imtil the House of Hanover became firmly seated on the throne. The greater number and the most influential of the Dissenters were indilFerent to the proceedings of the legislature from another cause. A Bill was already under discussion having for its object the promotion of a union of the Presbyterians, and possibly the Indepen- dents, with the Church. If it should be successful, the Test and Corporation Acts would not afl'ect them ; they would only affect the smaller and more unpopular bodies of Baptists and Quakers. Some amongst the Presby- terians had not, even yet, very large views concerning toleration, and they were the most conspicuous repre- sentatives of the " Dissenting interest." While, therefore, these bills were under discussion, they stood still. If the ■'"' comprehension scheme " should, as they expected, ■come to a satisfactory termination, their own troubles would be over ; if the contrary, they were not disposed to complain so long as mere toleration was allowed. In the absence of all external pressure on the legislature, exceptmg from the King, and in view of the spirit of the clergy, now just beginning to raise the cry of the " Church in Danger," it cannot be a matter of surprise that these measures should have been defeated. No one in nil the debates questioned the undoubted loyalty of Dis- rsenters ; the doubt was as to the loyalty of the Church. Both proposals, therefore, became a sacrifice to the twin Molochs of political disaffection and ecclesiastical supre- macy. The last act, as peers of Parliament, of the non- 128 TRE TOLERATION ACT. [a.d. 1689.] juring bishops was to move for the introduction of two Bills — one for the toleration and the other for the comprehension of Dissenters. In doing this they vindicated the sincerity of their promises, and fur- nished proof that their conduct did not proceed from personal animosity to the King, for on no questions did William feel more strongly than on these two. The Earl of Nottingham, on behalf of the Government, took charge of both these measures. The first was entitled " An Act for exempting their Majesties' Protestant sub- jects. Dissenting from the Church of England, from the Penalties of Certain Laws." It passed the House of Lords without objection, and reached the House of Com- mons in May, a.d. 1689. That House, however, had its ^ own Bill on this subject, entitled " An Act for Liberty and Indulgence to Protestant Dissenters," and on May 11th both Bills were read a second time. There was no substantial difference between the two measures, and on the question that the House do go into Committee, it was agreed, out of respect to the Lords, that their Bill only should be proceeded with. So important a measure was probably never so briefly discussed. The first speech made upon it was by Hampden, who remarked that every man was in favour of indulgence to Dis- senters, and that little needed to be said on the subject. "The empire of religion," he continued, "belongs to God," and he showed that those nations which had refused to acknowledge this principle had been injured by such a policy. He deprecated certain theological references in the Bill, but expressed his hearty agreement with the clause which excluded Unitarians from toleration. After two or three unimportant speeches, the measure was. [a.d. 1GS9.] SOWU ON TOLERATION. 129 ordered to be committed. Two days subsequently the report of the Committee was brought up by Mr. Hamp- den. There was some debate on the proposal to allow Quakers to make an affirmation instead of takino- an oath ; "but," said Colonel Birch, "these sort of people have been in the shambles these twenty years;" and, he added, that he had never supposed they would have accepted such a bill.* It was also urged that the measure should be limited to seven years ; but the House made no alterations in 'it, and, on the same day, May 17th, it finally passed. During the passage of the Bill through the legislature, the last appeal for an enlarged toleration was issued. John Howe, in an anonymous publication, entitled " The Case of the Protestant Dissenters represented and argued," laid down, in clear and stately language, the right of Dissent. He based this right on the natural claims of conscience, on the human origin of those forms and ceremonies which divided Dissenters from the Church, on the unnatural cruelty of the laws by which the supremacy of the Church had been enforced, and on the known patriotism of Dissenters. In this publication, Howe affirmed that the generality of Dissenters differed from the Church of England in no substantials of doctrine or worship, or even of government, provided that the government were- so managed as to attain its acknow- ledged end. He also argued against the unreasonable- ness of excluding Dissenters from any participation in civil affairs. " We tremble," he said, " to think of the * There is a curious passage in George Fox's " Journal" of this month, in which he states how he attendc'l the House of Commons and saw the- niemhers to arrange the terms for Quakers. 130 THE TOLERATION ACT. [a.d. 1689.J sacramental test brought down as low as to the keeper of an alehouse." " Never," he added, " can there be union or peace in the Christian world till we take down our arbitrary inclosures, and content ourselves with those which our common Lord hath set. If he falls mider a curse that alters man's landmark, to alter God's is not likely to infer a blessing." This Act, which has subsequently received the popular title of the " Toleration Act," gave, as may be supposed from the temper of the times in which it passed, the smallest possible advantage to Dissenters from the estab- lished religion. The only Dissent which it recognized or allowed was dissent from forms and ceremonies ; it allowed none from what were supposed, at that time, to be the established doctrines of the Church. The pre- amble recited that its object was to give some ease to scrupulous consciences, in order that Protestants might be more united in interest and affection. It exempted Dissenters, on condition of their takmg certain oaths against the Papal rule and supremacy, from the opera- tion of those laws of Elizabeth compelling attendance at parish churches; on the same condition, it exempted them from any past defaults against those laws, and provided that they should not in future be prosecuted for their Nonconformity. No assembly of persons meet- ing for religious worship was allowed to hold such meeting in any place the doors of which were, at the time, secured by locks, bars, or bolts ; nothing was to exempt Dissenters from payment of tithes or other parochial dues ; if any persons elected to a parochial office objected to take the oaths, they might serve by deputy; all Dissenting preachers and teachers were re- [a.d. 1689.] THE TOLEBATION ACT. 131 quired to take the oaths and subscribe, before a general or quarter session, all the articles of religion excepting the thirty-fourth, thirty-fifth, and thirty- sixth, or neglecting to do so, were liable to be subjected to the penalties of the Act of Uniformity and the Conventicle and Five Mile Acts of Charles the Second ; the names of such persons as had so subscribed were to be registered, and they were to be charged a fee of sixpence for such regis- tration ; those who scrupled at the baptizing of infants were •exempted from the obligation to subscribe to the Article respecting Infant Baptism; all Dissenting ministers so qualified were not to be liable to serve on juries or to be appointed churchwardens or overseers ; any one going to a Dissenting place of worship might be called upon at any time, by a justice of the peace, to take the oaths, and if he refused, was forthwith to be imprisoned with- out bail, and to be punished as a "Papal recusant;" "certain other persons" — intending Quakers — who scrupled at the taking of any oath, were allowed to substi- tute for it a promise and declaration in the terms of the oath, subscribing at the same time a profession of their belief in the Trinity and in the Divine inspiration of the Scriptures ; all the laws until that time in force for fre- quenting Divine service on the Lord's-day were to be executed against all persons who did not attend some place of religious worship ; Dissenting as well as Church congregations were to be protected from disturbance during public service ; no Dissenting congregation was to be permitted to assemble until the place of worship had been certified before the bishop of the dio- cese, his archdeacon, or a justice of the peace; and lastly, all Papists and all who denied the doctrine of the 9* 132 ^ THE QUAKERS AND TOLERATION, [a.d. 1689.] Trinity were wholly excluded from the benefit of the Act. The Dissenters as a body, we are informed, re- ceived this measure with thankfulness and content.* The only people who were dissatisfied with it were the Quakers, who continued, from this time forward, year after year, to denounce, in the most emphatic language, tithes and Church-rates, and all compulsory exactions for the support of religion.f Howe, as soon as the Act was passed, addressed to Churchmen and Dissenters an exhortation to peace and charity, counselling them no longer to " bicker " about forms, ceremonies, or Church constitutions, but to adopt such a course of conduct a& might lead to a closer ecclesiastical union.:]: In addition to the Quakers there was one man who did not view this Act with complacency. It has been supposed that the terms of the Toleration Act were * Calamy's " Baxter," p. 653. " Life of Howe," p. 163. t " We desire your testimony against tithes may be kept up in the peace- able spirit of Christ, as becomes true Christians, rather suftering patiently the spoUing ofyovir goods, than any ways to strive or struggle with the sj^oilers^ and retain them by force." " Yearly Epistle," 1689. " It is our desire that, for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, and His holy testimony, that all Friends be faithful to Him in their testimony against tithes of all sorts, knowing that since they were ended by Christ they were imposed by, and originally sprung from, that anti-Christian root, a Popish usurpation in Church and State." " Yearly Epistle," 1690. Similar language is used for many years in all the subsequent Epistles of this Society. In 1693 the Friends are urged to be a good example to their children in testifying against "the grand oppression and anti-Christian yoke of tithes, that our Christian testimony, borne and greatly suffered for, be faithfully maintained against them in all respects, and against steeple-house rates or lays." " Epistle," 1693. The number of persons imprisoned for non-payment of these exactions when the " Yearly Epistle " was drawn up, generally ave- raged about one hundred, and the goods taken to about .£4,000. " Epistles, etc., from 1681 to 1857." 2 vols. London. 1858. % " Humble Requests to Conformists and Dissenters touching their Temper and Behaviour towards each Other, upon the lately passed Indul- gence." 1CS9. Ia-d. 1689.] JOHN LOCKE. 133 negotiated by John Locke : if so, we know that he con- sidered them to be most inadequate to the claims of justice.* Locke, although not a Dissenter, had been trained under Dissenting influences. " Educated," says Sir James Mackhitosh, " amongst English Dissenters, during the short period of their political ascendancy, he €arly imbibed from them that deep piety and ardent spirit of liberty which actuated that body of men. "f €ast out from Oxford soon after the Restoration, he took refuge in Holland, where, in a.d 1688, he com- posed, in Latin, his First Letter on Toleration. He came to England with the Prince of Orange. Soon after the Act was passed, this Letter was translated, and published in English. It was the first publication in which the principles of religious equality were described and de- fended by a Christian philosopher as well as a Christian statesman. Locke's mental constitution peculiarly fitted him for the dispassionate treatment of such a subject. His intellect, while it was clear and penetrating, was neither cold nor unsympathetic. He was endowed with the highest order of the reasoning faculty, but his breadth of vision was equal to its accuracy and its strength. The founder of a new school of English philosophy, he led the way to a revolution in the doctrines of mental science. All the strength and freshness of his intellect he brought to bear on the discussion of the relation which should subsist between civil governments and the human conscience. His motive, however, in writing on this subject, was not merely to settle a question in poli- tical philosophy. He was a devout, religious man, as * Lord King's " Life of Locke, i. 327. i" Sir James Mackintosh's Miscellaneous Works, Art: "Locke." 134 LOCKE ON [a.d. 1689.] well as an exact thinker ; and he felt that the religion of Jesus Christ did not, and could not sanction any form or degree of persecution. He had an inflexible sense of right, and his mind revolted at the suggestion that in- justice could ever j)romote the interests of the Christian religion. The argument of the First Letter begins by stating the marks of a true Church. Toleration is considered to be its chief characteristic. Pomp of outward wor- ship, reformation of discipline and orthodoxy, are rather marks of men striving for power and empire over one another than of the true Church of Christ. A person may be possessed of all these things, and yet be desti- tute of charity, meekness, and goodwill to all mankind ^ and if so, he is "short of being a true Christian him- self." It is in vain, Locke argues, for men to usurp the name of Christian without benignity and meekness of spirit. He appeals to the consciences of all perse- cutors, and asks them whether they have persecuted out of friendship and kindness, and whether they have dealt Avith members of their own communion, who were guilty of all manner of vices, as they have dealt with godly Nonconformists ? Why have they tolerated whore- dom, fraud, and malice in their own flocks, and perse- cuted innocency of life, embodied in conscientious dis- sent; was this to the glory of God? " Let such," he says, " talk ever so much of the Church ; they plainly demonstrate by their actions that it is another kingdom they aim at, and not the advancement of the Kingdom of God." If they desired the good of souls they would, like the Prince of Peace, send men out, not armed with the sword or other instruments of force, but with the [a.d. 1689.] TOLEBATIOJS: I35 Gospel of Peace, and with the exemplary holiness of their lives. He then proceeds to define the boundaries of the State and the Church. The office of the civil magistrate, he says, is to protect life, Hberty, health, and prosperity, and does not extend, nor ought to be ex- tended, to the salvation of souls. The care of souls is not committed to him more than to other men ; for God has not committed such authority to one man over another, as to compel any one to his religion. All the life and power of religion consists in the inward persuasion of the mind ; and faith is not faith without believino-. The civil magistrate's power consists only in outward force, and it is impossible for the understanding to be com- pelled to the belief of anything by such a force. Even if the rigour of law could change men's opinions it would not help to the salvation of their souls. With regard to the Church, he argues that it is a purely voluntary society for public worship. People cannot be born members of it, and neither bishop nor presbyter is necessary to constitute it. It could not be a Church of Christ if it excluded from its communion those who would one day be received into the kingdom of heaven. With respect to toleration, it is maintained that all persons are entitled to equal rights as citizens, whatever may be their religion, and whether they be Christians or Pagans. Locke notices it as remarkable that the most violent defenders of the truth, and ex- claimers against schism, hardly ever let loose this, their zeal for God, with which they are so Avarmed and inflamed, unless they have the civil magistrate on their side. He takes notice also of the fact, that while people are let alone in the management of all their tem- 13G LOCKE ON TOLERATION [a.d. 1689.] poral affiiirs, if they do not frequent Church, noise and clamour are at once excited. In his judgment, the magistrate has no power to enforce or to forbid any rites or ceremonies in the worship of God ; for, though ever so indifferent in their own nature, when they are brought into the Church and worship of God, they are removed out of the reach of his jurisdiction. The motive of all such interference he ascribes to the heads and leaders of the Church, moved by avarice and an in- satiable desire of dominion, making use of the immo- derate ambition of magistrates, and the credulous superstition of the people to animate them against Dis- senters, contrary to all the laws of the Gospel, and to the precepts of charity. The principles laid down in this remarkable Letter are defended with the greatest force of reason and felicity of illustration. They not only strike at the root of all state- churches, but they go far to unchristianize state- churches as such, and all such members of them as act according to the spirit of their foundation. The real schismatics, Locke argues, are not the men who sepa- rate from an established religion, but the men, who, professing that religion, violate, by their want of charity, and by their carnal desire for supremacy, the precepts and the spirit of Christianity. This Letter was followed by two others, on the same subject, in which the position taken by the writer was defended with equal acuteness and power. In other writings Locke gave what may be termed the moral history of state- churches. In the religion established by Jesus Christ, he remarked, such outward ceremonies as had been com- mon amongst the ancients, and which were always con- [A.D. 1689.] AND STATE CR UBCHES. 137 ducted by an order of men called " priests," were almost dispensed witli, and pompous rites were abolished. Since then, its ministers, who, like the ancients, also called themselves priests, had assumed to themselves the parts both of the heathen priests and the philosophers, and had combined to enlist the secular power on their side. They had been the cause of more disorders and tumults, and bloodsheds, than all other circumstances put together. He traced the divisions of Christendom, and the persecution to which men had been subjected, to the assumption by the clergy, supported by the magistrates, of sacerdotal power, although the Scriptures plainly showed that there was nothmg which a priest could do which any other man could not also do.* He connected with this the rise and growth of Episcopacy, and the ambition which such an office had excited .f The origm of state -churches, accordmg to Locke, was to be ascribed to the lowest passions of humanity; their characteristics were not the characteristics of true religion, and their history had been one of inhuman cruelty and oppression. The treatises of Locke bore the same relation to the age in which they appeared as those of Milton had borne to a previous generation. Both writers addressed the rulers of the State with a common object, and both designed their works for the establishment of sounder principles of government. While priests and presbyters alike were laying claim to supernatural power and arbi- trary authority, Milton, in wrath and indignation, exposed the pretences of both parties. When the popular will had, in relation to the control of the * Locke's Common-place Book. Art : " Sacerdos." t "Defence of Nonconformity." Life, ii, pp. 215—218. 138 LOCKE AND MILTON. [a.d. 1689.] civil government, successfully asserted its power, he would have had it to assert itself, with equal intensity, against all ecclesiastical usurpation. To make sacer- dotalism appear as odious to others as it did to himself, he arrayed it in the most repulsive garb which his ima- gination could suggest. He brought to bear agamst it the resources of the richest scholarship, and tried its claims by history, by experience, by Scripture, and by conscience. His writings aided to dam its doctrines against further advance, until priests and presbyters united to break down the obstacle which opposed them both. When the civil government again became un- settled, Locke endeavoured to do what Milton had done. The style and manner of Milton would have been un- suited to the circumstances of the Revolution, The possessors of power both in Church and State now pro- fessed to be animated by a conciliatory spirit. Locke therefore addressed them in the calm voice of philosophy. His purpose was not to arouse indignation, but to per- suade the judgment and the conscience. As far as his own generation was concerned he failed, but the lovers of freedom in all subsequent times have drawn from his works a strength which, but for him, they could not have attained. Nothing could have been more opposed to the prin- ciples of government laid down in Locke's writings than the ecclesiastical law of England as settled by the Tole- ration Act. This Act, while it repealed former laws which had had for their direct object the extinction of all Dissent, legalized it, and gave it social standing. But care was taken that this standing should be as low as possible. The right of all persons to think for them- [a.d. 1689.] TOLERATION- ACT CONSIDERED. 139 selves in matters of religion was now finally recognized by the law of England, but those who chose to exercise this right were, at the same time, deprived of a portion of their civil privileges. The State expressed its solemn and deliberate judgment that such men could not be trusted. It did not believe this ; it knew that the very heart of loyalty was with the Dissenters ; but it was thought expe- dient, notmthstanding, to punish them. It has not been the practice of statesmen to base their legislation on prin- ciples of abstract justice, but to accommodate their mea- sures to the temper and the strength of the various parties in the kingdom. The statesmen of the Revolution sacri- ficed Dissenters to appease the jealousies and the fears of the lower order of the clergy. In a.d. 1687 the Dissenters had voluntarily surrendered their liberties, in order to save the State; in a.d. 1689 the State, ostensibly for its own safety, limited those liberties mthin the narrowest bounds which, with any pretension to honour, it could define. But if, relatively to Dissenters, the Toleration Act was an unjust and an migenerous measure, relatively to the State it was an almost infinite concession. In passing it the civil government declared that it had been vanquished : that conscience had conquered law ; that a system of absolute repression had failed, and could no longer be continued. Henceforward the Church was not to be armed with the sword to kill, but with the stave alone to punish and distress. The contest between it and Dissent was not to be one for existence on the one side and extermination on the other, but for equality in the one and supremacy in the other. In order that she might prosecute this new warfare with success the Church was armed and equipped at the expense of the State. 140 THE COMPEERENSION BILL. [a.d. 1689.] She had the exclusive privileges of office and power, and her endowments were anew secured to her. The Dis- senters, like the Christians who were sent into the Roman amphitheatre, were defenceless. Looking at the prospect of the two parties from a human point of view, which was most likely to succeed ? Looking at them from another point of view, which was most likely to perform the effective religious work of Christian Churches ? At the same time that the Toleration Bill was intro- duced into the House of Lords, the bill for the " Com- prehension " of Dissenters in the Established Church was also introduced. Six times during the previous hundred years had stej^s been taken to bring about this result. Some of these proposals had failed from the insin- cerity of the government and the Church, and others from the want of general interest in the subject. It seemed that, on this occasion, there could be no such failure. The Crown was known to be warmly interested in the scheme, and some of the most eminent of the Church dignitaries were not merely favourable to it, but anxious for its success. The only quarters, apparently, from which opposition could be expected were the House of Commons and the clergy — whose influence could so •effectively be brought to bear on the composition of that House. The bill introduced by the Earl of Nottingham to the House of Lords was entitled " An Act for uniting their Majesties' Protestant subjects."'"" The preamble recited that the peace of the State was "highly con- * When Lord Macaulay wrote his History this Bill had not been seen by more than "two or three living persons" (chap, xi.) It has since been reprinted in the " Eeport of the Subscription Commission for 1865." Pari. Paper, 3441. Sess. 1865. [A,D. 1689.] THE COMPREHENSION BILL. 141 cerned " in the peace of the Church, and that it was most necessary, in the present conjuncture, for that peace to be preserved. In order, therefore, to remove occasions of diflference and dissatisfaction amongst Protestants, it was provided that no subscription or declaration should be required from any person but the declaration against the Papacy, and that the declarant approved "of the Doctrine and Worship and Government of the Chnrch of England by law established as containing all things necessary to salvation," but this was subsequently altered to an engagement to " submit to the present constitution ot the Church of England " with an acknowledgment that " the doctrine of it contains in it all things necessary to salvation," and a promise " to conform to the worship and the government thereof as established by law." The declarant was also required to promise that, in the exer- cise of his ministry, he would preach and practice accord- ing to such doctrine. No oaths were to be required on admission to a benefice but the oaths of fidelity to the present settlement of the Crown, and the oaths concerning residence and simony. Schoolmasters, also, were re- quired to take the two former oaths. Persons taking any degree, fellowship, headship, or professorship in the Universities were to take the same oaths, and also to engage, in the words required of clergymen, excepting, in the case of laymen, the latter portion of them, to con- form to the Established relis-ion. There was also a clause to the effect that, with the imposition of the bishop's hands, Presbyterian ordinations should be con- sidered vnhd, but this clause was struck out. It was next provided that, excepting in the Royal Chapels and the cathedral and collegiate churches, no person should 142 THE COMFRESENSION BILL. [a.d. 1689.] be compelled to wear a surplice during the performance of any of his ministerial duties, but only a black gown. Compulsion to use the sign of the Cross in Baptism was abolished, and parents were allowed to take the office of godfathers and godmothers. Kneeling at the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was left to the option of the com- municant. Lastly, as the liturgies and canons of the Church were capable of being altered so as to " conduce to the glory of God and the better edification of the people;" as the ecclesiastical courts were defective m their jurisdiction, particularly in respect to the removal of scandalous ministers; as Confirmation should be solemnly administered, and a strict care exercised in the examination of candidates for the ministry, their Majesties were petitioned to issue a Royal Commission to the bishops and clergy, not exceeding thirty in number, for the purpose of making alterations in the liturgy, the canons, and the ecclesiastical courts, and to pre- sent such alterations to Convocation and Parliament "that the same may be approved and established in due course of law." This Bill did not pass the Lords without some difficulty. The clauses relating to kneeling at the Sacrament occasioned, says Burnet, " a vehement debate," * and a strenuous opposition was made to the proposal to include only members of the clerical order in the Commission. When the vote was taken on this proposal, the numbers were found to be •equal, and therefore, according to the rule of the house, the amendment was negatived. The Marquis of Win- chester, Lord Mordaunt, and Lord Lovelace entered, * "OwnTime«,"p. 531. [a.d. 1689.] THE COMFRERENSION BILL. 143 however, their protest against this vote, in which they expressed their opinion that it was a humiliation of the laity ; that it unduly exalted the clerical order ; that it was a recognition of the Eomish principle of the clergy alone having a right to meddle in religion; that it would be a greater satisfaction both to Dissenters and to the legislature if lay lords and commoners were included in the Commission, that the clergy had no •authority but such as was given to them by the laity in Parliament, and that it was contrary to historical pre- cedents. When the Comprehension Bill reached the Commons it was allowed to lie on the table ^vithout discussion. Instead of proceeding with it, the house passed a resolu- tion requesting the King to summon a meeting of Con- vocation, and the Lords seconded the request. Tillotson was, at the time, in intimate intercourse \vith the King, and the blame of summoning this body has been uni- formly charged on the advice given by him. While the measure was being discussed by the Lords, Tillotson himself suggested to the King that Convocation should be summoned to deal with it.* In all probability, there- fore, the clause in the Bill relating to Convocation was inserted at his suggestion. Tillotson's sincerity in pro- moting Comprehension cannot be questioned, but the step which he advised proved, as it was prophesied it would be,t fatal to the success of the scheme. Tillot- son's motives had reference to the character of the • Birch's " Life of Tillotson," pp. 165, 166. t Burnet was very angry at the address of the Commons and prophesied that if Convocation were summoned it would be " the utter ruin " of the Comprehension Scheme. Reresby's " Memoirs," p. 344, 144 THE CO^IPEERENSION [a.b. 1689.] Church. He thought it desirable that the stigma of its being a mere " Parliamentary religion," should be taken away from it, and that, therefore, liberty should be given to it to revise its own constitution.* The King, no doubt, saw in the suggestion a means of con- ciliating the clergy, and therefore yielded to it. In accordance with the terms of the Bill the Com- mission was first nominated. It consisted often bishops and twenty divines, and included men of all parties in the Church. Amongst them were Lamplugh, Archbishop of York ; Compton, Bishop of London ; Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury; Stilliugfleet, Tillotson, andTenison, Tillotson and Stillingfleet appear to have taken the initiative in all the proposals which were laid before this body. Before it met Tillotson drew up a list of the concessions which, in his judgment, the Church would be willing to make. All ceremonies, Tillotson thought, should be left indif- ferent; the liturgy should be revised, the Apocryphal lessons left out, and the Psalms re-translated; the terms of subscription should be altered in accord- ance with the clauses of the Bill on that subject ; the canons should be revised, the ecclesiastical courts re- formed, persons ordained in foreign reformed Churches should not be re-ordained, and Presbyterian ordination should be considered valid.t The Commissioners met on October 3rd, and in six weeks held eighteen meet- ings, some of them of several hours' duration, besides holding various sub-committees. A diary of their pro- ceedings was kept, and a copy < fthe Prayer Book used by them in their revision is still in existence. J * Birch's " Tillotson," } . 166. t Birch's "Tillotson," pp. 168—170. % These papers wurc inaccessible until recent year?. Calamy kncAV of [a.d. 1689.] COMMISSION. 145 Nothing could have exceeded the conscientious and scrupulous care, or the spirit of conciliation which cha- racterized the labours of this Commission. They had before them all the works of Nonconformists, from Elizabeth's time to their own, in which exceptions had been taken to the services and the constitution of the Church. The whole of the Prayer Book was considered sentence by sentence, and alterations were made through- out every part. The proceedings do not appear to have been always of an amicable character. Six of the Com- missioners never sat, one attended only twice, and three others left after the third meeting.* The whole of these belonged to the High Church party. The attendance, however, was still very considerable, and always included five or six bishops. Neither Burnet, Tillotson, nor Tenison was once absent. The labours of the Commission resulted in the adoption of an entirely reformed service, and in the revision of several of the most important laws and ceremonies of the Church, the whole amounting to nearly six hundred alterations. The Apocrypha was discarded ; the word " priest " was altered to " minister ;" the "Lord's-day" was substituted for "Sunday;" the use of the surplice was left optional; the Athanasian Creed was so explained as to diminish the effect of the damnatory clauses; there was to be no obligation to kneel at the communion, nor to use the cross in baptism ; the marriage service was purged of its indecencies and the words of the contract modified; the absolution their existence, but could not see them. Tenison desired them to be deposited in the Lambeth Library, but to be kept secret. They were published, on the motion of Mr. Heywood, M.P., in Pari. Paper, 283, Sess. 1854. "* Pari. Papers, " Alterations, &c.," p. 108. 10 146 CONVOCATION [a.d. 1689.] service was so changed that it was impossible for it to sanction Romish doctrine ; in the burial service the objectionable phrases relating to the " sure and certain hope " of the everlasting happiness of the departed were changed to an expression of belief in the resurrection of all the dead, and in the eternal life of all who might "die in the Lord." Ordination by presbyteries was acknow- ledged to be valid, and the ordination service so altered that the gift of the Holy Ghost, which the words now ascribe to the bishop, was made a matter of prayer only, the Commissioners expressing their judgment that the form then, and now, in use was imported into the Church of England service in the " darkest times of Popery." In addition to these, several alterations were made in the collects, the litany, the catechism, and other por- tions of the service. These changes were made not merely to satisfy Dissenters, but, as Stillingfleet remarked, they were " fit to be made were there no Dissenters " whatever.* The Commission finished its labours on the 10th November, and on the 21st of the same month Convo- cation met. The Upper House was, as a whole, well disposed for peace and unity. Sancroft being under suspension, it was presided over by Compton, Bishop of London, who had been one of the most active members of the Commission, and whose antecedents were all in favour of a conciliatory policy. The Lower House gave, at its first sitting, a proof of its opposite temper. The liberal party had hoped to secure Tillotson as pro- locutor, but it appeared that the members had been * lb. p. 103. [a.d. 1689.] AND COMFBESENSION. 147 already canvassed by the High Church and Jacobite party in favour of Dr. Jane, of Oxford, one of the Commis- sioners who had ceased to attend the meeting of that body, on the ground that he was not satisfied with its authority, and that, after having given his assent and con- sent to the contents of the Prayer Book, he did not see how he could make an alteration in them. Jane was elected, and with his election the hopes of all Hberal Churchmen died. It was with great difficulty, after this, that the house could be prevailed upon to consent to an address to the King. It was proposed by one of its members that the non-jurors should sit with them.* The Bishop of London spoke warmly in favour of in- dulgence and charity, but on this question he spoke to deaf ears. All the indulgence and charity of the Lower House were accorded not to Dissenters but to those who stood in the strongest political and ecclesiastical opposi- *tion to them.f They spent their time in considering what books they should condemn, and in creating occasions of difference with the Upper House. It was useless to lay the scheme of revision before this body. To prevent unseemly spectacles, it was prorogued until the January of the next year, when, with Parliament, it was dissolved. No attempt was afterwards made to revive this subject. The failure of this scheme perpetuated, to a great extent, Nonconformity in England. The Presbyterians never ceased to regret the issue of the labours of the Comprehension Commission. Baxter protested, in his * Kennet, iii. 555. t Lathbury's " History of Convocation, " p. 332. Procter's " History of tlie Common Prayer Book," p. 159. Kennett, iii. p. 555. 10* 148 OJV TSE FAILURE OF TRE [a.d. 1689.] latest works, that the body to which he belonged was in favour of a National State Church. He disavowed the term Presbyterian, and stated that most whom he knew did the same. They would be glad, he said, to live under godly bishops and to unite on " healing terms."* He deplored that the Church-doors had not been opened to him and his brethren, and pleaded urgently for a " healing Act of Uniformity, "f Calamy explicitly states that he was disposed to enter the Establishment if Til- lotson's scheme had succeeded. :{: Howe, also, lamented the failure of the scheme. § It is uncertain to what extent the Independents shared in this feeling, but it is unquestionable that they Avere generally considered to be willing, on certain terms, to unite with the Church. They formed a portion of the deputation of ministers which waited on the King after his coronation, when Dr. Bates said, on behalf of the whole body, that they were now encouraged to hope for a firm union of Pro- testants by the rule of Christianity being made the rule of Conformity. ' ' We shall cordially, ' ' said the ministers, " embrace the terms of union which the ruling wisdom of our Saviour has prescribed in His Word." Such an union, they added, would make the Church a type of Heaven. On the same day they addressed the Queen, and besought her to use her influence to compose the differ- ences which then existed, and that the terms of union might be those in which all Protestant Churches were agreed. II It was stated, however, that the Independents * Baxter's " National Churches," p. G8, a.d. 1691. t lb. p. 72. X Calamy's " Own Life," i. 208. § Calamy's " Howe," p. 163. II Calamy's " Baxter," pp. 623-24. [a.d. 1689.] CO MPBESENSION SCHEME. 149 seemed incapable of anything but toleration, and that they could not be brought into the Church excepting by such concessions as would shake its foundations. But, in the judgment of many men, the concessions made by the Commissioners were sufficient to do this.* Calamy's assertion that the scheme, if it had been adopted, would, in all probability, have brought into the Church two-thirds of the Dissenters, -j* indicates the almost entire agreement of the Independents with the Presbyterians concerning the expediency of accepting it. Had Owen been alive, their sympathies might have been restrained ; but no man since his death had taken, or was qualified to take, his place. The Comprehension scheme failed not because of the disaffection of Dissenters, but because of the opposition of the Church. While it was under discussion, pamphlet after pamphlet appeared against it, in which it was denounced as tending to division rather than to union, and as undermining and "pulling down" the Church. The Universities declared against it. J South declaimed against "the rabble" being admitted, and compared the proposals for union to letting a thief into a house in order to avoid the noise and trouble of his tapping at the door.§ It seems, also, to be certain that the states- men who publicly advocated it were privately opposed to it. Even those who were most eager in its promotion came afterwards to the conclusion that its failure was * Dr. Comber to Dr. Patrick (one of the Commissioners), " Tanner MSS." 27, 93. t Calamy's " Baxter," p. 655. % "Vox Cleri," a.d. 1689. " Burnet's Own Times," p. 543. "Birch's Tillotson," p. 183. § Sermons, vol. v., p. 486. 150 FAILURE OF COMPREHENSION, [a.d. 1689.]* owing to a " very happy direction of the providence of God,"* for that, in all probability, it would only have strengthened the schism of the non-jurors and have given occasion to a stronger opposition to the government. That its virtual rejection was a breach of faith to Dis- senters, no one questioned. " All the promises," says Burnet, " made in King James's time were now entirely forgotten." In a different sense from that intended by Bishop Burnet, " the happy providence of God " in this matter may be acknowledged by all Dissenters and most En- glishmen. The absorption into the National Church of two-thirds, and those the most learned and influen- tial, of the Dissenters of that period would have been a public calamity. It is true that the Church to which they would have given their adhesion would have been a reformed Church. JSTo suspicion of Romanism could henceforth have attached to it, and it would have afforded no foothold to men whose sympathies were with the doctrines of Rome while their offices were in the Church of England. But the strength of English Protestant Dissent would have been broken, and its influence both in its political and its ecclesiastical rela- tions,— on the religion of the people and on the character of public legislation, — have been fatally diminished in power. * Burnet's " Own Times," p. 544. CHAPTER III. THE COMPREHENSION BILL TO THE SCHISM BILL. A.D. 1689— A.D. 1714. Tolerated, but still under the frown of the State, all classes of Dissenters began at once to make the most active use of their newly acquired liberty. The whole body apparently constituted, at this period, about a twentieth portion of the inhabitants of England and "Wales,* or alittle more than a hundred and ten thousand persons. It was the opinion of some that Dissent would die out with the generation then existing ;f and, looking at the age of its living leaders, and at the little prospect that there seemed of men of equal power and influence rising to take their places, this opinion may not have appeared, even to many of their own number, an unreasonable one. They did not, however, act as though there was any such probability. The most aggressive, and, in some respects, the most suc- cessful body at this period, was that of the Quakers. Fox, Barclay, and Penn, were still living. Although nearly seventy years of age, Fox's zeal was as ardent as ever it * Return to au Order in Council as follows: — Province of Canterbury — Conformists 2,123,362 ; Nonconformists 93,151 ; Papists 11,878. Province of York— Conformists 353,892 ; Nonconformists 15,525; Papists 1,987. " Cole's MSS. in the British Museum," vol. x. p. 136. There is an evident in- accuracy in this retiu-n, for the population of England was then nearly double the aggregate of these figures. Probably the return related only to the worshipping population. t This was Burnet's statement to Calamy as the opinion of the "great men of the Church." Calaniy's " Life of Howe," p. 129. 152 TSE QUAKEBS—FOX, &e. [a.d. 1689.] had been. Years of imprisonment and labour were, however, telling upon his constitution. The meetings which he attended now made him feel '' wearied and spent." * His work was nearly finished, and in little more than another year he, also, was to join the dead witnesses. \o man then living had done more than he in preach- ng the Gospel, and in planting and watering new Christian communities. What was said of him by the friend of Milton was not in excess of the merits of his extraordinary character and work. He was, says Ell wood, f a " heavenly -minded man; " valiant and bold for the truth ; immoveable in principle as a rock, but patient in suffering, forgiving in disposition, gentle to the erring, and " tender, compassionate, and pitiful to all in affliction." He had a wonderful acquaintance with the Scriptures, and was a bold and vigorous yet plam preacher. His zeal knew no bounds, and his love and charity were as great as his zeal. Like many great orators. Fox probably owed much of his popular power to his commanding stature, his "graceful countenance," and his admirable voice. His natural, fitted with his spiritual, qualifications to make him the founder of a sect, and he did not die until he had seen it spread throughout the world, and, in his own country, almost at the height of its vigour. Robert Barclay, whose defence of the doctrines of the Quakers has not, during two hundred years, been super- seded by any work of equal ability and scholarship, was now also approaching death ; but other men were in the prime of life and the fulness of activity. Amongst them Fox's " Journal," vol. ii. p. 340. f ^^' P- 369. A.D. 1689.] THE BAPTISTS— KIFFIN: 153 were Penn, whose political influence was equal to that of any man who did not sit in Parliament, and George Whitehead, one of the most earnest of preachers. The Quakers at this period were remarkable for their extensive use of the press. Penn was equally conspicuous as a writer and as a negotiator. His history of the Society is now out of date, but his expositions of their doctrines were very numerous, and are still of value. Whitehead, however, was probably their best literary controver- sialist. The documents of the Society, as well as the registries of the Bishops' Courts, give proof of the rapid progress which Quaker principles made imme- diately after the passing of the Toleration Act. Between A.D, 1688 and a.d. 1690 licenses were taken out for no fewer than a hundred and thirty-one new temporary, and a hundred and eight new permanent places of worship for this Society. Sixty-four of these were established in Lancashire alone.* In their Yearly Epistles the Friends are repeatedly congratulated on the " prosperity of the truth in many counties," on the opening of new places of worship, and on the willingness of people to receive their doctrines. f The old leaders of the Baptist denomination were, for the most part, men greatly advanced in years. Fore- most amongst them was William Kiffin, merchant, and once alderman of London, the first pastor of the Devon- shire Square Church, and the " father of the Particular Baptists."! Kiffin had suffered distress and imprisonments under each of the reigns of the last three Stuarts, but * Paxl. Paper, No. 156, Sess. 1853. t Yearly Epistles, a.d. 1687, and A.D. 1690. X Ivimey, ii. 296. 154 TEE BAPTISTS— KNOLLTS. [a.d. 1689.] his great wealth and social position brought him at last into consideration at Court. Charles the Second did not think it beneath him to " borrow " ten thousand pounds from him, and James the Second endeavoured to use him as an instrument to bring over the Dissenters to his views. Kiffin, on the last occasion, gave the King a rebuke which silenced his tongue and flushed his cheek. Two of the old man's grandsons had been hung by Jeffreys in the "bloody assizes." James would have bought him over to his interests by nomination to office, but Kiffin excused himself from age, adding, with tears, " the death of my grandsons gave a wound to my heart which is still bleeding, and never will close but with the grave." The King, we are told, was struck with the rebuke. A total silence ensued, while his countenance seemed to shrink from the remembrance. He replied, how- ever, "I shall find a balsam for that sore," and then turned away.* Kiffin was an able and faithful preacher, and a man of unbounded benevolence. At this time he was about seventy-five years of age, and he lived until the last year of King William's reign. His portrait does not bear out the once current impression concerning the Baptists of that age. "With skull-cap and flowing ringlets, with moustache and "imperial," with broad lace collar and ample gown,j* he resembles a gentleman cavalier rather than any popular ideal of a sour-visaged and dis- contented Anabaptist. A still older man than Kiffin was Hanserd KnoUys, minister of the Church at Broken Wharf, Thames Street. Knollys was originally a clergyman of the Estab- * Noble's " Cromwell," ii. 463. t See his i^ortrait in Wilson's Dissenting Chixrches, i. 403. [a.d. 1689.] THE BAPTISTS— KEACR. 15& lished Church, but had now been connected with the Baptists for fifty years. He, too, had known from ex- perience all that persecution could tell. The High Com- mission Court in Charles the First's time had followed him to New England. Under Cromwell he had met with favour ; but was illegally arrested for preaching in favour of baptism at Bow Church, Cheapside. After this he was stoned out of a pulpit in Suffolk by fanatical Presbyterians ; but in London he gathered one of the largest of Nonconformist congregations. He was impri- soned in Newgate for eighteen weeks in the reign of Charles the Second, and again, in the same reign, imprisoned in the Compter. He was, perhaps, the most active preacher in the denomination — preaching for forty years, in prison and out of it, seldom less than three or four times a week. His scholarship adorned all his sermons and all his writings. When the Toleration Act passed he was ninety-one years of age, and he survived it for two years.* Benjamin Keach, pastor of the Church m Goat Yard Passage, Horsleydown, was at this time in the height of his power. He, too, had suffered under the Stuarts. For publishmg a Child's Instructor he was imprisoned and pilloried at Aylesbury, and for years afterwards was hunted from place to place. He was pre-eminently the controversialist of his denomination. He had defended adult Baptism against Baxter and Flavel; had engaged in controversy with the Quakers and with Baptists on the ordination question; was a writer on Popery, on ministerial support, on public singing, and on the obser- vance of the Sabbath. His published works, some of * Knollys' " Own Life." Wilson's » Dissenting Cliurches," ii. 562-71. 1S6 TRE BAPTISTS— GIFFORD. [a.d. 1689.] which are of great religious value, were more than forty in number.* Out of London Andrew Gifford, of Bristol, occupied the most prominent position amongst Baptist ministers. Gifford, like many others of that age, had been a constant preacher in parish churches until he was silenced by the Act of Uniformity. He was the most active and intrepid evangelist in the West of England, and was remarkably popular among the colliers of the district, who, on the approach of officers to apprehend him, would disguise him as a labourer so that he should not be recognized. The narrative of his imprisonments and escapes from apprehension, and his travels to preach the Gospel, dur- ing which he would swim any river that obstructed his way, read more like romance than history. He was actively engaged in the Duke of Monmouth's rebellion, but fortunately escaped the punishment which fell on most of those who were implicated in that transaction. He apjDears to have had a remarkable moral power, which often awed both his gaolers and the civil autho- rities. Gifford took one of the most prominent parts in the organization of the Baptist body. He invariably at- tended the assemblies which were held in London, and when the)'' were discontinued he established a Western Association of Churches. No man took a warmer interest in the education of the ministry, and he ardently supported all the efforts which were made at that time rto improve the mental qualifications of preachers. 'Gifford lived until the year 1721, leaving a son and •grandson in the Baptist ministry .t * Wilson, iv. 243-250. •f Iviiney's "History," i, 432 ; ii. 541-547. Broadmead Records. [a.d. 1689.] BAPTIST ASSEMBLT. I57 Soon after the Toleration Act was passed the Baptists held a general assembly of their churches in London. It was summoned by a circular signed by Kiffin, KnoUys, Keach, and four others. The object of this meeting was to discuss the general state of the denomination. It appears from the terms of the invitation that the Bap- tist body was in a remarkably depressed state. Its condition was openly deplored, and it was stated that its power, life, strength, and vigour had, to a great ex- tent, departed.* The registries of the Bishop's Courts confirm this statement. Scarcely any, if any, denomina- tion appears to have made so little progress after the passing of the Toleration Act. While the total number of Nonconformist places of worship Hcensed in the two years from a.d. 1688 to a.d. 1690 was nearly one thousand, f the number avowedly belonging to the Baptists were only sixteen.^ This assembly was attended by delegates from more than a hundred churches in thirty counties of England and Wales. Thirteen of these were in London, one in Corn- wall, and no fewer than thirty-five in Devonshire, Somer- setshire, and Wiltshire, where, at that period, owing mainly to Gifford's labours, the chief country strength of the denomination lay. It is noticeable that Lancashire sent only one delegate to this meeting, and that York- shire was altogether unrepresented, there being, at that time, no Baptist church m the whole of that county.§ * Ivimey, i. 479. t Namely, temporary, 796; permanent, 143. Pari. Paper. X The great majority (503) were registered without any specifications, and 158 were registered as " Protestant Dissenters" only. It is possible that some of these were Baptist, but I think that they were nearly all Presbyterian and Independent. § Hunter's " Life of Oliver Hey wood," p. 413. 158 BAPTIST ASSEMBLY. \_l.d. 1689.] The proceedings of this body appear to have been marked by great humility and harmony, and they give a most favourable impression of the ardent and sincere religious character of the Baptists at this period. With regard to ecclesiastical government, it was resolved that the assembly had no authority to impose any belief or practice upon any of the Churches, and that all it could do was offer counsel and advice according to the Scriptures. It was decided to raise a common fund by way of " free-will offerings " for the support of the ministry in poor dis- tricts, for home evangelization, and for the education, in classics and HebrcAV, of ministerial students. It was recommended that weak Churches existing in the same neighbourhood should unite together for the better support of the ministry, and for the better edifica- tion of each other; that ministers were entitled to an adequate maintenance ; that there should be a " proper ordination of ministers; that Baptists should be at liberty to attend Churches of other denominations ; but that persons who, being members of Baptist Churches communicated in the Established Church, should, after admonition, be rejected. Those who did not attend the ordinary fixed meetings of the Church were to be reported, and those who did not contribute to its ex- penses were to be " withdrawn from." Excesses of apparel in ornaments and dress, including "long hair and periwigs," were condemned; and the Lord's-day was considered to be sacred to worship. Two distinc- tively doctrinal articles were also adopted ; one hi favour of the " reconciliation, adoption, or justification" of all who have a living faith, and the other in declara- tion of the sufficiency of the Holy Spirit alone for the [a.d. 1689. J BAPTIST MINISTRY. 159 continuance of a Christian ministry. A formal appro- bation was expressed of a book in favour of the main- tenance of ministers; and, lastly, the assembly passed a declaration against the government of James and an acknowledgment of their thankfulness for that which had been established under "William.* A Confession of Faith and an Epistle to the Churches were also adopted. In the latter, the general decay of religion is dwelt upon, recommendations are made in accordance with the resolutions of the meeting, and a general fast-day appointed. The Confession of Faith, adopted by this assembly, consisted of thirty-two articles relating to theological doctrines and Christian ethics. The former would now be considered of ultra-Calvinistic tone. The doctrine of the Divine decrees is pushed to its uttermost applica- tion, even " infants " being classed in the two orders of the "elect" and the non-elect. Marriage within the degrees condemned by the law of Moses is held to be " incestuous." Liberty of conscience is declared to be a natural right, and all infringements upon it are consi- dered to be contrary to the Word of God.f The repeated reference in these proceedings to the necessity of a sufficient maintenance for the ministry was caused by the fact that most of the Baptist ministers of the period were supported, not by their Churches, but by some trade or profession. Some of the most eminent were schoolmasters. J The Churches frequently supplemented the incomes of these men by small sub- * Ivimey, i. 478-501. t Crosby, iii. Appendix 56, 111, X The Broadmead Church at Bristol voted £20 a-year to Mr. Whinnel when his school was closed by a warrant.—" Records," 10th May, 1663. 160 BAPTIST ASSEMBLIES. [a.d. 1692.] scriptions. But although the Baptists were not mindful of their obligations in this respect, and had therefore a comparatively unlearned ministry, the incomes of all Dissenting ministers were extremely small. Oliver Heywood, one of the most celebrated of the Presby- terians of the time, received only twenty pounds a year ;* Sylvester, one of the most respected of the same denomi- nation in London, seldom received as much as ten pounds a quarter, and Calamy began his ministry with a similar stipend, j" One feeling only could have sustained them under such circumstances, — the feeling that, what- ever became of them, they must obey their consciences in preaching the Gospel. Some ministers, however, such as Baxter and Bates, often from having married women of fortune, enjoyed good incomes; but this was a rare exception to the general rule. Similar association meetings were held in several following 3^ears, from the proceedings of which it ap- pears that a project for raising a common fund for the education of the ministry and the assistance of poor Churches was attended with some success. County associations were also formed. In a.d. 1692 it was resolved, for convenience, to divide the general asso- ciation into two, — one section meeting in London, and the other at Bristol. In the same year, and before the division took place, the question of public singing was brought forward. It had been agreed, between the two parties who were opposed on this subject, to submit it to the authoritative decision of seven ministers, who made their report to this assembly. The referees * Life, p. 391. t Calamy's "Own Life," i. 360. [a.d. 1691.] TRE GENERAL BAPTISTS. 161 unsparino^ly condemned the unchristian manner in which the controversy on this question had been conducted by both the parties to it, and told them to humble them- selves before God for their mutual want of forbearance and charity. They advised that aU the books that had been written should be called in, their further circula- tion stoj^ped, and that nothuig more should be published on the question.* ^o resolution concerning the merits of the points at issue was proposed. The result of this proceedmg was that the public discussion of the question died out. Each church pursued the practice which it most approved, until, in the course of years, no oppo- nents of public singing were left. The London Associa- tion meetings appear to have been discontinued in the year 1695. The Western Association, however, after rebuking their metropolitan friends for their want of zeal, continued to meet at Bristol, Taunton, Exeter, and other towns. At most of these meetings two subjects, in addition to the necessity of increased personal religion, were especially dwelt upon,— first, the fund for° the sustentation of churches ; and, secondly, the better education of ministers. On the latter question con- siderable ill feeling still existed. The promoters of it were charged with depreciating the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the Bristol Association was compelled, in its defence, to define the precise value at which it assessed "human learnins:." While the Particular Baptists were thus organizing their resources, the General Baptists were not less activet The strength of this body appears to have laid mainly * Ivimey, i. 520—523. n 162 BUSSELL AND CAFFIN. [a.d. 1691.] in what are now called tlie Home Counties and in the Midland district. Of their ministers, the most eminent were Dr. William Russell and Matthew Caffin. Dr. Russell, Avho had been educated at the University of Cambridge, was a man of eminent scholarship and no less eminent controversial ability. Public and private disputations, indeed, seem to have been, if not his chief, at least one of his chief pleasures. He assailed Quakers with an animosity which was only equalled ui the retorts which he provoked. All Avho held the doctrine of Infant Baptism were equally the objects of his attack. He engaged in one of the public debates with the Quakers, and was the representative of the Baptists in their last similar controversy Avith the P^edobaptists.'" Caffin, also, was a University man, having studied at Oxford. To him, many of the churches in Kent, Surrey, and Sussex owe their existence. Caffin was at one time charged Avith heresy on the subject of the Trinity, and the discussion of his views appears to have given the first impulse to the subsequent movement in favour of Unitarianism amongst the General Baptists. All, how- ever, that he did, was to define, or attempt to define, the exact relations of the divine and the human elements in the second person of the Trinity. As every attempt to do this, from the primitive ages of Christianity down- wards, had provoked some metaphysical or logomachic discussion, Caffin might have felt assured that he would be assailed. He was exonerated from the charge of hetero- doxy; but those who had brought the charge against him, and those who had supported it, withdrew from the * Crosby iv. 250—261. [a.d. 1691.] GJENEEAL BAPTIST CONFESSION'. 163 majority, and made a breach which was not healed for several years.* The General Baptists had, like their brethren of the same denomination, their Assemblies, which met from time to time, chiefly in London, Buckinghamshire, and Northamptonshire. Some amongst their body appear to have keenly felt their separation from those who agreed with them on all points but such as were involved in the distinction between Calvinists and Arminians. They felt, to use their own words, that they were "looked upon as a people degenerated from almost all other baptized congregations," who, therefore, were " afraid to have affinity with them" in Christian work. In order to remove some prejudices and to open the way to reconciliation and fellowship, the churches in the county of Somerset agreed, m a.d. 1691, upon a Confession of Faith.f In this confession the doctrine of Original Sin, considered as an inherent taint, or as a sufficient cause of eternal condemnation, is denounced as both unscriptural and irrational ; and the doctrine of reprobation is also abjured. The grace of God is declared to extend to the whole world, and if any man fall short of salvation it is not because God, but because the man himself, has so willed it ; while the perseverance of the saints is declared to be dependent on their own conduct. This Confession, which is a clear, and in some places an eloquent, state- ment of the doctrines of the General Baptists, closes with a specific reference to the nature of the kingdom of Christ, and the means by which that kingdom should be sustained. "We believe," say these churches, "that * Crosby, iv. 328 — 342. Ivimey, i. 548—554. t Crosby, iii. 259 ; iv. Appendix i. 11* 164 BAPTIST DENOMINATION. [a.d. l(J91.j this kingdom ought not to be set up by the material sword, that being so exceeding contrary to the very nature of Christianity." For this reason they decline to have any communion with those " that own - the setting up of this kingdom by such means; believing that His spiritual kmgdom, which is His Church here on earth, ought not to be set up or forced either by the sword or any civil law whatsoever, but by the preaching of the Gospel, which is the Sword of the Spirit and the Word of God."* Clearer or more decisive lano-uasre on this subject has never been held, and it camiot be a matter of surprise that no attempt was made to " comprehend " such men in an Established Church. From the year immediately succeeding the passing of the Toleration Act to the end of the reis-n of William the Third the history of the Baptist Denomination, as a whole, was not a history of progression. Judging from the language held in the circular letters adopted at the Association meetings, the general state of religion was not satisfactory. The circumstance that this condition of comparative declension was so often and so urgently brought before the churches, is a proof that the leaders of the denomination and the representatives of the churches did not share in this depressed spiritual state. While, however, these representations may be considered to be correct, it is a question how far the apparent declension proceeded from actual decay of religious feeling, or how far it proceeded from the subsidence of political and ecclesiastical excitement. Under perse- cution the feelings of men arc strongly moved. There ■'' Art xxvii, Crosby, iv. Appendix i. pp. 41. 42. lA.D. 1702.] CA USMS OF FAIL UBF. 165 is a tendency to bear increased testimony to a persecuted truth, and to work with double zeal in behalf of a cause that is unjustly o^Dpressed. The excitement of good men— however good they may be— on whom the hounds of law have been let loose, is not always of a healthy nature and may easily be mistaken for better feelings. Many a man, also, will cheerfully and heroically suffer, who will not steadily work, and it is possible that the Baptist Denomination at this period was composed largely of such men. But, if this was the fact, it is strange that the same characteristic should not have been found in the other three Nonconformist bodies. So far was this from being the case, that the Presbyterians, Indepen- dents, and Quakers made, in the earlier years of the reign of William and Mary, greater comparative pro- gress than they have ever made since that time. The advances of Quakerism may, in a large degree, if not wholly, be attributed to the extraordinary evan- gelistic zeal of that body, and, where there was a Gifford or a Caffin, the Baptist body —as m the \Yestern and the Home Counties— had met with similar success. Without a large number of such men, it was morally impossible, at that time, for a Christian sect which occupied, socially, ahnost the lowest position of any, to make great ad- vances on the population: and the fact that the majority of the ministers of the Baptist body were men of other occupations prevented any general or extensive system of evangelization on their part. But it did not preclude growth in personal piety. If one cause more than another operated in this direction, it was the spirit of controversy, which seemed almost to possess the body. A Quaker writer of about this period, describes the Bap- 166 TRE INDEPENDENTS. [a.d. 1691.] tists as having great love and affection for their rehgion but as wanting in unanimity and agreement amongst themselves, and rash and morose towards such as differed from them.'"'' Any testimony from this quarter, written at a time when Quakers and Baptists were engaged in hot disputes, is to be received with some reserve ; but the published writings of the Baptists of the latter part of the seventeenth century substantiate the general accuracy of this description. Their zeal was, if not for the most part, to a very considerable extent, con- sumed in contentions amongst themselves and with other denominations. The invariable result followed. What they gained in sectarianism they lost m spiri- tuality. The Independents and the Presbyterians, having re- linquished nearly all expectation of such a reform in the Established Church, as would enable them to enter its communion, began to open, in all parts of the king- dom, new places of worship. The trusts of many of the Presbyterian meetings were so framed that the buildings could afterwards be used by the Established Church, but the majority of their places of worship were not of a per- manent character, most of the licenses taken out applying to rooms in private houses. The edifices which were erected by these, the two wealthiest sections of Dis- senters, were of the plainest character and were generally situated in the meanest thoroughfares. Very few were registered as " Independent," a fact which may be accounted for by the circumstance that the two denomi- nations were now drawing more closely together, and * Gerard Croese's " Collection," p. 76. Quoted in Crouch's " Sufferings,"' p. 145. [a.d. 1691.] MATTSEW MEAD. 167 making arrangements for an amalgamation on terms by which the distinctive principles of each were to be vir- tually sacrificed. It is impossible to tell which party took the initiative in this project, but it is evident that both were almost equally anxious for its successful realization. The In- dependents were comparatively ill represented at this time. Their three most eminent ministers were Matthew Mead, of Stepney, Isaac Chauncey, of Mark Lane, who had succeeded David Clarkson as pastor of Owen's Church, and Stephen Lobb, of Fetter Lane. Matthew Mead, Avhom Howe describes as " that very reverend and most laborious servant of Christ,"* occupied the highest rank amongst the Independent ministers. He had been a23pointed to the living of Shadwell by Cromwell, but had been ejected by the Act of Unifor- mity. Soon after, he went, in common with many ministers of that age, to HoUand, where he became acquainted with the Prince of Orange, and earned such great respect from the Dutch communit}^, that the 3tates presented him with the four pillars which upheld the meeting house at Stepney. He had one of the largest of all the congregations in London, and was as indefatigable in Christian work as he was amiable in spirit. In consequence of his mild temperament, and the moderation of his opinions, he was probably more inti- mate with Churchmen and Presbyterians than any other minister of his denomination. He possessed, for more than forty years, the intimate confidence and friendship of Howe, and when, at the close of the century, he died, * Funeral Sermon for Mead. Title, a.d. 1609. 168 CSAUNCI^Y AND LOBJB. [a.d. 1691.] the strongest personal link between the Presbyterians and the Independents was broken. Chauncey added little strength to his denomination. Although a learned, he was not a popular man, and he alienated most of his congregation by too fre- quently addressmg them on ecclesiastical order and discipline.* He appears to have thought that the mantle of Owen and Clarkson had fallen on his shoulders, and that it was his especial duty to continue their testimony in favour of the principles of his denomination. His zeal cannot be doubted, but he was nearly altogether destitute of the qualifications which had so distinguished his two predecessors. Lobb's character is rather diffi- cult to estimate. Unequivocal testimony is borne by his contemporaries to his personal piety, and he had been well trained for the ministerial office. But he was a Jaco- bite Dissenter ; he had publicly defended James in the exercise of his arbitrary powers ; he had advised the King to prosecute the seven bishops, and he nearly succeeded in committing the reputation of Dissenters as a body in that controversy. He was a notorious favourite at the Court of the Stuarts, and therefore not a great favourite with his own people, f He took, also, an unhappy part in the theological controversies which arose soon after the Revolution, and in them did his best to promote division and disunion. With the exception, therefore, of Mead, the Indepen- dents had no highly qualified leader. On the other hand, nearly all the old Presbyterian leaders were still living, and it appeared certain that if an amalgama- * Wilson's " Dissenting Churches," i. 289— 291 . + lb. iii. 436—446. [a.d. 1691.] THE F BE SB YTEBI ANSI— BAXTER. 169 tion should take place, that powerful and influential body would ultimately absorb the Independents. Baxter drawing, as he himself said, when the Toleration Act passed, "to the end of this transitory life," was now taking "half-duty " with Matthew Sylvester, and about to be confined to his house, where, however, he still preached twice a day, and from whence he was to issue, in the two years of life that remained to him, thirteen works in addition to the hundred and twenty-five which he had already published. Neither the brain nor the heart of this old Goliath of Presbyterianism had suffered with age ; his immense labours had not even yet wearied him, nor, although he had grown more catholic and his charity was much more extensive than it had been,* was he tired of controversy. ' He had filled the largest space of any ecclesiastic of his generation, and he filled it until the year of his death. The great old man lived to see one dream of his life apparently fulfilled, in the settled concord of two at least of the Christian sects. Next to Baxter stood Bates, the " silver-tongued," who had now taken Baxter's place in the public repre- sentation of Dissenting interests. Bates shone in the qualities in which Baxter was especially deficient. Mild, polite, affable, and courteous ; full of charity ; eloquent, yet chaste in his oratory, and a rare conversationalist, his social influence was surpassed by that of none. Side by «ide Avith Bates stood Howe, then in the sixtieth year of his age. This great man was one of the few who was venerated as much by his contemporaries as by his suc- cessors. Time, which commonly adds increased lustre * Calamy's " Baxter," p. 677. 170 JECOTFJE, ANNJESLET, SYLVESTER, &c. [a.d. 1691. J to the memory of the good, has not been able to magnify- any of the quahties for which Howe was so conspicuous. His strong and capacious intellect ; his subhme elevation of thought ; his flowing eloquence ; the holiness of his life ; the dignity and courtesy of his manners ; the humour of his conversation, won for him from the men of his own time, the title of the "great Mr. Howe." After serving Cromwell as a court chaplain, and being often engaged by him in affairs of State, Howe, at the Eestoration, took his part with the ejected Puritans. Latterly he had been pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Silver Street. His Presbyterianism, however, was of the most moderate character, for his charity embraced all sects. Nor could he consent to excommunicate the Church of England, with whose most eminent scholars and divines he lived on terms of frank and friendly intimacy. He statedly communed with Churchmen, and repeatedly defended the practice. Dr. Samuel Annesley, formerly lecturer at St. Paul's, and Rector of St. Giles', Cripplegate, one of the most humble of men, and pathetic of preachers, was now pastor of the Presbyterian Church at Little Saint Helen's. Mathew Sylvester, Baxter's biographer, with whom Bax- ter was co-pastor, and who was one of the most pro- found of theological thinkers, was minister at Carter Lane. The youngest in pomt of residence, amongst the Presbyterian ministers, was Dr. Daniel Williams, who had been, for about a year, pastor of the New Broad Street Church. Williams's reputation had, however, preceded him from Dublin, where he had preached for twenty years. He at once took a distinguished place amongst the city brethren, and, in matters of controversy, soon became [a.d. 1691.] VINCENT, ALSOF, FLAVEL, &c. 171 their acknowledged leader. This eminent divine, and no less eminent scholar, was, besides Howe, the only man then living who almost invariably adorned the cause which he advocated by his combined candour and charity. His exhaustive analysis of the arguments of opponents ; the clearness and order of his statements, and the learning with which they were supported, were unequalled by any contemporary writer ; and his sermons were as faithful and forcible as were his written works. As the founder of the Divuiity scholarships, and of the valuable library, both of which still bear his name, his memory has now been held in grateful reverence by students and scholars for nearly two hundred years. No greater race of preachers than the Presbyterian ministers of this period ever adorned the pulpits of the metropolis. In the suburbs they were represented by men of scarcely less eminence than those who were kno^vn as the city ministers. In the south, Nathaniel Vincent, a scholarly man but chiefly remarkable for his quickness of wit and redundancy of good humour, occupied the pulpit of St. Thomas's, Southwark, Vincent Alsop, "the South of Dissent," preached at Princes Street, Westminster ; while Thomas Doolittle, the prm- cipal trainer of young men for the ministry, and who built the first Dissenting place of worship m London,* was a preacher in Monkwell Street. In the provinces this de. nomination could boast of John Flavel, in Devonshire ; of Oliver Heywood, in Lancashire; of Philip Henry, in Cheshire ; and amongst laymen, of the Ashurst family in London, and Lady Hewley, in York, all of whom were * Circ, A.D. 1666, in ]\Ionkwell-street. This place of worship has now disappeared. 172 TSE " UNITED MINISTERS:' [a.d. 1691. J steadfast adherents to, and liberal supporters of, the Presbyterian system. It would seem that so powerful a denomination must have carried all before it, and that whatever might be the history of the smaller sects, the history of Presbyterianism would be one of increasing usefulness and splendour. The whole of the ministers in London threw them- selves with great ardour into the proposals for union with the Congregationalists. Howe is said to have had a principal share in drawing up the terms of agreement, which were ultimately settled, at the beginning of the year 1691, by a committee consisting of six Presby- terian and six Congregational ministers. Amongst the former were Howe, Williams and Annesley, and amongst the latter. Mead, Chauncey, and Lobb. The terms were afterwards published, under the title ot "Heads of Agreement assented to by the United Minis- ters in and about London, formerly called Presbyterian and Congregational; not as a measure for any national constitution, but for the preservation of order in our con- gregations, that cannot come up to the common rule by law established." The "heads" are nine in number. The first relates to the constitution of the Christian Church, in which the right of each particular congrega- tion to choose its own officers is recognized ; but minis- ters and elders are to "rule and govern," and "the brotherhood are to consent." This was an old Presby- terian formula, dating as far back as the days of Field and Wilcox, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The second relates to the ministry, who are to be, in all cases, elected by the churches, after the advice, " ordinarily requisite," of neighbouring churches. It is also stated I fA.D. 1691.J THE " UNITED MINISTERS:' 173 to be " ordinarily requisite " that the pastors of neigh- bouring churches should concur in the ordination of the ministers. In this article the distinctive feature of Pres- byterianism— the j^ower of the presbytery— is entirely abandoned. " Censures " form the subject of the third article, which contains a simple statement of the nature of church discipline. In the article on the communion of churches, frequent meetings between the several Chris- tian communities are recommended, both for worship and for counsel. The next subject dealt with is that of "Deacons and ruling Elders." Of the latter it is said that, while some are of opinion that there is such an office, and others think the contrary, "we agree that this diffe- rence make no breach amongst us." The subject of the sixth article is " Synods," and it is recommended that in order to concord, and in weighty and difficult cases, synods should be called for advice and consultation, and that particular churches should have a reverential regard for the judgment of such meetings. Obedience to civil magistrates is inculcated under the succeeding head, and it is added that "if at any time it shall be their pleasure to call together any number of us, or require any account of our effiDrts, and the state of our congre- gations, we shall most readily express all dutiful regard to them herein "—a concession to civil authority to which the descendants of these men would certainly not agree. Of confessions of faith it is remarked that it is sufficient if a Church acknowledges the divine origin of the Scrip- tures, and owns the doctrinal parts of the articles, or the Westminster or Savoy Confessions. Lastly, it is de- clared that Christians of other communities should be treated with respect; and that all who have the essential 174 TKE « UNITED MINISTEBSr [a.d. 1691.] requisites to Church communion should be received without troubling them with disputes concerning lesser matters. Both denominations, it will thus be seen, relinquished some of their distinctive opmions. The Congregation- alists expressed their agreement with the Presbyterians concerning the government of each church being vested in the ministers and elders ; and the Presbyterians sur- rendered the doctrine of the authoritative power of synods.* On the whole, however, the Congregationalists surrendered less than their brethren of the more powerful denomination. What is chiefly remarkable, however, in connexion with this attempted settlement of the diffe- rences between the two sects, is the circumstance, that the consent of the churches to the arrangements which were made, was not applied for by either party. No *' lay " representative was concerned in drawing up the " heads ;" and the creed and constitution of all the churches were fixed without any consultation with them. The amalgamated bodies described themselves as the united "ministers" only; and although they were pastors settled over two different classes of Christian organizations, they decided, of their own accord, to dis- pense with the characteristic titles which those organiza- tions had assumed. It must, of course, be taken for granted that the churches tacitly assented to these arrangements ; but the manner in which they were made contrasts as strongly with the habits of the Baptist asso- * It is worth notice that, while the Episcopalians of the United States have accepted the revised Prayer Book of a.d. 1689, the Congregational and a large section of tho Presbyterian Churches of that country are, for the most part, governed in accordance with the " Heads of Agreement" of a.d. 1691. [a.d. 1691.] TKE " UNITED MINISTERS:' 175 ciations of the same period, which were invariably attended by lay delegates, as with the modern practice both of the Presbyterian and of the Congregational communities. The scheme of union was joyfully accepted in several parts of the country. The Cheshire, Lancashire, Not- tinghamshire, Yorkshire, Hampshire, Gloucestershire, Dorsetshire, Somersetshire, and Devonshire ministers at once assented to it. In London the union was formally celebrated by a sermon preached by Matthew Mead, on " Two Sticks made One," in which the preacher declared that now the day of reproach had been rolled away from the Christian Church,* and earnestly conjured the mmis- ters to manifest and preserve their accord. At South- ampton, Mr. Chandler was appointed to preach to the county muiisters. " Blessed be God," he cried, " who hath united us together." •]* Flavel, as soon as he saw the heads of agreement, exclaimed, " Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace ; "J and in a subsequent sermon, alluded to them as "those blessed sheets." There can be no doubt of the sincere and great delight of most of the mmisters throughout the country at this event, and although the scheme came to a quick and unhappy conclusion, the annual meetings of the two denominations, commenced at this time, were continued in some counties for more than a century. § Two events speedily occurred to disturb this fraternal feeling, and virtually to dissolve the union. Some * Mead's " Two Sticks," p. 19. t Chandler's " Gantry's Concurrence," p. 41. % Flavel's " Life and Remains." § Hunter's " Life of Heywood," p. 357. 176 TRE EOTHWELL CONTBOVEBST. [a.d. 1691.} Cono;reirational ministers in London, Nathaniel Mather, pastor of Lime Street Church, and one of the committee who framed the " heads," being the most conspicuous, had never heartily accepted it. He is accused, in fact, of having been unwearied, in hindering and breaking it.* If there were any, as probably there were, anxious to seize an occasion to provoke first an ill-feeling, and then a rupture, such an occasion was soon given to them. Within a year of the formation of the union two discus- sions on points of doctrine and order arose. The first was excited by the preaching of the Rev. Richard Davis, of Rothwell, in Northamptonshire. Mr. Davis was a Congregational mmister holding high Calvinistic or rather Antinomian opinions, believing and preaching that repentance was not necessary to salvation, that the el'jct were always Avithout sin, and always Avithout " spot before God." Notwithstanding these vieAvs, DaA^s Avas an active and untiring evangelist. He preached and made converts in all the neighbouring counties, and encouraged any unordained person to do the same. He appears to have been a man of narroAV opinions, but, like many similar men, of great intensity of belief, and of un- daunted zeal. Where the sustenance or the progress of rehgious life Avas at stake he made light of all ecclesias- tical traditions, and all established church order. He was the first amongst the Congregationalists Avho broke the bounds of ordination. Wherever he made converts he justified them in maintaining Christian fellowship together, and in alloAving one amongst their number to preach to them, whether they had the sanction of neigh- * Dr. AVilliams's Woi];s, iv, p. xii. [a.d. 1691.J THE BOTHWELL CONTBOVEBST. 177 bouring churches or not. The attention of the united ministers was soon called to Mr. Davis's proceedings. The country brethren solicited their judgment upon them, and quickly obtained it. Both the doctrine and the practice of Davis were severely condemned. He was denounced and stigmatized in language which imphed that he was an unruly child of the devil, who suc- ceeded by mere "falsehood, clamour, and noise." The city ministers, acting as a metropolitan synod, sat in judgment upon him, and, as though they were a Sanhedrim, virtually cast him out from their midst as unworthy of any Christian communion, stating at the same time, as is common in such assemblies, that " they would earnestly pray for his repentance." Unfor- tunately, however, for the interests of the union which had but just been celebrated, their judgment was not received by all persons as of an authoritative and bind- ing character. Davis himself repelled it. His vindi- cation,* although characterized by what many persons would consider to be extreme theological views, was, on the whole, in better taste than the attack which had been made upon him. He successfully defended his evangelistic Avork, and the right of Christian men to continue what he had begun, and successfully maintained his ministerial position. The controversy threw eleven counties into disorder, and before a year had passed away, the Congregationalists had begun to be weaned from the union. The ministers could not have made a more fatal mistake than by interfering in this question. They knew, all along, that many Congregationalists were * "Truth and Innocency Viudicated," A.D. 1G91. 12 178 THE ANTINOMIAX CONTBOVEBST. [a.d. 1691— jealous of the union. Knowing it, they deliberately gave occasion for suspicion, that, if their authority were once acknowledged, the liberty and the independence of Christian churches, and the right even to preach the Gospel, might be fatally endangered. In the midst of the excitement connected with this controversy, another, and a graver one, arose. Dr. Crisp, an Antinomian divine of the Commonwealth period, had written several works in defence of the views held by the school of theology to which he l^elonged. His son, wishing to republish his father's works, with pre- viously unpublished manuscripts, conceived the notion of requesting some of the most eminent of the London ministers to certify to their genuine character. The ministers, Howe — strangely enough, considering his characteristic prudence — amongst them, did what was requested. Crisp's works therefore went forth to the world, with what many conceived to be a recommen- dation from the leaders of the moderate Calvinistic party.* Amongst those who did not sign this certificate, and who probably was not asked to sign it, was the acute and wary controversialist, Baxter. It is more easy to imagine a veteran rat deliberately entering an unbaited cage, than to imagine Baxter putting his hand to such a document. If he had hated anything more than Quakerism it was Antinomianism, which, all through his life, he had assailed with a vigour and constancy which none but himself could have exhibited. No sooner, therefore, had Crisp's works appeared than, after * I cannot help agreeing with Mr. Henry Rogers that this was nothing but a disgraceful trick of Crisp's son ; hut it is incomprehensible that the London ministers should haveTallen into such a trap. Rogers's " Life of Howe," pp. 271—273. [a.d. 1699.] THE ANTIN02IIA]^ CONTROVEBST. 179 remonstrating with those who had so rashly given them such surreptitious importance, he prepared once more to enter his old and favourite field of controversy. In de- ference, however, to the earnest sohcitations of Howe, he refrained from publishing what he had written. Howe at once cleared his own reputation, by writing a recommendation of Elavel's ''Blow at the Root," a work against Antimonianism, just about to be pub- lished. This, however, did not repair the mischief which had been done, and accordingly Dr. Daniel Wil- liams was requested to undertake a formal refutation of Crisp's doctrines. The Avork appeared in a.d. 1692, under the title of " Gospel Truth, Stated and Vindi- cated." Prefixed to the first edition was a recommen- dation from Bates, Howe, Alsop, and thirteen other Presbyterian ministers, to which thirty -two other sig- natures, includmg those of Doolittle, Sylvester, and Edmund Calamy, were added in the second edition.* No CongregationaHst, however, would sign this recom- mendation. Both Bates and Wilhams requested Mead's signature, but he refused, first, on the ground that he did not judge it to be prudent to sign, and ultimately because he disapproved of its doctrines.! It became, therefore, very evident that the Presbyterians and the Con- gregationalists did not hold the same theological opinions. The variance was at once made public by virulent attacks from Chauncey, ]\rather, and Lobb, on Wil- liams's doctrines relating to free grace and justification. The controversy which ensued lasted for more than seven years, during the whole of which period the London ministers were torn by the angriest dissensions. * Williams's Works, iii. pp. 3, 4. t Williams's Works, iii. p. 28K 12 * 180 THE ANTINOMIAN CONTROVEBSY. [a.d. 1691— In A. D. 1692, Chauncey withdrew from the united ministers. Honesty, truthfuhiess, and charity were now equally sacrificed. The Congregationalists denounced the Presbyterians as no better than Arminians and Socinians, and the Presbyterians retorted by fixing upon their opponents the stigma of Antinomianism. Howe tried to hush the storm by preaching on the carnality of re- ligious contention, but this time he preached in vain. The imited ministers also endeavoured to stem the torrent. In three successive years they issued three statements of doctrine to meet the various phases which the debates assumed ; but each statement only gave rise to fresh disputes. They were, however, still more than sixty in number, and the whole of their moral support was given to Williams, who, it must be said, was worthy of the confidence they gave to him. Failing to silence him in argument, some persons now attacked Williams's moral character. He met the disgraceful charge by courting an examination into his whole life, from which he came out with augmented reputation. An open rupture between the two bodies now took place. In A. D. 1694, the Congregationalists excluded Williams from the Merchants' Lecture at Pinners' Hall. This lecture had been founded by some wealthy London tradesmen, for the purpose of holdmg week-day morn- ing services, which should be conducted by the most eminent of the Dissenting ministers of the metropolis. It was always largely attended, and had been of eminent use, both in a religious and in an ecclesiastical sense. To prevent further contentions, the Presbyterians now withdrew, and with the aid of the majority of the sub- scribers, established a ncAV lecture at Salters' Hall, the A.D. 1699.] TEE ANTINOMIAN CONTROVJERSY. 181 lecturers being Bates, Howe, Alsop, and Williams. The old lecture was continued by Mead, Cole, and four other Congregationalists. Mead appears to have remained with some reluctance, and he afterwards regretted that he had not gone with the Presbyterians.* This disastrous controversy raged, at best, around doc- trines the reception or rejection of which have scarcely influenced the Christian character. There can be no doubt that the Presbyterians, at this time, were more moderate Calvinists than the Cono-resrationalists, and that the epithet of " Baxterians" was not inappropriately applied to them, but as Baxterianism included the articles of the Church of England, and the confessions of Dort and Savoy, their moderation was certainly limited. What they did not believe, was the doctrine of absolute repro- bation, held in the sense that persons were condemned irrespective of their character and faith. They did not believe that simiers were pardoned \vithout repentance. They did not beheve that the Saviour so stood in the sinner's place, that God ever looked upon Him as a sinner. The last point was the point most vehemently ■debated m this controversy. The question was — Was there a change of persons, or only of person in the re- demption; and according as this was answered, and the sense in which the answer was understood, the con- troversialist was classed as an Arminian, or even Unitarian, on the one side, and as an Antmomian on the other. Mather went so far as to state that believers * The old Merchants' Lecture was subsequently transferred to New Broad Street, and is now delivered at the Poultry Chapel. The Salters' Hall Lectures are discontinued. One of the last lecturers was Dr. W. B. py thought occurred to Lobb. He believed that Stillingfleet, Bishop of Wor- cester, the greatest controversialist in the Church, and whose views had been referred to by the Presbyterians, would not approve of Williams's views of justification, and that Dr. Jonathan Edwards, who had recently " un- masked" Socinianism, would be able to detect that doctrine in Williams. He therefore made an appeal to these divines to give their judgment on the controversy. Both men generously consented, and both pronounced without reservation, in favour of the entire orthodoxy of Williams. Lobb, not satisfied with Stillingfleet's reply, and feeling confident that the bishop must have misun- derstood him, wrote agam at greater lengtli, the result of which was, that Stillingfleet, taking Williams's work out of his hands, answered Lobb himself. Stillingfleet finally advised that the Congregational ministers should formally clear themselves of the charge of Antinomianism. The advice was taken, and in a.d. 1698, a "Declaration", was published. Williams, at Lobb's request, responded in A.D. 1699, with an "End to Discord," clearing himself from the imputation both of Socinianism and Armi- nianism. Peace followed, and the ministers met together again, but the scheme of an organized union of the denominations was a thing of the past.* * I do not pretend to have read all the pamphlets and sermons connected A.D. 1699.] THE TRINITAEIAN CONTItOVEBSJ. 183 The spirit of intolerance exhibited during the progress of this controversy was not confined to mutual recri- mination. The Presbyterians successfully vindicnted themselves from a charge of Socinianism, which could never have been honestly brought against them; but there was no doubt that Socinianism was spreading. The doctrine of the Trinity had been discussed in the Established Church. Dr. Wallis, a Professor at Oxford University, had endeavoured to prove its truth by mathematical demonstration, and had oiven, in doinff SO, ample room for a reply. The Cjuestion being thus raised to the surface, the Socinians took advantage of the opportunity, and openly assailed Trinitarianism. Howe joined in an attempted explanation, but, although a master of metaphysics, lost himself in metaphysical subtleties. Sherlock, Dean of St. Paul's, defended the doctrine, but, in doing so, only laid himself open to the ironical criticism of South, that he had furnished the world with three deities. The principal Socinian at this period was Thomas Firmin, a wealthy London merchant, of high reputation for benevolence, who expended part of his fortune in the distribution of books in favour of his doctrines, and the remainder in works of charity. The literature of this small but increasing party was well written and moderate in spirit. Tillotson was never forgiven, because, while with this controversy which were published during these eight years ; and if, as I did, anyone should make an attempt to do so, he will, I think, do as I have done — speedily relinquish it. I have read, however, all that Williams wrote ; the Declarations of the Ministers ; a part of Chauncey and Lobh's publications ; Stillingfleet's and Edwards's Letters to AVilliams ; the account in Bishop Bull's "Life;" in Calamy's " Howe " and his "Own Times ; " in Dr. Toulmin's " History ; " and in Mr. Joshua Wilson's " His- torical Inquiry." The above narrative is based on these works. 184 THE TBINITABIAN CONTROVERSY, [a.d. 1697.] preaching against their opinions, he had once praised in high terms, their manner of conducting controversy. " They are a pattern," he said, " of the fair way of dis- puting; they argue without passion, with decency, dignity, clearness, and gravity." " They have," he added, " but this one defect, that they want a good cause and truth on their side, which, if they had, they have reason, and Avit, and temper enough, to defend it."* The legislature, the clergy, and the Dissenting ministers, had no such charitable opinions of this sect. The first had already excluded them from the benefit of the Act of Toleration ; and the House of Commons now voted an anonymous work entitled, " A clear confutation of the Doctrine of the Trinity," to be a blasphemous libel, and ordered it to be burned by the hangman. The clergy, for the most part, agreed with South, that the Socinians were " impious blasphemers, whose infamous pedigree runs back from wretch to wretch, in a direct line to the devil himself; and who were fitter to be crushed by the civil magistrate as destructive to govern- ment and society, than to be confuted as merely heretics in religion, "t The Dissenting ministers appear to have held opinions of a more moderate character, but of a similar tendency. In a,d. 1697, they waited on the King, and urged him to interdict the printing of any work in favour of Socinian doctrines. In the next year the Commons addressed the King, beseeching him to take measures to root out vice and immorality, and to give orders for the suppression of all books containing assaults on the doctrine of the Trinity, or on any other funda- * Birch's " Tillotson," p. 427. f lb. p. 428. [i.D. 1697.] OCCASIONAL CONFOBMITT. 185 mental article of faith. The same year an Act was passed prohibiting all such publications. Any person found writing, printing, publishing, or circulating any works, or preaching, against the doctrine of the Trinity, was condemned to lose nearly all the privileges of citizenship; he could neither sue nor be sued, and neither bequeath, nor receive property. He was disabled for ever from holding any public office, and he was to be imprisoned for three years without bail. The merciless severity of this Act appears to have excited no criticism and no remonstrance. Even the plain teaching of history was not once thought of. The history of the city where Servetus was burned was ignored. The men who had urged the passing of this law did not even dream of such a theological Nemesis as that their o^vn direct ecclesias- tical descendants should, in less than two generations almost universally embrace the creed which they thus attempted violently to stamp out. The future relations of the various Dissenting bodies to each other were, for a time, settled by the terms of concord established at the close of this controversy. The Quakers stood aloof from all intercourse with other denominations. There is no proof that the Baptists had, as yet, united with others in any public matters ; the Presbyterians and Congregationalists were on terms of friendly intimacy with each other; and when interests common to Dissenters as such, required to be represented or defended, uniformly acted as one body. The theolo- gical creeds of the several parties were also clearly defined. It remained to determine in what relation they should stand to the Established Church. On this question there were the greatest differences, both of opinion and of action. 18G OCCASIONAL CONFOMMITT. [a.d. 1697.] The principles of the Quakers prevented them from holding any religious communion Avith members of the State-Church, and the Baptists were equally opposed to it. Members of some Baptist churches were forbidden to enter, on any pretence whatever, the established places of worship ; inter-marriage and social intercourse with Episcopalians were equally prohibited.* Of the practice of the Congregationalists there appears to be no record, but in all probability, it was milder than that of either the Quakers or the Baptists. The Presbyterians not only, in some instances, practised what was then termed^ *"' Occasional Conformity," but publicly advocated it; but this was more characteristic of London than of the country. Many of their leaders, indeed, appear to have hesitated in taking any steps which might give fixity to the separation of the Presbyterians from the Church. When Edmund Calamy requested Howe to be present at his public ordination, Howe not only refused^ but thought it necessary to take the advice of Lord Somers, as to the expediency of any such service taking place. Bates also, notwithstanding an admission to the effect that separation from the Church was not only justifiable, but necessary, as circumstances then stood, declined a similar request.f The older Presbyterians still looked on the Church with affection, and would have done nothing either to bring her into disrepute, or to separate themselves entirely from her communion. Circumstances now arose, which compelled them to * Robert Robinson's "Lecture on a Becoming Behaviour in Religious Assemblies." The above were Articles of Communion in the Baptist Church at Cambridge at this time. t Calamy's " Own Life," i. 338—348. [a.d. 1697.] DANIEL BE FOE. 187 defend their position. According to the Act of Uni- formity, no person who was not a communicant of the EstabHshed Church could hold any muncipal office ; but with the Presbyterian practice, a person could be a communicant, and yet be a Dissenter. In a.d. 1697, Sir Humphrey Edwin on being elected Lord Mayor of London, carried the regalia of his office to Pinners' Hall, which was then used by a Congregational church. The circumstance excited considerable irritation amongst Churchmen. It was described as a reproach to the city, and a crime against religion.* It was on this occasion that Daniel De Foe, for the second time, took up his pen to treat of an ecclesiastical question. De Foe was Ijorn of a Dissenting'^family, and had received a classical education at one of the best of the Dissenting academies. His ecclesiastical principles were Presbyterian, but he does not appear to have identified himself very closely with any particular congregation. As yet, he was a comparatively unknoAvn man. He had, however, some years before, taken part in public questions. He had joined the Duke of Monmouth's rebellion, and had suc- cessfully exerted his influence to dissuade Dissenters from accepting James's offer of indulgence. He was noticed amongst the royal regiment of volunteer horse, composed for the most part of Dissenters, who went out to welcome William and Mary on their first state visit to the city.t Since that time he had been engaged, and had failed m business, and was now accountant to the Commissioners of glass duty. De Foe saw, in Sir Humph- rey Edwin's conduct an inconsistency which was re- * Dr. Nichols's " Apparet : " Calamy's Abridgement, i. p. 561. t Oldmixon, iii. p. 36. Wilson's " De Foe," i. p. 189. 188 DE FOE AND HOWE ON [a.d. 1697.] proachful to religion. Probably, he also saw, for his vision was constantly, and with singular accuracy, pro- jecting itself into the future, that the pratice of occasional Conformity must, if persisted in, tend to the destruction of Nonconformity. He therefore published a remonstrance with Edwin,* in which, in the terse, vigorous and pun- gent style, which made him the most effective and the most celebrated political writer of his age, he pointed out the grave character of his act. De Foe set aside, alto- gether, the question whether Nonconformity was right, or whether it was wrong, but argued that when a man conformed he practically denied the lawfulness of his dissent; while at the same time, in dissenting, he was condemning the smfulness of Conformity. If he could conscientiously commune with the Established Church, his conscience ought to allow him to become a member of that Church, and he was guilty of the sin of schism if he did not. De Foe examined the various reasons which might induce a person occasionally to conform. He might hold his act of communion to be a civil act only ; but, inquired De Foe, How can you take it as a civil act in one place, and a religious act in another ; is not this playing "bo-peep with God Almighty?" Or, a person might occasionally conform from patriotic motives, but the author plainly expressed his entire disbelief in the existence of persons who were willing to " damn their souls to serve their country; " and was of opinion that the power of God was omnipotent enough to pro- tect a nation without the perpetration of any sin. In reply to the argument that it was not a sinful act, De * " An Enquiry into the Occasional Conformity of Dissenters in Cases of Preferment." a.d. 1697. [a.d. 1701.] OCCASIONAL CONFOBIIITY. 18^ Foe maintained that it was such in a Dissenter, or his dissent was sinful ; and he expressed the opinion that no Church could lawfully separate from the Church of Eng- land, and yet allow its members to be occasional Con- formists. No notice aj^pears to have been taken of this pam- phlet on the occasion of its first publication, but three years afterwards, in a.d. 1701, another Dissenter, Sir Thomas Abney, a member of Howe's Church, was elected Lord Mayor. Having qualified himself for office by taking the Lord's Supper in an Established church, Sir Thomas afterwards communed with the members of Howe's congregation. De Foe, thereupon, republished his " Enquiry " Avith a preface dedicated to Howe, in which he asked Howe whether this practice of alternate communion was allowed by him or by Dissenters in general, and, if not, he conjured him by his tenderness for the weakness of others, by his regard to God's- honour and the honour of the Church, to censure it, in order that the sincerity and purity of Protestant Dis- senters might be vindicated. If it were allowed, he desired Howe to give his reasons in defence of the prac- tice. Howe replied in a pamphlet, the pubhcation of which all who venerate that great man's name, must regret.* De Foe had addressed Howe in terms of the utmost respect; Howe replied Avith insinuations and with abuse. His pamphlet abounded in personalities. He suggested that the writer of the " Enquiry " must be a Fifth Monarchy man, and openly stigmatized him as of " stingy, narrow spirit." Nor did he avoid gross * " Some Considerations of a Preface to an Enquiry, etc." By John Howe A.D. 1701. 190 HE FOE AND HOWE. [a.d. 1694.] misrepresentation, which, however, must have arisen from carelessness rather that from intention. It is strange, also, to notice that he did not give a direct reply to De Foe's question. He declined to say whe- ther or not he approved of occasional Conformity, but instead, suggested a number of hypothetical cases in which a person might be justified in that practice. Howe's argument conveys and was evidently intended to convey, the impression that he considered the questions at issue between Church and Dissent as of minor importance. He closed it by remarking that if De Foe's judgment were true, that truth, accompanied by De Foe's temper, was much worse than any occasional Conformist's error. De Foe at once published a re- joinder,* in which, after remarkmg on the tone of Howe's reply, he assailed the position taken by Howe with the keenest logical acumen. Like many other con- troversialists, the two writers argued from different pre- mises and with different objects, and would never have agreed. De Foe could not see how it was possible for a man to be conscientious in conforming, at the same time, to an EstabUshed Church, and to a Church which, on conscientious grounds, had separated from the Establish- ment. Logically, De Foe Avas right, but Howe did not try the position by the rules of logic. He tried it by the test of Christian sympathy, a sympatliy which, in some cases, may be only another name for personal inclination or even for laxity and indifference, but may also be of a higher character. If De Foe, in his rejoinder, had tested Howe's arguments by Howe's own justification of * "A Letter to Mr. Howe by way of Reply, etc." a.d. 1701. [a.d. 1G94.] RIGHTS OF CONVOCATION. 191 Nonconformity, published twelve years before, he would have placed the divine in a painful position. The fact, however, that Howe did not openly state that he himself approved of occasional Conformity, while it is known that, privately, he approved of and defended it,* appears to be a sufficient indication that he did not feel his posi- tion to be logically tenable. With De Foe's second pamphlet the controversy on this subject was, for the present, closed, to be re-opened in a different and graver form by the Legislature itself in less than another year. The tendency of public opinion towards the close of William the Third's reign, so far from being in favour of an increased measure of toleration, was favourable to a limitation of the liberty already enjoyed by Dissenters. By the death of Mary they had lost the protection of a Queen of large and liberal views, and of the most kindly feeling towards themselves. Tillotson and Stillingfleet were also dead ; the Tories had obtained possession of power, and the clergy Avere advancing in their preten- sions. The King, having had sufficient experience of the temper of Convocation in the year when the Comprehen- sion scheme was under discussion, had not summoned that body to meet for business for ten years. In the interval, a claim was put forth to the effect that Convo- cation had a right not only to meet whenever the Houses of Parliament met, but to sit and transact business without the Royal license. This doctrine was boldly advocated in a " Letter to a Convocation Man," pubHshed anonymously, in a.d. 1694, but known to be from the pen of Dr. Binkes. Its novelty was only equalled by its * Howe's "Letter to Boyse." Roger's " Life of Howe," p. 295. 192 BIGHTS OF CONVOCATION. [a.d. 1691.] audacity. In the Act of Submission of a.d. 1532, Henry the Eighth had required the clergy to consent that no constitutions, canons, or ordinances of Convocation should be enacted or enforced without the King's consent, nor unless the King should first license the clergy to assem- ble, and give to their decisions his assent and authority.* In the next year, an Act was passed subjecting the clergy to fine and imprisonment if they assembled without the Royal writ. From that period, it had been the established law that a ^vi'it was necessary to meet ; that another writ was necessary to allow of business ; that after business had been transacted it could not take effect without the confirmation of the sovereign, and that even with the sovereign's own authority no canons could be made against the laws and customs of the land or the ]\^ing's prerogative. The claim now advanced was, in effect, that the clergy were entitled to the same powers which they had enjoyed before the Reformation, and that, in fact, there neither was nor should be a Royal supremacy. The nature of this demand, which, if it had been acceded to, would have put the ecclesiastical laws and the religious liberties of Englishmen into the hands of the Jacobite clergy, was at once seen. The letter was replied to by Dr. Wake, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, in an elaborate work, in which the authority of the Crown was sustained with great learning and ability.^ Wake, in return, was * Fuller's History, v. p. 189. Before this period the Archbishop had been accustomed to summon the provincial Councils, for which no license was required. t Lathbury's " History of Convocation," p. 110 — 111. \ " The Authority of Christian Princes over their Ecclesiastical Synods." A.D. 1697. [a.d. 1701.] FRAXCIS ATTEBBUBT. 193 charged with surrendermg the rights of the Church, and an endeavour was made to prove that the Act of Sub- mission did not involve the Royal supremacy to the extent that had been supposed. Binkes was now silent, a far abler man having undertaken to defend the cause of the clergy. This Avas Dr. Francis Atterbury, a clever, learned, Avitty, but ambitious and unscrupulous clergyman, who Avas afterwards appointed by Queen Anne, Bishop of Rochester, and Avho was ultimately banished the kino;dom for intrio-uino; for the restoration of the Stuarts. Atterbury maintained that the Convoca- tion had a perfect right to sit, and to make canons, with- out the permission of the sovereign, but he convinced few excepting the non-juring and Jacobite clergy of the accuracy or success of his arguments. So able a con- troversialist, however, could not remain unansAvered. Bishop Burnet, Bishop Kennett, and a host of inferior writers took the field against him, and ultimately Wake, in a second Avork, summed up the Avhole case. But, Avhile the upholders of the rights of the sovereigns of England Avere indisputably successful in maintaining their position in argument, the High Church party Avere equally successful in the main object for Avhich this con- troversy was provoked. .They did not destroy the King's prerogative, but they compelled him to summon a meet- ing of Convocation. This step Avas taken on the advice of his Tory ministry, and assented to by Tenison. Convocation met in the spring of 1701. The LoAver House at once gave proof of their High Church spirit. It had ahvays been assumed, up to this time, that the xirchbishop could prorogue both Houses, but the LoAver House now refused to be prorogued by him, treating his 13 194 [MEETING OF [a.d. 1701.] authority as well as his acts with open contempt. They claimed to sit when, and as long, as they chose ; they openly defied the episcopal bench, and proceeded, with- out asking for the Royal license, to transact business of the most important character. Their first work was of a nature the most congenial to their inclinations and their temjDcr. Toland, a free-thinker, had published a book in disparagement of the divine nature of Christianity. This work was seized upon, extracts from it were selected, a so- called synodical censure of it was passed, and the proceed- ings reported to the Upper House. Such an assumption of independent authority could scarcely be overlooked. The bishops at once took legal advice concerning the power of the Lower House to perform such an act. The opinion of the lawyers, which was entirely against the possession of such a right, and hinted at the possi- bility of the penalty of the Act of Submission having been incurred, was communicated to Convocation by the archbishop, and the body again prorogued. Similar scenes took place all through the summer. From the condemnation of Toland's book, the Lower House proceeded to deal vaih. Bishop Burnet's Exposi- tion of the Articles. They represented that it tended to introduce such a latitude and diversity of opinions as the Articles were framed to avoid; that it was opposed in many ])laces to the received doctrme of the Church, and that it contained propositions which were dange- rous to the Establishment. What were the passages complaired of were not stated. Burnet asked that these re] resentations might be received in order that he mio-ht reply to them; but it is obvious that if the bishops lind consented to this step they would have ac- [A.D. 1702.] CONVOCATION. 195 loiowledged the right of the Lower House to make such a representation. In place of doing this they passed a series of resolutions, in which the power of the Lower House to censure any work was denied ; their censure of the " Exposition of the Articles " denounced as defamatory and scandalous, and the author of that book formally thanked for his great service to the Church of England. After this, prorogation followed on proroga- tion, until, by the dissolution of Parliament, Convocation also was dissolved.* The new body was, however, pos- sessed of no better temper than the old. From the first day of its meeting to the last it did little else but dis- pute concerning its rights and privileges. The death of the King put a brief termination to these scandalous and offensive proceedmgs.f There was more in this memorable controversy than appeared upon the surface. Those who have read, with any attention, the Avorks of the lower order of the clergy of King William's reign, -will scarcely fail to have per- ceived that the doctrines which were advanced during the discussions which took place on the powers of Con- vocation and the relative authority of the Episcopacy^ had a political as well as an ecclesiastical bearing. The bishops and the clergy belonged to different political parties. The former were, for the most part, ardent and steadfast adherents of the Revolution. They had, indeed, been selected for their known pohtical sym- pathies. They were personally attached to the King, and they threw the whole weight of their influence into the measures which he was knoAvn to favour. The * Latlibury's " History," cap. xi. t These are Archbishop Tenison's own words. " Tenison's Life," 97 — 99. 13* 19G QUEEN ANNE. [a.d. 1702.] clergy, on the other hand, were Tories. They hated equally the Revolution and its promoters. They despised every bishop who had been nominated to his see by the revolutionary King. Any ecclesiastical measure that was approved by Tillotson, Tenison, or Burnet was sure, on that account, to receive their oppo- sition. They delighted to disparage every man who had received a single mark of favour from William. It was this feeling which gave its animus to the Convoca- tion controversy. The clergy flouted the authority of the bishops, not because they were bishops, or because of their power as such, but because they were King William's bishops. While they treated Tenison with contempt, they reverenced every non -juror who had once held the e])iscopal office. If they had attached the supreme importance which they affected to attach to the questions at issue between the Upper and the Lower Houses, why did they not raise them when a Stuart was on the throne? By-and-by, there can be no doubt, this controversy became a sincere one. From writing as the clergy did, they came at last to believe what they wrote. Hence the controversy did not die with the death of William, but its temper was moderated. The incen- tive of hate to the reis-nin": sovereisrn was lost, and for some time it seemed that their bigotry, and what they considered to be their loyalty, would be gratified by the return of the Stuarts to the throne. With such antici- pations they could afford to let the question of their imaginary rights remain in comparative abeyance. Anne was no sooner seated on the throne than it became evident that the liberties of Dissenters were in danger of serious restriction. The High Church tendencies of [a.d. 1702.] TREATMENT OF DISSENTERS. 197 the Queen were well kno-svii, and it was confidently anti- cipated that she would view with favour the desires of the clergy to limit the operation of the Toleration Act. Dissenters were everywhere insulted; their ministers could scarcely walk the streets with safety; High Church ballads, all ending with the refrain of " Down with the Presbyterians" were composed and sung by drunken mobs under newly-erected Maypoles. " Queen Mary's bonfires" were hinted at for the effectual extirpation of obstinate schismatics ; people talked of pulling do^vn the Meeting-houses as places that should not be suffered to exist; and at Newcastle-under-Lyne they carried this desire into execution.* Two things, however, operated as a restraint on the indulgence of these intolerant passions. The first was the increased numerical power and social influence of Dissent. In the twelve years from a.d. 1688 to A.D. 1700, Dissenters had taken out licenses for no fewer than two thousand four hundred and eighteen places of worship, t De Foe, who knew as much as, if not more, of their condition than any other man, reckoned their number at this period at no fewer than two millions, J and states that they were the most numerous and the wealthiest section in the kingdom, § but notwithstanding their great activity and the mde surface of the kingdom over which they had spread their network of Christian organizations, it is almost impossible to accept this estimate. The second circumstance in their * Calamy's "Abridgment," i. 620 ; and " Own Life," i. 460. De Foe's " Cliristianity of tlie High Cliurch," Ded. t Pali. Return, 156. Sess, 1853. X De Foe's " Two Great Questions," in the first series of the collection of his writings, p. 394. § "Christianity of the High Church;" Ded. 198 TREATMENT OF DISSENTERS, [a.d. 1702.] favour was that they were known to approve of the renewal of hostilities with France, which, soon after the accession of Anne, declared in favour of the Pretender. The Queen herself, however, treated them with contempt. The first occasion that the three Denominations of Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Baptists * united together for a common public purpose was on the acces- sion of Anne to the throne, when a deputation, headed by Dr. Daniel Williams, waited upon her. Either their address displeased her, or she did not care to assume a courtesy which would not sincerely express her own feelings. She heard the deputation in silence. Not a word of thanks, nor a promise of protection escaped her lips. Since the time of James the First, the Dissenters had not been treated with such scant courtesy, and they must have left the royal presence Avith an increase of the cloudy aj^prehensions which a contemporary writer states to have generally prevailed amongst them.f In her first speech to Parliament, indeed, the Queen pro- mised to protect the Dissenters so long as they conducted themselves peaceably towards the government, but she added that members of the Established Church would enjoy her favour. At the close of the session she deigned to be more distinct. She promised to preserve and maintain the Act of Toleration, but she again added, " My own principles must always keep me entirely firm to the interests and rclio-ion of the Church of Eno-land, and will incline me to countenance those who have the * In tins year, also, the body termed " Ministers of the Three Denomi- nations," was formed. The committee consisted of four Presbyterian, three Congregational, and three Baptist ministers. — Ivimey, iii. 42. t Calamy's " Own Life," i. 460. [a.d. 1702.] THE POLITICAL POSITION-. 199 truest zeal to support it."* This was nothing less than the offer of a royal premium upon High Churchism, and it is therefore scarcely to be wondered at that, from this time, High Churchism became the popular form of religion. Neither the condition of political parties, nor the apparent tendency of public affairs, was calculated to dispel the apprehensions entertained by the Dissenters. Within two months of her accession to the throne, the Queen had dismissed from office nearly every statesman who had enjoyed the confidence and favour of William. The names of Halifax, Somers, and Orford, the great leaders of the Revolution, were struck from the Privy Council list. The conduct of public affairs was placed in the hands of Marlborough and Godolphin, both men of Tory sympathies but less extreme m their views than other members of their party. The House of Commons was "full of fury against the memory of the late King, and those who had been employed by him."-|- Its political sympathies were unmistakably evidenced by the election of Harley, once a Presbyterian and a Whig, and now a Tory Churchman, to the Speakership. Above any of these m influence, for, at this time, she commanded the Queen herself, was the wife of Marl- borough, chief favourite at Court, who, during the early part of this reign, set up and pulled down men at her pleasure. This woman's politics were guided mainly by considerations of interest ; but it happened that those interests were sometimes identical mth those of the nation. Undoubtedly, she was no friend of the Jacobite * Boyer's " Annals," vol. i. t Burnet's " Own Times," p. 719. 200 SACHEVERELL AND WESLEY [a.d. 1702.] party, and she saw that the fortunes of her husband and family could not be advanced by the return of the Stuarts or the promotion of extreme Toryism. Although she occupied this confidential position with a Tory Queen, the Countess of Marlborough was herself an ardent Whig. More than Somers or Halifax, she was the leader of the party, and so successfully, by means of Court intrigue, did she lead it, that she soon had the satisfaction of seeino; a chansre in the adminis- tration of affairs. Before this was brought about it was determined to make the Dissenters feel the effect of the death of their protector. The Church party raised a cry for the sup- pression of the Dissenting academies and for the repeal of the law which allowed occasional Conformists to hold public offices. A clergyman named Henry Sacheverell was chosen to discharge the preliminary work of inflam- ing the passions of the people. Sacheverell had qualifi- cations which eminently fitted him for such a part. He was a man of hot and angry temperament, unscrupulous in his language, and fierce in his style of denunciation, but totally destitute of either learning, education, or refinement. He had all the bad qualities of a demagogue united to all the worst qualities of a bigot. He was Avhat most men of his class are, ])oth bold and cunning. His cunning taught him that he might rise to popularity^ if not to eminence, by pandering to extreme Church prejudices, by preaching up the wrongs of the clergy, by denouncing, with holy horror, the schism of Dissent, and by warning the nation of the danger to be expected from the encouragement of men whose ancestors had rebelled against, and [A.D. 1702.] ON DISSENTING ACADEMIES. 201 brought to the block, the " lawful King" and " martyred saint " and sovereign, the direct ancestor of the Royal lady who then sat on the throne. Sacheverell's first attempt in this direction was made in a sermon preached before the University of Oxford, on June 3, a.d. 1702* In the slipshod style which characterized all his writings, Sacheverell referred to the Dissenters and their friends as enemies of the Commonwealth and State. " It is as unaccountable and amazing a contradiction to our reason," he cried, " as the greatest reproach and scandal upon our Church, however others may be seduced or misled, that any pretending to that sacred and inviolable character of being her true sons, pillars, and defenders, should turn such apostates and renegadoes to their oaths and professions, such false traitors to their trusts and offices, as to strike sail with a party that is such an open and avowed enemy to our communion, and against whom every man that wishes its welfare, ought to hang out the bloody flag and banner of defiance." In another sermon preached before the judges at assize, in the same city,f the same orator made formal complaint of Dissent- ino; academies as beino^ dano-erous to the Church and State, and as "fountains of lewdness," from which were "spawned all descriptions of heterodox, lewd, and atheis- tical books; "their supporters were described as "worse monsters than Jews,Mahommedans, Socinians, or Papists;" and the State was asked to pass a law for the suppression of " such a growmg mischief." Sacheverell was followed * " The Political Union : a Discourse, showing the dependence of Govern- ment on Keligion in general ; and of the English Monarchy of the Church of England in particular." t " The Nature and Mischief of Prejudice and Partiality." 202 OWEN AND PALMER'S VINDICATION [a.d. 1703.] by Samuel AYesley, a clergyman,* who attacked the educational uistitutions of Dissenters as being both im- moral in theu' character and disloyal in their tendency. The last author was replied to with great force, and his character exposed by Mr. Samuel Palmer, a Dissenting minister of Southwark — a man in every way competent to such a task. The controversy between Wesley and Palmer extended through four years. Wesley was as unscrupulous and abusive as Sacheverell himself. The mildest words in which he could describe Dissen- ters were "villains," "hypocrites," and "murderers. "f There can be no doubt that the success of the Dissent- ing academies had dra^vn away many from the Esta- blished Church as a religious institution, and that their natural tendency and effect were the perpetuation of an educated and learned ministry. But this was not the only grievance. It was asserted " that they endangered the success of the two national Universities." To prove this point Wesley explicitly refers to the numbers of nobility and gentry who would have sought their educa- tion at one or other of the great seats of learning, " had they not been intercepted by these sucking academies.":}: After stating the numbers who had been educated at * " A Letter from a Country Divine, concerning the Education of Dis- senters in tlieir Private Academies in several parts of tlie Nation. Humbly offered to the consideration of the Grand Committee of Parliament for Eeligion." Wesley was father to the celebrated John Wesley. t Those who may be curious to see the spirit in which Dissent was attacked, and the style of controversial writing which was deemed both allowable and respectable at this period, can scarcely do better than read the three pamphlets of Wesley. The title of the first has already been given ; the second is entitled, "A Defence of a Letter" (a.d. 1704) ; the third, "A Reply to Mr. Palmer's Vindication" (a.d. 17u7). % " A Defence, &c.," p. 14. [A.D. 1703.] OF DISSENTING ACADEMIES. 203 certain well-known institutions, he adds that, on the whole, by a modest computation, " there must have been some thousands this way educated." '"' The reply to such an attack was very obvious. " It is the Church of Eng- land's own fault," said Palmer, " that Ave stand excluded from the public schools;" and he appealed both to the Universities and to the Colleges to remove the barrier which prevented Dissenters from takmg advantage of the acknowledged benefits which they offered. It ap- pears, from this writer, that Dissenters had made formal proposals for admission at Oxford and Cambridge. He states that they had expressed their willingness to be content with some of the inferior Colleges and Halls, and to submit to any civil or moral tests, and indignantly exclaims against the injustice of their exclusion. t Sacheverell met, at this pomt, with another antagonist, Mr. James Owen, who reminded him that from the reign of Queen Elizabeth to that of Charles the First, the de- grees and preferments of the Universities were conferred without distinction of parties or opinions, and in reply to a taunt levelled at the ignorance of Dissenters, made the apt and pertinent remark that, while it was made one of the causes of prejudice and partiality, the Dis- senter " was not allowed the benefit of a learned educa- tion to cure him of this vice." " He excludes them," said the author, " from the fountain of learning, nor will he allow them to drink water out of their own cisterns. He would have them punished for using the means of knowledge, and yet damns them for the prejudices of * lb., 15. 15. t Palmer's " Vindication," pp. 11, 12, A.D. 1705, 204 BE FOE'S [a.d. 1703.] ignorance."* The right to participate in the ad vantages- of the Universities, was, it will thus be seen, affirmed, as strongly by the generation of Dissenters who, by the operation of the Act of Uniformity, were the first to be excluded, as it has been by all their descendants. Sacheverell's party, however, found in Daniel De Foe an abler and more astute opponent than was either Palmer or Owen. De Foe was now rising, with strong and rapid strides, to the height of his reputation as a political writer. Shortly before the death of "William he had published the exquisite satire of the " True-born Englishman," in which those who were for ever carpmg at the King on account of his foreign birth were shown a not very flattering image of themselves. De Foe had previously enjoyed the friendship of the King, and by this service had laid him under a debt of gratitude. But De Foe's politics were not popular, and he took no pains to earn applause. If, amongst any people, he might have expected encouragement, it should have been amongst the Dissenters, for he was the only vigorous and constant advocate of what, at that time, was understood to be religious freedom. But, by the majority of Dissenters^ De Foe was treated with undisguised contempt. Calamy sneeringly alludes to him as "a certain warm person, who thought himself well qualified for the management of any argument." t It was the poUcy of the clerical leaders of Dissent at this period not to advance any claims for further political concessions. Considering the threatening aspect of the dominant High Church party,. * Owen's "Moderation still a Virtue," pp. 98, 103, a.d. 1704. t " Own Life," i. 4G4. [a.d. 1703.] " SHORTEST WAYr 205 it is possible that this was a prudent attitude. The princi- pal representatives of Dissent were ui frequent com- munication with the members of the government and other parliamentary leaders, and, no doubt, shaped their public action according to the advice which they re- ceived. Excepting, therefore, in matters relating exclusively to ecclesiastical polity, they preserved a prudent, if not a dignified, quiet. If they prided themselves in anything, it was in being "moderate." When, at this very time, as well as afterwards, pro- posals were made to the Leo^islature for the abrido-- ment of their liberties, this course was referred to as an argument in favour of their retention of the position which the law had already given to them. But it un- fortunately happened, as under similar circumstances it has generally happened, that this argument was of no avail. However highly the statesmen of this period may have appreciated a quiet policy, and however sincere they may have been in advising and eulogizing it, they had no hesitation in sacrificing the Dissenters when party necessities made such a sacrifice desirable. So far therefore, from anything having been gamed by the adop- tion of a "moderate" course, much had been lost. The rights and principles which had been held back, or which had ceased to be actively urged, had lost ground. The fruit of "moderation" and quiet was retrogression and weakness. To the policy generally adopted in this reign, however prudent it may have seemed, and however conscientiously it may have been taken up, is, in part, to be attributed the rapid decline of Dissent in the immediately succeeding generations. De Foe was no party to such a policy. If he was 206 BE FOE'S [a.d. 1703.] conspicuous for the possession of one quality more than another, that quality Av^as fearlessness. He was accused by persons of a more timid disposition of not being apt to consider consequences :* the fact is, he never consi- dered immediate consequences. He seemed to be able to see past any present disadvantages that might arise from the recommendation or adoption of a particular course of action to what would be its ultimate issue. Temporary sacrifices, temporary unpopularity, or the excitement of temporary anger, Aveighed nothing with him. He had, in regard to ecclesiastical politics, what no other Dissenter of his day appears to have possessed, a firm and far-sighted policy — a policy Avhich he carried out almost alone, at the cost of fortune, health, and reputation, but the wisdom, as well as the courage of which, posterity has gratefully vindicated. De Fo3 met Sacheverell's furious denunciation of Dis- sent and apostrophe to the " bloody flag" of persecution by a satire so delicate that, for a time, it deceived those against whom it Avas directed into the belief that it was written on their own side ; so keen and so severe that when the veil was once removed the desire for revenge against its author knew no bounds. " The Shortest Way with the Dissenters" belongs to the period in the history of English literature in which were pro- duced the " Tale of a Tub," " Gulliver's Travels," and the " History of John Bull," and takes equal rank with either of those immortal satires. That, out of the circle of persons of literary pursuits, it is not so widely known and read as are the popular writings of Swift and * Calamy, ib. [a.d. 1703.] " SHORTEST WAY:' 207 Arbuthnot, is owing to the feet that it takes the form of an ordinary and apparently grave political tract, instead of a humorous narrative. In politics, and especially in ecclesiastical politics, De Foe felt too deeply to allow the humorous to predominate over the serious. While he was not averse to pleasing the fancy, he was intent on convincing the reason. He was incapable, in his poli- tical writings, of subordinating his purpose to the instru- ment by which he chose to accomplish that purpose. Whenever, especially, he was engaged in attacking High Churchism, he was almost savagely earnest. A kind of Mohawk ferocity was a characteristic of most of the party writing of this age ; and it was not an uncommon circumstance for people who were attacked by the pen to threaten a reply by the sword;'"' but De Foe rose above the ordinary level of party warfare. He saw, in the High Churchmanship of this reign, a power which threatened, if it was not resisted with all the vigour of which the mind was capable, to be fatal to the liberties of Englishmen ; to undo, as was sometimes openly pro- mised, the work of the Revolution, and arrest, perhaps, for generations, the progress of the people towards a more liberal government and a more religious life. The author commences " The Shortest Way with the Dissenters" with a history of Dissent, in which its rebel- lious tendency and tyrannical character are described in exaggerated Sacheverellian style. The " purest Church in the world," he says, hns borne with it, '*with invin- cible patience," and a " ibtal lenity." " Charity and love," he adds, " are her known doctrines." He then * Botli De Foe and Swift, as is well kiiown, received frequent threats of assassination. 208 BE FOE'S [a.d. 1703.] examines the reasons given by Dissenters for their continued toleration. They are numerous, but so were the Huguenots, and yet the French kmg disposed of them; but the more numerous they are the more are they dangerous, and the greater need there is to sup- press them. If it be said that there is need of union in time of war, there is the greater need at such a time to take security against private enemies, and heaven, by depriving them of their " Dutch Sanctuary," had clearly made way for their destruction. The popular objection that the Queen had promised them toleration was worth nothing, for the promise was limited by the safety of the Church ; and although there might be no immediate danger to that institut io, if the present op- portunity was not taken it might be too late hereafter to do the work. " If ever," writes the author, in an admirable imitation of the High Church style, "you will establish the best Christian Church in the world; if ever you will suppress the spirit of enthusiasm ; if ever you will free the nation from the viperous brood that have so long sucked the blood of their mother ; if ever you will leave your posterity free from faction and rebellion, this is the time. This is the time to pull up this heretical weed of sedition that has so Ions; dis- turbed the peace of our Church, and poisoned the good corn." Is it cruel, he inquires, to do this? "Is it cruel to kill a snake or a toad? " " I do not," he says, with mock charity, " prescribe fire and faggot, but they are to be rooted out of this nation." He pro- ceeds to ridicule the laws imposing fines and impri- sonment for not attending Church, and in sarcastic allusion to the " occasional Conformists," sa3's, that they [A.D. 1703.] '' SHORTEST way:' ' 209 that will go to church to be chosen sheriffs and mayors would go to forty churches rather than be hanged. " If one severe law were made, and punctually executed, that whoever was found at a Conventicle should be ba- nished the nation, and the preacher be hanged, we should soon see an end of the tale. They would all come to Church, and our age would make us one again." In his opinion Providence had given the country her pre- sent Queen, her present Parliament, her present Con- vocation, for the deliverance of the Church. After comparmg the Church to Christ crucified between two thieves, "Let us," he concludes, " crucify the thieves. Let her foundations be established upon the destruction of her enemies, the doors of mercy being always kept open to the returning part of the deluded people. Let the obstinate be ruled with a rod of iron. Let all true sons of so holy and oppressed a mother, exasperated by her afflictions, harden their hearts against those who have oppressed her." This work was no sooner issued from the press than it was caught up, and circulated with eager zeal by the High Church party. One clergyman, on receiving a copy of it from a friend, in expressing his thanks, wrote, " I join with that author in all he says, and have such a value for the book, that, next to the Holy Bible, and the sacred Comments, I take it for the most valuable piece I have. I pray God to put it into her Majesty's heart to put what is there proposed in execution,"* De Foe himself says, that " the wisest Churchmen in the nation were deceived by this book. * Wilson's " De Foe," ii. 56. 14 210 PROSECUTION [a.d. 1703.] Those whose tempers fell in with the times hugged and embraced it; applauded the proposal, and filled their mouths with the arguments made use of therein." Some Dissenters even were taken aback, and from the popu- larity with which it was greeted, began to fear that they were in considerable danger. When, however, the fact came out that it was written by a Dissenter, ^vith a view to expose the designs of the High Church party, and that it was nothing but a satire, a hot fury took possession of the men who had allowed their passions to cheat their judgments as to its real character andintention. In press and pulpit the author was now denounced as a malignant slanderer. The men who had been foremost in praise were now the most vehement in denunciation. Caught in a trap, their only resource was openly to dis- avow the doctrines which they had before enthusiasti- cally approved. It was, they said, a base calumny on the Church, and no punishment could be too severe for the author. Hounded on by the rage of the clergy, the government undertook to ascertain who was the writer of the pamphlet, a task in which, by the Earl of Not- tingham's perseverance, they quickly succeeded. A State prosecution against De Foe was immediately com- menced. A proclamation was issued and a reward of fifty pounds offered for his apprehension. In this pro- clamation the " Shortest AYay " is stigmatized as a scan- dalous and seditious pamphlet, and after the fashion of the " Hue and Cry," De Foe's personal appearance is minutely described. The House of Commons ordered the pamphlet to be burned in New Palace Yard by the com- mon hangman. De Foe had, before this, prudently retired from the scene, but on learning that both his printer [a.d. 1703.] OF BE FOE. 211 and publisher had been apprehended, he voluntarily surrendered himself. He then wrote a brief \dndi- cation of his work, and threw himself on the justice of the government. He was tried at the Old Bailey on February 24th, a.d. 1703. The Attorney- Gene- ral, Sir Simon Harcourt, who prosecuted, appears to have treated him in the style in which State prisoners were treated before Jeffreys. De Foe frankly admitted his guilt, and was sentenced to a fine of two hundred marks, to stand three times in the pillory, to be im- prisoned during the Queen's pleasure, and to find sureties for his good behaviour for three years. The leader of political Dissent was thus dealt with in the " shortest way," and his satire proved, by the sentence on himself, not to have been a libel. It is to the disgrace of the majority of the Dissenters of that period, that, so far from defending or supporting De Foe, they did nothing but heap reproaches upon him. They affected to believe that he intended his work as a serious production, forgetting, as he well says, that he must then have designed to place his father, his wife, his six children, and himself in the same condition. He appears to have felt this conduct far more severely than he felt the effect of his sentence. For, although forsaken by his own people, the pubKc, in place of treating him as a criminal, honoured him as a hero. When he appeared in the pillory they greeted him with shouts of applause ; they hung what was in- tended to be the instrument of his disgrace with gar- lands of flowers, and plentifully supplied him with refreshments. De Foe himself, summoning all his moral courage to meet his position, turned it at once to . 14* 212 BE FOE'S IMPRISONMENT. [a.d. 1703.] advantage by composing a " Hymn to the Pillory," in which, in clever rhyme, he satirized his opponents and prosecutors, and vindicated his pamphlet. He occupied his whole time while in Newgate in publishing more pamphlets, and in collecting his works, until, after he had been in prison for more than a year, Harley put him- self into communication with him, with a view to secure his literary services for the Ministry, and the Queen sent relief to his family, and set him free. It was during this imprisonment that De Foe established his " Review," a journal of politics and general information, published on an average about three times a week, written wholly by himself, and printed at his own risk. In the pages of the "Review" are, for the first time in English literature, to be seen the style and scope of the modern newspaper article. Questions of domestic and foreign politics, of education and morals, of arts and sciences, and trade and com- merce, were treated with a fulness of information, sincerity of purpose, and vigour of style which, if the politics advocated had been popular, would have secured, even from the contemporaries of De Foe, as much respect and reward as they secured malignity and fear. De Foe came out of Newgate the scoff of the polite wits, but mth the consciousness that after the controversy on the " Shortest Way," no " bloody flag" could, in his time, be reared in England. The High Church party had concentrated their ven- geance on his single person. The conduct of the government in this case has been freely censured, and no words are strong enough to describe the arbitrary injustice with which they treated De Foe. But when the " Shortest Way " was written, they were not only [a.d. 1703.] THE OCCASIONAL CONFOBMITT BILL. 213 Tories, but at the mercy of the High Church majority in the House of Commons, and no government of Queen Anne's or any other reign were likely to sacrifice them- selves for the sake of a Dissenter. Between the publication of Sacheverell's sermon and De Foe's caustic reply, an attack was made on the liberties of Dissenters from another quarter. On No- vember 4th, A.D. 1702, the members for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge brought into the House of Commons a Bill for the prevention of occasional con- formity. This measure was supported by the whole strength of the Tory and High Church party, and was carried through the Commons by an immense majority. The clergy successfully exerted themselves to inflame the passions of the people to their highest point in order to ensure the passing of the measure into law.* The Tory party, however, in prosecution this Bill, were not animated entirely by motives of religious intolerance. The " Occasional " Bill, from its first to its last intro- duction, was mainly a party measure. The Whigs, in many parts of the country, where the corporations re- turned members to Parliament, were, to a great extent, depended for their election on the Dissenting members of those corporations. On the fidelity of these members they could always rely. But, if the Occasional Bill were passed, no Dissenter could, in future, be a member of any corporation. The Whigs, accordingly, fought against the Bill with stubborn tenacity. The cha- racter, however, of the opposition to it, was as mixed * "Among those who were hottest in this affair were the clergy, and a crowd of women of the lowest rank, inflamed, as it were, with a zeal for religion." — Cunningham's "Great Britain," i. 318. 214 THE OCCASIONAL [a.d. 1702.] as were the feelings which had led to its promotion. There were as sincere friends to religious liberty amongst the statesmen of the Whig party as there were sincere opponents to it amidst the Tories, Both parties, also, could raise the same cries of the welfare of the nation, and the welfare of the Church. The one party believed that the first could be secured only by excludmg from its service the extreme adherents of the doctrine of resistance, and that the second would never be safe while Dissent was permitted to exist. The other party believed that the security of the State was best promoted by the good-will of all the people to the laws, and that the Church had gained, and would still gain, by preserving a mild and tolerant attitude to those who differed from her. In the Bill which passed the Commons there was much which might reasonably have suggested hesitation even to the warmest partisan of the Church. It pro- hibited any person who did not statedly commune in the Established Church from holding any civil, military, or naval office whatsoever. Not only every admiral, general, judge, alderman, town councillor or high officer of state, but every common soldier and sailor, every bailiff, and every cook and scullery maid in the Royal household was required to be a member of the Established Church. The bill further provided that if any person holding such an office should, at any time after receiving his appointment, attend any Conventicle or reli- gious meeting other than one conducted according to the liturgy and practice of the Church of England, he should forfeit the sum of One hundred pounds, and Five pounds for every day that he continued in the execution of his office ; and he was at the same time adjudged to be tA.D. 1702.J CONFORMITY BILL. 215 incapable, during the remainder of his life, of holding any public employment.* The House of Lords, at this period, was not greatly •affected by the prevailmg High Church passion. It was, to a considerable extent, a house of William the Third's creation, and most of the bishops had owed their nomuiation to that liberal monarch. When, therefore, the Occasional Bill came before it, it proceeded to make modifications in some of its most offensive provisions, and to add to it clauses which were calculated to make its operation less extensive and less permanent. The Bill, in this amended shape, was sent do"\vn to the Com- mons, who at once requested a free conference with the other House. On the evening of this prolonged and celebrated meeting Dr. Calamy waited on Bishop Burnet, upon whom he urged the claims of the occasional Conformists with such apparent success that he con- cluded "it might answer very good ends for some of us sometimes to wait on great men." f The conference between the two Houses was managed with great ability on both sides. It was opened by the representatives of the Commons, who denounced, in strong terms, the " scandalous practice " of occasional Conformity, and exposed, in vivid language, the dangers besettmg the monarchy and the Church from the existence and encouragement of Dissent. This mode of argument was an unhappy one, for it threw upon the managers for the Lords the necessity of de- fending Dissent. The Lords had sent their ablest and most eminent men to manage this interview. The » Boyer's " Annals," i. 173—177. f " Own Life/' i. 473, 474. 216 THE OCCASIONAL [a.d. 1702.] Duke of Devonshire represented the old landed aris- tocracy of the nation ; Somers and Halifax represented the statesmen of the Revolution; and Bishop Burnet the episcopal bench. While the Lords admitted that it was a scandal to religion that persons should conform to the Church only for the sake of obtaining a place, they did not admit Dissent from the established religion to be such an evil as the Commons had represented it to be. They considered that Dissenters differed from Churchmen " only in some little forms," and that they should be charitably dealt with. They also argued that the principle of toleration had already produced such visibly good results, had, in fact, contributed so much to the security and reputation of the Established Church, and had so diminished the number of Dissenters, that it was unwise to trench upon it. Then then proceeded to vindicate the body from the charges of disloyalty and schism. The Commons had said that Dissenters had never wanted the Avill, when they had the power, to destroy the Church and State ; this, replied the Lords, is " hard and untrue, since, in the last and greatest dan- ger the Church was exposed to, they joined with her in all imaginable zeal and sincerity." The Commons had denounced separation from the Church to be schism, and, therefore, a spiritual sin; the managers of the Upper House replied that " the Lords cannot think the Dissenters can properly be called schismatics." AYitb regard to one of the amendments, by which it was pro- posed to exempt workhouses from the operation of the Bill, the Lords somewhat satirically remarked that " it could never be conceived that the distribution of some Presbyterian bread to the poor, and Dissenting water- [A.D. 1702.] CONFOBMITY BILL. 217 gruel to the sick could ever bring prejudice to the Church of England." Finally they advocated the prac- tice of a charity such as the Almighty had both allowed and commanded,* and repeated that, owing to the exer- cise of such a charity Dissent was " visibly abating all over the nation," and that nothing but severity could prevent its final absorption into the Church. The Com- mons rejoined ; but the Lords adhered to most of their amendments, and the bill accordingly fell through. For this issue the Dissenters were mainly indebted to Arch- bishop Tenison, who framed, and resolutely persisted in retaining, the Lords' amendments, t and to Bishop Burnet, who was one of the principal spokesmen in the conferences with the Commons. Burnet felt the gravity of the poli- tical issue involved. " Had the Bill passed," he says, " we had been all in confusion, and our enemies had had the advantage."! The Court strained its utmost to secure its success. The greatest number — a hundred and thirty — of peers that had ever, at that time, been brought together, met to decide upon it. The Queen's husband. Prince George of Denmark, although himself a Lutheran, and an occasional Conformist, was com- pelled to vote for it, while he exclaimed to one of its opponents, " My heart is vid you ! " But even this vote and example failed to secure a majority, and the Court, at the end of the session, had to acknowledge itself defeated in the one measure which it had most desired to carry. It was not to be expected, under such circumstances, * Boyer's " Annals," i. 178—200 ; Chandler's " Debates," iii. imss. t " Tenison's Life," p. 102. X " Memorial to the Princess Sophia," p. 91. 218 TSE OCCASIONAL [a.d. 1703.] that this question would be allowed to rest ; but, during the close of one Parliament and the opening of another, a change had come over the temper of the Court. Dur- ing the whole of the summer the Duchess of Marl- borough had been intriguing for the restoration of the Whigs, and exerting her influence Avith the Duke to induce him to coalesce with that party.* When the Queen, in November, a.d. 1703, met the two Houses of the Legislature, the effect of this influence was immediately apparent. " I want words," she said, in the last paragraph of her speech, " to express to you my earnest desires of seeing all my subjects in perfect jDcace and union amongst themselves. Let me, there- fore, desire for all that you would carefully avoid any heats or divisions that may disappoint me of that satisfaction, and give encouragement to the common enemies of our Church and State, "f The Commons replied in words which merely echoed this wish ; but the reply of the Lords was couched in the most emphatic and threatening language : " We, in the most solemn manner, assure your Majesty," they rejoined, "that we will not only avoid, but oppose whatsoever may tend to create any disquiet or dissension amongst your sub- jects."^ All parties knew that this language referred to the Occasional Bill; but the fact that the Court seemed disposed to evade this question only served to inflame, to a greater height, the passions of those who had determined that it should pass. Accordingly, on the same month that the Parliament was opened, a new Bill was brought into the House of Commons. It was * Coxe's " Life of Marlborough," cap. xviii. t Boyer's " Annals," ii. 163. X lb, p. 166. [a.d. 1703.] CONFOBMITY BILL. 219 of a more moderate character, as regards penalties, than the former measure, but not less offensive in respect to its political tendency. Its most violent advocate was Sir John Pakington,* who, in supporting it, declaimed in furious language against Dissent and Dissenters. Its fate in the Upper House was, however, worse than the fate of the Bill of the previous year. Archbishop Tenison and Bishop Burnet led the majority of the bench of bishops to vote against it. Burnet, especially, distinguished himself by the warmth of his opposition ; but, although he opposed it because, he says, he had long looked on liberty of conscience as one of the rights of human nature antecedent to society, it is certain, if his speech has been correctly reported, that while he used his utmost power to throw out the Bill, he ex- pressed himself as favourable to the exclusion of all Dis- senters from public offices. He defended, that is to say, the practice of occasional conformity, because he judged it to be consistent -with Christianity, and favourable to the progress of the Church. With regard to the latter point he repeated the argument which he had urged at the conference between the two Houses, in A. D. 1702. "Toleration," he said, "has not only set the Dissenters at ease, but has made the Church both stronger and safer, since God has so blessed our labours that we see the Dissenters lose as much strength as we gain by it. Their numbers are abated, by a moderate computation, at least a fourth part, if not a third." t The lay Lords spoke not less vigorously against the measure. On a division, the second reading was * Ancestor of the present Conservative Member for DroitAvich. f Boyer's " Anaals," ii. 179, 220 THE OCCASIONAL [a.d. 1703.] rejected by 70 to 59. In the majority were fourteen^ and in the minority nine bishops. The Duke of Marl- borough gave a silent vote in its favour, and used his influence to prevent the Bill becoming law. Both he and Godolphin had now become aware that the interest really at stake in this Bill was not the interest of the Church, but of the nation, and that it was impossible to dispense "svith the aid of Dissenters in securing a consti- tutional government. By this decisive rejection of a measure which the majority of the Commons and nearly the whole of the clergy had resolved to pass, popular excitement was raised to its utmost pitch. The vote of the bishops drew down upon them unmitigated abuse.* They were denounced as traitors to the Church, and enemies to religion. The Queen and the Prince came in for their share of vituperation. f " I wish," wi'ites Swift to Stella,:}: " you had been here for ten days, during the highest and warmest reign of party and faction that I ever knew or read of, upon the Bill against Occasional Conformity, which, two days ago, was, upon the first reading, rejected by the Lords. It was so universal that I observed the dogs in the streets were much more con- tumelious and quarrelsome than usual ; and the very night before the Bill went up, a Committee of Whig and Tory cats had a very warm and loud debate upon the roof of our house. But why should we wonder at that, when the very ladies are split asunder into High Church and Low, and, out of zeal for religion, have hardly time * As a specimen see Leslie's " Bisliop of Salisbury's Proper Defence," A.D. 1704. t Burnet's " Own Times." p. 741. X December 16, 1703. [A.D. 1703.] CONFORMITY BILL. 221 to say their prayers. For the rest, the whole body of the clergy, with a great majority of the House of Commons, were violent for this Bill." The controversy was now, for a time, transferred from the Legislature to the people. Clubs and societies were formed aU over the kingdom to take measures for secur- ing the success of the Bill when it should next be brought before Parhament, and the press teemed with pamphlets on both sides of the question. The Friends, the Baptists, and a large proportion of the Congrega- tionalists, as they judged communion with the Church to be unlawful and unscriptural, took no part in the con- troversy; but it was otherwise with the Presbyterians, who occupied a high social position, were conspicuous for their wealth, and held many ci\dl offices. It is not a little singular to find, amongst the reasons urged by this party for the continuance of occasional conformity, the argument which Burnet employed with such force in the House of Lords. Not satisfied with justifying the practice by the authority of ecclesiastical and political precedents, they gravely and earnestly argued that it should be allowed to continue because it strengthened the Established Church and depressed the Dissenting interest. They acknowledged the truth of the statet ments that occasional conformity had weakened them, and that, on account of the practice, their adherents were fast leaving their communion; * but mth strano-e mconsistency and fatal blindness they still advocated Ft. De Foe alone, writing from Newgate, set forth the ques- tion on the only principles which a Nonconformist could * " Moderation a Virtue," p. 29. 222 THE OCCASIONAL [a.d. 1703.] consistently urge. He condemned the practice, as he- had done in his controversy with Howe, as both hypo- critical in its character and injurious in its tendency, and maintained that no respectable Dissenter would be affected by the Bill. Taking the broad ground of religious equality, he denounced the intolerance which made either temporary or j^ermanent Churchmanship a qualification for any public office. In answer to a violent pamphlet from the pen of Sir Humphrey Mack- worth,* he showed that the Established Church of England was, in this respect, the most intolerant Church in Christendom.t He made the Church welcome to every man who could conform for a place or a salary ; who could be bribed or bought, or frightened out of his Dissent; but, he asked, was it just that a Dis- senter should be excluded, for any consideration, from places of profit, while he was compelled to serve in places of trouble ; was it just that he should be pressed as a sailor, and he made incapable of preferment ; that he should maintain his o'wn clergy and the clerg}' of the Church, pay equal taxes, and yet not be thought worthy to be trusted to set a drunkard in the stocks? " We wonder " he cried, " that you will accept our money or our loans." He had no fear that Dissent would be endangered by the passing of the Act, for its foundation was lodged in God's especial providence ; it would be strengthened by it, and its professors would learn to live like people under the poAver of those who hated them.J. In none of De Foe's works is there so much passionate indignation * " Peace at Home," a.d. 1703. t " Peace without Union," a.d. 1703. X "An Inquiry into Occasional Conformity," a.d. 1703. [a.d. 1704.] COHFOBMITT BILL. 223 as there is in this scornful rebuke of ecclesiastical into- lerance and " politic Dissent." That the author did not stand alone in his views is evident from the fact that this pamphlet passed through four editions in less than a year.* He had also an able coadjutor in a Dissenting minister, named Stubbs, who roused the indignation of the moderate party by comparing them to a neuter gender in religion, and by calling upon them to choose, at once, between God and Baal.* No publication of this period, however, was of greater weight than one written by John Shute, afterwards Lord Barrington, in which the services of the Protestant Dissenters to the State, their necessary antipathy to an absolute Govern- ment, and the liberality of their principles, were stated with the greatest completeness. It being one of the stock arguments against Dissenters, that, on account of their supposed complicity with the execution of Charles the First, their toleration was incompatible with the existence of a monarchy, the author reprinted in his work the Vindication of the London Ministers, signed and published by fifty of their number, in which the trial of Charles was condemned, and the sentence upon him severely deprecated. J The Church party in the Commons met, in a.d. 1704, with a determination to carry matters with a high hand. The Occasional Bill, still more modified, was accordingly tacked to the Land-tax Bill, on the credit of • Wilson's De Foe, ii. 137. t " For God or Baal ; or, No Neutrality in Religion. Preached against Occasional Nonconformity." Quoted in the " Interest of England in respect to Protestant Dissenters," pp. 58-9," a,d. 1703. X " The Rights of Protestant Dissenters," A.D, 1704-5. 224 CONTROVEEST ON [a.d. 1704.] which Marlborough had just concluded a treaty with Prussia. It was taken for granted that the Peers would not reject a measure on the carriage of which the national faith had been pledged, and the success of the war depended. But the High Church party had, in the extravagance of their zeal, overreached themselves. They were deserted by their o'svn friends, and the tack was rejected by 251 to 134 votes. This, however, did not dishearten them. The Bill, without the tack, was still persisted in, and again carried through the Commons- When it made its appearance in the Lords, Anne herself went do"\vn to hear the debate. Her presence had the effect of exciting the orators to unusual vehemence, even on this question ; but it was understood that, at present, she did not desire that the Bill should pass. It was rejected by a majority of thirty-four, Marlborough and Godolphin both voting against it.* From this time the extreme Tories were nicknamed " Tackers ;" their violence had made them unpopular; the Whigs were slowly rising to power, and the Occasional Conformity Bill slept the long sleep, for such a measure, of seven years. This resolute and repeated attack against the civil rights of Dissenters had thus, owing to the exigencies of party, failed of its purpose. It was not, however, the only assault that was made upon them at this period. At no time was a more strenuous effort made to bring back, by the legitimate weapons of argument, the moderate Dissenters to the Church, than in the last years of King WUliam's and the earlier years of Queen Anne's • Chandler's Debates, a.d. 1704. Boyer's Annals, vol. iii. [a.u. 1703.] CHURCH AND DISSENT. 225 reigns. The whole argument at issue, between the Church and the moderate party esj)ecially, was set forth on the part of Churchmen, with an ability of intellect, a fulness of learning, and a candour of spirit, which, at such a period, when the tempers of men had become softened by mutual charity, were likely to tell with successful force on the ranks of Dissent. There were many, and those the men of strongest brain and highest character, who had long been convinced that the best means to strengthen a church were those which were most in accordance with Christianity itself. Tillot- son, Tenison, Burnet, Stillingfleet, and Patrick, were conscious that the attitude which the Established Church had hitherto assumed towards those who differed from her communion, had been a blunder as well as a crime. Persecution had only strengthened the persecuted. How was it possible that men, and especially good men, should be attracted towards a church which had always borne to them a forbidding aspect ; which had been little more than an incarnation of Pagan vices, instead of Christian virtues ; and whose history had been signalized by repeated acts of the most deliberate oppression and cruelty ? Instead, therefore, of invoking the vengeance of the civil magistrate, and instead of calling for more penal laws, the new order of Churchmen seriously prepared themselves to meet the Dissenters with their own weapons. In place of a collection of Acts of Parliament they published a " collection of Cases" which had been written to recover Dissenters to the Communion of the Church.* Here Sherlock, * " A Collection of Cases," &c., a.d. 1698. 15 226 THE " COLLECTION OF CASUS." [a.d. 1703.] Deaii of St. Paul's, Williams, Bishop of Chichester, and Freeman, Dean of Peterborough, discoursed of the terms of communion in things indifferent in religion ; scrupulous consciences were attempted to be quieted, and their doubts satisfied by Sharpe, Archbishop of York; objec- tions to the Book of Common Prayer were answered by Dr. Claget ; Fowler, Bishop of Gloucester, undertook to show that the accordance, in certain particulars, of the Established Church with the Church of Eome, was no sufficient reason for Dissent ; Hooper, Dean of Canter- bury, vindicated his Church from the imputation of Eomanism, and Tenison persuasively urged the interests of Protestantism as a reason why there should be no separation from the Established Protestant Church. These " Cases," twenty-three in number, are singularly free from many of the vices of theological controversy. They are characterized by great intelligence of treatment and fairness of argument. Of personal abuse, or the im- putation of dishonesty in opponents, there is so little, that only a person who seeks for those blemishes could find them. The Avorst that can be said agamst all the writers is, that they are uniformly dull and prolix ; but that this was not considered a great fault, is evidenced by the fact that, whether caused by curiosity, interest, or by a desire to make proselytes, the Collection speedily passed through several editions. In conjunction with other circumstances, it is not at all improbable that these Avritings aided to thin the ranks of Dissent. Men who were already disposed to conform would at least find an excuse for taking the final step in the heavily-marshalled but friendly arguments of these exemplary controver- sialists. [a.d. 1703.] BI:NJAMIN ROABLT. 227 The publication of Calamy's "Abridgment of the Life of Baxter " also gave occasion for a revival of the respective claims of Church and Dissent. Calamy, in one of the chapters of his work, had stated in plain and unexag- gerated language, the reasons why Dissenters such as Baxter had separated from the ecclesiastical Establish- ment. His justification of this Dissent was received as an attack on the Church, and was answered with no little vehemence by a clergyman named Olyffe, and by Benjamin Hoadly, afterwards Bishop of Bangor.* Hoadly wrote with the hope of con- quest animating his heart. He avowedly treated of those questions only which separated such men as Calamy from the Church; for their Dissent he judged to be more unaccountable than the separation of others. He thought it quite possible to convince these men of their error; for, he said, "there is somewhat both in the principles and the practice of these persons which suffers me not to think it altogether an hopeless attempt." Hoadly was the best specimen of Broad-churchmanship in his time ; and if any writer could have succeeded in such an enterprise as the one he had undertaken, he would certainly have done so. The logical faculty in his intel- lectual constitution being subordinate to sentiment, he was a man of catholic principles respecting creeds ; he held many views in common with Dissenters concern- ing the relative rights of peoples and sovereigns and Church and State, and was an open and fearless dispu- tant. With all this he had utterly miscalculated the nature and character of moderate Dissent, and in at- ♦ « The Reasonableness of Conformity, a.d. 1703." 15* 228 ED2IVNB CALAMT. [a.d. 1703.] tacking Calamy had equally miscalculated the strength of his adversary. Edmund Calamy now occupied the position of the principal representative of Dissent in the metropohs. It was his pride to consider that he was descended from "moderate" Dissenters, and to be a "moderate" Dis- senter himself. His grandfather and his father belonged to the two thousand who were ejected by the Act of Uniformity of a.d. 1662; and their descendant adopted, with little alteration, the faith of his celebrated ancestors. " I had," he says, in the " Life" of himself, which has often been quoted in these pages, " moderation instilled into me from my very cradle."* When he had become celebrated for his preaching. Bishop Burnet consulted him as to the opinions, in ecclesiastical matters, of " the more moderate sort of Dissenters," " with whom," he remarks, " I was known to be most conversant. "f Calamy' s Dissent, however, was not less firm or con- scientious because it was " moderate." The line which divided him, and perhaps the majority of Dissenters of this period, was not so broad as that which divided the Congregationalists, Baptists, and Friends, who were occasionally classified together under the title of " high Dissenters," from the ecclesiastical Establishment, but it was as distinctly marked. Being narrower it could be more easily stepped across, and accordingly most, if not all, of the secessions to the State Church were from the moderate or old Presbyterian ranks. But in the instances in which this Dissent was not merely hereditary or accidental, but conscientious, it was clung * « Own Life," vol. i. 72. f lb. 470. [a.d. 1703.] EDMUND CALAMT. 229 to with a tenacity quite as intense as that which characterized the more extreme sections. It may be difficult to explain why it should have been the case, but it is evident that the class to which Calamy belonged, considered their Dissent to be of a superior order to that of their brethren. Ecclesiasticallv, if not religiously, it was reckoned as of higher birth; it was more aristocratic in its pretensions; its adherents were more wealthy, and occupied a better social position; it stood nearer to the great, popular, and patronized Estab- lishment than did the more unfashionable sects. There was, accordingly, the slightest tinge of Pharisaic pride in its attitude towards meaner brethren. The Congrega- tionalists, Baptists, and Friends, might be good men, but they were not "moderate." Some of them ques- tioned the scripturalness of a national establishment of religion, even of a national establishment of Presbyterian- ism : did it not follow that they were men of an in- ferior understanding and of a vulgar mind ? Calamy was the ablest and best representative of the last generation of Puritans. He appears, from the indica- tions afforded in his "Own Life," to have been a man of courtly manners and affable address, shrewd in his dealings with men, and politic in his management of public affairs. He was one of a class who never allow their zeal to outrun their discretion. He was an emi- nently " safe" man. While, however,- he was possessed, in a large degree, of the merely prudential virtues, he was not wanting in higher qualities. He was an active pastor, an unusually successful preacher, and a good and ac- curate scholar. The historical literature of Dissent is more indebted to him than it is to anv other man. His " Life 230 " MODERATE NONCONFOBMITYr [a.d. 1703.] of Baxter," his Memorial of the two thousand ejected ministers; his defences of the character of the Puritans from the attacksof Archdeacon Echard and of Walker, and his " Own Life," are works which have laid, not merely English Dissenters, but all Englishmen under obligation to him. Nor was his own generation less mdebted to him for the promptitude, vigour, and success mth which he met Olyffe and Hoadly, in vindication of the principles of "moderate Nonconformity." The first portion of this work was published in the year 1703.* Hoadly was irritated by it, and immediately addressed " A Serious Admonition" to Calamy, which was followed by a treatise on the " Reasonableness of Conformity," and this by a defence of the " Reasonableness." Calamy also added two works to his first, the third of which was published in a.d. 1705. These works are remarkable for two characteristics. The positions sustained by the author are nothing but the old positions of the Puritans, in advance of which Calamy had not moved one step. The general ground taken was that the Estab- lished Church was unscriptural in its constitution and its ceremonies. But if this were the case, how could Calamy defend occasional conformity ? The Presby- terians, in fact, pulled down their own arguments by their practice. AVhen they observed conformity they did so on the plea that there was little difference between the two communions; when they justified their Dissent they did so because of the greatness of that difference. The second characteristic of Calamy's Defence is its masculine style. It is the first exposition of the reasons * "Defence of Modern Nonconformity." f A.D. 1705.] BRAKE'S '' 3IEM0RIAL:* 231 •of Dissent written in modern EnHish — the Eno-lish of Addison and Pope, as distinguished from that of Shakespeare and Hooker. But this mode of controversy did not satisfy the High Church zealots. Arguments which could not be enforced by a more effective weapon than reason were held by them in contempt. Having failed in all their appeals to the Legislature, they now raised the cry that the Church was in danger; not, it was insinuated, from Dissenters alone, but from the Crown itself. Anne's temporary desertion of them, in the case of the Occasional Conformity Bill, had stung them to the quick. One writer was found bold enough to put in print what the clergy talked only at home or at most in the coffee-houses. This was Dr. Drake, who, in a pamphlet entitled the "Memorial of the Church of Ensfland," attacked, mth furious animosity, the Queen's ministers, the bishops, and all who had contributed to the failure of High Church tactics. The nation, remarked Drake, had for a long time abounded with sectaries ; the sons of those who had overturned both Church and State, and who were heirs of their designs, yet remained in the country. The Churda, the author went on to say, would be strong enough to encounter these men but for the treachery and supineness of its members. The head of the Church was inclined only to forgive and forget ; she gave them comfortable speeches and kind assurances, while her prime minister gave them his ■countenance. The bishops were preaching indifference, «and had extinguished the noble spirit which had ani- mated their predecessors. Politicians were told that it was dangerous to rely too much on the apparent supine- 232 " TRE CRUBCR IN DANGERr [a.d. 1705,] iiess of the clergy, or on their passive principles, for it was not to be expected that they would long bear to be used as they had been, or see the party in poAver courted at their expense, for the Church was in danger.* Here, at last, was found a cry which, like the war-whoop of an American Indian, was sufficient to excite the whole clerical race to do final battle. Every pulpit at once echoed with it. In the coffee-houses nothmg was spoken of but the Church's danger. With such a cry the Whigs could be extinguished and the Dissenters extermmated. Drake's pamphlet was a repetition of De Foe's "Shortest Way" without its satire. Those who dreaded the consequences of its publication de- nounced it as a forgery. It was a second part of the " Shortest Way,"t and it Avas not written by a High Churchman. De Foe himself greeted its appearance with undisguised expressions of gratification. He pub- licly thanked the author for convincing the Avorld that Avhat he had said ironically was now declared to be true literally. :|: Reviewing the histor}' of the High Church party from the accession of the Queen to the time of this publication, he showed that Drake's doctrines were the goals to Avhich they had always tended. § Pam- phlet noAV followed pamphlet. The grand jury of Middlesex, Ashhurst the Presbyterian in the chair, made a presentation against it. By their order it waS' burned before the Royal Exchange, the Sheriff of London attending to witness the burning. |1 This cere- * "The Memorial of the Church of Engkntl," a.d. 1705. t Leslie's " Rehearsal," No. 98. . I Review, ii. 266—270. § " The High Church Legion," a.d. \~(^'k II Boyer'.s 't. " Now is the time for them," he said, "to stand upon their own legs, and be truly independent; they will soon make circumstances recover, and the figure they make differ from anything they ever made before."* This would have been unquestionably the wiser policy, for statesmen are no exception to the rest of mankind in estimating people at the value which they put upon themselves. The Dissenters, as a body, chose, however, to take counsel of their prudence, by adopting the second line of j^olicy. This was the case with Sir Thomas Abney and Sir John Fryer, aldermen of London, with the mayors of several country corpora- tions and with justices of the peace, who decided to hold their offices and to cease their attendance at any public place of worship. The conduct of this class is stated to have been decided by the representations of the leaders of the Whig party and the Resident of Brunswick, who pledged their word that, on the death of the Queen, and the accession of the House of Hanover to the throne, the law should be repealed. Sir Thomas Abney, amongst others, ceased attendance at any public place of worship for seven years. Dr. Watts acting during the whole of that time as his private chaplain.-]- This course met, however, with severest condemnation from some of the Presbyterian ministers, who st'gmatized it as a gross * " Present State of Parties." t Calamy's " Own Life," ii. 245, 246. Milner's " Lile of ^^'atts." [a.d. 1714.] THE SCHISM BILL. 269 dereliction of duty, as a desertion of the brethren who continued in public communion, and as a virtual con- demnation of those who had suffered for the Dissenting interest.* Nor did the studious moderation of this course meet the reward which it certainly deserved. The Act was found to have failed, to a great extent, of its jDrincipal purpose. It had not materially injured Dissent, and it was necessary, if the schemes of certain politicians were to succeed, that Dissent should not only be weakened but, if possible, extinguished. Amongst the statesmen of this period there was more than one who had conceived the bold design of destroying the Protestant succession. At the head of these were Francis Atterbury, Bishop of Kochester, and Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke, who had been appointed Secretary of State to the last Tory ministry of this reign,— a ministry formed of Jacobite materials, and which no sooner entered on office than it began to make arrangements for securing the Pretender's succession to the Crown. While Dissent, in any form, existed, it was felt to be impossible to count on the result of such an engagement. f Whoever might turn traitors to the Constitution, it was very well known that the Pretender would find his strongest and most persistent opponents in this party. Bolingbroke therefore resolved to strike at the roots of Dissent. Accordingly, on May 12th, A.D. 1714, a Bill, popularly termed the "Schism Bill," was introduced into the House of Commons. By this measure it was provided that no person should keep any public or private school, or teach or instruct, as * Williams's " Enquiiy." Works, ii. 454. t Chauibeiiin's " Queeu Anne," p. 495. 270 I)ISSI::N'TI:ES and [a.d. 17i4.] tutor or schoolmaster, who had not subscribed a declara- tion to conform to the Established Church, and obtained, from the bishop of the diocese in which he resided, a license to teach. No license was to be granted unless the applicant could produce a certificate that he had received the Sacrament according to the rites of the Church, for a year previous. If he taught without such a license he was, on conviction, to be imprisoned without bail. Sectarian hate scarcely ever gave birth to a more scandalous proposal than that of the Schism Bill. While its precise object was to destroy Dissent, and, by destro}^- ins: it, to bring; in the Pretender, its actual effect would have been the extinction of the best means of religious education to be obtained at that time in England. It was a proposal to sacrifice the intelligence and religion of the people at the shrine of the Established Church. Its first blow would, of course, have fallen on the insti- tutions established for the training of ministers. The Presbyterians had academies for this purpose at Hoxton, Taunton, and Shrewsbury; the Congregationalists at Plasterers' Hall, while throughout the country, at Bridgewater, Tiverton, Tewkesbury, Colyton, Carmar- then, Bridgenorth, and other towns, many ministers of the denomination had established private academies for ministerial education. The Baptist institution connected with the Broadmead Church at Bristol, and the Quakers' schools, would also have been extinguished. Besides these, private schools for the middle classes existed in every large town. The rapid increase and successful career of these institutions had been a source of alarm for many years. They had furnished a stimulus to the [a.d. 1714.] POPULAR EDUCATION. 271 zeal of High Churchmen in the matter of Occasional Con- formity, for the sight of a Dissenting academy inflamed the passions of men of the Sacheverell order almost to madness. The members of the Established Church, by the formation of the Society for the Promotion of Chris- tian Knowledge, had done a little to overtake the ignorance of the people ; but the Dissenters had, nearly a quarter of a century before, set them the example. The first school for the poor established in England was founded in A.D. 1687, in connexion with Nathaniel Vincent's church in Southwark. To the honour of the founders it was of an unsectarian character. Children, it was stipulated, should be received into it " without distinction of parties, the general good being intended."'*- In the year 1714, in the debates on the Bill now under review. Lord Cowper stated that the schools in many country towns were chiefly supported by Dissenters, who educated Churchmen with themselves.f In the charity schools founded by the Christian ICnoAvledge Society, all chil- dren were required to be taught the formularies of the Established Church, and were taught, besides, to hate the existing government.J There was, in fact, a s}^- tematic attempt to train the children in the principles of * Toulmin's " History," p. 430. Milner's Watts, p. 430. t " Parliamentary History," in loco. X Dr. Watts, in his " Essay towards the Encouragement of Charity Schools, particularly among Protestant Dissenters," published a.d. 1728, remarks, "Many others were formed by persons of the Established Church' to which seyeral Dissenters subscribed largely ; but at last they found, by sufficient experience, that the children were brought up, in too many of these schools, in principles of disaffection to the present government in bigoted zeal for the word Church, and with a violent enmity and malicious spirit of persecution against all whom they were taught to call Presby- terians, though from many of their hands they received their bread and clothing. It was time then for the Dissenters to withdraw that charity which was so much abused."— ^ForAs, i. p. 527. 272 THE SCHISM BILL PASSED. [a.d. 1714] Jacobitism.* With the Dissenters' schools closed, and all other educational institutions in the hands of the High Church clergy, the re-establishment of the Stuart dynasty would have been a matter of comparative ease. The introduction of this bill excited the gravest alarm, and the Dissenters at once took active measures to pre- vent its being passed. Statements were written and circulated amongst members of both houses of the leo-islature ; Calamy addressed the bishops in a series of pungent queries ; and meetings were held from day to day in the City, the Temple, and at Westminster, to concert measures of opposition ;j* but no time was given for agitation. It was carried in the Commons, after hot debates, by two hundred and thirty-seven to one hundred and twenty-six votes, the Bill being read three times, in one day. In the Upper House, Lord Cowper, Lord HaUfax, and Lord Wharton led a \dgorous and almost successful opposition to it. The argument used in its favour was that it was necessary for the security of the Church. " Dissenters," said the Bishop of London, " have made the Bill necessary by their endea- vours to propagate their schism, and to draw their children to their schools and academies." Lord Wharton appears to have made the ablest speech against it. He remarked that such a measure was but an indifferent return for the benefit the public had received from these schools, in which the greatest men had been educated — men who had made a glorious peace for England, who had paid the debts of the nation, and Avho had extended * This was animadverted upon with great severity by Wake, Arch- bishop of Canterbury, in 1716, and also by Gibson, Bishop of London, t Calamv's " Own Life,'' ii 282—285. [a.d. 1714.] BEATJE OF QUEEN ANNE. 273 its commerce.* Three divisions were taken on the Bill. In the first it was carried by fifty-nine to fifty-four votes ; in the second by fifty-seven to fifty-one ; and in the third and final struggle, when both parties brought their whole forces together, by seventy-seven to seventy- two, f The Queen had, from the first, given the Schism Bill her heartiest encouragement. She signed it on the 25th of June. On Sunday, the 1st of August, it was to have been put in operation. On the morning of that day Thomas Bradbury, the Congregational minister of Fetter Lane, was walking through Smithfield, when he met Bishop Burnet. Burnet called to him from his carriage, and inquired why he seemed so troubled? "I am thinking," replied Bradbury, " whether I shall have the constancy and resolution of that noble company of martyrs whose ashes are deposited in this place; for I most assuredly expect to see similar times of violence and persecution, and that I shall be called to suffer in a like cause." The bishop, endeavouring to calm him, informed Bradbury that the Queen had been given over by her physicians, and was expected every hour to die, and that he himself was then on his way to Court. He offered to send a messenger to Bradbury to give him the earliest intelligence of the Queen's death, and arranged that, if the messenger should find Bradbury in his pulpit, he should go into the gallery of Fetter Lane Chapel, and drop a handkerchief. The Queen died on the same morning ; and while Bradbury was preaching the messenger arrived, and dropped his handkerchief * Calamy ii. 287. t " Parliamentary History." 18 274 TENI80N, SUBNET, [a.d. 1714.] from the front gallery. The preacher made no reference to the event in his sermon, but in the succeeding prayer he offered public thanks for the delivery of the nation, and implored the Divine blessing on King George I. and the House of Hanover. He then asked the con- gregation to sing the eighty-ninth Psalm. It is reported that, shortly after, Bradbury preached from the text, " Go, see now this accursed woman, and bury her ; for she is a king's daughter." He often, in after life, made reference to the fact that the first pubhc proclamation of the accession of the house of Hanover to the throne was made from the pulpit of the Congregational Church in Fetter Lane.* With the decease of Anne the Schism Act became a dead letter. No attempt was made to enforce it. The High Church party had lost their chief strength, and the last law for the limitation of religious liberty in England had been passed. Through the fiat of the Almighty, the leo-acy which the revolutionary Kmg and his statesmen had left to the country was preserved nearly intact. Henceforward, the struggle was to be, not for the preser- vation, but for the extension of freedom. Almost simultaneously with the death of the Queen, three men who had devoted all their great abilities to the cause of a free and constitutional government, also dropped from the page of ecclesiastical history. Tenison and Burnet lived barely long enough to see George I. ascend the throne. They both died full of years, and every o-eneration which has succeeded them has cast its chaplet of honour on their tombs. De Foe, at the same * Wilson's "Dissenting Churclies," iii. p. 513. [a.d. 1714.] AND BE FOE. 275 period, relinquished his political labours. Hated more than any man of his time by the Tories and Jacobites, whose chief literary employment was to load him with abuse, he at last incurred the almost equal hatred of the Whigs. The cause of this was his opposition to their foreign policy, and his exposure of their desertion of the Dissenters; or rather, as he stigmatized it, "the bar- barity" of their treatment. The members of his own eccle- siastical party were scarcely less displeased with him for his bold rebukes of their timidity and of their continued adhesion to the men who had betrayed them. In a strain of mournful eloquence he wrote, in one of the last numbers of his "Review:" "And now I live under universal contempt, which contempt I have learned to contemn^ and have an uninterupted joy in my soid ; not at being contemned, but that no crime can be laid to my charge to make that contempt my due." Of the Dissenters themselves and his relation to them, he wrote at the same time, "It is impossible for the Dissenters in this nation to provoke me to be an enemy to their interests. . . . Not that I am insensible of being ill-treated by them, or that I make any court to their persons. When any party of men have not a clear view of their own interests, he that will serve them, and knows the way to do it, must be certain not to please them, and must be able to see them revile and reproach him, and use him in the worst manner imaginable, without being moved. I remember the time when the same people treated me in the same manner upon the book called ' The Shortest Way,' and nothing but suffering for them would ever open their eyes. He that cleared up my integrity then, can do it again by the same method, 18 * 276 DE FOE'S RETIREMENT. [a.d. 1714.] and I leave it to Him."* He warned them again of the folly of looking to politicians for their liberties, instead of to themselves and their own exertions. In a subsequent " Appeal to Honour and Justice," he reviewed the course of his own political life from the time when, thirty years before, he had joined the standard of the Duke of Monmouth, and had cautioned Dissenters not to listen to the promises of James. This vindication is written with an affecting earnestness, which shows how much he felt the reproaches of his friends. His life, he said, had been one of " sorrow and fatigue ;" but he was desirous that his children should not be disturbed in the inheritance of their father's character. This was one of the last of his political publications. The " Review" was discontinued in the place where it had been begun — in Newgate — where a second imprisonment for a second political "libel" was awarded to him. The remainder of his life, as all know, was devoted to writing works on political economy and on education, and to that marvellous series of fictions of which "Robinson Crusoe" was the fore- runner. It is scarcely surprising that the Dissenters of his own day did not understand such a man. De Foe lived many generations before his time. The character of his mind and work belong more to the nineteenth than to the seventeenth century. He was too inventive and enterprising ; too original and bold ; too broad, too political, and too versatile for men of " the Old Dissent." They never, therefore, understood him. And now, happily, he could lay do"\vn his political work, for religious liberty was to become a watchword given from a King's mouth. * Wilson's " Life of De Foe," iii. pp. 294, 295. CHAPTER IV. FROM THE SCHISM ACT TO THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSENTING DEPUTIES. A.D. 1714 TO A.D. 1732. The history of the Free Churches of England during the reign of George I. — a period which is nearly con- terminous with the time to be reviewed in the present division of this work — is the history of that decline in religion which immediately preceded the rise of Method- ism. It commenced with a popular outbreak against the government and the Dissenters. George was a Lutheran in religion, but on coming to the throne ex- pressed his firm purpose to maintain the Churches of England and Scotland as by law established. At the same time he remarked that, in his opinion, this could be effectually done without impairing the toleration, which was so agreeable to Christian charity, allowed by law to Protestant Dissenters. ■^^' The three denominations, in common with others, presented an address on the occasion. Nearly one hundred ministers, all clad in their black Genevan cloaks, were present. " What have we here?" asked a nobleman — "a funeral?" On which Bradbury replied : " No, my lord ! a resurrec- tion." f Dr. Daniel Williams, for the last time in his * "Parliamentary History." t " Monthly Repository," 1820, p. 316. 278 ACCESSION OF GEORGE I. [a.d. 1715.] life, headed the deputation. Their address was excusably egotistic. The deputation referred to their adherence, against all temptations and dangers, to the revolutionary settlement. " Our zeal," they went on to state, " has been proved to be very conspicuous by those noble patriots who now surround your throne." They expressed their determination to uphold the government against all pre- tenders whatsoever, and thanked the King for his decla- ration in their favour — a declaration which both relieved them from anxiety and gave them grounds of hope for future protection and favour. The King expressed his pleasure at receiving the address, and assured the ministers that they might depend on his protection.* The coronation of George was accompanied by tumults, riots, and murder, in several towns. In a.d. 1715 the Pretender was proclaimed as King James III. The cries of the " Church in Danger," '' High Church and Sacheverell," and "No Presbyterianism," were now again heard. The Pretender's adherents, as though the ques- tion at issue were one of Church and Dissent — as, indeed, to some extent, it was — began at once to demolish the meeting-houses. At Oxford — then, as now, the head- quarters of High-Churchism — the places of worship belonging to the Presbyterians, Baptists, and Quakers were destroyed; the Baptist chapel at Wrexham, the Presbyterian church at Nuneaton, several churches in the county of Stafford and in other parts of England, shared the same fate.f The whole of the Dissenters, durinof this rebellion, rallied round the Hanoverian * Calamy's " Own Life," ii. pp. 299, 300. t Calamy, ii. 313. Ivimey, iii. 121. Gough's "History of the Quakers," iv. Hi5. [a.d. 1715.] ATTACKS ON DISSENTERS, 279 dynasty. At Newcastle-on-Tyne a corps of seven hundred keelmen, mostly Dissenters, were embodied for defence.* At Chowbent, in Lancashire, the Dissent- ing minister, Mr. Wood, rallied together four hundred Dissenters, armed and equipped at his own expense, and took them to join the standard at Preston — an act of loyalty which, owing to the penalties atten- dant on the Occasional Conformity Act, was obliged to be condoned by a special Act of Parliament.f The Dissenters, as soon as this rebellion had been quelled, waited on the King, the spokesman being, for the first time, a member of the Baptist denomination, Mr, Nathaniel Hodges. J They referred at length, in their address, to the treatment they had received, adding, with truth, that whenever there had been a design to introduce Popery and arbitrary power in England, the Protestant Dissenters had generally been the first to be attacked. § The King, in reply, expressed his concern at the "unchristian and barbarous treatment" which they had received, and promised compensation. § "Unchristian and barbarous" were words that had never before fallen from a King in description of acts committed by Churchmen against Dissenters ; and there need be no wonder at the general feeling of peace and satisfaction which ensued. ♦ Belsham's " History of Great Britain," iii. p. 36. t George i. c. 39. The losses of Dissenters on this occasion were repre- sented to the House of Commons, and two years afterwards, but with great diliiculty, the sum of five tliousand pounds was obtained in reparation of the damages which had been sustained. X Crosby, iv. 126. This circumstance gave occasion to a writer in the " Weekly Journal " to ridicule the "mean occupations" of " that dipping set of people." Hodges was afterwards knighted, and was, I think, the first Baptist who received that honour. § " Gazette," May 17, a.i>. 1715. 280 NUMBER OF TRE [a.d. 1715.] For the first time in the history of the Free Churches, an endeavour was now made to obtain an exact return of their number and distribution. This was elFected, after great labour, by Daniel Neal, than whom, for such a task, no man, whether in respect to ability or to honesty, was more competent. Neal gives the total number of the Free Churches in England and Wales, in the years 1715 and 1716, at eleven hundred and fifty.* * Neal thought it necessaiy to distinguish only Baptists and Psedobap- tists. His List, with his own classification, was as follows : Total. Baptists. Total. Bapt. Bedfordshire . 23 22 Somersetshire . 55 12 Berkshire 26 10 Suffolk . 34 0 Buckinghamshire 17 7 Surrey . 20 4 Cambridgeshire 23 5 Sussex . 16 1 Cheshire 21 4 Staffordshii-e . 16 2 Cornwall 12 0 Warwickshii'e 18 4 Cumberland 19 2 Wiltshire 20 4 Derbyshire 28 9 Westmoreland 5 9 Devonshire . 61 6 Worcestershire 18 8 Dorsetshire 35 5 Yorkshire 48 0 Durham . 9 0 — — Essex 52 8 Totals 1107 247 Gloucester 51 16 Hants . 32 9 W.VLES 3. Herefordshire 8 1 North Wales — Hertfordshire 26 10 Anglesea 1 Huntingdonshire 31 1 CarnaiTonshire 1 Kent . 52 27 Denbigh 3 Lancashire 47 4 Merioneth 1 Leicestershire 33 9 Montgomery 2 Lincolnshire . 22 3 Flint . 1 Middlesex 91 26 South Wales — Monmouthshire 8 2 Brecknock . 3 Norfolk . 20 4 Cardigan 3 Northamptonshire 40 22 Carmarthen . 9 Northumberland 27 0 Glamorgan . 7 Nottinghamshire 8 1 Pembroke 8 Oxfordshire . 14 3 Eadnorshire . 4 Eutland 6 3 — Shropshire 15 2 43 [a.d. 1715.] FBEE CRVBGREB. 281 But there is evidence that his list, although no doubt substantially accurate, is not correct in all particulars. Neal states that there were no Baptist churches in Yorkshire at this period ; but it is certain that Mitchell and Crossley had founded, before this, more than four in the two counties of Yorkshire and Lancashire. There was a prejudice, at this time, as at the time of the Rothwell controversy, against recognizing any assembly as a church which was not presided over by a regularly ordained pastor ; and not many Baptist churches, in the early part of the eighteenth century, could boast of such men.* The Quakers also are evidently omitted from the whole list, and in Yorkshire alone they had founded, before this period, eighty permanent churches.f If Neal's list is absolutely correct, more than half of the churches for which licenses had been taken out between A.D. 1688 and a.d. 1710 were extinct in a.d. 1715. It is possible that this was the case, for subsequent statis- tical inquiries tended to confirm Neal's general accuracy as regards the three denominations. Taking the list as it stands, it is curious to observe the numerical relations of the different orders of Free Churches. All but one of the twenty-three Free Churches of Bedfordshire were Baptist. These were the fruits of Bunyan's labours ; but it would seem that the body had not sufficient heart- power to send its faith to the extremities of the king- dom. There was' not, apparently, a single Baptist church in Cornwall, Durham, Northumberland, or * I am aware that no existing Baptist cliurch in Yorkshire can trace its origin to this date, and it is therefore possible that Mitchell and Crossley's labours were ultimately fruitless. t Pari. Paper, 156, September, 1853. 282 QUAKERS AFFIRMATION LAW. [\.d. 1715.] Westmoreland. The position of this denomination in the agricultural counties of Dorset, Hereford, Hun- tingdon, Lincoln, Monmouth, Sussex, Suffolk, and Wilt- shire was almost equally low. In Suffolk, indeed, there was no Baptist church whatever. There were no counties where Baptists and Pasdobaptists were equally divided, but the list indicates a predominance of Baptist over Congregational Churches in the metropolis, for it is known that there were more than fifty Presbyterian places of worship in London at this period. On the whole, however, Neal's list, while it does not bear out the language of those who appeared to consider Dis- senters to be a majority in the kingdom, shows the great power of the voluntary principle in religion. As the result of little more than thirty years' toleration, and under the greatest discouragements, more than fifteen hundred places of worship had been opened and kept open. The Quakers were the first to take advantage of the new spirit in the conduct of public affairs. By the Act of William the Third, they had been allowed to make an affirmation instead of an oath. This Act was, however, limited to a term of years, in order that it might be seen whether it would work consistently with the public interests and the administration of justice. As this term was now on the point of expiring, application was made for its extension. A Bill was therefore brought into the House of Commons, and, in a few days, an Act was passed giving the Quakers this right in perpetuity. At the same time the operation of the law was extended, for a brief period, to Scotland and the Colonies.* The rapidity * SewcU's " Ilistorv," ii. 469. [a.d. 1717.] A aiTATION FOB BELIGIO US LIBERT J. 283 and ease with which this measure was conducted through the leo^islature were bright omens of a more tolerant system of law. It now remained to be seen whether the Whig party would redeem their promises, and several writers began to remind them of their engagements. In a.d. 1715 there appeared the first claim, from the new government, for a full toleration. This was made in a pamphlet entitled "The Case of the Protestant Dissenters in England fairly stated," the author of which reviewed the history of the Test and Corporation, the Occasional Con- formity, and the Schism Acts, and demanded their repeal as well in the interests of the House of Hanover as of the Dissenters themselves.* The next year Calamy wrote in favour of the repeal of the Occasional Confor- mity Act.f With his habitual caution he did not take the initiative in this without the instigation of several members of Parliament, and when he wrote he asked merely for the repeal of the law which bore most harshly on Presbyterians. Others at once followed his example. At the commencement of the year 1717 the agitation took a shape as systematic in form as it was formidable in character. Members of the House of Commons, in- dignant at the injustice which had been done to Dis- senters, and at the delay which had taken place in fulfilling the promises made to them, met together, and at last, on the 20th March, summoned a meeting, which was attended by more than two hundred members, at the Rose Tavern, Temple Bar, to consider the subject. This large and influential assembly was addressed by * Calamy, ii. 344. t lb. 369. 284 HOADL Y ON RELIGIO US LIBERTY, [a.d. 1717.] Lord Molesworth, Sir Richard Steele, and Mr. Jessop, who reminded it that the Dissenters suffered from their disabilities solely in consequence of their zeal for the Protestant succession; and urged that such friends of the Government should be placed in a capacity to serve it. They had reason to believe, they added, that the King himself was favourable to the object. It was stated, in reply, that, as a matter of fact, the Court was apprehensive of the opposition of the House of Lords. The meeting was then adjourned. On assembling again, a few days afterwards, it was authoritatively stated that the obstacles to the introduction of a Bill were now removed, and it was therefore resolved to prepare a measure for the full relief of Dissenters.* Hoadly, who had now been promoted to the bishopric of Bangor, threw the weight of his powerful intellect into the same scale. In a sermon on the " Nature of the Kingdom or Church of Christ," preached before the King on the 31st March, a.d. 1717, the general doctrine of which will presently come under review, Hoadly attacked all the laws which limited the civil rights of any classes of Christians. The Church of Christ, he main- tained, could not be protected or encouraged by human laws and penalties. It was "something," he said, in another work, " of quite another nature than anything that can be supported by the acts and statutes and laws framed in the different nations of the world ; and something which is best and most effectually preserved according to the will of Christ, by methods agreeable to the spirit of the Gospel." f Six months afterwards the * Tiii(lar& " Continuation," vii. 96, 97. Fifth edition. t Hoadly's "Rights of Subjects," p. 172. [a.d. 1718.] MOTION IN TEE LORDS. 285 King indicated the state of his own feelings in a passage of his speech on opening Parliament, in which William the Third's customary language was adopted almost word for word. " I could heartily wish," he said, " that at a time when the common enemies of our religion are, by all manner of artifices, endeavouring to undermine and weaken it both at home and abroad; all those who are friends to our present happy Establishment might unanimously concur in some proper method for the further strengthening the Protestant interest, of which as the Church of England in the great bulwark, so will she reap the principal benefit of every advantage accruing by the union and mutual charity of all Pro- testants."* This significant language, coupled with the address of the House of Lords in reply, which echoed the King's sentiments in his own words, indicated that, in the judgment of the Crown and its ministers, the time had arrived when all the disabilities of the Dissenters might be removed. Protected by a powerful party in Parliament, and with the certainty of success attending their eflibrts, the Dissenters now boldly took the field. Meetings were held all over the country,f and it was resolved to demand the repeal, not only of the Occasional and Schism Acts, but of the Test and Corporation laws. On December 13th, A.D. 1718, Earl Stanhope, who had become principal Secretary of State, brought in a Bill for " strengthening the Protestant interest " by a repeal of portions of the Occasional Conformity Act, of the Schism Act, and of some clauses in the Test and Cor- * " Parliamentary History," vii. 502. t Tinelal's " Continuation," vii. 224. 286 BILL FOB " STBENGTHENING [a.d. 1718.] poration Acts. The Earl, in moving the second reading of the Bill, enlarged on the equity, reasonableness, and advantage of restoring Dissenters to their natural rights, and on the probable effects of such a measure, which, he said, would strengthen the Protestant interest, and be of advantage to the Established Church. The end, in his judgment, would be that the Archbishop of Canterbury would become the patriarch of all the Protestant clergy. The authors and supporters of the Acts fought for their preservation with all the strength and eagerness with which a parent will fight for the lives of his off- spring. They said that it would " pluck the Church of its best feathers ; " that it would invest her enemies with power ; that they were the "main bulwark of our excellent constitution in Church and State," and that to repeal them would be to break the articles of union with Scotland. No man was more vehement in his opposition than the old Earl of Nottingham, who, in WiUiamthe Third's reign, had, by his own influence, prevented the repeal of the Test and Corporation laws, and who was himself the author of the Occasional Conformity Act. The debate was then adjourned for five days. On the 18th De- cember the Bill was read a second time without oppo- sition, but on the motion for going into committee the Earl of Nottingham again raised the standard of oppo- sition. No bishop had yet spoken upon it, and accord- ingly an appeal was made to the episcopal body for an expression of their opinions. Wake, Archbishop of Canterbury, the successor of Tenison and the opponent of Atterbury, at once responded to the appeal by in- timatinof that he should vote ao-ainst the measure. In his judgment, also, the Acts proposed to be repealed [a.d. 1718.] THE PBOTESTANT INTEBESTy 287 " were the main bulwarks and supporters of the Esta- blished Church." Dawes, Archbishop of York, took the same side, and urged the danger of trusting the open and avowed enemies of the Church with power and authority. Next rose Hoadly, who, in a speech characterized by an eloquent statement of the principles of Christian liberty, said that if Dissenters were ever to be drawn over to the Church it must be by "gentle means." All religious tests, he affirmed, were an abridgment of the natural rights of men, an injury to the State, and a scandal to religion. The laws pro- posed to be repealed were persecuting laws, and could no more be justified than could the persecution by heathens of the early Christians. The power, he went on to say, of which the clergy seemed so fond, he had learned, from reason and from the Gospel, must be kept Avithin due bounds, and not be allowed to entrench upon the rights and liberties of fellow-creatures, and fellow-countrymen. An endeavour was made by Smal- ridge, Bishop of Bristol, to break the force of Hoadly 's speech, but he was ably replied to by Willis, Bishop of Gloucester, and Gibson, Bishop of Lincoln. The Earl of Nottingham now again rose, and warned the House that Dissenters were " an obstinate set of people, never to be satisfied." In wise governments, said Dr. Eobinson, Bishop of London, who followed, " all offices and places of trust are in the hands of those of the National Church." Atterbury next took up the argument, and dwelt on the hardships which Dissenters were bringing on the Church. Next to Hoadly's, however, the speech of the debate was White Kennet's, Bishop of Peterborough, who said that it was the promotion, by the clergy, of arbitrary measures 288 SUCCUSS OF TRE BILL. [a.d. 1719. and persecutions which, in Charles the First's reign, had brought contempt upon themselves and ruin on the Church and State. In ridicule of the cry of " Church in danger," he said that, while raised for sinister designs, it merely made " a mighty noise in the mouths of silly women and children." The debate lasted until six in the evening, and was then adjourned to the 19th Decem- ber. Twenty-six speakers, on this occasion, recapitulated the old arguments, and the Bill was then put to the vote, when it was declared to be carried by eighty-six to sixty-eight. The next day, on going through committee, the clauses relating to the Test and Corporation Acts were withdrawn, and the Bill passed the third reading by fifty-five to thirty-three. It was brought into the Commons on December 24th, and on the 7th January in the next year was debated for eight hours and a half.* On a division it was carried by two hundred and forty-three to two hundred and two. It was attempted to introduce a clause, the object of which was to exclude Unitarians from the benefit of the Act, but the amend- ment to this efi'ect was negatived, and it finally passed through committee by two hundred and twenty-one to one hundred and seventy votes. "j* If the world had not had some previous experience of the inconstancy of public opinion, and the influence exercised on the fortunes of public measures by a know- ledge of the views which are popular with courts, some astonishment might be expressed at the contrast afibrded by the divisions on this measure with those on the two * Owing, it is said, to the exclusion of all strangers excepting the Prince of Wales and some peers, no report of this debate is in existence. f " Parliamentary History," vii 567, 590. [a.d. 1717.] TRIE TESTS RETAINED, 289 Acts which it repealed. But, "with the accession of George, and the increasing security of his government, the Church and Tory party were driven from a contest for perpetual supremacy to a struggle for existence. They had seen some of their most eminent members be- headed for rebellion ; Oxford, the favourite minister of Anne, was in the Tower awaiting his impeachment for • high treason, and Atterbury, their episcopal leader, was about to be indicted for the same offence. The opinion of the English people was slowly deciding in favour of a constitutional government, and a constitutional -govern- ment meant, in George the First's mind, equal liberties for all, and no distinction whatever between Church- men and Dissenters. It appears to have been owing, in some measure, to the want of firmness in Dissenters themselves that they did not, at this time, obtain the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. The King was known to be in favour of their repeal, but is reported to have observed to Lord Barrington, who was considered to represent the public interests of Dissenters, that he was assured, by his ministers, that this point could not be carried, and he was persuaded that the Dissenters would not insist on an act which might beprejudical to himself.* The authority for this assurance was Lord Sunderland, who had informed the King that to attempt a repeal of the Test would ruin the whole Bill. At the same time assurances were given that it should soon be repealed-t The Dissenters, in fact, were sacrificed, as had been the case in former periods of their history, to what was said to be the * Belsham's "Great Britain," iii. 132. t Tindal's Continuation," vii. 244. 19 200 GBOWTH OF OPINION. [a.d. 1717.] general good of the nation. As on previous occasions, they willingly and cheerfully accepted their position, and, as on previous occasions, the promises made to them were forgotten almost as soon as they were made. But they do not seem to have inquired why they, and they only, were perpetually sacrificed ostensibly for national, but often for mere party, purposes. They never asked how it was that such rare self-abnegation was not ex- pected from the Church. They appear to have con- sidered that it was one object of their existence to be occasionally offered up on the altar of patriotism. But in George the First's case there was, undoubtedly, some excuse for their willing resignation of claims which had long been recognized as both appropriate and just. The Kmg was known to entertain a high respect for them, and a warm appreciation of their past services. His sincerity could not, for a moment, be doubted; and when he made the withdrawal of their claims a matter of j^ersonal favour to himself, it would have been difficult, and apparently ungracious, to refuse it. And they could not have suspected that, by the course which they then took, they were fastening the Test and Cor- poration Acts on the necks of their descendants to the third and fourth generations. The human mind seldom or never becomes enlar2:ed in one direction ovi[y. Growth in respect to the laws of civil j^olity is sure to be accompanied by a similar growth in respect to the laws of ecclesiastical polity. Sacerdotalism in religion and Absolutism in politics, have generally risen and fallen together. While, there- fore, the principles of toleration were receiving a prac- tical recognition from the Government, the exorbitant [a.d. 1717.] HOABLTS SEBMON. 291 claims of the Church and its clergy were being dealt with in an equally effective manner. Hoadly's sermon on the " Nature of the Kingdom or Church of Christ," which has been already referred to, soon attracted the attention of the Lower House of Convo- cation. It could scarcely, indeed, in any age, have passed without criticism, for its doctrines were opposed to all the doctrines relating to the mutual relations of the Church and the State on which the ecclesiastical government of England is founded. Taking as his text the significant declaration of the Saviour that His king- dom was not of this world, Hoadly proceeded to show that the Church of Christ was a kingdom of which only He himself was King. He was the sole Lawgiver to His subjects ; He had left behind Him no visible human authority; no vicegerents who could supply His place; no interpretations upon which His subjects were abso- lutely to depend, and no judges over the consciences or the religion of His people. If any pretended to possess such an authority they usurped Christ's office, or ruled in their own kingdom, and not in His. The Church itself he defined to be the number of men, whether small or great, whether dispersed or united, who were truly and sincerely subjects to Jesus Christ alone in matters relating to the favour of God and their eternal salvation. The laws of this kingdom, Hoadly went on to say, had no tendency to the exaltation of some in worldly pomp and dignity, or to their absolute dominion over the faith and religious conduct of others of His subjects, or to the erecting of any sort of temporal kingdom, under the covert and name of a spiritual one. Its rewards and penalties were not the rewards and 19* 292 ROABLTS SERMON. [a.d. 1717.] penalties of this world ; and if they could be, sincerity and hypocrisy, force and persuasion, a willing choice and a terrified heart were become the same things, and truth and falsehood stood in need of the same methods to propagate them. If an angel from heaven were to give any account of His kingdom contrary to what Christ himself had given, it ought, added the Bishop, to have neither weight nor authority with Christians. It must be doubtful whether Hoadly, in laying down such broad principles relating to the spirituality of the kingdom of Christ, saw to what extent those principles would apply. His audience, probably, under- stood him to be preaching a sermon against the Test and Corporation Laws and the claims of the High Church party, but Hoadly's language, which was used by one who knew the full and exact value of words, has, obviously, a far broader reach than this. Is it possible that, at this time, Hoadly, flushed with the prosperity of the Liberal party, and the decline of High-Churchism, had sketched for himself the career of a second Cranmer, and that he preached this sermon as a tentative step in the direction of the further reforma- tion of the English Church ? He, unquestionably, had a full and clear conception of the gross inconsistency of a church which claimed to be Christian, being patronized, supported, and controlled by the State. He saw the totally unscriptural character of what was known as "Church authority," and he recognized the fact that human law has no right to limit the claims of the individual conscience. His sermon was, in fact, a pro- clamation of the unchristian character of the church of which he himself was a bishop. It can hardly be [a.d. 1717.] TRE BANGCBIAN CONTBOVEBST. 293 imagined that he made such a proclamation without thought of its exact nature, but it is more than probable that he had not reflected on all the consequences of the step he had taken, and that he did not sufficiently know himself. If, at any time, he had indulged in the great design of purifying the Church by separating it from all which separated it, in character, from the king- dom of Christ, he abandoned it. In the worry of personal controversies, and the succession of eleva- tion after elevation upon the episcopal bench, Hoadly, if he ever felt it, lost the zeal of a Church reformer. He continued, throughout his life, the dreaded opponent of all who, whether in civil or ecclesiastical politics, or in theology, were disposed to advance the pretensions of collective authority in preference to individual right, and in this sense he reformed the Church of England, but the precise reform sketched in his celebrated sermon he took no steps to carry into execution. What he did was to break the neck of Church power. For years subsequent to the publication of this sermon, one of the greatest ecclesiastical controversies that had ever been waged in England, took place. Hoadly was necessarily the principal disputant, and he did not cease from the warfare, until, by sheer weight and force of brain, he had shattered all the defences which ambition and tradition had erected around the usurped authority of the Church.* The doctrines embodied in Hoadly's sermon con- * I have read no more, and perhaps less, than some other writers have read of the " Bangorian Coutroversy." It extends certainly beyond a hundred pamphlets, and any one who would thoroughly digest these would do a great service to ecclesiastical literature. I do not think that the practical influence of the coutroversy, in the direction indicated in the text, has ever been suihciently recognized. 29i ACTION OF CONVOCATION. [a.d. 171 7. J tained a declaration of principles which were utterly opposed to the constitution in Church and State. In less than a month from its publication, the Lower House of Convocation accordingly made a representation concern- ing it to the Upper House. They connected with the sermon another publication of Hoadly's, entitled "A Preservative against the Principles and Practices of the Non-jurors both in Church and State," in which Hoadly had attacked, at the same time, the sacerdotal claims of the priesthood and the doctrines of the Jacobites. They complained that Hoadly appeared to deny the authority of the Church to judge, censure or punish offenders in the affairs of conscience and eternal salva- tion ; to affirm that all such exercises of authority had been an invasion and an usurpation upon Christ's king- dom ; that such doctrines tended to breed in the minds of the people a disregard to those who were appointed to rule over them ; that he put all religious communions on an equal footing, and that he left God alone to be judge of the conscience. If, said the Lower House, these doctrines be admitted, "there is evidently an end of all Church authority to oblige any to external com- munion, and of all power that one man can have over another in matters of religion ; " " there are in the Church no governors left; in the State, none who may inter- meddle in the affairs of religion." They charged Hoadly with undermining the constitution of the Church and impeaching the supremacy of the King, and besought the Upper House to " vindicate the honour of God and re- ligion," and to "assert the prerogative given to all godly princes in Holy Scripture."* The Upper House * Wilkin's *' Concilia," iv. 672, 676. [a.d. 1717.] QROWTR OF VNITABIANIS2L 295 had, however, no opportunity of replying to the repre- sentation. Convocation was immediately prorogued, and no further license was given to it to proceed with synod- ical business. The extravagant pretensions which it had put forward, and the mischievous character of its proceed- ings, had become offensive to the State. So fast had been the growth of the minds of men, since Jacobitism, by the safe accession of the Hanoverian dynasty, had lost every hope of success, that it was already an anachronism in the constitution. For a hundred and fifty years the representation against Hoadly was its last official act. Church power, as it had hitherto existed in England, became a thing of past history only. As it had thriven, so it perished, with absolutism. There was no class in England which did not feel relief from the final removal of the weights which had been placed on the free movement of human thought. In no direction was this more visible than in theology. Men everywhere felt that they were at liberty to think for themselves. The natural and immediate result of this feeling was Latitudinarianism. In many minds an enforced respect to authority gave place either to a license of reason, or to an indiiference respecting abso- lute truth. Others, who were not wanting in natural reverence, tried anew the doctrines of the Christian religion, and rejected at once all such as did not, to them, seem to be in accordance with the Scriptures alone, or with the unaided and undirected human reason. To this movement, as natural as it was inevitable, is to be attributed the apparently sudden growth, at this period, of Unitarianism in England. Hitherto the distinguish- ing doctrines of the Unitarians, although they had been 296 GBOWTR OF UNITABIANISM. [a.d. 1717.] actively propagated, had not, as far as can be seen, greatly influenced the religious opinions of the people. But there were many men, eminent either for great power of thought or for an enlarged benevolence, who had become more or less imbued with the spirit of Unitarian theology. The philosophy of one age is generally the theology of the next. Locke had made the philosophy of the then living generation, and its tendency was m favour of the Arian form of Unita- rianism. He was accordingly denounced by the orthodox and claimed by the Unitarians themselves. Stilling- fleet's death is said to have been hastened by Locke's treatment of him in the Trinitarian controversy, and it is certain that the great philosopher succeeded in defeat- ing the great theologian on his own ground. On the Trinitarian side, the whole of the argument was so managed as to prove, if anything was proved, the exist- ence of three Gods. The defenders of the received belief lost themselves in a maze of metaphysical subtle- ties, and seldom did more than give an advantage to their opponents. In his "Reasonableness of Chris- tianity," Locke again offended, and was again de- nounced. Watts, charitable as he was, accusing him of darkening the glory of the Gospel and debasing Chris- tianity.* Locke himself, however, in a vindication, denied that there was one word of Socinianism in his work. Whatever he may have thought, he did not, either by act or word, formally identify himself with Unitarianism, but the general influence of his writings was * All that can be said in favour of Locke's Unitarianism has been said by Mr. Wallace, in his " Anti-trinitarian Biography," Vol. iii. Art. Locke. It is one of the questions on which there must always be some difference of opinion. [a.d. 1717.] GROWTH OF UNITABIANISM. 297 unquestionably in its favour. If Sir Isaac Newton, as has been claimed, was also an Unitarian, he had not the moral courage to state the fact in his lifetime.* In the Established Church the elements of this doctrine could be very distinctly traced. Men who had subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles, who used the Book of Common Prayer, and who. repeated the Athanasian Creed, did not hesitate to express their disbelief in the Trinity. Early in this generation one of the authors of the Unitarian tracts had written as follows : — " We place not religion in wor- shipping God by ourselves, or after a particular form of mamier, but in a right faith, and a just and charitable conversation. We approve of known forms of praising and praying to God ; as also in administering Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Marriage, and the other religious offices ; we like well of the discipline of the Church by Bishops and parochial ministers ; and we have an esteem for the eminent learning and exemplary piety of the Noncon- forming clergy. For these reasons we communicate with that Church as far as we can, and contribute our interests to favour her against all others who would take the chair." f Such conduct laid them open to merited rebuke from their opponents. They were charged with cowardice and with dishonesty ; :|: but at present they did not choose to reveal themselves. When, however, a divine such as Dr. Samuel Clarke did not hesitate to argue in favour of the inferiority of the second person of the Trinity, and to defend his continuance in the Established Church by laying down, as a rule of sub- * Wallace, iii. Art. Newton. t " The Trinitarkn Scheme of Eeligion," p. 28. ad. 1692. X Edwards's " Socinian Creed," p, lb5. ad. 1697. 298 GBOWTR OF UNITARIANISM. [a.u. 17J7.] scription, that any person might reasonably subscribe to any formularies or confessions whenever he could, in any sense at all, reconcile them with Scripture,* inferior men need scarcely have hesitated to take, openly, the same ground. It must, however, be said that there had been plain warnings of the dangers of such a confession of faith. William Whiston, Professor of Mathematics in Cambridge University, had embraced Arianism, and was expelled the University and censured by Convocation. Samuel Clarke incurred the same censure ; and although such acts were not now followed by any civil punishments, they placed a man under the ban of a large and influential section of society. Punish- ment by public opinion is felt quite as acutely by a man of sensitive mind as is a grosser form of punishment by a man of sensitive body ; and the clergy of the Esta- blished Church, as well as the clergy out of the Esta- blished Church, have always known how most eftectively to administer it. In the days of which we write it was certainly more profitable, so far as this world is con- cerned, for a man to live in open violation of the whole of the moral law than for him to deny the truth of the Athanasian creed. A large proportion of the clergy did the former, and held their benefices without let, hin- drance, or opprobrium. Convocation did not dream of censuring them; but if a Whiston, a Clarke, or a Hoadly — men of unstained life and transparently honest nature — gave to an old truth a new form, or departed from the lines laid down by law on which the thoughts of the Established clergy were to travel, a hoot of execration arose against him. Some excuse, therefore, * Clarke's " Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity," Perry's History, iii. 305. [a.d. 1717.] THOMAS EMLYN: 299 although no justification, can be found for those persons who held the Unitarian creed remaining in the Church. One thing, at least, they lacked, without which an unpo- pular opinion has little j^rospect of becoming popular — a fearless courage. They loved their creed sufficiently to advocate it in private, but they loved their benefices more. Of open and avowed Unitarians the most conspicuous was Thomas Emlyn, a man of devout temperament and considerable ability, who had been virtually excomuni- cated from the Presbyterian communion. Emlyn had been educated in Doolittle's academy, and had been pastor of a small Dissenting congregation in Lowestoft. He ascribed his change of views on the subject of the Trinity to reading Sherlock and Howe's defence of that doctrine which, he considered, tended only to polytheism. Afterwards, he went to Dublin, to take the pastorate of the Church formerly presided over by Dr. Daniel Williams. He did not, however, announce his change of views, which was privately discovered by a member of his consrreo-ation. He then said that if such views were obnoxious to his congregation he would immediately resign. The Dublin ministers, however, met before this resignation could be arranged, and agreed that he should not be allowed to preach again. His congregation thought it desirable that there should be only a tempo- rary cessation of his ministry. The ministers, however, decided that he should preach neither in Ireland nor in England during the interval — an assumption of autho- rity which Emlyn boldly refused to recognize. Two messengers, one a Presbyterian, the other a Congre- gationalist, were forthwith despatched to London to warn 300 TROMAS EMLTN. [a.d. 1717.] the ministers of those denominations of Emlyn's hetero- doxy, and of their decision respecting him. "If," said Emiyn, upon this, " the Presbyterians and Independents claim such power as this, not only to reject from their own communion, but to depose from their office such pastors of other churches as conscientiously differ from them in opinion, and to extend this to other kmgdoms, forbidding them to preach there also, I think they have a mighty conceit of their o^vn large dominion, and dis- cover a very ridiculous ambition. I wonder who gave them this sovereign deposing power over their brethren." Emlyn now published a statement of his belief. On his return to Dublin, soon after this, in February, a.d. 1702, at the instance of a Baptist of the name of Caleb Thomas, he was arrested for writing against the Trinity, tried, found guilty, sentenced to pay a fine of a thousand pounds, and to lie in gaol until the fine was paid, the Chief Justice telling him that the pillory was his due, and that, if he had been in Spain or Portugal, he would have been burned. The fine was subsequently reduced,^' and Emlyn came to reside in England, where he lived on terms of friendship with Whiston and Clarke.^j" * The Arclibishop of Armagh, as Queen's Almoner, claimed a shilling in the pound on this fine, and reiused to take it on the reduced amount. " I thought," writes Emlyn, "that the Church was to be as merciful as the State ; but I was mistaken herein." t Wallace's " Anti-triuitarian Biography," iii. Art. " Emlyn." This per- secution called forth a sarcastic rebuke from Hoadly, who, in a preface to Steele's " Account of the State of the Roman Catholic Eeligion throughout the World," published in a.d. 1717, wrote, " Sometimes we of the Established Church can manage a prosecution (for I must not call it persecution) our- selves, without calling in any other help. But I must do the Dissenting Protestants the justice to say, that they have shown themselves, upon occa- sion, very ready to assist us in so pious and Christian a work as bringing lieretics to their right mind ; being themselves but very lately come from experiencing the convincing and enlightening faculty of a dungeon or a tine. [a.d. 1717.] UNITABIANISM AMONGST DISSENTERS. 801 Amongst Dissenters, Unitarianism had also made some progress. It is probable that the Baptists had never been entirely free from this taint. The Dutch Anabap- tists of Henry VIII. and Elizabeth's reigns were all Arians, and the General Baptist denomination was scarcely formed before a charge of heterodoxy on this subject was brought against one of its principal members. Gale, the pastor of the Barbican church, who was now living, was an able opponent of Trinitarian views, and other ministers had discovered an equal tendency to speculation on this, to some minds, dangerously attrac- tive question. It is not possible, however, to trace the existence of Unitarianism, amongst the General Baptists, to their theological creed. Arminianism does not neces- sarily or naturally lead to either the Arian or the Socinian form of Unitarian doctrine. The connection of this body with Unitarianism was accidental, and may be traced, in the first instance, to the existence of the Dutch Anabaptists, and, in the second instance — as is the case with aU creeds — to the personal influence and the writ- ings of one or two men of unusual mental and moral power. Such a man was Dr. John Gale. Neither the Particular Baptists nor the Congregationalists evinced any tendency towards anti-Trinitarian opinions. Both these bodies professed a higher order of Calvinism than was professed by any other Nonconformist communions ; but that Calvinism is, in itself, no effectual protection against the inroads of Unitarianism, has been sufficiently proved by the experiences of New England and The Nonconformists acciTsed him (Emlyn), and Conformists con demned him, the secular power was called in, and the cause ended in an imprisonment and a very great fine ; two methods of conviction about which the Gospel is silent." 302 JAMES PEIRCE. [a.d. 1718.] Geneva. Why these two denominations should have been free from the tendency which was affecting all other bodies may partly be explained by the fact that, with the exception of Watts, neither of them contained a man of eminently speculative mind; and Watts himself, when, after this period, he became involved in the vortex of this discussion, no sooner touched it than he also fell from the orthodox standard. The Presbyterians, however, shared equally with, if not to a greater extent than, the General Baptists, the characteristic tendency of theological thought. They were men, for the most part, of larger read- ing than other Nonconformists, and the writings of Whiston and Clai;ke had found their way amongst them.* While this movement of thought was taking place, a circumstance occurred which gave to it a sudden impulse as well as a wide, if a factitious popularity. There were in the city of Exeter, four Presbyterian churches. Amongst the ministers of these churches there was one, James Peirce, formerly a member of Matthew Mead's congregation, who was suspected of holding anti-Trinitarian views. Peirce had already made himself well known and highly respected by the Dissenters of Eno-land for his vio:orous and able defences of Nonconformity against the attacks of two clergymen of the Established Church — Snape and * Peirce, of Exeter, UTites : — " The common vogue of this people is that there was nothing of this doctrine in the city before my coming into it ; that I was the first who brought it amongst them ; and abundance of re- proaches and untoward wishes have been bestowed upon me for this cause. But there is no truth in this report. Dr. Clarke, Mr. Whiston, and other writers, who difl'er from the common notion, had been read here before nij'- coming." "Western Inquisition," p. 11. Both Peirce and Hallet became Unitarians by tlie perusal of Clarke's works. [a.d. 1718 1 TRE EXETER DISPUTES. 303 Nichols. The most elaborate of these defences was written in Latin for circulation amongst the Protestant Churches of Europe * In this work Peirce compared the constitution of the Established Church, its forms and ceremonials, its ritual, and the origin and administration of its revenues, with the practices which prevailed in the early ages of Christianity. This work became, in a brief period, the most popular defence of Nonconformity, and was one of two subsequently recommended by Doddridge for the education of Nonconformists. Peirce is described by Calamy, who had no sympathy with his doctrines, as a minister of good repute, and courted and beloved by his people. f He ap])ears also to have been a man of great reading, honest judgment, of an eminently candid mind, and Christian spirit. Although he held the anti- Trinitarian doctrine, he did not think it necessary to preach it, but, for consistency's sake, he omitted from his services all phrases which impHed the equal divinity of the three persons of the Trinity. A brother minister, however, in the course of a private conversation, finding that Peirce did not hold the orthodox view, repeated the con- versation to another minister, Mr. Lavington, of Exeter, who, in his turn, felt it to be his duty to proclaim that fact amongst the people. All Exeter soon rang with the information. In Peirce's own pulpit, during his tem- porary absence from the city, another minister charged some of the Dissenters of Exeter with "damnable heresies, denying the Lord that bought them." Peirce was then * " A Vindication of the Dissenters : In answer to Dr. William Nichols' Defence of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England, etc." By James Peirce. a.d. 1718. t Calamy's " Own Life," ii. pp. 403, 405. 304 THE EXETEB DISPUTES. [a.d. 1718.] requested by three members of his congreojation, to preach a sermon on the nature of the satisfaction of Christ, which he did, and which appears to have pleased the majority of the people. Charges of heterodoxy, however, are not quickly abandoned, and, when it was found that Peirce did not stand alone in his views, the Committee of Dissenters, who, by a local arrangement, were charged with the management of the temporal affairs of the four Exeter churches, and in whom the property was vested, resolved to take up the matter. They accordingly appointed a deputation to wait upon each of the ministers, with a request that they should assert the eternity of the Son of God. Peirce could have no objection to do this, and therefore replied that he would say anything which was to be found in the Scriptures, but nothing beyond. Most of the people were now satisfied. Meantime the question was carried to London, and brought back in enlarged dimensions. At a conference of Western ministers it was proposed that another clearance should be made by another test, and this was carried by a large majority. Each minister at once declared what he believed on this subject in his own words. Peirce's declaration was, " I am not of the opinion of Sabellius, Arius, Socinus, or Sherlock. I believe there is but one God, and can be no more ; I believe the Son and Holy Ghost to be divine persons, but subordinate to the Father, and the unity of God is, T think, to be resolved into the Father's being the fountain of the Divinity of the Son and Spirit." Mr. Hallett, of Exeter, another of the Presbyterian ministers who was also a suspected man, closed his declaration by quoting Baxter's words, " Two things have set the [a.d. 1718.] THE EXETEB DISPUTES. 305 church on fire, and been the plagues of it above a thousand years ; first, by enlarging our creed and making more fundamentals than God ever made ; secondly, com- posing, and so imposing, our creeds and confessions in our own words and phrases." Some ministers denied the right of any body of men to demand their opinions, and refused to make any declaration. The official record of the result was, " It is the general sense of the assembly that there is but one living and true God, and that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the one God" "which," says Peirce, " was the sense of about two to one of the as- sembly." Official proceedings and records of this cha- racter have not been celebrated for settling private opinions or for quieting public controversies ; and the result of the deliberations of the "Western ministers was no exception to the usual rule. From this time scarcely any question was debated throughout the West of England but the question of the Trinity. It was dis- cussed in families, preached about from the pulpit, written about in pamphlets, and the local journals teemed with intelligence of what was being said and done. In this condition the Exeter Committee again addressed themselves to the ministers for another de- claration of their real opinions. This, however, did not satisfy the people, and it was resolved to make an appeal to London for advice. The London ministers had already been informed ot the nature and progress of this controversy. Those who obeyed the summons addressed to them by their brethren, more than a hundred and fifty in number, met, therefore, fully prepared to discuss it. But some of the most eminent of the ministers declined 20 806 THE SALTEBS' HALL [a.d. 1719.] to have anything to do with the matter. They rightly judged that it could only end in divisions amongst them- selves, and they also doubted their competency, as Dis- senters to form a court for the adjudication of such a question. Amongst those who refused to meet were Calamy, Watts, and Neal — certainly the three most eminent men belonging to the Presbyterian and Con- gregational denommations. The wisdom of their course was made apparent almost as soon as the assembly met. The meeting was summoned at Salters' Hall on February 19th, A.D. 1718-19, and it was the general opinion that a letter of advice to the brethren at Exeter should be drawn up and forwarded to them. It was thereupon proposed by Bradbury, at the unanimous direction of the Congregational ministers, and, after hot and angry debates, pressed to a division, that every minister then present should, as a witness to his own faith, subscribe the first Article of the EstabHshed Church on the doc- trine of the Trinity, and the answers to the fifth and sixth questions in the Catechism of the Westminster Assembly. This motion was opposed mainly on the ground that it was an imposition of a human creed, and that to impose such a creed was inconsistent with the prin- ciples of Protestant Dissent. On bemg put from the chair the motion was rejected by seventy-three to sixty- nine votes, or, as was subsequently said, " the Bible carried it by four."* On this vote taking place the minority left the conference, and resolved themselves into a distinct body. Two assemblies now met. The first, or non-subscribing assembly, was presided over by * Nearly all tlie Congregationalists voted with tlie minority ; the Bap- tists were divided by ten to nine. [a.d. 1719.] CONTBOVEBST. 307 Dr. Joshua Olclfielcl, minister of the Presbyterian church in ]\Iaid Lane, Globe Alley, close to the spot where the Globe Theatre formerly stood. Oldfield was a man of great learning and sound judgment, and one of the most •eminent of the tutors connected with the Presbyterian body. Amongst the members of this assembly were John Evans, Benjamin Grosvenor, Dr. Gale, Samuel Chandler, Dr. Avery, Nathaniel Lardner, William Jacomb, and Daniel Burgess. The majority of this assembly were Presbyterians, but it included a few Con- gregationalists and Baptists. The second, or subscribing assembly, was presided over by Thomas Bradbury. It included nearly all the Congregational ministers of the metropolis, and a majority of the Nonconformist pastors actually exercising the pastoral office. Amongst the m.ost eminent were William Tong, Jabez Earle, and Daniel Mayo. The two assemblies forwarded separate addresses to Exeter, each address containing " Advices for Peace." The Non-subscribing ministers completed their paper on March 10th. They expressed, in this paper, their opinion that there were errors of doctrine sufficiently important to warrant and oblige a congrega- tion to withdraw from the minister ; that the people are the sole judges as to what these errors are ; that the Bible only is the rule of faith; that no man should be condemned because he would not consent to human creeds ; that no man should be charged with holding the consequences of his opmions if he disclaimed those con- sequences ; and that, if agreement could not be arrived at, there should be quiet withdrawal without the censure of any person withdrawing. Accompanying the advices, the non-subscribing ministers forwarded a letter disclaim- 20* 308 THE SALTUJRS' HALL [a.d. 1719.] ing their right to judge the matter at issue, as well as all sympathy with Arian doctrine. Following the letter was a statement of reasons for not subscribing, at the Salters' Hall conference, the paper relating to the Trinity. Amono-st the reasons alles^ed were — that there was no necessity for clearing themselves from suspicion as to their orthodoxy ; that it would have been taking a side against one of the Exeter parties ; that no declarations^ in other words than those of Scripture, could serve the cause of peace or truth ; that the subscription insisted on was beyond what even the legislature required ; that it would have been paying an unwarrantable regard to the Assembly's Catechism ; that it would have been contrary to the principles of Protestantism, of the nature of an imposition, and a surrender of their Christian liberty. They observed, in conclusion, that they were of opinion that if such a demand were complied with, no one could tell where it would stop. These documents were pub- lished with the signatures of seventy- three ministers. In the following month (April 7th, a.d. 1719) the subscribing assembly forwarded their " advices for peace." It was prefaced with a declaration of faith in the Trinity expressed in the words of the first Article of the Established Church and the answers on that subject in the Assembly's Catechism. These were signed by forty- eight London and eleven country ministers, and eighteen other ordained or licensed preachers. Great pains and some pressure, it is said, were used to obtain these signatures. In the accompanying advices the rights of the people are stated in almost the same language as that used by the non-subscribers ; the opinion is then expressed that, in such cases, neighbouring ministers ;[a.d. 1719.] CONTEOVUBSY. 309 'might be called in for counsel ; that it was proper that a minister should be called upon for a declaration of the faith, when that faith was suspected ; that if the attempts at union and agreement should fail, the people and the minister should quietly withdraw from each other, and that the denial of the doctrine of the Trinity was an error contrary to the Scriptures and to the faith of the Reformed Churches. If these proceedings had terminated at this point, although they were already the subject of scandal throughout the country, no very great harm perhaps would have been done. But the non-subscribing minis- ters had published their documents under the title of ^* A True Relation;" the subscribing ministers there- fore saw fit to publish theirs' under the title of an " Authentic Account," and to these followed an " Impar- tial Statement." " Proceedings," "Accounts," "Animad- versions," " Defences," and " Letters," now followed each other in rapid succession. The London prints opened their columns to both parties. Each side defended itself and attacked the other with a virulence and an animosity which disgraced equally their characters and their manners. Charges of deliberate lying and the gravest accusations respecting personal character were made and retorted without stint or measure. It must be said, however, that the non-subscribing party showed themselves, in their manner of conducting the contro- versy, far superior to their brethren. The subscribers were led by " the bold Bradbury," whose zealous and fiery temper communicated itself to nearly all his party. Bradbury himself wrote the most violent of the whole ..series of pamphlets. The best controversialist was 310 FBOGBESS OF [a.d. 1719.] Peirce, who wrote, throughout, with a grave moderation of style and a charity of tone which his orthodox brethren might Avell have copied. It unfortunately happened, for both the parties to Salters' Hall dispute, that their letters of advices were delivered just too late to be of any service. While the London ministers were disputing, the Exeter people had taken the matter into their own hands. The trustees, after consulting with seven neighbouring ministers, and. without bringing the question before the church or congregation, took upon themselves to lock Peirce out of his chapel. Peirce remonstrated that the people should determine this, but received the reply that, as there might be a majority in his favour, it was resolved not to consult them, and that he and his brother minister Hallett might preach at another meeting. Liberty to do this was, however, denied, and Peirce's friends, to the number of three hundred, subsequently built for him a new place of worship. The London advices were delivered after Peirce had been locked out. * From this time Unitarianism spread with unexampled rapidity. It was unfortunate for the orthodox party • I have endeavoured to state the history of this controversy with abso- lute accuracy, but some of the narratives are so contradictory that, on some points, I may have failed to do so. The principal authorities which I have consulted are Peiixe's " Case," " AVestern Inquisition," " Defence," " Justi- fication," and " Reply ; " the Exeter peoples' " Account of the Reasons of their withdrawal from Peirce's and Hallett's Ministry ;" the " Non- subscribing Ministers' True Relation," the Subscribing Ministers' " Authen- tic Account," "The Synod," Bradbury's "Answer to the Reproaches," Easty's " Propositions," the Non-subscribing Ministers' " Reply to Sub- .scribing Ministers' Reasons," Calamy's " Own Life," and Murch'a " Western Churches." The whole of the pamphlets in this controversy are perhaps seventy in number, and the greater portion, if not all, are to be found in Dr. "Williams's library. [A.D. 1719.] UNITABIANISM. 311 that their cause, both in London and in the West, had become identified with an act of personal injustice, and something like synodical tyranny. It is impossible, however, to throw the whole blame of this transaction on one party. Peirce himself cannot escape the charge of want of ingenuousness. When his faith was questioned the most honourable course for him to have pursued would have been to offer to resign his charge. The act of the trustees was probably as illegal as it was harsh, for no trust-deeds of that time contained any specifica- tion of doctrines. The injustice to whicli he had been subjected rankled in Peirce's breast until his death, and, courteous although he was in print, he scarcely ever forgave those who had inflicted it upon him. For their part, while they had succeeded in one object, that of removing Peirce from his place of worship, they had utterly failed in another and a greater. They contrived to make the doctrine of Unitarianism popular, and they lived to see nearly every Nonconformist church in Exeter, and some of the principal churches in Devon- shire and Somersetshire, lapse from the orthodox standard. The Presbyterian churches of London, Lancashire, and Cheshire became similarly infected. In less than half a century the doctrines of the great founders of Presbyterianism could scarcely be heard from any Presbyterian pulpit in England. The denomination vanished as suddenly as it had arisen, and, excepting m literature, has left little visible trace of the greatness of its power. The Unitarians became, from this period, a distinct and separate denomination in England. Hitherto it had been their desire as well as their practice to worship 312 ABANDOJS-MENT [a.d. 1719.] with other persons. They held the opinion that differ- ences in matters of doctrine, even a difference on the question of the Trinity, should not separate Christian believers. They had the expectation that, in the course of time, the churches mth which they were connected would be brought round to their o^vn views. They do not seem to have perceived that their position, in this respect, was a false, if not a dishonest one. But the variations in the degrees in which they differed from the orthodox standard were so numerous that it is almost im- possible to define what, at this period, Unitarianism was. Locke rejected the accusations both of Arianism and of Socinianism. Watts wrote against both these doctrines, and Peirce openly, and no doubt sincerely, stated that he belonged neither to the school of Arius nor Socinus. Yet all these rejected, in different degrees, the doctrine of the Trinity as stated in the Athanasian Creed. AVhether it would have been wise and prudent not to have forced the more moderate section of the Unitarian party, to which Peirce belonged, from all ecclesiastical association with existing churches must be doubtful. Those, cer- tainly, who remained in communion with the Established Church did not succeed in altering the doctrine of that Church. On the other hand, no notice of their existence was taken by many congregations, and a large number of those congregations subsequently became Unitarian. Their creed was, in fact, neither suppressed by the ex- cision of those who held it, nor by tacit connivance in their presence. It was a development of thought, — the first form which rationalism took after mental freedom had been finally secured. Some good came even from the Salters' Hall disputes. [A.D. 1719.] OF CREEDS. 313 While the Bangorian controversy was exciting attention to the fictitious nature of the claims of the sacerdotal party in the Established Church, the Salters' Hall con- troversy was exciting, amongst Dissenters, an equal amount of attention to the mischievous character and influence of the imposition of human creeds. On this question there was little difference of opinion between the subscribers and the non-subscribers. Both parties rejected the principle of such an imposition, but disagreed as to whether the declaration concerning the doctrine of the Trinity could be correctly indicated by that title. While, therefore, the non-subscribers vigorously attacked the system of creeds, the subscribers maintained that such attacks were wholly uncalled for. None, after this controversy, ventured to suggest the framing of any system of doctrine which bore the smallest likeness to a human creed. The authority of all past compositions of this nature was gone. The lull which succeeded to these exciting contro- versies extended o^qv the lifetime of a generation. Religion, whether in the Established Church or out of it, never made less progress than it did after the cessa- tion of the Bangorian and Salters' Hall disputes. If, as was undoubtedly the case, breadth of thought and cha- rity of sentiment increased, and were, to some extent, settled Liito the mental habit of the nation, religious activity did not increase. The churches were characterized by a cold indifferentism. The zeal of Puritanism was almost as unknown as it was unimitated. It seems to have been impossible for the Christian men of this gene- ration to fight with the old force of Christianity while they were being fitted into a new armour of thought. 314 STATE OF RELIGION. [a.d. 1719.] Everything was changing, and until the change was completed, and they had accommodated themselves to it, they seemed half paralyzed. When the old dogmas of church authority were exploded, the Episcopalians scarcely knew what to do. The great buttress of their whole system was gone. The edifice had not been main- tained with extraordinary success, as a religious institution,- under the best of circumstances : would it now bear the smallest extension ? They had also to meet Protestant Dissenters who were free to say anything that they pleased. There was no possibility of putting Watts in Newgate as Delaune and De Foe had been put. Not merely gibbets, racks, and thumbscrews, but even the pillory was gone, and gone for ever. Men who would have liked a return of such days saw themselves frowned upon at Court, and, as a result, sneered at by the people. Church questions dropped, one after another, from public view, and, for the most part, men were glad to be rid of them. Full liberty of thought had been obtained, and it can scarcely be a matter of surprise that they were thankful to rest in order to enjoy it. On the part of the Dissenters this quiet, and, indeed^ worse than quiet condition, was, for other reasons, equally natural. They had fought the last great battle for toleration, and God had given them the victory. They were sure, now, that they might exist, and they ap'pear to have been grateful simply to enjoy, for almost the first time, a security that was disturbed neither by threats nor by apprehensions. Their old enemy was virtually extinct ; they were on good terms with govern- ments and ministers, and none of the Georgian bishops were at all likely to make them martyrs. They existed by [a.d. 1721.] QUAKUBS' AFFIRMATIONS. 315 the side of a wholly different Church from that to which they had lately been accustomed. In their judgment, therefore, the warfare against that Church was over. They went to their little meeting-houses ; heard their preachers ; paid them, perhaps, as well as they could, and were satisfied. They admired the bishops from a re- spectful distance, and were very fond of quoting Hoadly. If they thought much of the deadness, ignorance, and corruption that were around them, they never thought of removing it. It must have seemed, indeed, too great to be removed. The early part of the Georgian era was not characterized, in any form or section, by intensity. Intensity had, for a time, done its work, and was now giving place to breadth. When breadth should be matured, intensity might come again to build on a new and a better foundation than the old. Nothing that required great exertion or great sacrifice was either attempted or done during this period. The Quakers, with their habitual moral boldness and sagacity, were the only people who sought and obtained an en- larged degree of liberty. Penn, who had been, for the greater portion of their existence, their parliamentary agent, negotiating, on their behalf, terms with monarchs, ministers, and members of parliament, had died in the year 1718; but the Society was not therefore left with- out a similar representative. Joseph "Wyeth and Thomas Story were selected to take the initiative in the delicate work which was now required to be done. The form of Affirmation which had been imposed by the statute of William III. in place of an oath, for the use of Quakers in courts of law, did not, it would appear, meet the approval of some members of the body. It contained 316 QUAKERS' [a.d. 1721.] the words, " In the presence of Almighty God," which, it was objected, made it equivalent to an oath. It was therefore resolved to move for a new form of affirmation. Wyeth, who was well kno"vvn to the King, addressed a letter on the subject to his Majesty, and secured his concurrence in their wishes. Story, who had frequently appeared, on public occasions, at Court, waited on the Earl of Sunderland, principal Secretary of State, and, from his interview, had reasons for believing that the Government would support them. Next, with pains- taking assiduity, the two primates were visited, and inte- rest made with members of both houses of the legis- lature.* Everything being prepared for the successful passage of the measure, a petition, signed by a hundred and thirty-two persons, was presented to the House of Commons on December 14th, a.d. 1721. The petition represented that, in consequence of the scruples of cer- tain members of the Society, many " had fallen under great hardships by imprisonment or loss of their pro- perty, they not being able to answer in courts of equity, take probates of Avills, prove debts on commission of bankruptcies, verify their entries on the leather or candle acts, take up then' freedoms in corporations, be admitted to their polls on their freeholds, or give evidence on behalf of others not of their persuasion ; " and they prayed that a Bill might be brought in for granting such a form of affirmation as might remove their difficulties. This was accordingly done, and the Bill passed through all its stages on the ninth of the following month. On the same day it was introduced * Gough's "History of the Quakers," part iv. 180—183. [a.d. 1721.] AFFIRMATIONS. 317 into the House of Lords, where it was opposed by Atterbury, who remarked that he did not know why such a distinguished indulgence should be allowed to men who were " hardly Christians." The Earl of Iley replied that they were Christians by Act of Parliament, at least, inasmuch as they were included under the Toleration Act; to which Atterbury angrily rejoined that to call Quakers Christians by Act of Parliament was a reflection on Christianity itself. The first reading took place with no further opposition; but when, on January 15th, the motion for the second reading was made, Atterbury again endeavoured to prove that Quakers could not claim to be Christians. After a lively debate, the Bill was carried by sixty-four to fourteen votes. Four days afterwards the House was to have gone into committee, when a petition against the measure, from some of the London clergy, was presented by Dawes, Archbishop of York. The clergy alleged that if the Bill should pass, their tithes would be in danger; that society would be injured if justice were to be adminis- tered without an appeal to God ; that the enemies of Chris- tianity would triumph when they saw such consideration made by a Christian legislature to "a set of men " who renounced the divine institutions of Christ ; and that it might tend to the increase of Quakerism^ The Ai'chbishop moved that the petition be re- ceived and read. A hot and angry debate took place on this motion. Fourteen peers — seven on each side — argued the question; the Government firmly opposed the reception of such a document,, and it was ultimately decided to reject it. Sunderland then expressed the opinion that a committee should be 318 QVAKERS' AFFIRMATIONS. [a.d. 1721.] appointed to inquire into its authors and promoters, for it was nothing but a libel. The question that the peti- tion be rejected was again put, and carried by sixty to twenty-four, several peers, headed by the Archbishop of York, entering their protest against the decision. The Bill was then suspended, but, on the fifth of March following, the protest of the peers was ordered to be expunged from the records of the House. On the 18th of June the Bill finally passed by fifty-two to twenty- one votes, Wake, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Potter, Bishop of Oxford, signing a vehement protest against it.* Nothing could more clearly indicate the change in the spirit of Government and in the opinions of the people than the history of this measure. It was enough that it received, in the first instance, the opposition of the High Church clergy, and that Atterbury, now about to be impeached for high treason and be banished the king- dom, appeared as its principal opponent, for it to pass by the most commanding majorities. If the Presbyterians had been possessed of anything like the courage and persistency of the Quakers, they could, no doubt, at this time, have procured, with ease, the repeal of the Test and Corporation laws. While, however, they enjoyed the liberty of occasional conformity, and could thus qualify for office by partaking of the Sacrament accord- ing to the rites of the Established Church — joining the Church, that is to say, for half-an-hour every year and protesting against it during the remainder of their twelve months of office, they appeared to think that they had secured all that was needful and honourable. The indifference of Dissenters with respect to their * " rarliamentary History,'' vii. [A.D. 1723.] TRE ENGLISH BEGIVM DON JIM. 319 'Civil rights has, however, another explanation. In the next year they received a substantial mark of the royal favour. Daniel Burgess, secretary to the Princess of Wales, and, as it supposed, son to the minister of that name, is reported to have suggested to Lord Townsend that a grant from the royal purse would be highly esteemed by the Nonconformist bodies. Townsend, we are told, took the advice of Sir Robert Walpole, Chan- cellor of the Exchequer, and Walpole concurring, the subject was mentioned to the King. George the First, whose disposition was as generous as Avas his creed, immediately ordered £500 to be paid out of the Trea- sury for the benefit of the widows of Dissenting minis- ters. This grant, upon application, was afterwards in- creased to nearly £1,000 per aimum, payable half yearly.* Such, at least, is the public history of the origin of the "Eegium Donum," but its private history is scarcely so simple. It was, in fact, a bribe to the Dissenting ministers from the statesman who declared that " every man had his price." All of them were not satisfied that the promises which they had received had been so scandalously ignored. In order to quiet them, and, at the same tune to keep them in subjection, Walpole requested to meet their principal representatives. He informed these that he wished to relieve them from their disabilities, but that the time for doing so had not jet arrived. He was the greatest friend that they had, and as a proof of his goodwill he ofi'ered them the royal bounty. " Pray," said the wily mmister, " receive this for the use and comfort of the widows of Dissenting ministers, till the administration can more effectually * Calamy's " Own Life," ii. 465. 320 THE ENGLISH [a.d. 1723.} serve your cause."* The ministers accepted the money, which was privately distributed by nine of their number. It was not, however, taken without some grave doubts as to what would be the opinion of posterity with respect to those who consented to receive and distribute it. In the fear that this secret bounty might subsequently " come to be inconveniently known," Calamy, who was one of its first distributors, attempts, in his diary, an elaborate justification of the act. It had become in his own lifetime, he says, " more known than was ever to have been desired ;" but he reminds those who might afterwards hear of the circumstance that, according to Burnet, Charles II. gave similar bounties to many of the Presbyterian ministers of his reign. It is true that Baxter would not touch the money, and that he sent it back ; but most of those to whom it was offered took it, "The Court," adds Burnet, "hired them to be silent, and the greatest part of them were so, and very compliant." "But," says Calamy, "there was in the reign of George I. nothing to be silent about, unless it was the contmuance upon the Dissenters of the hard- ships they were under, of which they often complained." He remembers also that Dr. Owen received a thousand guineas from Charles II. for distribution amongst Dis- senters ; but he also remembers that Owen was severely blamed for receiving it. Daniel Williams, however, for refusmg the offer of a similar amount, was censured for not accepting it. Calamy then asks why the Dissenters of England might not as thankfully receive such help * These facts are taken from an article in the " London Magazine" for 1774, said to have been written by the well-kno-\vn Congregational minis-' ter and tutor, Dr. Mayo. Calamy, ii. 466, note. Ia.d. 1723.] BEGIVM DONUM. 321 •as the Presbyterians of Ireland, to whom, in a.d. 1690, "William III. ordered a royal grant, although even they were condemned for taking it ?"' The fear of the grant becoming publicly known is, however, a sufficient proof that Calamy himself was not satisfied with his own excuses. No one can imagine that there was an open and direct bargain between the Court and the Dissenters, but there can be as little doubt that if the latter accepted it as a free gratuity the former considered it to be a bribe. And it had all the demorahzing effects of a bribe. For more than a century and a quarter the " Reo-ium Donum" continued to be a source of weak- o ness, strife, discontent, and reproach. It destroyed the self-respect of those who received it ; it subjected its distributors to the odium of their more independent brethren, and it has never ceased to be a subject of taunt from the controversial advocates of an endowed religion. The necessitous circumstances of many widows of Dissenting ministers, as well as of many of the ministers themselves, was, at this period, attracting the attention of all denominations of Dissenters. The Presbyterians and the Congregationalists estabhshed funds for their relief, with very liberal rules for their admmistration. In A.D. 1717 the Particular Baptists resolved to estabhsh a similar fund. In the preliminary paper of proposals which was issued, the reason for this organization is stated to be the " great decay" of the Baptist interest in some parts of England, and the difficulty they experi- enced in keeping up the public worship of God " with any tolerable reputation in other parts ; the great want • Calamy, ii. 468, 472. 21 322 POVERTY OF MINISTEBS. [a.d. 1725.] of able and qualified persons to defend the truth, to supply those churches which are in want of ministers ; the poverty and distress to which some employed in that sacred office are exposed for want of a competent mam- tenance for themselves and families."* It was therefore proposed to raise a public fund for the support and maintenance of ministers, but that it should be for the use of Particular Baptist Churches only. Nearly a thousand pounds were contributed by the six churches rej)resented at the first meeting, but a strong objection was taken to the proposal for confining the advantage of the fund to Particular Baptists only. The principal opponent of this proposition was Benjamin Stinton, 2)astor of the church at Horsleydown. Stinton addressed an able protest against it, in which he pointed out the difficulty of making a proper distinction between the two divisions of the body, and said that it would expose the Baptists as a people of an uncharitable and party spirit. The Presbyterians, he remarked, regarded no distinctions of such a nature, and they might even help the Cono^reofationalists, and the Con2:reo'ationalists could also give aid to persons outside of their own denomina- tion, f Stinton's protest, however, received little atten- tion, audit was virtually resolved that if General Baptist ministers were starving, their Particular brethren were bound to let them starve. Soon afterwards, in a.d. 1725, the General Baptists established, but on broader prin- ciples, a similar society. | * Ivhaey iii. 150, 151. t Crosby, iv. 350, 356. 1 It is significant of the circumstances of Dissenting ministers at this period that the Fund Committee of the Particular Baptists resolved not to aid any minister who was in receipt of as much as £25 a year, yet a hun- dred nuniiters ■were aided in the year after the fund was established. [a.d. 1730.] THE HOLLIS FAMILY. 323 Amongst the benefactors of this denomination, who liberally assisted it with money, were the members of the Hollis family. Thomas Hollis, senior, although a Baptist, was for sixty years a member of a Congregational Church, His charity to all, but especially to those who were of his own denomination, had scarcely any parallel. In the assistance of poor ministers, in establishing schools, and in building churches, he probably surpassed in liberality any person of his age and generation. His son, Thomas Hollis, inherited, happily, his disposition as well as his wealth. Not content with assisting those near at hand, he founded the Hollis professorships of divinity, mathematics, and natural and experimental philosophy in Harvard University, Massachusetts, to which he was determined by the entirely unsectarian character of that great institution. He endowed 1 the same University, also in his lifetime, with scholarships for poor students, with a philosophical apparatus, with types of Hebrew and Greek, and with a large library. When, in a.d. 1731, he died, the churches of New England paid an almost universal tribute to his memory, and the Governor and Council of the colony ordered a funeral sermon to be preached before them. John Hollis, his brother, Avas of a similar nature.* Not all, therefore, of the Baptists were of a narrow disposition, nor is there any proof that, in most matters, they were narrower than their brethren. It was towards the close of this period that the spirit of Kationalism reached its highest development in England. Not satisfied with impugning the divinity of the Saviour, the facts of His life and the authenticity * Crosby, iv. 155, 231. 21 324 THE BEISTICAL [a.d. 1730.] and credibility of the books of the Bible were denied. Like the Unitarian, the Deistic controversy arose from the release of the human mind from the fetters of autho- rity, and, in its essence, was only an extension of the spirit of free-inquiry. It was a challenge of the human intellect to the ability of the Christian Church to prove, by reason, the foundations of the Christian faith. The Unitarians had denied the fact of the necessity of an expiatory sacrifice for sin in the form in which the doc- trine of the Atonement had hitherto been stated ; the Deists denied that the Almighty had, at any time, re- vealed a religion to mankind. They did not deny the existence of a natural religion in the heart and con- science of man, but they did deny the historical foun- dation, the necessity, and, to a great extent, the bene- ficial influence, of Christianity. The books of the Bible were, to these men, either forgeries, or impositions, or both ; and they challenged the Church to prove the contrary. As early as the begimiing of the previous century. Lord Herbert of Cherbury had aimounced and defended similar views ; and Thomas Hobbes, of Malmes- bury, had succeeded him. Mr. Charles Blount followed. The tendency of the works of all these writers was simply to eliminate Christianity, except as an amusing system of morals, from the authentic history of the Avorld. In A.D. 1701, Toland had been censured by Convocation for his book entitled " Christianity not Mysterious." Toland, however, was scarcely a Deist, and considered himself to be a Christian. The design of his work was to prove that there was nothmg in the Christian religion either con- trary to, or above, reason. He systematically depreciated, however, the genuineness of the books of the New Tes- [a.d. 1730.] CONTBOVEBST. 325 tament, comparing them, in their character, to the spurious gospels which had made their appearance in the early history of Christianity. In a.d. 1711, Lord Shaftesbury took the same side by the publication of a work entitled " Characteristics." In this work the state of the world under the heathen and the Christian administrations was compared, and judgment given in favour of the former. In the most polished style, and with the most caustic irony, Shaftesbury ridiculed the characteristics of the Christian religion. The " saving of souls," he exclaimed, "is now the heroic passion of exalted spirits." He denounced the doctrine of future rewards and punishments as equally unphilosophical in character and demoralizing in tendency, producing a narrowness of spirit, a neglect of the public good, and a selfishness of aim " which was observable in devout per- sons of almost all religious persuasions."* Shaftesbury, however, was careful to distinguish between himself as a thinker and as a citizen. He proclaimed, accordingly, with sarcastic solemnity, that he accepted the Christian religion "as by law established," and was steadily "orthodox" in his adhesion to it. Taking the ordi- nary ground of State-Churchmen, he remarked that he considered it, indeed, "immoral and profane" to doubt the truth of any religion whatever to which the State had given its sanction. He also accepted the Scriptures, although theii' text was not authentic, as " Avitty and humorous " books ; but the scheme of the Christian religion, as a whole, he considered to be an invention of the clergy for their own aggrandizement. The highest morality, he conceived, was the pursuit * " Characteristics," ii. 58. 32G THE DJEISTICAL [a.d. 1730.] of virtue for its own sake, and its perfection must always be o^ving to the belief of a God.* Contemporary with Shaftesbury was Anthony Collins, author of a " Discourse of Free-thinking," of an "Essay concerning the Use of Eeason," and of a "Dis- course on the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion." Collins, in these works, boldly attacked the sacred writings, charging them with gross textual errors, and putting the foundation of Christianity, not on the actual life and work of the Saviour, but on prophetical fulfilments only.f Another Free-thinker soon followed. This was Thomas Woolston, who selected, as his ground of attack on the Christian religion the narratives con- cerning the miracles of Jesus Christ. In six discourses, published between a.d. 1727 and 1729, Woolston main- tained that these miracles never really took place ; that they were merely allegorical representations ; and that the supposed life of Christ himself was also nothing more than an allegory. The Gospel narratives he denounced as absurd and incredible, and the Resurrec- tion as a myth. J No sooner was the last of Woolston's discourses published than another author appeared, who argued that Christianity was, after all, nothing but a hash- up of the " Law of Nature." Dr. Tindal, who ela- borated this theory, considered that the Christian religion, or such portions of it, at least, as were really historical, if any were, was an entirely supererogatory performance. The God of nature, in his creation of man, had given him all that was needful for his spiritual * Leland's " View of Deistical Writers," Letters v. vi. t lb. Letter vii. + lb. Letter viii. [A.D. 1730.] CONTBOVEBSJ. 327 existence, and any external revelation was therefore unnecessary.* The personal character of those who made these bold and repeated assaults on the bases of the Christian religion, rendered their writings more influential and dangerous than would otherwise have been iho. case. They were, for the most part, men of great intellectual ability and of high attainments. They were not only virtuous men, but they considered their system to be more favourable than the Christian rehgion to the cultivation of all human virtue and dignity. Their doctrines found thousands of willing believers. Amongst the wits and rakes Deism became a fashionable creed. Society then witnessed, on a small scale, what would be the effect of the withdrawal of the sanctions of the Christian religion from liuman life. All the best Christian thought of the nation was accord- ingly employed to make good the defences of the Gospel. Accepting issue on the ground selected by the impugners of the received doctrines, l^oth Church and Dissenting writers undertook to prove the entire reason- ableness of the Christian faith. . They were quite willing that it should be brought to the bar of that intellect and judgment which the Creator had given to man. " Those amongst us," said Gibson, the learned Bishop of London, " who have laboured, of late years, to set up reason against revelation, would make it pass for an established truth that if you will embrace revela- tion you must of course quit your reason, which, if it were true, would doubtless be a strong prejudice against revelation. But so far is this from being true, that it is universally acknowledged that revelation itself is to * " Christianity as Old as the Creation," a.d. 1730. 328 TRE BEISTICAL [i..D. 1730.]; stand or fall by the test of reason, or, in other words^ according as reason finds the evidences of its coming from God to be or not to be sufficient and conclusive, and the matter of it to contradict or not contradict the natural notions which reason gives us of the being and attributes of God." * " Our religion," said Dr. Rogers, the Boyle lecturer, " desires no other favour than a sober and dispassionate examination. It submits its o-rounds and reasons to an unprejudiced trial, and hopes to approve itself to the conviction of any equitable inquirer." t " If in revelation," said Bishop Butler, "there be found any passages the seeming meaning of which is contrary to natural religion, we may most certainly conclude such seeming meaning not to be the real one." % Dr. James Foster, the successor of Gale at the Barbican Baptist chapel, held similar language. " The faculty of reason," he remarks, "which God hath, implanted in mankind, however it may have been abused and neglected in times past, will, whenever they began to exercise it aright, enable them to judge of aU these things." 11 The Deists themselves acknowledged the candour with which they were met. Collins said, publicly, that many of the repHes to him were " written with a temper, moderation and politeness, unusual in theological controversies, and becoming good, pious, and learned men;" that the authors allowed the subject to * "Second Pastoral Letter," a.d. 1730. + " Boyle Lectures," a.d. 1727, p. 59. X "Analogy of Religion," part ii. chap. 1. II "Truth and Excellency of the Christian Religion," a.d. 1731. I am indebted to Mr. Pattison's Essay on the " Tendencies of Religious- Thought in England, 1680-1750," for the suggestion of the above ([uota- tions. [a.d. 1730.J CONTROVEBSY. 329 "depend only on the force of the argument, appeal only to the reason of men for a determmation, and dis- claim all force and other application to the passions and weakness of men, to support and maintain the notions they advance."* With one exception, none dreamed of putting law in force to punish the authors of these works. Woolston was indicted, under the Blasphemy Act, for the publication of his Discourses, and was condemned to a year's imprisonment and a fine of a hundred pounds, but no person expressed a stronger condemnation of such a resort to force for the purpose of putting down opinion than Woolston's ablest antagonist, Nathaniel Lardner. In the preface to a " Vindication of the Miracles of the Saviour," Lardner remarked that if men were permitted to propose their objections to Christianity no one need be in pain for the event. All force, he said, on the minds of men in matters of belief, was contrary to the spirit of Christianity ; and severity, instead of doing good, had always done harm.f The most popular reply to the deistical arguments was from the pen of Sherlock, Bishop of Bangor, the old opponent of Dissenters, who selected, for attack, Wool- ston's discourses. Throwuig the argument for the Resurrection of the Saviour into the form of a legal trial, Sherlock wrote a book,J which, if coarse and familiar in its language, largely influenced public opinion, and, probably because it was coarse and familiar, passed rapidly through fourteen editions. Nathaniel Lardner, then a young Presbyterian minister in Poor Jewry Lane, * " Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered." Preface, p. 4. t Kippis's " Life of Lardner," p. 15 — 18. X '< Trial of the Witnesses of Jesus Christ," A.D. 1730. 330 THE BEISTICAL [a.d. 1730.] conceived the design of an exhaustive work on the Credibihty of the Gospel History, and published, in A.D. 1727, the first part of that great performance, which occupied thirty years of one of the most laborious of human lives. Lardner also defended the Miracles from Woolston's attack, in which he was followed by Dr. Zachary Pearce, of St. Martm's, London, and Small- brooke, Bishop of St. David's. Dr. Waterland, an eminent Church scholar, replied to Tindal. Dr. James Foster surveyed the whole argument. Balguy, in "A Letter to a Deist" (a.d. 1729), sustained the beneficial influence of Christianity on moral virtue in reply to Shaftesbury. Woolston met with no fewer than twenty adversaries, the most conspicuous of whom, amongst Dissenters, were Dr. William Harris, of the Poor Jewry Church,"' and Mr. Hallett, of Exeter. Watts also took the field. Next to Sherlock, however, the most popular of the opponents of Deism was Dr. James Foster, who, at this time, and for many years subsequently, occupied the most prominent position amongst the preachers of the metropolis. Foster had been educated for the Dissenting ministry by Hallett, of Exeter, and had imbibed from his tutor, and probably also from Peirce, who held him in high estimation, anti- Trinitarian views. As early as the year 1720 he had published an essay to prove that the doctrine of the Trinity was not one of the fundamentals of Christianity. At the same time he vindicated the Resurrection of the Saviour in a sermon preached in reply to the objections of the Deists. The * Dx'. Harris, who was one of the most accomplished scholars and one of the greatest masters of the English language of his time, made a magnificent collection of works on Christian polemics, the whole of which he left, by will, to Dr. Williams's library. [A.D. 1730.] CONTROVERSY. 331 reading of Gale's work on Infant Baptism induced him to forsake the Presbyterians and to undergo adult immersion. He was subsequently elected successor to Gale, and while in charge of the Barbican Church com- menced a Sunday evening lecture at the Old Jewry. Few, if any, of the Dissenting churches of this period held evening services, and Foster's lectures commanded a great and varied audience. This, however, was entirely due to the eminent and unrivalled abilities of the lec- turer. Possessed of the finest elocutionary powers, a clear reasoner, chaste in his style, happy in his choice of language, combining energy with simplicity and dignity with pathos, with a voice that charmed the ear and a manner that added expressiveness to every sentence which he uttered, he both surprised and enchanted all who heard him. " Here," says the friend who preached his funeral sermon, "was a confluence of persons of every rank, station, and quality; wits, free-thinkers, and clergy, who, while they gratified their curiosity, had their prepossessions shaken, and their prejudices loosened." * Pope, who did not spare even more emi- nent men, has handed Foster's name down to all posterity : — Let modest Foster, if he will, excell Ten Metropolitans in preaching well. Until Edward Irving' s ministry, probably no preacher for nearly a hundred years, enjoyed such marked popu- larity as this famed General Baptist minister. Subse- quently, the Deistical controversy gave rise to the great work of Bishop Warburton on the " Divine Legation of * Wilson's " Dissenting Churches," ii. 270, 282. Dr. Fleming's Funeral Sermon, p. 15. 332 INFLUENCE OF TSE [a.d. 1730.] Moses," and of Bishop Butler on the " Analogy of Natural and Revealed Religion;" but these works belong to the generation succeeding that of the most conspicuous early Deists. With such an exhibition of power and of scholarship arrayed against it, it is not surprising that Deism, as an intellectual theory, was quickly beaten from the field of controversy, and it is not more surprising that practical and vital religion did not gain from its defeat. The apolo- gists of Christianity, in fact, were, to a great extent, drawn aside by the controversy in which they were engaged, from the principal work of preachers of the religion of Jesus Christ. They built up, with masterly ability, and acknowledged success, the external defences of their faith ; they proved, beyond cavil, the superiority of the Christian religion as a moral agent, but they did little more than this. They strangely forgot the internal evidences of the truth of Christianity. Whether Shaftesbury's sneer had or had not told upon them, they neglected, to a lamentable extent, one of the chief means of " saving souls." They fell into a habit of treating Christianity as an intellectual creed, as a system of morals, and a means of virtue. In no age, probably, have so few appeals to the spiritual affections of men been made as were made during the age of Deism. As few persons are moral from considerations of reason and prudence alone, and as none can be religious without the strongest feelings of the heart going forth towards their Maker and Redeemer, it followed that the Christian preachers exercised little influence on either the morals or the religion of the people. Christianity, as an in- tellectual belief, was enlightened and steadied, but faith [i..D. 1730.] DEISTICAL CONTROVERSY. 333 as a vital power scarcely ever existed in less degree. Preaching, if accurate and polished, was cold and heart- less. Foster's sermons are the best illustrations of the most popular Christian oratory of the Deistic period. Fos- ter was an Addison in the pulpit, but he expressed even less of Christian aiFectionateness than the moral essay- ist. Amongst, however, the most eminent of preachers and writers, "Watts was one who carefully guarded himself against this danger. In three sermons on the " Inward Witness of Christianity, or an evidence of the truth of the Gospel from its Divine effects," Watts proclaimed the superior character of the testimony derived from the conscience and experience of man to that of any external evidence. He warned the Christian world against a religion which consisted in merely correct morals and a correct theology, " while devotion freezes at the heart ; " and he vindicated zeal in the ministry of the word from the ridicule of an age which pretended to " nothing but calm reasoning." But even Watts was careful to abjure the charge of " enthusiasm," and ap- pealed to " common sense and reason " in defence of preaching characterized by the " movements of a sacred passion," and by a living fire.* It must be said, how- ever, in honour of the Christian apologists of this gene- ration, that the special work which was given them to -do they did with conscientious care and unrivalled suc- cess ; with such care and such success, indeed, that all subsequent labourers in the same field have done little more than to add, here and there, small outworks to their great system of fortifications. * " Tliree Sermons," &c., Dedication, a.d. 1730. 334 DECLINE OF [a.d. 1730.] As it is impossible for Konconformity, in the circum- stances in which it has been placed in England, to live and extend without the possession, by its adherents, of an unusual measure of personal piety and of the spirit of self-sacrifice, its comparative decline, under the influences of the [age of reason, was very natural. Calamy mentions no fcAver than twenty-five ministers, amongst whom were Joseph Butler, afterwards Bishop of Durham, and author of the " Analogy," and Thomas Seeker, afterwards Ai'chbishop of Canterbury, who seceded to the Church. Amongst the number of those who conformed were eighteen of the non-subscribing ministers in the Salters' Hall controversy, who re- sented the imposition of one tenet, but who had no hesi- tation to subscribe to the "six hundred," which are reported to be contained in the thirty-nine Articles of religion.* In London, and the neighbourhood within the bills of mortality, it appeared that between a.d. 1695 and a.d. 1730, one church only had been erected, but that, by enlargements, increased accommodation had been made for four thousand persons. Twelve of the old congrega- tions had been dissolved and ten new congregations * Calamy says : — " Some of those who had before gone over from us to the Church had been scandalous, but it was otherwise with those who now conformed. They were generally persons of sobriety and unblemished character, and might therefore be received and caressed by those whom they fell in with, with a better grace." Calamy observes that many of those who had left Dissent were soured in spirit by the change, and discovered " enmity and contempt with respect to those whose company they quitted." He adds, " It was easy to be observed and much taken notice of, that most that conformed about this time, complained much of a spirit of imposition working among the Dissenters, which discovered itself in the proceedings at Salters' Hall, and on other occasions, when the debates about the Trinity greAv warm." — " Own Life," ii. 503, 506. [a.d. 1730.] diss:e]:^t. 335 organized ; fourteen had increased, fifteen had declined, and twenty remained in about the same state. The Presbyterians are described as being almost equally divided between Calvinists, Arminians, and Baxterians, but principally moderate Calvinists ; the Congregation- alists as all Calvinists, and the Baptists as divided between Arminians and Calvinists, with the addition of three Socinians, of whom Foster was one. The Con- gregationaUsts are described as being greatly deficient in unity and sympathy mth each other.* While the fact of this declension was generally acknowledged, there were considerable differences of opinion concerning its causes. The first writer who directed attention to it, and who, himself, afterwards con- formed to the Established Church, assigned it to the ignorance of Dissenters of their own principles, and to * Palmer MS. in Dr. Williams's library. The numbers of th.e churches of the different denominations were : — Presbyterians 44 Independents - 3.3 Baptists - - - 26 <( L The Palmer MS., from which these particulars are taken, is one of the most valuable records of the state of Nonconformity in the last century. Its author is said to have come from Northampton to London, but no one has been able to fix his identity. It contains an account of the state and condition of every church, and is written with great care, but perhaps too great freedom. The substance of the MS. was reprinted, seventy years ago, in the " Protestant Dissenters' Magazine.'' Calvinists - - - 19 Arminians - - - 1.3 Baxterians - - - 12 Calvinists - - - 27 Doubtful - - - 1 Antinomian - 3 Disorderly - - - 2 Seventh Day — Calvinists - 1 Arminian - 1 Particular — Calvinists - 7 Antinomian - - 9 General — Arminian - 5 Socinian - - - 3 336 PSILIP DODDRIDGE. [a.d. 1730.] the bad management of their affairs. Amongst the proofs of the latter, he adduced, especially, the want of culture in ministers, which, he asserts, had lost them many "gentlemen."* The reply to this pamphlet pro- ceeded from the pen of a young minister at Northamp- ton, who had recently engaged m a work which was designed to remove any occasion for the last charge. This was Philip Doddridge. Doddridge was then twenty-eight years of age. He had been educated at St. Albans, by Dr. Samuel Clarke, and pressed by his tutor to devote himself to the ministry. Callmg for advice and assistance on Dr. Calamy, he met, from the fashionable and stately Presbyterian, only a frigid recep- tion. " I waited," he says, " upon Dr. Edmund Calamy to beg his advice and assistance that I might be brought up a minister, which has always been my great desire. He gave me no encouragement in it, but advised me to turn my thoughts to something else. It was with great concern that I received such advice; but I desire to follow providence, and not force it."t Providence led him, and in a.d. 1723 Doddridge was settled as pastor of the Congregational Church at the village of Kib- worth. From Kibworth he removed to Harborough, where, under the urgent solicitation of Watts and of the ministers of the neighbourhood, he established an insti- tution for the training of students for the ministry. In A.D. 1729 he removed to Northampton, taking his pupils with him. His gentleness of manner, his devotion of spirit, his extreme charity and conscientiousness, and the • " An Inquiry into the Causes of the Decay of the Dissenting Interest," A.D. 1730. t Orton's " Life of Doddridge," Work.s, i. 21. [A.D. 1730.] FHILIP DODDRIDGE. 337 breadth and thoroughness of his learning, had already signalized him in the eyes of those who most intimately knew him, as a man who was capable of great and varied service. His reply to Gough was his first publication. In it he ardently identified himself with the " Dissent- ing cause," which, he was persuaded, was " founded on reason and truth," and that the honour of God, and the public good, and the interests of liberty and serious piety, were nearly concerned in its support. He agreed with Gough as to the necessity of teaching the principles of Dissent, and the injury which had been received from unscriptural impositions and uncharitable contentions. He was of opinion that more practical religion was to be found in the free than in Esta- blished places of worship, and that it was a religious reverence for the divine authority which was their main support. Concurrently with this, he urged that preachers should study the character and temper of the populace, and not neglect the common people, who already con- stituted the bulk of the Dissenting interest. He appre- hended that it would never be worth the while of Dis- senters to neglect the populace in order to bring over gentlemen who had forsaken them. He would rather, he remarked, have honest and godly mechanics or day- labourers in the congregations than any who would be likely to leave them from " delicacy of taste." It was evident, in his judgment, that some of those who had quitted Dissent had been influenced by merely secular views, and particularly by marrying into the Church — a custom which had given it a " fatal blow." I^otwith- standing this, he vindicated the utmost simplicity in preaching, and was of opinion that any other style would 22 338 TRi: DISSENTING [a.d. 1732.] accomplish the ruin of Dissent. Such a style of preach- ing had been accompanied with a great increase in the number of Dissenters in his neighbourhood, who would be surprised to hear of an inquiry into causes of decay.* Another writer immediately followed Doddridge. He acknowledged that the decline of Dissent, so far as the conformity of some of its ministers was concerned, was plain ; that all were of opinion that there was a general decay; and that one of the causes of it was that very belief — people being ashamed to continue m a " sinking cause." If, in local cases, it was declining, the circumstance was to be attributed to, amongst other things, the fact that it was not apparently the social or commercial interest of a man to be a Dissenter, and that Dissenters too often sent their children to Church schools, j* Before this discussion was concluded the Dissenters had resolved that one mark of their civil inferiority should, if possible, be removed. In November, a.d. 1732, two meetings were held at the Silver Street Chapel to consider the advisability of applying to the legisla- ture for a repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. At the first of these mectino;s a £:eneral committee was appointed. At the second it was resolved that every church of the Presbyterian, Congregational, and Bap- tist denominations, within ten miles of the metropolis, should be requested to appoint two deputies. On the 29th December in the same year the first General Assembly of the Deputies was held. In consequence of * " Free Thoughts on the Most Probable Means of Eeviviiig the Dissen- ting Interest," a.d. 1 730. t " Some Observations on the Present State of the Dissenting Interest," A.D. 1731. [a.d. 1732.] DEPUTIES. 339 the report presented to this body by the committee appointed at the previous meetings, in which it was stated that, upon consulting the ministers of State and others, there seemed to be no possibility that any application which might then be made to Parliament would be successful, it was determined not to take immediate action on the subject, but the committee and the deputies were confirmed in their appointments.* At last, therefore, there seemed to be some probability that the civil rights of Dissenters would receive something like adequate attention from themselves. An organiza- tion was now established which, if not so extensive as the one which De Foe had suggested, gave indication of increased self-respect and increased firmness of purpose. For the first time in their history the Dissenters resolved to take, with respect to the laws by which they were injured, and ultimately with respect also to the social disability and oppression which naturally grew out of those laws, an aggressive attitude. If they had not yet lost faith in the promises of politicians, they had resolved, as De Foe had advised them, to act, in some measure, for themselves. * " A Sketch, of the History and Proceedings of the Deputies," etc., pp. 1 — 2, A.D. 1813. This was just previous to the General Election of 1734, and Walpole, to obtain the support of the Dissenters, gave them promise of future support. Belsham's "Great Britain," vol. iii. 481. Tin- dal's " Continuation." 22* CHAPTER V. FROM THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSENTING DEPUTIES TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF METHODISM. A.D. 1732— A.D. 1744. After the General Election of a.d. 1734, when the whole strength of the Dissenters was exerted to keep Sir Robert Walpole's ministry in power, application was again made to that statesman for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Walpole's conduct on this, as on a subsequent occasion, must be judged by what is known of the general character of the man. He was unscrupu- lous, he was tenacious of power, and he was equally tenacious of popularity. Personally, he had no objection to the repeal of these Acts, but, as a politician, he de- clined to identify his government with any motion to such an effect. He knew, and frankly acknowledged, his obligations to Dissenters, and also the obliga- tion which the Crown was mider to them,* but he dreaded to raise again the cry of "the Church in danger." He remembered how that cry had been suffi- cient, in a former reign, to cast out one of the strongest ministries, and almost to endanger the Hanoverian suc- • Coxe's " Walpole," i. 47G. [a.d. 1735.] THE TESTS BILL. 341 cession; and he shrank from the probability of its renewal. This is the most reasonable explanation of his conduct. He would have served the Dissenters if he could have done so consistently with his own poli- tical interests, but, as it was, he announced his inten- tion to oppose them. For the first time, therefore, the Dissenters acted independently of the Govern- ment. They did what they could to ensure success, but knew beforehand that they would be beaten. A Bill was drawn up and committed to the hands of Mr. Plumer, member for Hertfordshire, who moved it on the 12th March, a.d. 1735-6, Mr. Plumer did equal justice to his subject, both in matter and manner. His statement was convincing, his argument conciliatory, and he was well supported in debate. When, however, Walpole himself rose, and, while doing justice to the services and the pubHc spirit of Dissenters, expressed his opinion that the motion was ill-timed, and that the Government must resist it, its fate was settled. On a division it was lost by 251 to 123.* It is remarkable that where the general body of Dissenters failed, the Quakers, immediately afterwards, although on another question, should again have almost commanded success. The prosecutions of this body for tithes and church-rates were so frequent, and entailed so much suffering, that they had become anxious to facilitate the processes of law by which they were con- victed. Since the Act of William III. providing for the recovery of these charges in a summary way, eleven hundred and eighty members of this society had been prosecuted in the superior courts, more than three * " Parliamentary History." 342 QUAKERS [a.d. 1736.] hundred had been imprisoned, and several had died in prison.* Nothing could exceed the severity with which the law on this subject was administered, or the per- sonal hardship which was inflicted upon those who opposed it. For debts of a few shillings, which were not disputed, costs to the amount of scores of pounds were incurred, followed, in several instances, by for- feiture of all goods, and by loss of personal liberty. It was therefore determined to make a representation of their sufferings. In an address presented to Parliament, they pointed out that these prosecutions were an evasion of the Act for the summary recovery of rates, and asked that their prosecutors might, in future, be restrained from making the process of recovery so expensive and ruinous. A bill was accordingly brought in, providing that when a tithe or rate was not litigated, the warrant of two justices of the peace should be sufficient for the levy of a distress. Walpole gave his hearty support to this Bill, and, in doing so, roused once more the very cry which, as a statesman, he most dreaded to hear. No sooner was it before the House, than " the Church in danger " resounded throughout the land. Gibson, Bishop of London, led the way; and in the " Country Parson's Plea against the Quakers' Bill for tithes," endeavoured to prove that if the way of recovering these dues was made less ruinous than it was, the opposition to the payment would increase. Other pamphlets fol- lowed ; circulars were sent to the clergy throughout the country to petition against the measure, and it was re- solved to ask permission to appear by counsel before the * Goiigh's " History," iv. 279. These and other particulars were sepa- rately published and brought before Parliament in the year 1736. [a.d. 1736.] AND TITHES. 343 House against it. This unusual liberty was accorded to both sides ; but the power of the Government, although not until the measure had been debated for several days and considerably modified, was sufficient to procure its passage. It finally passed the House by 164 to 48 votes. In the Lords it was met by every species of resistance. Arguments against its merits having failed, the plea was at last put forward that the measure had been rendered so imperfect by its manipulation in the Commons' com- mittee, that it was not fit to be passed, and that there was no time left to amend it. On this ground it was rejected by 54 to 35 votes, the majority including fifteen bishops. No man was more irritated by this result than Walpole. It was not the habit of this minister to give the support of the Government to measures which were likely to fail, and he had fully reckoned on his ability to carry this Bill. His mortification at his defeat is repre- sented to have been extreme,* and he visited upon the author of it all the punishment which a minister of state knows so well how to inflict. Gibson was deposed from the position of confidential adviser of the Crown on ecclesiastical questions, and received no further pro- motion. The elation of the clergy, however, was as great as was the humiliation of the mmister. Those of London and Salisbury voted special addresses of thanks to their bishops for the zeal and success with which they had opposed the measure. Those of London expressed their gratitude for the vigilance with which the '^ legal rights of the clergy had been mamtained;" and those of SaKsbury came forward to manifest their " grateful sense of their preservation from that strange and un- * Coxe's <' Walpole," i. 478. 344 TRE TESTS BILL. [a.d. 1738.]; heard-of infringement of their rights," and for the de- fence of " their just and indisputable privileges." * The " rights " of the clergy meant, in this instance, the right not to tithes or other dues, but to punish, with the greatest punishment next to that of death, those who, without compulsion, refused to pay them. Their "privileges" meant, simply, the privilege of persecution. All that the Bill, had it been passed, would have accomplished, would have been to cheapen the process of recovery ; but it was scarcely in the nature of ecclesiastical pride and hate to lessen any of the disadvantages of Dissent. It was probably in consequence of the mortifying defeat which he experienced on this occasion that when Walpole was next apphed to by the Deputies to use his influence to relieve them from the tests, he gave an abrupt and unqualified refusal to assist them. A deputation, headed by Dr. Chandler, waited on the minister, and, remmding him of his repeated promises, solicited his influence in their behalf He made, says his biographer, the usual answer, that, whatever were his private inclinations, the attempt was improper, for the time had not yet arrived. " You have so repeatedly returned this answer," said Chandler, " that I trust you will give me leave to ask when the time will come ? " "If you require a specific answer," said Walpole, " I will give it you ui a word — Never ! " t In spite, however, of the discouragement given by these words, it was resolved, in a.d. 1738-9, again to bring the subject before the Legislature. The Deputies prepared for their work with systematic care and vigour. Early in the year a paper of reasons in favour of the rights of Dissenters was issued, and a copy * Gough, iv. 287. f Coxe's " Walpole," i. 608. [a.d. 1739.] ACTION OF THE BHPUTIES. 345 put into the hands of every member of the House of Commons. On March 30th a Bill was brought in. No particulars of the debate which followed are reported, but its issue was even more unfavourable than on the previous occasion. The Bill was rejected by a hundred and eighty-eight to eighty-nine votes. This result did not, however, immediately discourage its friends. The committee of the Deputies met soon after the rejection of the measure, and reported themselves to be satisfied, if not with the issue, at least with the character of the debate. Measures were at once taken to extend, by cor- respondence, the power of the Deputies in the country. Letters were sent into every county, and a general meeting of Dissenters from all parts of England sum- moned for the following year. It is to be presumed that this meeting, if it was ever held, advised the Deputies to discontinue their exertions. Nothing more was done, and the subject was allowed to sleep for half a century.* During this long period the Deputies were occupied in defending, often at great expense, the civil and eccle- siastical rights of Dissenters throughout the kingdom. If a clergyman refused to bury the child of a Dissenter, they put the law in motion to compel him to do so ; if Dissenting chapels were unjustly taxed, they resisted the claims that were made ; if ignorant or intolerant Justices refused to register places of worship, they served them with a mandamus from the Court of Queen's Bench to compel them to discharge their duty ; they successfully resisted demands for clerical fees and for clerical charges made for services that had never been rendered ; they protected the rights of Dissenters in respect to charity * " History and Proceedings," etc., pp. 7 — 12. 346 TEE BAPTISTS AND [a.d. 1742.] schools, and saw to the legal observance of trust deeds. In a very brief period their vigilance gave them such power that a check was eflfectually put upon the inroads of intolerance. Much of their success was un- questionably due to the character and energy of their chairman, Dr. Benjamin Avery, a physician of London, who occupied the post of chairman and treasurer for not fewer than twenty-eight years — from a.d. 1736 to A.D. 1764.* In the year 1742 a case occurred which tested the consistency of the Baptist denomination in respect to occasional conformity to the Established Church. A Mr. Baskerville, member of the Baptist Church in Unicorn Yard, had been elected to the common council of the city of London, and had qualified himself for his office by receiving the sacrament according to the rites of the Church. Being immediately remonstrated with, he de- fended the course which he had taken, and resented what he deemed to be an interference with his own rights of conscience and of private judgment. The ■church at once took the advice of the London Baptist Board on the course which they should pursue towards him. At a meeting of the Board the question was pro- posed whether a person ought to be continued in the fellowship of the church who had received the sacrament in the Church of England to quahfy himself for an office when he did not incur any penalty if he refused to accept the office. The Board unanimously decided that it was absolutely unlawful for any member of a " Gospel Church" to communicate with the Established Church on any consideration whatever. The matter was then submitted ♦ " Sketch of the History," etc., pass. [x.D. 1742.] OCCASIONAL CONFORMITY. 347 to the churches individually, who agreed, without excep- tion, that such a person ought not to be continued in the fellowship of the church. At a subsequent meeting of ministers and deputies of all the churches, an address to the Unicorn Yard Church was agreed upon. In this address, after making an allusion to the bad example which would have been set had any sanction been given to the practice of occasional conformity, and referring, with grief, to the indulgence and growth of it amongst other Dissenting denominations, the assembly proceeded to state the grounds of their decision. They remuided the church that their forefathers had separated from the National Establishment on principle, and because they would not submit to any rehgious constitution which was not strictly regulated by the Word of God. They would submit to no ordinance or duty that was enjouied by a human authority which invaded the rights of conscience and the prerogatives of God ; they did not hesitate for an instant to refuse to commune with a church the very frame of which was contrary to the appointment of the Lord and His Apostles, that had sprung from human policy and power alone, that assumed to itself an arbi- trary right of imposing prescriptions on the consciences of men, and that harboured in its bosom multitudes of people of the most corrupt principles and the most pro- flio-ate lives. These men had been faithful to blood in their testimony : if we, therefore, said the Assembly, submit to a wicked prostitution of the holy Supper for the sake of mere worldly honour or lucrative employ- ment, we should be unworthy of the character of our ancestry, we should be exposing our profession to ridi- cule, we should be esteemed hypocrites, and we should 348 RISE OF METROBISM. [a.d. 1736.] draw down the righteous indignation of Heaven upon our inconsistency. The church was therefore exhorted to watch against all corruption, and to put away from it the root of bitterness. In the next year, Mr. Basker- ville repeating his offence, he was formally adjudged, after another expostulation, to be no longer a member of the church.* This decisive course saved the London Baptists from any repetition of this practice. It was at this period that the names of three young clergymen, who, for a year or two past, had been hold- ing extraordinary religious services in the metropolis and other towns, were becoming the subject of the familiar but prejudiced talk of all religious circles. The first of these was John Wesley. If, in early life, any one man more than another had been carefully nurtured in Church principles, John Wesley had been so nurtured. Both his paternal and his maternal grandfathers had been ejected by the Act of Uniformity of a.d. 1662. His father, however, had not only conformed to the Church, but was one of the most bitter, unscrupulous, and malignant opponents of Dissent. His mother, the daughter of Dr. Samuel Annesley, had also conformed. The father appears to have been a man of no more than average piety, but the mother was a woman of high principle, deep religious feeling, consistent life, and un- usual intelligence. To her the Wesley family probably owed the remarkable religious and intellectual gifts with which all its members, in greater or less degree, were endowed. It is possible to trace the secret of many of John Wesley's higher characteristics, and of some of his inconsistencies, to the influences which were brought to * Ivimey, iii. 228—233. [A.I). 1736.J JORN WESLEY. 349 bear upon him iii early life. Saved, when an infant, as though by a miracle, from perishing in the flames which -consumed his father's house, he was led to consider him- self consecrated for some great work. His mother, in consequence of it, was especially careful of the soul of this saved child. In early life he saw, in his father's family, that conflict between Church principles and Christian duty which he himself was afterwards to illustrate on the grandest scale of any Churchman or Christian. When his father was from home, his mother insisted on taking his place as a Christian teacher and exhorter. She held public religious services, at which she read sermons and prayed with and advised the people. Her husband took alarm, first at what he considered to be the unfitness of such a proceeding in a woman, and, secondly, at the invasion of Church authority which was involved in such acts. In reply to the first, Susanna "Wesley fell back on her responsibility as a Christian. She, as well as he, had a stewardship to administer ; and she cared nothing for unfitness. " If," she said, " I am unfaithful to Him or to you, how shall I answer unto Him, when He shall command me to render an account of my stewardship ?"* In her further answer, as to its " looking particular," there is to be seen a projection of one of the principles which guided John Wesley through his life. " I grant it does," she said ; " and so does almost everything that is serious, or that may any way advance the glory of God or the salvation of souls, if it be performed out of a pulpit, or in the way of common conversation ; because in our corrupt age the utmost care and diligence has been used to banish all discourse of God, or spiritual * Southey's " Life of "Wesley," chap, i. 350 WESLET [a.d. 173e.] concerns, out of society — as if religion were never to appear out of the closet, and we were to be ashamed of nothing so much as confessing ourselves to be Chris- tians."* In reply to the second objection, that she was invading the authority of the Church, she did not do what many would have done, namely, question and deny the claims of that authority, but simply pointed to the good that had been and was being effected. Exactly the same character was in her, in this respect also, that was in John Wesley. She would not yield to her hus- band's desire that she should discontinue her services. " Send me," she replied, " your positive command, in such full and express terms as may absolve me from guilt and punishment for neglecting this opportunity of doing good, when you and I shall appear before the srreat and awful tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ.'^ From his mother also he derived a taste for works of Christian asceticism and mysticism. Law's " Serious Call " and a Kempis's " Imitation " were two of her favourite books, and those two books became his almost constant companions. Add to this, that supernatural noises were constantly heard in his father's house, and that they were credited, by aU the members of the family, as supernatural, and Wesley's subsequent ten- dency to superstition may also, in part, be accounted for. The child was, in nearly all instances, the father of the man : even his earliest acquired mental weaknesses were destined to be a source of influence. Wesley, when he went from his father's house to Oxford, went with somewhat chaotic religious impulses. He said, a few years after, of this period, as he said^ * Southey's *' Life of "Wesley," chap. i. A.D. 1737.] AT OXFORD, 351 after that, of the subsequent period, that he did not then know God, and that he had no true faith. When the first course of his residence at the University was nearly completed, he became strongly influenced by religious feelings. With his brother Charles and a few other members of the University, he gave up his life to visit- ing the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned. He read deeply and prayerfully in the Bible, and read with it, again, Law, a Kempis, and Taylor's " Holy Living and Dying." He fasted long and often, prayed by day and night, lived by strict "method," and became a Christian ascetic, with a strong inclination for a retired and medi- tative life. But although he and his friends were sneered at throughout the University as the " Holy Club," as " Methodists," and as everything else that was deemed to be contemptible in that school of the prophets of the Established Church, they gained too much from their work for themselves and their fellow-men to swerve from it. Nor were they men, in other respects, who could be put down by coarse jokes or contemptuous tongues. Wesley was a man as learned and as cultured as any amongst them. He was a good classical critic, he had almost a natural capacity for logic, he had been elected to the Greek chair, and was moderator of the classes. His religious devotion adorned his academical position^ and his academical position adorned his religion. Charles Wesley was younger by five years, but was giving equal promise of ability and eminence. To the " Holy Club " was soon joined another, and an equally powerful spirit. This was George Whitefield, who went from the position of a beer-drawer in Bristol to that of a " poor scholar " at the University. The " Imitation " 352 QEOEGE WHITEFIELD. [a.d. 1738.] had fallen, also, into his hands, and after a depth of despair almost equal to that of Bunyan, he, too, had taken hold of God and his Christ. It is singular how both Wesley and Whitefield went through, in their earhest religious experiences, the same process, not of mental conflict, but of physical discipline. Whitefield fasted twice a-week for thirty-six hours ; went, like David, to his closet for prayer, seven times a-day, and devoted the whole of Lent to the most laborious religious exercises. He, too, afterwards looked back upon this time as upon a time of spiritual ignorance. When he went to Oxford, before he became acquainted with the Wesleys, the " Serious Call " fell into his hands. It intensified equally his religious feelings and his ascetic inclinations. Soon afterwards he joined the " Holy Club," and became, next to John Wesley, its most devoted member.* Wesley's call to Georgia to be a missionary amongst the Indians probably saved him from becoming the leader of a "Ritualistic" party in the eighteenth century. He went there with a noble and self-sacrificing purpose, but with all the ecclesiastical tendencies of a High Church- man, combined with a somewhat superstitious faith in what may be described as Christian magic. Instances of the latter are to be found in the whole of his journals. The first occurs on the voyage to Georgia. A woman who thought that she was dying, wished to receive the communion. " At the hour of her receiving," says Wesley, " she began to recover, and in a few days was entirely out of danger." t One of his first acts of minis- * Philip's " Life and Times of Whitefield," chap. i. t "Journal," Nov. 10, 1736. [a.d. 1737.] WESLEY AND THE MOBAVIANS. 353 terial duty in Georgia was to baptize an infant. " The child was ill then," remarks Wesley; "but recovered from that hour."* His visit to America was a failure, and his rigid and priestly adherence to the rubrics of the Established Church, which brought upon him a law-suit, ultimately compelled him to return to England. From the Moravians on board the ship which took him out he had, however, learned one doctrine, the disclosure of which came upon him with surprise. Having occasion to consult Mr. Spangenberg, one of their pastors, he was asked, "Have you the -witness within yourself? Does the spirit of God bear witness with your spirit that you are a child of God?" Wesley says he was surprised, and did not know what to answer. "Do you know Jesus Christ?" continued the pastor. Wesley could only say that he knew He was the Saviour of the world. "But do you know that He has saved you?" The reply was simply an expression of a hope that He had died to save him. " Do you know yourself? " asked Spangenberg. "I do," replied Wesley ; but he adds, ^' I fear they were vain words." f Further acquaintance with the Moravians in London and in Germany strengthened Wesley's views in this direction. He saw that the Gospel to be preached was a Gospel which offered free pardon to all sinners ; which proclaimed the necessity of a new birth, and which gave prominence to the doctrines of justification by faith and the witness of the Spirit. His heart grew within him as he thought of the happiness which man might enjoy, and of the salvation of which he might partake, if the Gospel were but preached to him as it * " Journal," Feb. 21, 1736-7. f lb. Feb, 7. 23 354 WSITEFIELUS TBEACKING. [a.d. 1737.] might be preached. And to such preaching he deter- mined to devote himself. Much, however, as John "Wesley's name has been identified, and justly so, with the great religious awakening which followed from his preaching, and from that of his followers, it is to Whitefield that the origin of the movement is more especially due. It was not Wesley, but Whitefield, who first awoke the people from the sleep of spiritual death; and it was not Wesley, but Whitefield, who first broke the bonds of ecclesiastical conventionalisms and laws. This occurred while the Wesleys were in Georgia. Whitefield was ordained in A.D. 1736. His first sermon, preached immediately afterwards in Bristol, was reported to have "driven fifteen persons mad," which simply meant that it roused several from a state of religious indifi'erence to an intense and awful anxiety. When he next visited Bristol, in a.d. 1737, crowds of all denominations went to hear him. It was the same in London, at Gloucester, and everywhere that he went. Young as he was — not twenty-three years of age — he was now sought for from all parts of the kingdom. He preached several times in a week, and people went miles in order to hear him. When he left Bristol he was escorted out of the city by a multitude of horsemen and other persons. The beginning of the revival he himself traces to a sermon preached by himself in this year, " on the nature and necessity of our regeneration or new birth in Christ Jesus." "This sermon," he remarks, "under God, began the awakening at Gloucester, Bristol, and London."* From this time he consecrated himself to * Andrew's "George Whitefield," p. 27- [A.D. 1739.] OPPOSITION OF THE CLJEEGT. 355 the work of an evangelist. He preached nine times a week, and in London people rose before daybreak in order to be able to hear him, and, with lanterns in their hands, might be seen threading their way from all parts of the metropolis to the place where he was to preach. This had not lasted three months before the clergy began to oppose him. He was emptying their dull churches, and was consequently assailed as a " spiritual pickpocket." Pulpits were now refused to him. To add to his bad odour, he was] accused of visiting Dis- senters— a charge which was true ; for many Dissenters opened their houses to him, and welcomed him as their guest. The people, however, shared in none of the jealousy of their Church leaders. When, at Wesley's solicitation, he was about to leave for Georgia, " they pressed," he says, " more eagerly and affectionately than ever upon me. All ranks gave vent to their feelings. Thousands and thousands of prayers were put up for me ; they would run and stop me in the alleys of the churches, hug me in their arms, and follow me with wistful looks." Keturning from Georgia for priest's orders, after an absence of a few months from England, Whitefield found the churches of the metropolis more than ever closed to him. He was violating the diocesan and parochial systems, by expounding the Scriptures from house to house. He was doing good not according ^^to ecclesias- tical law. He was savino; souls in a manner of which a beneficed clergyman could not approve. The result was, that the greatest preacher in England could scarcely find a church in all London in which to preach. From similar motives, every church in Bristol was now closed 23* 356 OPPOSITION OF TRE GLEBOT. [a.d. 1730.] to him. He took refuge in the prison chapel, but from this also he was soon cast out. A man who did not respect the parochial system was not considered fit to preach, even to condemned felons. Whether souls were saved or whether they were damned was, to the clergy of those days, a matter of entire indifference, so long as their own privileges could be maintained intact. White- field, who, although a reverent son of the Church of England, thought less of the decrees of councils and of canons than Wesley, at once made up his mind as to what he should do. He waited on the Chancellor of the Diocese of Bristol, who asked him why he preached without the Bishop's license ? Whitefield replied, that he thought that custom had grown obsolete. The Chancellor, he adds, then read over to him that part of the Ordination Service which precludes any minister preaching in a private house, and demanded of him what he had to say to that ? Whitefield's reply had a terrible force. " There is a canon," he said, " which forbids all clergymen to frequent taverns and play at cards; why is that not put into execution?" The Chancellor answered that if complaint were made on that point, he would attend to it; and then said, " I am resolved, sir, if you preach or expound any- where in this diocese till you have a license, I will first suspend you, and then excommunicate you."* But the Chancellor, in this instance, spoke without considering his diocesan, who gave Whitefield the necessary autho- rity. It was immediately after this that, for the first time, Whitefield engaged in field preaching. He determined • « Whitefield's " Journal," a.d. 1739. [A.D. 1739.] FIELD PBEACHING. 857 to carry the Gospel to the savage and heathen colliers of Kingswood. "Finding," he says, " that the pulpits are denied me, and the poor colliers are ready to perish for lack of knowledge, I went to them, and preached on a mount to upwards of two hundred. Blessed be God that the ice is broken, and I have now taken the field. I thought it might be doing a service to my Creator, who had a mountain for His pulpit, and the heavens for His sounding-board, and who, when the Gospel was refused by the Jews, sent His servants into the highways and hedges. " When Whitefield next preached to the colliers of Kingswood he had an audience of ten thousand. His j)reaching was followed by marvellous results. He could see the tears coursing down their blackened cheeks as he spoke, and hundreds, according to his own statement, were soon brought under deep conviction. Whitefield's way was now open to him, and he preached wherever he could find space or standing room. At Bristol his audiences rose from five and ten to twenty thousand persons — more than all the churches together could contain. He preached once at Gloucester, but only once, for the churches of the city were immediately closed to him. From Gloucester he went to Wales, and, accompanied by Howel Harris, the founder of Welsh Methodism, preached throughout every part of the prin- cipality. Here, as in England, the churches were shut against him, but the people flocked by tens of thousands to hear his voice. It was the same in the country districts of England, which he afterwards visited. At Basing- stoke, the landlord of the imi turned him out of his house, and the mayor forbad him to preach. There, however, he preached twice — once in a field, and once 358 CONTINUED OPPOSITION [a.d. 1739.] on the racecourse ; for the man who had bearded the Chancellor of his diocese was scarcely hkely to be frightened by the opposition of a country mayor. In very few places which he afterwards visited was he allowed the use of the church. One of the cities to which he went was Oxford, where he was received with the characteristic wisdom and charity of the University authorities. The yice-Chancellor sent for him. " Have you, sir," he inquired, "a name in my book here?" " Yes," said Whitefield, " but I intend to take it out soon." " Yes," replied the Vice-Chancellor, " and you had better take yourself out too, or otherwise I will lay you by the heels. What do you mean, going about alienating the people's affections from their proper pas- tors ? If you ever come again in this manner, I will lay you first by the heels, and then these (referring to Whitefield's friends) shall follow." It is satisfactory to find that Whitefield did not meet with a sunilar recep- tion from D oddridge, ujDon whom he called at North- ampton, after leaving Oxford. Doddridge received him with both kindness and courtesy. He, at least, was not afraid of his people's affections being alienated by the most powerful preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. At Hertford, Whitefield was compelled to go to the common to preach; at Hitchin, the churchwardens ordered the church-bells to be rung, so that his voice, as he stood under the shadow of the church in the market-place, might be drowned. After this he re- turned to London, and began his memorable mission at Moorfields, which then contained the refuse of the metropolis. Here, and on Kennington Common, his audience consisted of as many as forty thousand [A.r. 1739.] WESLEY'S PREACHING. 359 persons.* Everywhere his voice was a two-edged sword, and for the first time for generations men could understand the Divine interrogation, " Is not my word like a fire, saith the Lord, and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces ? " From London, Whitefield once more sailed to Georgia. He remained there but a few months ; but he did not leave America until he had preached in all the principal cities, breaking, in the new world as in the old, the sleep of soul in thousands of men. It was after Whitefield had first met the colliers of Kingswood that he addressed a letter to Wesley, beseech- ing him to go down and preach to the people. Wesley was still holding affectionate intercourse with the Moravians. A " Society," formed to a great extent on the plan of modern Methodist class-meetings, existed in Fetter Lane. Here Wesley attended "love-feasts," which lasted all through the night ; here he enjoyed "penitential" seasons ; and here he was wrought up to a state of the highest devotional rhapsody. His preaching now began to be attended by those physical manifestations which have often accompanied revivals of religion. Strong men and women cried aloud, before assembled congregations, in the agony of their spirit : when the pains of hell gat hold upon them, they roared and shrieked in suffering. Fits were frequent amongst those who heard. By-and-by, — sometimes in a few hours or even minutes, — agony would give way to joy, terror to peace, the fear of hell to the jDossession of heaven below, the service of the devil to an assured acceptance with God. Such phenomena, believed, at that time, to have been unprecedented, drew down on the * Wliitefield's Journal," a.d. 1739. Andrew's " AVliitefield," cap. iv. 360 HUMABKABLU EFFECTS. [a.d. 1739.] preaching of the Wesleys a not unnatural opprobrium. They were contrary to all that had hitherto been ex- perienced of the operations of the Spirit of God on the soul of man. Good Christians were scandalized. Wesley, however, accepted their defence ; and, whatever may be thought of all such abnormal manifestations, his reply must be held, to a certain extent, to be conclusive. " You deny," he writes to his brother Samuel, " that God does now work these effects ; at least, that He works them in such a manner. I affirm both, because I have heard these facts with my ears and seen them with my eyes. I have seen fas far as it can be seen) many persons changed in a moment from the spirit of horror, fear, and despair, to the spirit of hope, joy, and peace ; and from sinful desires, till then reigning over them, to a pure desire of doing the will of God. These are mat- ters of fact, whereof I have been, and almost daily am, eye or ear -svitness. Upon the same evidence (as to the suddenness and reality of the change), I beheve or know this, touching visions and dreams. I know several persons in whom this great change from the power of Satan unto God was wrought either in sleep or during a strong representation to the eye of their mind of Christ, either on the cross or in glory. This is the fact ; let any judge of it as they please. But that such a change was thus wrought appears, not from their shedding tears only, or sighing, or groaning, but from the whole tenor of their life, till then in many ways wicked, from that time holy, just, and good. I will show you him that was a lion till then, and is now a lamb ; he that was a drunkard, but now exemplarily sober ; the whoremonger that was, who now abhors the [a.d. 1739.] WESLEY JOINS WHITEFIELD. 361 very lusts of the flesh. These are my living arguments of what I assert, that God now, as aforetime, gives re- mission of sins; and the gift of the Holy Ghost, which may be called visions. If it be not so, I am found a false witness ; but, however, I do and will testify the thuiffs I have both seen and heard."* It is needless to say that Wesley might have obtained an explanation of all these extravagances without assigning them to the method of divine agency. But the ecstatic tem- perament in himself, which was communicated, by a natural law, to those whom he addressed, enabled him not only to see, in all these manifestations, the finger of God, but to rejoice in them. He liked excitement, he liked mystery, he liked the marvellous, and he beheved with the utmost credulity, in the superhuman, or aU that appeared to be so. Such was the man who was about to follow Whitefield to Bristol ; but Wesley hesitated to take this step without consultmg' his oracles. He wished to know the will of God respecting the matter, and, in order to ascertain it, resorted to his favourite practice of Bibliomancy. He opened the Bible once, and the text on which he stum- bled was not of good omen ; he opened it again, and it was worse ; a third and fourth time, and it was worse still. Then he consulted the Fetter Lane Society, who had recourse to the lot, and the lot decided that he should go. Immediately afterwards, the Bible was opened in several places, and every text indicated, as had been the case with Wesley himself, personal damage to Wesley if he accepted the invitation. The little society accordingly came to the conclusion that the * " Journal." 362 WESLEY'S FIELD FBEACHING. [a.d. 1739.] journey would be fatal, and Charles besought to go and die with him. But Wesley accepted the issue of the lot as the appointment of the Lord, and went. Whitefield must have been intimatel}'- acquainted with "Wesley's ecclesiastical prejudices and weaknesses, and he adopted the best method of overcoming them. He preached himself in the open air, before Wesley, and then left his coadjutor to his own course. Wesley says, " I could scarce reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in the fields, of which he set me an example on Sunday; having been all my lifetime (till very lately) so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order, that I should have thought the saving of souls almost a sin, if it had not been done in a church."* How reluctant he was to follow White- field's example, may be gathered from an entry made four days after this: "I submitted," he says, "to be more vile, and proclaimed in the highways the glad tidings of salvation." " More vile !" Nothing could more clearly indicate, than does this expression, the rooted ecclesiasticism of Wesley's character, the utter abasement which he experienced in doing anything that appeared to be unclerical, or inconsistent with the established conventionalisms of a priest in orders. But as the churches were one after another closed to him, as they had been to Whitefield and to himself in London, and as the sheriff soon prohibited his preaching even to the prisoners in gaol, he appears to have thought little more of the vileness of proclaiming the Gospel in the open air. From this time Methodism became an established * " Joiinial," March 29, a.d, 1739. [A.D. 1739.] ESTABLISHMENT OF SOCIETIES. 363 institution. In the year 1739, the first Methodist "meeting-house " in England was built at Kingswood, and the first Methodist meeting-house opened in Eng- land, opened at the Foundry, in Moorfields. Wesley called the congregations who used these places of wor- ship, " societies." These societies were divided into " bands " and " class-meetings," in which spiritual exercises were indulged, and the devotional feelings cultured. Wesley's idea at this time, and for many years afterwards, was merely to revive the state of religion in the Church; but he knew enough of the condition of society in England, and of human na- ture, to be aware that unless those who had been brought under the awakening uifluence of the Gospel met together, and assisted each other in keepmg alive the fire which had been lit in their hearts, it must, in many instances, seriously diminish, if not altogether die out. His societies, however, differed in no respect whatever from Dissenting churches, excepting that their members did not, at first, everywhere build places of worship, and did not celebrate the Lord's Supper, or have the separate administration of baptism. But both Whitefield and Wesley were at this time Dissenters m a degree. They had openly and deliberately broken an essential law in the Church's constitution. How many more laws they might break, was simply a question of time, circumstance, and conscience. It was during Whitefield's residence in America that the first breach was made between himself and Wesley. Whitefield was a Calvinist, and he had heard from Eng- land, to his intense surprise, that Wesley was preaching against the Calvinistic doctrines. When they had separated 364 SEPABATION OF [a.d. 1740.] from each other at Oxford, there was no difference of opinion between the two friends on doctrinal questions. But Wesley, in the meanwhile, had come under Moravian influences, and from the Moravian had gone to the Arminian creed. With all the ardour of a new dis- ciple, he was not satisfied with expounding the doctrines of that creed, but made it a practice to denounce all the characteristic tenets of Calvinism. Whitefield, ac- cordingly, wrote to Wesley, expostulating against his conduct. There was no intolerance in Whitefield's dis- position ; of the two men he had by far the finer human nature. He did not, therefore, denounce Wesley's new creed; he simply said, " I differ from your notion about not committing sin, and your denying the doctrine of election and final perseverance. I dread coming to England unless you are resolved to oppose these truths with less warmth. I dread your coming over to America, because the work of God is carried on here by doctrines quite opposed to those you hold." He be- sought him with painful earnestness, not to preach as he had been preaching. " For Christ's sake, dear sir," he wrote, " if possible, never preach against election in your sermons ; no one can say that I have mentioned it in public discourses, whatever my private sentiments may be. For Christ's sake, let us not be divided amongst ourselves ; nothing will so much prevent a division as your being silent on this head."* Next, he expressed regret at Wesley's doctrine of sinless perfection, and, with somewhat unnecessary irony, his contempt of Wesley's superstitious practice of casting lots. But Wesley would not be silent, and he would not give up • Andrew's "Whitefield," 117, 118. [a.d. 1741.] WRITEFIELB AND WESLET. 365 casting lots. Whitefield therefore again took up his pen, and in terms of anguish thus addressed his brother in the Gospel : "For Christ's sake, be not rash; give yourself to reading ; study the covenant of grace ; down with your carnal reasoning ; be a little child ; and then instead of pawning your salvation, as you have done in a late hymn-book — if the doctrine of universal re- demption be not true, instead ot talking ot sinless perfection, as you have done in the preface to that hymn-book, and making man's salvation to depend on his own free will, as you have done in this ser- mon; you Avill compose a hymn of praise of sove- reign distinguishing love, you will caution believers against striving to work a perfection out of their own hearts, and print another sermon the reverse of this, and entitle it Free Grace Indeed; free, because not free to all ; but free, because God may Avithhold or give it to whom and when He pleases. God knows my heart; nothing but a simple regard to the honour of Christ has forced this letter from me. I love and honour you for His sake; and when I come to judgment, I will thank you before men and angels for what you have, under God, done to my "soul."* This letter getting, unfor- tunately, into print, Wesley took it with him to the Foundry, at Moorfields, where it was being circulated, and, before the whole congregation, tore it into pieces. When Whitefield, in the year 1741, returned again to London, he was received with no diminution of affection by the Wesleys. He found, however, or imagined he found, that the preaching of the two brothers had seriously damaged his reputation. " Many," he writes, * Southey's " Wesley," chap. li. 366 TRE REVIVAL [a.d. 1741.J " very many of my spiritual children, who, at my last departure from England, would have plucked out their own eyes to have given me, are so prejudiced by the dear Messrs. Wesley's dressmg up the doctrine of elec- tion in such horrible colours, that they will neither hear, see, nor give me the least assistance ; yea, some of them send threatening letters that God will speedily destroy me."* What is termed an explanation fol- lowed, when Whitefield said that the Wesleys and him- self preached two different Gospels ; that he could not hold out the right hand of fellowship to them ; and that they must part. From this time the Methodist move- ment was divided into two lines : Whitefield preached Calvinism, and the Wesleys Arminianism, and both were equally successful in turning men from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to the salvation of God. The personal friendship of the men was, how- ever, soon renewed, and each helped the other in the work he had in hand. The three years which Whitefield now spent m Eng- land were the years of probably the greatest revival of re- ligion that had been kno^vn since Christianity was first preached. His first work, after separating from the Wesleys, was to go to Scotland. Presbyterian secta- rianism stood, for a time, m his way. The Erskines had invited him, but would not hear of his preaching in any other pulpits but those of their own section of Presby- terianism. "Why?" asked Whitefield. "Because," said Ealph Erskine, " we are the Lord's people." "I then," says Whitefield, "asked, were there no other Lord's people but themselves ; and, supposmg all others * Soutliey's " Wesley," chap. xi. [a.d. 1742.] UNDER WRITEFIBLB. 367 were the devil's people, they certainly had more need to be preached to, and therefore I was more determined to go into the highways and hedges; and that if the Pope himself would lend me his pulpit, I would gladly proclaim the righteousness of Christ therem.'"'' White- field, in fact, always preferred the "highways and hedges." "Field preaching," he remarked, "is my plan. I cannot join so in any particular place. Every one hath his proper gift." While, therefore, the presbytery was quarrellmg about him, he took him- self out of the hearmg of their wrangles, and would have nothing to do with their solemn league and cove- nant. But his success amongst the people was as great as it had been in England. His audiences numbered tens of thousands ; and hundreds, as the result of his preaching, appear to have imdergone a change of heart. He is next found, in the year 1742, preaching at Moorfields Fair, an act which none but a man with the courage of a lion and the faith of a saint would have attempted. At six o'clock in the morning of Whit- Monday, "getting," as he says, "the start of the devil," he preached to ten thousand people. In the afternoon this number was doubled. The fair was now at its height, but large numbers left the shows to hear him. The result was that he was pelted with rotten eo-o-s. stones, and dead cats ; but he preached to the end, and announced that he would return in the evening. A merry-andrew, whose show had been forsaken, came, on this occasion, to lash him with a whip, but did not suc- ceed in doing any harm. Other attempts to stop his preaching also failed. When the service was over, * Whitefield's ''Journal," a.d. 1739. ^68 LABOURS OF [a.d. 1742.] Whitefield returned mth a pocket full of notes from persons brought under concern. He therefore visited the fair again, when he experienced, in addition to the former peltings, the greatest of all indignities by a man who, in the wantonness of beastliness, mounted a tree near the pulpit, and exposed his person to the Avhole congregation. Even this, however, did not disconcert the preacher, and he left the ground with unprecedented proofs of the triumph of the Gospel over sin. Once more, during these years, he visited Scotland, where he was the principal agent in the great revival at Cambuslang ; and once more he went through England and Wales, meeting, in many places, with an intense spirit of opposition, but in others with a glad and fer- vent reception. At Hampton, near Bristol, his pre- sence occasioned a riot ; at Axminster, the church bells were set in motion to stop him, and a clergyman asked him by what authority he preached ; at Kidder- minster, the bells were also rung; and at Plymouth, he was nearly assassmated. From this town he left again for America. The labours of the Wesleys during this period were not less incessant or arduous than those of Whitefield ; nor was the opposition to them less disgraceful. One or two clergymen had identified themselves with their work, and they were treated, notwithstanding their comparative obscurity, as the leaders of the movement themselves were treated. They were spoken of by the clergy at large " as if the devil, not God, had sent them." Some repulsed them from the Lord's table ; others stirred up the people against them, representing them, even in their public discourses, as " Felons not fit to [a.d. 1742.] JOSN WESLEY, 369 live,"* "Papists," "Heretics," "Traitors," "Conspira- tors against their King and country." The converts of these men encountered the same measure of obloquy. "They drove some of them," says Wesley, "from the Lord's table, to which, until now they had no desire to approach. They preached all manner of evil con- cerning them, openly cursing them in the name of the Lord."t The opposition to Wesley himself was more violent. At Epworth, where his father was incumbent for forty years, and where Wesley himself was born, he was refused the use of the church, and, by the drunl^en successor of Samuel Wesley, denied the Sacra- ment because he was "not fit." The greatest opposi- tion, however, was encountered in the Midland dis- tricts. At Wednesbury, Eggiston, the clergyman, incited the people to a riot, during which every Methodist— man and woman — who could be found was beaten, stoned, and pelted, and their houses dismantled. At Walsall, the mob, says Wesley, " roared at him like the roaring of the sea, and demanded his life." At Falmouth, his house was beset by an innumerable multitude, who wished to drag him out. But Wesley's courage and presence of mind never once deserted him. He would walk straight into the midst of the furious mob, ask what he had done to harm them, and at once begin to pray or preach. The w^orst and the most violent retreated before him. No men, indeed, ever possessed greater moral power than Wesley and White- field. Their looks were sufiicient to quail the angriest mobs. As though a Divine presence manifested itself, * Wesley's "Further Appeal." Coke's Life of Wesley," p. 218. t Vo. X " Joui-nal," JiUy 4, a.d. 1744. 24 370 CHABLES WESLEY. [a.d. 1742.1 men fell back before them, and allowed them to have their course. The history of Charles Wesley's labours is a similar history of personal zeal, and, to a considerable extent, of popular and official opposition. Although not so good a preacher as his brother John or as Whitefield, and although extremely uncertain in the command of his poAver, he produced the same effect upon the people. His first great tour was in the north of England, on his way to which he preached in almost every town. At Walsall he was attacked by the mob and stoned ; but, although hit several times, and twice dismounted from the steps of the market-place, where he was standing, he continued his service to the end, and then passed imhurt through the multitude. At Sheffield, to use his own language, " Hell from beneath was moved to oppose us." Here, too, he was stoned, and several of the mis- siles struck him in the face. The riot in this town raged throughout the night, and the meeting-house was pulled down by the mob to the foundations. Charles, who was even a higher Churchman than his brother, states that this riot was occasioned by sermons preached against the Methodists by the clergy of Sheffield.* The following day the rioters broke the windows of his lodging. His next tour was throughout the West of England and Cornwall. At Devizes, the curate led a mob against him, who played the fire-engine into his house, and broke the Avindows. Two influential Dis- senters assisted on this occasion. f At St. Ives, the meeting-house in which he preached was gutted by the miners, who, with clubs, in their hands, threatened him ♦ Stevens's " History of Methodism," i. 191. f Southey's " Life," cap. 14. [a.d. 1742.] CRARGE OF SCHISM. 371 with instant death if he preached again. This mob was headed by the town-clerk. At Poole, the churchwardens led the mob to where Charles Wesley was preaching, and drove him and his congregation from the parish.* None of these things, however, hindered him. The more they were opposed, the more these men saAv the necessity for their work. Opposition did nothing but increase their zeal. "Crucify him! " cried the mob of Wednesbury at John Wesley ; and there was not one of the three great evangeUsts who would not have braved even crucifixion in the discharge of his work. In almost every large town in England the leaders of Methodism had now made many converts. Whitefield had neither the inclination nor the natural faculty for organizing, either into societies or churches, those who had been influenced by his preaching. John Wesley, however, had both the incHnation and the faculty. Few men, in any age, have exceeded him in the skill of organization or the wisdom of administration. He re- solved, first, on the formation of societies. He met, at this point, with the objection that he was creating a schism. His answer to this, to himself at least, was conclusive. He acknowledged that if by schism was meant only "gathering people out of buildings called churches," he was creating a schism ; but if it meant dividing Chris- tians from Christians, it was not ; for his converts were not Christians before they joined the societies, and they did not separate from Christians, unless, indeed^ drunkards, swearers, liars, and cheats were Christians. * The vestry-books of Poole contain, to this day, a statement of the expenses incurred at an inn for drink to the mob and its leader, for driving out the Methodists. Smith's "History of Methodism," ii. 2. 24* S72 LAY PBE AGREES. [a.d. 1742.,] All that he did was to form those who were Christians into classes, appointing leaders to those classes, who were to watch over the conduct of every member. Over all the classes he exercised a personal superinten- dence, giving every consistent member a ticket or certificate of his satisfaction with his personal godliness. At the weekly meetings of the classes mutual confessions of sins and statements of religious experiences were appointed, and once a quarter a " love-feast " was held.* Societies being established, the question of preachers came next to be considered. Wesley had always thought that preachers would be supplied from the pulpits of the Established Church, but in this he was disappointed. There was no resource, therefore, but to use laymen for this service. Charles Wesley opposed this step with all his influence, and Wesley himself accepted the necessity with the greatest reluctance. At first the laymen were allowed only to read the Scriptures, but reading soon led to expounding, and expounding to preaching. The first who, in regular connection with the Society, preached, was a man named Thomas Maxfield, a member of the Moorfields Society. Wesley was absent from London at this time, but as soon as he heard that Maxfield was preaching he came up in great anger. He was met by his mother. " Thomas Maxfield has turned preacher, I find," said Wesley. Susanna Wesley — who had preached herself — replied, " John, you know what my sentiments have been ; you cannot suspect me of favour- ing readily anything of this kind; but take care what you do with respect to that young man, for he is as surely called of God to preach as you are. Examine * Coke's " Life of Wesley," 228—239. [a.d. 1743.] MAXFIELB AND NELSON. 373 what have been the fruits of his preaching, and judge for yourself." "Wesley did so, and then exclaimed, "It is the Lord, let him do what seemeth him good." After Maxfield others arose, some of them men of great natural genius and remarkable spiritual power. Amongst them John Nelson, a Yorkshire mason, holds the first place. Nelson was almost as abundant in labour and in suffering as the Wesleys, and his influence over the working classes, especially in Cornwall, was equal to that of Wesley himself. Nelson, also, met at the hands of the clergy and the worse part of the people the same recep- tion as Whitefield and the Wesleys. His house at Bristol was pulled down ; at Nottingham, squibs were thrown in his face ; at Grimsby, the rector headed a mob to the beat of the town drum, and, after supplymg them with beer, called upon them to " fight for the Church." Fighting for the Church meant the demolition of the house in which Nelson was residing, and its windows were forthwith pulled to pieces and the furniture destroyed.* The preaching of Nelson was of an extraordinary character. Thorough Yorkshire common sense, homely wit, and intense pathos were its characteristics. The drummer of Grimsby, who had been hired by the rector to beat down Nelson's preaching on the day after the riot, was one of the wit- nesses of its power. After beating for three quarters of an hour, he stood and listened, and soon the tears of penitence were seen rolling down his cheeks. Men who went to mob the mason-preacher, left him in agonies ot remorse. Not even Whitefield possessed more power over the common people. Without Nelson, and similar lay preachers, Methodism could not have been sustained * Nelson's " Journal," p. 92. 374 ORGANIZATION OF [a.d. 1744.] as it was. The seeds which the leaders of the movement sowed, were by these men carefully matured. The few grew into many ; here and there societies were added to those already existing, all, in course of time, to grow into regularly constituted Christian Churches. The organization of Methodism thus gradually as- suming shape and completeness, required but one addition to assimilate it to the conventional forms of established ecclesiastical governments. This addition was made in the year 1744. On the 25th of June in that year, Wesley summoned a conference of the clergymen and lay preachers who had identified themselves with the new movement. Six clergymen, and at least four lay preachers attended. Wesley had many objects in sum- moning this conference. One was to classify the various societies into circuits; another, to settle questions of government and discipline ; and a third, to come to an agreement respecting doctrine. The first and second were easily affected; the third was discussed at con- siderable length, but as all the men were of a catholic spirit, and recognized the Christianity of every Christian, whatever might be his creed, the conference made no shipwreck upon dogmatism. It was decided that the truth of the Gospel was very near both to Calvinism and to Arminianism, even "within a hair's breadth;" so that it was altogether fooHsh and sinful, because they did not quite agree with either one or the other, to run away from them as far as possible.* One of the questions asked at the conference was, " Are we not Dissenters ?" The answer was, " No. Although we call sinners to repentance in all places of God's dominion ; and although * Coke's " Life of Wesley," p. 275. La.d. 1744. 1 2IETH0DISM. 375 we frequently use extemporary prayer, and unite toge- ther in a religious society, yet we are not Dissenters in tlie onl^^ sense which our law acknowledges — namely, those who renounce the service of the Church. We do not, we dare not separate from it. We are not seceders, nor do we bear any resemblance to them. We set out upon quite opposite principles. The seceders laid the very foundation of their work in judging and condemnmg others. We laid the foundation of our work m judging and condemning ourselves. They begin everywhere with showing their hearers how fallen the Church and ministers are : we begin everywhere with showing our hearers how fallen they are themselves."* The refined self-righteousness with which the self-righteousness of others was thus condemned was consistent with the weaker side of John Wesley's character. When occasion served, as in defending his work from the charge of schism, he could show how " fallen" the Church and ministers were, in language which condemned them, by imphcation, to destruction. The character and the labours of this conference formed an era of Methodism. A body had been con- stituted which assumed to itself the direction of all the affairs of the societies, determined their doctrines, and assigned to the officers their duties and the mode in which they should be discharged. Wesley had summoned to this conference those only whom he chose to summon. He had thus kept it, and under the circumstances, no doubt wisely, in his own hands. But he had also esta- blished a precedent, and that precedent he took care, in after times, systematically to follow, * Coke's " Life of Wesley," p. 287. 376 CAUSES OF [a.d. 1744.] The opposition and the success which attended the Methodist movement were due to various, and in some respects opposite, causes. The Wesleys, throughout their lives, Avished to walk in harmony with the Church of which they were ordained members, yet from that very Church they encountered the most malignant persecution. All ranks of the clerical order, from the bishops down- wards, opposed them. One who had held intimate inter- course with the bishops of the Establishment remarks that he had been an ear-witness of the treatment which the Methodists received from that body, and that, in their common discourse, their language was not only below Episcopal dignity, but even inconsistent with common decency — an example which was followed through every rank down to the country curate.* John Wesley's own opinion of the difference between himself and the other clergy of his Church related to two ques- tions: first, of doctrine, and, secondly, of the paro- chial system. He maintained that his doctrine was entirely consistent with the articles and homilies of the Church ; but that, with regard to the clergy generally, he differed from them in five points. They, he said, confounded justification with sanctification, whereas he believed justification to be necessarily antecedent to sanctification; they spoke of being justified by works, whereas he believed that the death and righteousness of Christ were the sole causes of justification; they spoke of good works as a condition of justification, while he beheved that there could be no good works previously to a man's being justified ; they spoke of sanctification as if it were an outward thing : he believed it to be an * Archdeacon Blackburne's Works, i. 312. [a.d. 1744.] OPPOSITION. 377 iiiward thing — namely, the life of God in the soul of man, a participation in the divine nature, the renewal of the heart after the manner of Him that created mankind ; they also spoke of the new birth as an outward thing, as if it were no more than baptism : " I," he said, " believe it to be an inward thing, a change from inward wicked- ness to inward goodness, an entire change of our inward nature from the image of the devil (wherein we are born) to the image of God — a change from the love ot the creature to the love of the Creator, from earthly and sensual to heavenly and holy affections — in a word, a change from the tempers of the spirits of darkness to those of the angels of God in heaven." "There is, therefore," he added, " a wide, essential, fundamental, irreconcileable difference between us; so that if they speak the truth as it is in Jesus, I am found a false witness before God; but if I teach the way of God in truth, they are blind leaders of the blind." ■^' If "Wesley's description, in this case, was correctly dra"svn, as no doubt it was, there need be no wonder at the state of religion and morals at this period. For, according to his autho- rity, the clergy could have had no notion whatever ot what religion really was. Not only could they not have felt its power in their own hearts, but they could not have had a proper intellectual knowledge of it. And, if they had, they dared not have preached it, for their preaching would have condemned their own lives. Both the bishops and the clergy of this period were habitually non-resident; plm'alities had increased to a shameful degree, and the lives of country incumbents were often openly immoral. Whitefield and the Wesleys were a * "Journal," Sept. 13, 173^. -378 CRABACTEB OF THE CLERGY, [a.d. 1744.] living rebuke to all this class. Their preaching tended to expose their real character, and to bring them into •contempt. The vast numbers who listened to them, and the many who were converted through their instrumen- tality, would know, perfectly well, that their own parish ministers could have had no practical acquaintance with religion. Hence, one reason of the opposition which they encountered. The clergy dreaded the exposure of their real character. The new preachers virtually pronounced them to be either grossly ignorant or ^grossly hypocritical. They therefore stood on their de- fence, and, in return, proclaimed the Methodists to be nothing better, and probably worse, than enthusiasts and fanatics.* But this was not the only reason for the treatment which the leaders of the Methodist movement expe- rienced. They were Chuchmen, but they were not, in all things, obedient sons of the Church. A friend once, naturally enough, asked Wesley how it was that he assembled Christians who were none of his charge to sing psalms and pray, and hear the Scriptures expounded, and how he could justify doing this in other men's parishes ? Wesley rephed, "I know no other rule, whe- ther of faith or practice, than the Holy Scriptures. But on scriptural principles, I do not think it hard to justify what I do. God, in Scripture, commands me, according to my power, to instruct the ignorant, reform the wicked, confirm the virtuous. Man ' forbids me to do this in another man's parish ; that is, in effect, to do it at all, * The state of the clergy at this period has been most faithfully described by a recent Church historian, the Rev. G. G. Perry, in his " History of the Church of England," vol. iii. cap. xlii. Southey's description, in his eighth chapter of the " Life of Wesley," is almost too well known to need reference. [A.D. 1744.] THE PABOCSIAL ISTBTEM. 379 seeing that I have now no parish of my own, nor probably evershaU. Whom, then, shaU I hear-God or man ? Suffer me now to teU you my principles in this matter. I look upon aU the world as my parish ; thus far, I mean, that in whatever part of it I am, I judge it meet, right, and my bounden duty, to declare unto aU that are willing to hear, the glad tidings of salvation."* This was good Christianity, but it was clearly not, nor is it now, Church of Englandism. It is Dissent, and Dissent of the oldest form. The clergy were at least enlightened enough to be aware of this. The new preachers were invading their rights, and the invasion was resented. It is not necessary to ascribe a bad motive for this resent- ment. Whatever the clergy did not believe, they did believe in the constitution of the Established Church, and they had a moral, as well as a legal, right to protest against brother clergymen invading their parishes. ^ They were less to blame in t-his than their system; and if that system was so very bad, why did the Wesleys so con- stantly tell their hearers to attend their parish churches, and insist on the members of their societies partaking of the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Church? Another cause of opposition is to be found in the general condition of the people. If the clergy were ignorant and debased, the people were more so. It has been justly remarked, by an acute and philosophical writer, that the preaching of Wesley and Whitefield was a test of what the people had been previously taught or allowed to rejoice m as Christian truth, under the tuition of their great religious guardian, the National Church ; and, carrying with them this quahty of a test, how were * ''Journal," June nth, 1739. 380 CRABACTEB OF THE PEOPLE, [a.d. 1744.] those men received ? They were generally received on account of the import of what they said, still more than from their zealous manner of saying it, with as strong an impression of novelty and strangeness as any of our voyagers and travellers of discovery have been by the barbarous tribes who had never before seen civihzed men.* To the mass of the people, indeed, religion was almost unknown. Their morals were, for the most part, more degraded than those of beasts. Drunkenness was not merely not frowned upon : it was fashionable. " I remember," said Dr. Johnson, "when all the decent people in Lichfield got drunk every night, and were not thought the worse for it." f The people of Wales and Cornwall were little better than heathens — uninstructed by the clergy, whom they seldom saw, and who gave them no good example when they were seen, and so ignorant as to have scarcely the knowledge of a God. Such a people were ready enough to join in a riot against the Methodist leaders. Under the same guidance they would have joined in a riot against anyone and anything. The hatred of the clergy to the leaders was an intelligent hatred ; but that of the lower classes was an ignorant and brutish passion. When they listened, and came to understand or to feel what was being said to them, and why it was being said, they received the preachers with raptures and went out by thousands to welcome them. Their great human hearts then drank eagerly of the message of salvation. Before Whitefield and the Wes- leys went amongst them they were like a Sahara. No sooner did the rain of the Gospel descend upon them * Foster's " Essay on tlie Evils of Popular Iguoraiice," t Boswell's " Johnson," i. 340. [a.d. 1744] ATTITUDE OF BISSENTEBS. 381 than the desert became like unto a garden, and brought forth fruit unto perfection. The attitude of the Dissenters toward the new move- ment was, for the most part, one of calm observation. Their congregations were unquestionably in need of a revival of religion. The decay of piety was deplored on all sides. Joseph Stennett, the principal minister amongst the Baptists of this period, has left a vivid picture of the times in which he lived. Infidelity, he remarks, was making an amazing progress ; the Gospel was being reduced to only a few lectures on morality ; practical iniquity was keeping pace with the corrup- tions of doctrine, and there was nothing but a melan- choly prospect to all the friends of true religion.* The whole land, he publicly declared, was corrupted with blasphemy and profaneness, mth drunkenness and lewdness, with fraud and perjury. Those who had separated themselves in profession, from the positively wicked, were filling up the cup of national guilt ; ordi- nances were despised and neglected, religious conversa- tion was changed for fashionable and vicious entertain- ments, and family religion was laid aside.f It might have been supposed that, under such circumstances, the advent of the Methodist leaders would have been eagerly welcomed ; but there was more than one cause of hindrance to this. The scenes which took place during the preaching of Whitefield and the Wesleys induced many persons to hesitate in acknowledging their mission. The Wesleys also were bitter opponents of Dissent. Charles, who was always " harping on the Established * " The Christian Strife." A Sermon, etc., a.d. 1738. t *' Eabshakeh's Retreat." A Sermon, etc., a.d. 1745. 382 ATTITVBE OF DISSENTERS. [a.d. 1744.] Church," remarked that he would sooner see his children Koman Catholics than Protestant Dissenters. He applied, publicly, in one of his sermons, the shipwreck of Paul to the difficulty of being saved out of the Church of Eng- land.* Charity for sinners he had to a large extent, but no charity whatever for any Christian who was not a member of his own church. It was impossible for Dissenters to receive such a man with the good feeling which a less sectarian course would have excited. There was no such difficulty, however, with Whitefield. White- field often avowed his attachment to the Church, but he was as far removed from a bigot as any man of his time. "I exhort all," he -wrote to Howel Harris, "to go where they can profit most. I preach what I believe to be the truth, and then leave it to the Spirit of God to make the application, "f While, therefore, the Wesleys were received with coolness by the Dissenters, White- field often met from them the warmest welcome. When he was driven from preaching near the church at Kidderminster, the Baptist chapel was opened for him. He took counsel of Watts, and held friendly intercourse with Doddridge. " I have lately," wi'ote James Hervey, one of the Oxford " Holy Club," and a well-known writer, "seen that excellent minister of the blessed Jesus, Mr. Whitefield : I dined, supped, and spent the evening with him at Northampton, in company with Dr. Doddridge. "+ Doddridge also lent Whitefield his chapel. No coarse disparagement of the labours of these men is to be found in the writings of any of the Dissenters of this period. When Methodism was * Everett's "Life of Adam Clarke, i. 83. t Andrew's " Life of Whitefield," p. 147. % Ibid. p. 240. [A.D. 1744.] OAUSIJS OF SUCGUSS. 38a better known, and its results well attested, they gladly acknowledged the good which it had effected. The causes of the success of the new movement need not be sought from afar. It is mainly to be attributed, as a matter of instrumentahty, to the remarkable cha- racters of those who conducted it. Its origination was owing to Whitefield. He was not the first of the " Holy Club," but he was the first who adopted aggres- sion as a principle of Christian effort. The earnestness of John Wesley would, no doubt, have compelled him, in course of time, to have had recourse to open-air preaching as a means, and as the only means, of reaching the people ; but Wesley, with all his enthusiasm, was a man of cautious and deliberate judgment, and, unless Whitefield had set the example, would have hesitated, for some time, in taking the first step in such an innovation on the established order of his Church, Whitefield had no caution. He was the impersonation of religious ardour. The preaching of the Gospel was, to him, not a duty merely, but a divine passion. This passion gave to it a character such as has been possessed by no other Christian orator. It was not that his sentences were well constructed, his periods well balanced, his empha- sis accurate, and his language forcible : some of these desirable but minor qualifications he did not possess in an equal degree with other great orators. But the man himself gave to every word which he uttered a character which no other man could give. Baptized by the Spirit of God ; his whole heart yearning for the recovery of lost souls as a mother yearns for the return of a prodigal son ; alive, from intense experience, both to the horrors of sin and the delights of holiness, he 384 CRABACTEB OF WHITEFIELD. [a.d. 1744.] pleaded his Saviour's cause with a love for Him and those with whom he pleaded, which made him seem, for a time, like one possessed. He was endowed with most of the attributes of a great pubhc speaker. Though not high in stature, and, in the first years of his work, of slight and delicate frame, his exquisitely musical voice could be distmguished at a mile's distance, and by every one of forty thousand persons in the open air. In gesture and action he equalled the most distin- guished professors of the dramatic art, and his oratory was as spontaneous as it was powerful. Although he often preached sixteen times a week, he was never known, after his earliest efforts, to study a sermon. His printed sermons are loose, and, to some extent, inaccurate in style, and no adequate conception of his genius can be obtamed from them. His most impassioned bursts of eloquence came, and seemed to come, as an inspiration. Numerous anecdotes of his power over his audiences have been preserved by those who heard him. They wept as he wept, and visibly trembled with terror when he described the judgments of the Almighty. So vivid were his descriptions, and so dramatic his action, that he would make a whole cono-reoation look around as thouo-h seeking the things which he described. His greatest weaknesses were irritability and hastiness. He was not, like Wesley, a wholly self-controlled man. But he was a warmer-hearted and a more generous man than "Wesley, and he had the most catholic and unselfish temper of any of the Methodist leaders. Not, however, by any natural gift did he acquire his marvellous power over the human heart. He spent whole nights in prayer ; and although he invariably rose at foiu' in the morning, [A.3). 1744.] WESLEJ AND WHITEFIELB. 385 he would often, in the course of the night, get up to read and pray. But if Whitefield gave to the new movement its first and greatest impulse, John Wesley was, unquestionably, its head and leader. Young though all these men were, their characters were fixed and formed when they commenced their work. The intensity of their religious experience had given to them a maturity which other men scarcely acquire when they reach to middle life. What John Wesley was at thirty he was, with scarcely any change, at eighty years of age. With an intellect keen, clear, and logical ; a judgment whose balance was almost perfect; a will as strong as steel; cool and self-possessed, yet ardent and even enthusiastic, and an able administrator, he was, above all men, qualified to be the founder and the organizer of a new religious sect. But he added other and still greater qualities to these. He was a man capable of the most rapt devotional feelings ; he possessed a conscience that never swerved from its sense of right; personal self- denial and self-sacrifice he counted as nothing; what would have been privation to others, was a rule of his life ; hunger and thirst he endured with indifference ; work which would have kiUed stronger men in a few months, brought to him no sense of weariness. Through all he felt himself to be upborne by the Divine arm, and he cared for nothing so long as he was doing his Master's will. In most respects Wesley was an entirely different preacher from Whitefield. The characteristic difference consisted in the fact that Whitefield was mainly a preacher to the passions, and Wesley to the consciences, of men. Whitefield aroused the half- 25 386 CRAJRACTEB OF CRABLES WESLEY, [a.d. 1744] dead soul by appealing to its fear, and hope, and love ; Wesley, by stating the Divine claims, and the corres- ponding human obligations. Whitefield would make men feel, Wesley would prove them, to be in the wrong. The style of their addresses was as different as was the substance. Whitefield was loose, inconsequen- tial, dramatic, and declamatory; Wesley was chaste, accurate, and logical. There was a difference, also, of tone. Whitefield had the finer human feelings and the more tender aff'ections ; Wesley the greater intel- lectual power and moral force. Whitefield could not have been a bigot ; Wesley never wholly freed himself from an ecclesiasticism which, while it cannot be confounded with bigotry, is nearly allied to it. The Spirit of God, however, possessed in perhaps an equal degree, both of these great but very different men. The same audiences heard them with equal dehght and equal profit. They had sought perfect spiritual cha- racter, and spiritual power was given to them in greater measure than it had ever been given to any men since the first day of Pentecost. Charles Wesley was, in all respects but one, the inferior of both these men. He was narrow, exclusive, and priestly. He could preach occasionall}^ if not often, with marvellous power and unction; but as a speaker he was extremely unequal. On one day his sermon would be instinct with eloquent thought and moving pathos ; on another, it would be dry, cold, spirit- less, and childish. He was, however, of great assistance to his brother, although sometimes, from his priestly dogmas, of greater hindrance. Apart from his brother, Charles Wesley would probably have been known only [a.d. 1744.] LIBEBALITY OF METHODISM. 387 as a learned, zealous, spiritual, and active clergyman, of great intellectual capability and great poetic power, but he would never have performed the work which he did, and never have enjoyed the reputation which has actually followed him. It was at the beginning of the Methodist movement, that, in conjunction with his brother, he published his first hymns. Here he far excelled both of his coadjutors; and in depth and warmth of devotional feeling has excelled most other Christian hymnologists. Such were the men who, excepting for the most part by the common people, were now everywhere spoken against. Yet they were successful. But, apart from their characters, one especial cause of success attended them. The Arminianism of the Wesleys and the Calvinism of "Whitefield divided the men from each other for a brief season, but none ever hved who were more tolerant of theological differences. In the first year or two of his preaching, Wesley could not leave the doctrines of election and reprobation alone, but afterwards he preached few formally theological discourses. It was his boast, in later life, that the Methodist societies were founded on a more liberal basis than any Christian church. " They do not impose," he said, " any opinions whatever. People might hold particular or general redemption, absolute or conditional decrees. They think and let think." * " Look all around you," he added, at another period ; " you cannot be admitted mto the Church, or society of the Presbyterians, Ana- baptists, Quakers, or any others, unless you hold the same opinions with them, and adhere to the same mode * "Works," vii. 321. 25* 388 METHODISM AMONGST [a.d, 1744.] of worship. The Methodists alone do not insist on your holding this or that opinion. . . . Now I do not know any other religious society, either ancient or modern, wherein such Uberty of conscience is now allowed, or has been allowed, since the age of the apostles. Here is our glorymg, and a glorying pecuHar to us." It was so; and none amongst the secondary causes of their success contributed to it more than this spirit. The spiritual influence of the Methodist leaders was not, however, confined to the lower classes. Through the influence of the Countess of Huntingdon they were brought into immediate contact mth a large section of the aristocracy. This celebrated lady, after having been a frequent attendant, mth her husband, on the preaching of the Wesleys and Whitefield, took Whitefield under her especial patronage. Defying all ecclesiastical order, she engaged the preacher to hold sersdces in her own residence, which the nobility were invited to attend. They accepted the invitation in great numbers. Amongst those who heard him were the Earl of Chesterfield, Viscount Bolingbroke, the Duke of Argyle, the Earl of Aberdeen, the Duchess of Montagu, Lord Lyttelton, the Duke of Kingston, Mr. Pitt, and most of those who formed the Court of the Prince of Wales.* With some of these Whitefield maintained an affectionate in- tercourse through life, and was of eminent use to them. To his preaching and the work of the Countess, may be ascribed the revival of religion m the aristocracy as well as in the common people. Few women have ever deserved a noble fame so fully * Life and Times of Selina, Countess of Huntingdon," vol. i. cap. vii. [a.d. 1744.] THE ABISTOCBAGT. 389 as the widowed Countess who had undertaken to bring the claims of religion, urged by the most eloquent and powerful of preachers, before the members of her own section of society. Herself of high lineage, and inti- mately connected by marriage with the most conspicu- ous noble families, she had an opportunity of religious service of which she took advantage to the utmost extent. Although the tone of thought amongst the aristocracy was especially unfavourable to the culture of the religious character, and extraordinary piety was generally identified with extraordinary ignorance and fanaticism, the Countess lost, by her fidelity and zeal, little, if any, of her social influence. She might be smiled at, and be made the butt of a few town wits, but the strength, thoroughness, and sincerity of her character generally secured for her the utmost respect. Her most intimate friends were women of her own circle and family. Next to these ranked Whitefield, the few clergy of the Established Church, such as Romaine, Venn, and Howel Harris, who were classed mth the Methodist party, some of the lay preachers, and, amongst Dissenters, Dr. Dod- dridge, who was her constant correspondent and fre- quent guest. She adopted Whitefield rather than either, or both of the Wesleys, because Whitefield was a Cal- vinist. She could not, indeed, have worked long with John Wesley, for she had many of the intellectual characteristics of the founder of Arminian Methodism. Her faculty of organization was almost equal, and her strength of will quite equal to that of Wesley's own. She saw, with Wesley, that organization was necessary to the permanence of the results which were being pro- duced by the new preaching. She had wealth, influence, 390 THE COVNTESS OF HUNTINGDON, [a.d. 1744.] capacity, and time to frame this organization, and she framed it. She founded colleges — Trevecca and Cheshunt, — she built places of worship), she appointed ministers and she sent out evangelists, and, although in different respects, aided in founding two denominations — the Calvinistic Methodist of Wales, and the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion in England. The latter, owing to many influences, has since become almost identified with the Congregational body. Like Wesley, the Countess had no intention of leaving the Established Church, but she had more moral courage than Wesley in respect to Church laws and ordinances. She saw no difference of species between a layman and a clergyman, and she saw no reason why, when Christians met together, they should not celebrate the Lord's Supper. Her societies, there- fore, became organized for all religious and ecclesiastical purposes much more quickly than those which Wesley directed. Wesley warded the pain of separation from himself; the Countess felt it in her lifetime. When it came, in the shape of a legal decision which compelled her to certify her buildings under the Toleration Act, she exclaimed, " I am to be cast out of the Church now, only for what I have been doing these forty years — speaking and living for Jesus Christ."* How was it that she did not remember that almost all religious earnest- ness, from that of early Puritanism, had met with a similar fate ? How could she have expected to escape ? When the early Methodists appeared, religious life was dying out of England. Even Dissent seemed to have lost its spiritual force, and, with it, its power of aggression. It had, apparently, almost done the work * Stevens's " History of Methodism," ii. 100. [A.D. 1744.] PUBLIC SEBVICB OF METHODISM. 391 which had been committed it to do. In its first period it had fought for spiritual liberty, and had won that hardest of all human battles. In its second period it had saved the country from arbitrary power. States- men and people, ecclesiastics and laymen, had now been brought round to a practical recognition of its service to the [politics, the intellect, and the conscience of the nation. Through it, the English people had grown to a broader type of thought than it would have been possible for them otherwise to have possessed ; for the doctrines of political liberty, of resistance to arbitrary power, and of the rights of conscience, were either the characteristic doctrines of Dissenters, or they were the natural consequences of them. But it seemed impossible to make any farther advance. The obstacle to this was to be removed by the infusion of a new religious hfe into the churches. For, in proportion as men and nations grow in religious, do they grow in political liberty. Neither is the offspring of indifference, but of behef. When, and not until that time, the churches had been baptized anew by the Spirit of God, did they once more seek for the extension of civil freedom and religious equality. The power to attain this is ultimately to be traced to the Methodist movement. CHAPTER VI. THE REVIVAL OF EELIGION IN WALES. Reference has more than once been made, in the course of this History, to the state of religion in the Principality of Wales, and the efforts of several godly and zealous men to effect some improvement in the moral and spiritual condition of the remarkable people who have inhabited that portion of the British Islands. Like Ireland, Wales had suffered not only from the fact of its being a conquered country, but from its being inhabited by a race alien to the origin and the language of the conquerors. Probably no people placed in similar circumstances had so steadily or so success- fully preserved their national characteristics as the people of Wales. It may be said that, for centuries, the land only — the bare earth on which they had lived — was kept in subjugation, for the spirit of the nation had undergone no change. They were never effectually conquered by Imperial Rome ; they never, as members of the ancient British Church, bowed the neck to Papal Rome. The strong hand of the Normans was employed for two centuries before the native government was set aside; and when, at last, the last Welsh prince was defeated, all the civil rights of the conquerors were made the rights also of the conquered. [a.d. 1588.] BELIGION IN WALES. 395 After the Eeformation, so far as religion was con- cerned, the Welsh, also like the Irish, were treated with a studied and contemptuous neglect. Their ecclesiastical revenues were, to a great extent, appro- priated to the augmentation of the revenues of the Church of England or bestowed upon English laymen. Englishmen, to whom the Welsh language was as unknown as Syriac or Sanscrit, were appointed to bishoprics, rectories, vicarages, and even curacies. These men necessarily ministered to fractions only of the people. But they were, for the most part, inca- pable of giving any spiritual instruction, for in morals they were as licentious as in religion they were ignorant. Towards the end of the sixteenth century, John Penry, the martyred apostle of Wales, described the clergy as "unlearned dolts," "drunkards" and " adulterers." At that time, a Bishop of St. Asaph held, in addition to the revenues of his see, sixteen livings in commendam, and only three incumbents in all the diocese resided upon their livings.* "Ye bishops of Wales," cried Penry, "seeing, you yourselves know, and all Wales knoweth, that you have admitted into this sacred foundation rogues, vagabonds gadding about the country under the name of scholars ; spend- thrifts and starving men, that made the ministry their last refuge: seeing you permit such to be in the minis- try as are known adulterers, known thieves, roisterers, most abominable swearers, even the men of whom Job speaketh, who are more vile than the earth, do you not say that the Lord's service is not to be regarded? "'f' * Strype's Annals. Quoted in Eees's " Nonconformity in Wales," p. 5. -j- "Penry's Exhortation," a.d. 1588, ib. p. 7. 394f RELIQICN IN WALES. [a.d. 1740.] In the middle of the seventeenth century, the Rev. Rees Pritchard, Vicar of Llandovery, said that it would be difficult to decide whether the clergyman, the farmer, the labourer, the artizan, the bailiff, the judge, or the nobleman Avas the most darmg in iniquity.* The picture of the state of the nation nearly a hundred years later was drawn in almost equally dark colours. The Rev. Thomas Charles, of Bala, thus describes it :— " In those days the land was dark indeed. Hardly any of the lower ranks could read at all. The morals of the country were very corrupt; and in this respect there was no difference between gentle and simple, layman and clergyman; gluttony, drunkenness, and licentious- ness, prevailed throughout the whole country. Nor were the operations of the Church at all calculated to repress these evils. From the pulpit the name of the Redeemer was hardly ever heard ; nor was much mention made of the natural sinfulness of man, nor of the influence of the Spirit. Every Sabbath there was what was called ' Achwaren-gamp ; ' a sort of sport in which all the young men of the neighbourhood had a trial of strength, and the people assembled from the surrounding country to see the feats. In every corner of the town some sport or other went on till the light of the Sabbath day had faded." f Durmg this long period a few men had, like the prophets of Judah, hfted up their voices for their God. Besides Penry in the reign of Elizabeth, and Vavaseur Powell, in the time of the Commonwealth, three Welsh clergymen, William Wroth, rector of Llanvaches, Rees * Pritchard's " Welshman's Candle," ib. t " The Trysorfa," a.d. 1799. Quoted in PhiHp's " Life of Wliitefield." [a.d. 1638.] WILLIAM WBOTH, 395 Pritchard, vicar of Llandovery, and Walter Cradock, stood conspicuous as shining lights in the spiritual darkness in which the nation was enveloped. Wroth was born in a.d. 1570, and was almost the first preaching incumbent in Wales.* From a man of gay and frivolous temperament he had suddenly become absorbed in the importance of the Divine message to mankind. His natural eloquence, his fervour of address, and his un- wearied zeal soon made his name known throughout his native country. But he was guilty of ecclesiastical irregularities. When his church would not hold the people who went to hear him he preached in the church- yard, for which offence he was called to account by his diocesan, who angrily inquired of him how he dared to violate the rules of the Church ? Wroth, it is said, repHed, with tears in his eyes, by calling the bishop's attention to the spiritual ignorance of the people and the necessity of employing every means to remove it, a reply which, for the time, availed. But he added to this offence the crime of refusing to read the " Book of Sports." Dragged afterwards, by Laud, before the Court of High Commission, he was summarily deprived of his benefice. Such a man was not likely to suffer mere ecclesiastical regulations or Episcopal prohibitions to influence his conduct. He still, therefore, continued to preach from house to house, and from town to town, and in a.d. 1638 founded, at Llanvaches, a Church on the Congregational model. He died in four years afterwards, leaving a reputation eminent for its sanctity, a title, " the blessed apostle of South Wales," of the highest spiritual rank, * J ohnes's " Essay on the causes which have produced Dissent from the Established Church in the Principality of Wales," p. 6. 396 BEES PBITCHABD. [a.d. 1633.] and a work which time can never destroy nor his coun- trymen forget. Rees Pritchard, or, as he was more familiarly styled, " Vicar Pritchard," was, if equally eminent in piety, not so unfortunate in respect to his ecclesiastical relation- ships. It happened that the Earl of Essex, when in his minority, resided near Llandovery, where Pritchard was born, and to his protection the vicar probably owed his immunity from persecution. His popularity was not less than that of Wroth. Vast multitudes went to hear him preach, and even the Cathedral of St. David's was not large enough to contain the hearers. Pritchard therefore preached in the open air, and, as in Wroth's case, a charge was immediately preferred against him in the Ecclesiastical Court. He escaped punishment, but did not relinquish his labours. The tradition of Pritchard's labours has descended from generation to generation of his countrymen, amongst whom his name, at the end of more than two centuries, is still held in veneration: But he established other claims upon their gratitude than those belonging to a zealous preacher of the Gospel. He was the " Welsh Watts." His religious poetry is one of the most prized inheritances of his nation. No book in the Welsh language, it is said, excepting the Bible, has had so extensive a circulation ; and, at one time, wherever the Holy Scriptures were to be found, there also was to be found the volume of ""Pritchard's Poems."* Walter Cradock, who was born in the early part of the seventeenth century, was a disciple of Wroth's, and im- bibed from his spiritual teacher something of his zeal * Johnes's " Essay," &c., pp. 12, 15. Eees's "Nonconformity," pp. 30, 36. [A.D. 1633.] WALTER CRABOCK. 397 and his independence. But these qualities were, at that time, an offence m the eyes of the ecclesiastical authori- ties. For refusing to read the "Book of Sports," he was ejected by the Bishop of Llandaff, in a.d. 1633, from his first curacy, at Cardiff. From thence he went to "Wrexham, where his eloquence drew crowds from the country around to hear him, and where his labours effected a signal reformation in the manners of the people. But before he had been there a year he was driven away. He is found, after this, at Llanvaire, from whence he made evangelistic excursions through all the neighbouring counties of North Wales. In the time ot the Commonwealth, he became a Congregationalist, and zealously defended the right of private judgment.* A hundred years after his death, the aged people amongst the Dissenters of the principality still talked of Walter Cradock.f Excepting these men, scarcely any appeared until just before the rise of Methodism to enlighten the people concerning the Divine revelation to mankind, and these — the forerunners of Welsh Dissent — were fro^vned upon by all the ecclesiastical authorities. In common with both the earlier and the later Puritans, they were com- pelled to break through established rules, or to see the people die in their sins; and the judgment of those who ivere set over them was, that it was better that people should die in their sins than that one iota of the canon law, or the smallest of the rubrics should be broken. The success and the popularity of Wroth, Pritchard, and Cradock, apart from their religious characters, were partly * Rees's " Nonconformity," pp. 51, 59. t Thomas's History of the Baptist Associations in Wales, p. 3. 398 8U0CUSS OF EABLY FBEACREBS. [a.d. 1633.} due to the fact, that they were eminently representative Welshmen. The Enghsh kicumbents, and their English curates, had they been, what they were not, fit men ta preach a pure religion, could never have touched the hearts of the people. One of their own nation was needed to speak and to plead with them ; and, as it has ever been since Christianity was first revealed, no sooner was it placed before them than thousands joyfully ac- cepted it. It is not, however, necessary to suppose that the spiritual rulers of the people were altogether averse to their becoming a religious people. Tor the most part, they simply cared nothing about them. They, no doubt, recognized the fact that those who actually became sub- ject to religious influences did not appear to possess that attachment to the Church, as by law estabUshed, which they preferred them to possess even at the risk of their personal salvation. But, on the other hand, they thought lio-htly of the doctrine of a new heart, and a new life. If the people had been " baptized," what more could they require ? Men hke Wroth, Pritchard, and Cradock, were considered enthusiasts, who were dangerous to the peace- able, if stagnant, order of things. If the religious sen- timent should grow, there would be an end of non-resi- dent Bishops living upon the proceeds of dozens of liv- ings, and of non-resident incumbents who never saw their parishioners. The State was equally indiiFerent, and was not animated by any loftier principles, than the hierarchy. If it had been, it would never have suffered the appointment of English prelates to Welsh dioceses, and never have overlooked the scandalous neglect of their duties of which the ecclesiastical officers of the Crown were habitually guilty. It would, at least, have [a.d. 1731.] GBIFFITR JONES. 399 seen that men fit for their peculiar work were sent to discharge that work. The native Welsh, or ancient British race, has always been marked by three character- istics,— an ardent imagination, and warmth and activity of feeling. No people are more susceptible to the beauties of poetry or the charms of popular oratory, and none are more easily moved by appeals to the religious affections. Nor is the sentiment of nationality more deeply fixed, or more universally distributed amongst any of the Celtic race — where this sentiment seems to last long-er than in any other race — than it is amongst the descendants of the earliest inhabitants of Britain. To this people, preachers, such as they were, were sent, who could have had no feelings in common with their parishioners. A warm and highly imaginative race was expected, if any- thing whatever was expected, to be influenced by the comparatively cold, hard, and matter of fact manner of the ordinary Englishman. A race who had stored up in their memories the traditions of centuries of an inde- pendent national life, was expected to be influenced by men who despised the very name of Welshmen, and altogether ignored the national tongue. What wonder if such a people ultimately turned, almost as a whole nation, from a Church which had treated them, from the year of its birth, as aliens and outcasts, rather than as brethren and sons ?* In the early part of the eighteenth century another clergyman arose, whose labours were probably of even greater practical benefit to his countrymen than those of * The causes of dissent in Wales have been most exhaustively treated by two Churchmen, the Eev. A. J. Johnes, in the " Essay" which has al- ready been quoted in the text, and by Sir Thomas^Phillips, in his very com- prehensive work on " Wales." 400 GEIFFITH JONES. [a.d. 1761.] any of his predecessors. This was the Rev. Griffith Jones, incumbent of Llandeilo and Llandouror. To this eminent man belongs the honour of establishing, long before Bell and Lancaster were born, a system of popular day-school education in Wales. Finding his own parish- ioners deficient in information upon the ordinary subjects of Christian doctrine and conduct, he founded a school for their benefit. The advantage of such an institution soon being made evident, he thought of the great good which would result if "a well organized system of schools " was established throughout Wales. Aided by contributions from friends, he began to put into execu- tion such a scheme. His plan was to engage travelling schoolmasters, who should visit town after town, stopping in each as long as their services were required, and re- visiting them from time to time. In order to procure proper teachers, he founded a teachers' seminary, to which he would admit none but apparently rehgious persons, the majority of whom, it appears, were Noncon- formists. In A.D. 1741, or about ten years after their establishment, a hundred and seventy-eight of these schools had been conducted during the year. The result was soon apparent. Intelligence improved, man- ners became more civihzed, and churches were better attended. Twenty years after this, when death put an end to the labours of this devoted and active philan- thropist, the number of schools which had been esta- blished, at different times, and in various places in Wales, amounted to three thousand four hundred and ninety- five, and the number of scholars taught to more than a hundred and fifty thousand, or at least a third of the whole population of Wales. By far the larger number [a.d. 1725.] KOWEL RABBIS. 401 of the scholars in these " circulating schools " were adults, who lamented, with tears, that they " had not had an op23ortunity of learning forty or fifty years sooner." When Griffith Jones died he left, as has been well said, " in the religious regeneration, and the religious gratitude, of a nation of mountaineers, a memorial, which will be envied most by those who are at once the proudest and the humblest of mankind." His work, however, met with much clerical opposition, and the bishops of "Wales did not give him the least countenance.* In the early period of the patriotic labours of this man, a young preacher, of the name of Howel Harris, a native of Trevecca, appeared amongst the people. Harris had been to the University of Oxford, but had left it in consequence of the immorality of the place. Having been refused orders, because he had preached as a layman, he began, on his return home, to address the people in the open air and in private houses. " After my return" (which was m a.d. 1725), he says, " I was occupied in going from house to house, until I had visited the greatest part of my native parish, toge- ther with those of neighbouring ones. The people now began to assemble by vast numbers, so that the houses wherein we met could not contain them. The Word was attended with such power that many on the spot cried out to God for pardon of their sins. Family wor- ship was set up in many houses, and the churches, as far as I had gone, were crowded, and likewise the Lord's table. It was now high time for the enemy to make a stand in another manner ; therefore he not only influenced the populace to revile and persecute me, but * Johnes's "Essay," pp. 15, 25. 26 402 JSOJVJEL HABBIS. [a.d. 1715.] caused the magistrates and clergy to bestir themselves — the former to threaten me, and such as would receive me to their houses, with fines ; while the latter showed their indignation, and used their endeavours to discou- rage me by other means. By this time I gained acquaintance with several Dissenters, who kindly re- ceived me to their houses." In order to maintain the work which he had thus commenced, Harris proceeded to establish religious societies. " This," he says, "was before any other society of the kind was established m England or Wales, the English Methodists not being yet heard of." There can be no doubt, in fact, that as the system of popular education was established in Wales before it was established in England, so also the system of religious " societies " was established in Wales by Howel Harris before it was established m England by John Wesley. When Howel Harris commenced his work, Dissent in Wales existed only in the most insignificant proportions. The number of Dissentini]: cono-resrations in the whole principality and the county of Monmouth, in the year 1715, was about one hundred and ten, and the actual attendants not much more than twenty-five thousand persons.* Of these the majority were Congregationalists a,nd Presbyterians ; the rest belonged to the Baptists und the Society of Friends. Most of these Churches had sprung from the labours of AVroth, Pritchard, and •Cradock. There is a vague tradition that a Baptist Church existed at Olchon in the year 1633, and such traditions have usually some sort of fact for their basis ; but the first Baptist Church, the origin of which can be * Rees's "Nonconformity," etc.," pp. 292, 293. [a.d. 1736.] 8TATE OF RELIGION. 403 clearly ascertained, was founded at Ilston, near Swansea, in the year 1649. The pastor of this Church, John Myles, was the first who maintained, in Wales, the prac- tice of unmixed communion* In a.d. 1736 there were only twelve Baptist Churches in the Principality, and five years later only fifteen. f In the few Churches con- nected with the various bodies of Dissenters there was an earnest religious life, but they exercised comparatively little influence upon the character of the nation at large. Before the rise of Methodism — that is to say, before the preaching of Howel Harris — the Churches were " little attended by the great mass of the people," and "indif- ference to all religion prevailed as widely as Dissent" has since pre vailed. J Harris himself says that, with the generality of the people, public worship being over, the remaining part of the Sunday was spent in indulging in the prevailing corruptions of nature ; that all family wor- ship was laid aside, except among some of the Dissenters, " while an universal deluge of swearing, lying, reviling, drunkenness, fighting, and gaming had overspread the country, and that the clergy themselves were evidently not m earnest in their work."§ The labours of Harris soon excited not only the atten- tion of his own people, but the notice of the Methodist party in England. Whitefield put himself in communi- cation with him ; Wesley went to Wales and saw him, and the Countess of Huntins^don also visited him. He now extended his labours ; and all through Wales his voice was heard as that of a prophet crying in the * Thomas's "History," etc., p. 5. f lb., pp. 43, 45. X Morgan's " Life of Howel Harris," p. 12. § Johnes's "Essay," pp.26, 27. 26* 404. STATE OF RELIGION. [a.d. 1749.] wilderness. He met, in many places, with the same treatment that the founders of Methodism in England received. He was mobbed, stoned, and often in danger of his life. At Machynlleth, where he was assailed by a mob, headed by the local attorney and the parish clergy- man, a pistol was fired at him, and he was driven with sticks and stones from the to"\vn. At Newport the stones flew about his head, and he was considerably injured. At Caerleon he was pelted with dung, eggs, and dirt. At Monmouth a dead dog, m addition to other missiles, was flung at him. Near Bala the incum- bent rushed upon him with an uplifted club ; the mob threatened him with death, and he was beaten and trampled upon until he was almost senseless. In Car- narvonshire he heard himself denounced by the chan- cellor of the diocese as a muiister of the de\al ; and when the chancellor called upon the people to rise up against such a man, he was hunted from the church and the town.* Mr. Perrott, the curate of Bedwelly and Mynyddislyn, A\Tote to him as follows : — " I am sur- prised at the liberty you take of coming to my curacies. . . . You must recede, or else yourself and the person or persons that have invited or sent for you, must expect that just resentment due for unlawful practices. "f But in almost all places that he -sdsited his preaching was successful. By-and-by some clergj-men took part with him, and a band was organized, resembling, in some manner, Wesley's band in England. Writing in a.d, 1749, Harris relates that every day for seven years, in ail weathers, and generally out of doors, he had preached three or four, and frequently * " Stevens's History," ii. 72, 75. f Eees's " Nonconformity, etc," p. 366. [a.d. 1749.] WILLIAM WILLIAMS. 405 five times, travelling from place to place, from ten to thirty miles a day. Although he had not received orders in the Established Church, he strenuously adherecl to its communion. He says that, for this, he was blamed by people of all denominations, and when he found some of his converts becoming Dissenters he thought it his duty " to declare against them." What he, in common with the leaders of the EngHsh Methodists, desired was that all those who were mfluenced by his preaching should remain members of the Established Church, but the progress of events effectually frustrated this intention. If the necessity for greater freedom of religious action than could be obtamed in the Church had not compelled the disciples of Harris and of his coadjutors to separate from it, the animosity which was felt towards them by its rulers, and which found expression in almost every Charge which came from their pens, would have been sufficient to cause an alienation, at first of temper, and ultimately of formal communion. The conduct of Harris was undoubtedly inconsistent. He was a law unto himself, or rather his conscience sat in judgment on the ecclesiastical regulations of the Church of which he was a member, and unhesitatingly rejected those which stood in his path as a preacher of the Gospel. This was actual Dissent, and accordingly "Welsh, like English Methodism, terminated in secession from the religion established by law. It was not long before Harris found coadjutors. Amongst these William Williams, of Penty-Celyn, stood eminent. He had been a licensed curate, but having committed the grave offence of preaching in other parishes than his own, was refused orders. Thencefor- 406 DANIEL ROWLANDS. [a.d. 1763.] ward he devoted himself to itinerant preaching ; and in- A.D. 1716 took the bold step of administering the com- munion in a Welsh Methodist chapel. It is stated that in the course of his journeys Williams travelled a dis- tance equal to four times the circumference of the earth. He was a man of an intense devotional spirit, united to an ardent poetical feeling. He, also, adhered to the Established communion. Contemporary with Williams was Daniel Rowlands, of Nant-cwnlle and Llangeitho, who, after preaching thirty years, was ultimately (about a.d. 1763) ejected from the Church for preaching in unconsecrated places, and for visiting other parishes than his o^vn. The ministry of Rowlands appears to have been one of almost unsur- passed power. The church at Llanddewi-hefi, which he served with his curacies, would contain three thou- sand persons, and was filled in every part. The strength of feeling and the degree of personal attachment to himseK, which he excited, is indicaied by the fact that persons would follow him from one church to another on the Sunday, and return home without having taken food from Sunday morning until Monday morning. After his ejection, Rowlands preached in a large place of worship built for him at Llangeitho, which became the centre of an extraordmary religious influence. Here, thousands, from every part of Wales, were accustomed to resort, some persons travellhig sixty and even a hundred miles in order to hear him. The description of these remarkable assemblages, given in the life of the Rev. Thomas Charles, of Bala, is not unlike that which the Psalmist of Judah has given of the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. " From twenty to thirty travelled together, [a.d. 1767. J aUOWTR OF WJELSS 3IETR0DISM. 407 or in two companies, some on foot and some on horse- back, both men and women. Those on foot started early on Saturday, and took a shorter course over the mountains, without any support except the food they brought with them, and their drink was pure water from the mountain springs. After hearmg one or two sermons from Eowlands they returned home again, fully satisfied and abundantly repaid for all the toil of their journey."* Every county in the Principality was re- presented at these meetings. Llangeitho, in those days, took a position somewhat similar to that occupied by the cathedrals in the early period of English ecclesias- tical history. There, the new order of preachers met every month, and from it, as a centre, they went forth to evangelize the country. One, who was equal to Row- lands, and who subsequently took the place of Rowlands both in the estimation and affection of his countrymen, and in public influence, the Rev. Thomas Charles, of Bala, wrote that " his gifts and the power which accom- panied his ministry were such that no hearers in the present age can form any adequate idea of them ; there is no one who has not heard him that can imagine any- thing equal to what they were."t The external results of the labours of these men was the organization of numerous religious societies, the parents of the Welsh Calvinistic Churches throughout the whole of North and South Wales. In a.d. 1747, their first meeting-house was erected at Builth, in Bre- conshire. In the next year two more were erected in Carmarthenshire. After that they rapidly increased. In A.D. 1767 the Countess of Huntingdon founded a * Sir Thomas Phillips' " Wales," p. 142. f lb. p. 146. 408 GEOWTR OF [a.d. 1773.] college at Trevecca, for the education of students, some of whom took orders in the Established Church, and be- came indentified with the rising Evangelical party, while others remained in the Countess of Huntmgdon's " Con- nexion," or ministered to Congregational Churches. A Methodist Association, at which Whitefield was present, was held for the first time in Wales in the year 1743, when rules were laid down for the government of the body. From that period similar associations have been periodically held. In the same year, Rowlands is stated to have had three thousand communicants in Cardigan- shire, and Howel Harris two thousand in Pembroke- shire.* Differences between Rowlands and Harris im- peded the progress of Methodism for some time after this, and theological controversies had the same effect on other religious bodies, but the general progress of religion, resulting from the labours of these eminent, although discarded members of the Established Church, was without precedent. The whole aspect of the nation was changed. Religious societies sprung up in every part of the land. Dissenting churches rapidly increased in number. An effectual check was given to all amuse- ments of an immoral tendency. The habitually warm temperament of the people began to flow, in greater and greater volume, in the channel of religious feeling. But when the early leaders of Welsh Methodism had died, no provision for a ^^ermanent organization of the forces which they had created had been made. Howel Harris died in a.d. 1773, Rowlands died in the same year, and Williams in A.D. 1791. As the founders of Calvinistic Methodism in Wales, Harris and Rowlands performed * Johnes's Essay," p. 36. [a.d. 1773.] WELSH METHODISM. 409 the greatest work which the Almighty has given to men to perform. They began the regeneration of a whole people who, until they and their fellow- labourers appeared, were sunk in almost heathen darkness. The good which they effected they effected against the will and in spite of the prohibitions of their own Church, which, as in England, and not in relation to the Metho- dists alone, had agaui exhibited herself in what was still her characteristic attitude, as the opponent of all sincere religious life, and all active rehgious work. But whatever credit may attach to a communion from the zeal of individual members is to be attached, ui this instance, to the Estabhshed Church in Wales. Although she disowned and expelled the men who were regene- rating their country, their personal attachment to her was never lessened. It is impossible to say whether their spiritual power and success would have been greater if they had possessed less of this feeling. Their communion with the Church, and their constant profes- sions of attachment to it, probably contributed, in the first instance, to their personal influence. It gave them, for a time, free access to churches, and gained them the ear of Churchmen. It is possible that, afterwards, its influence was not beneficial. For, when parish ministers could not address their people m the only language with which they were acquamted; when these ministers seldom even appeared m their parishes, and when their lives, if not always scandalous, were not such as to adorn an ordinary rehgious profession, the urgent advice to re- main in the Church, if it were followed, was not calcu- lated to conduce to the personal piety of the people. To supplement the deficiencies of the Church, or rather 410 WELSH METHODISM, [a.d. 1773.] to supply that for which it ostensibly existed, the nu- merous Methodist Societies were formed. These pos- sessed the soul, while the Church itself was only the skeleton of the community. The work of the pioneers of Welsh Methodism stopped short of the assurance of permanent success. This was obtained in the next generation, by persons whose individual sympathies were naturally freer than those of men who had been born and nurtured in the Church. CHAPTER VII. EROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF METHODISM TO THE SECOND AGITATION FOR THE REPEAL OF THE TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS. A.D. 1744— A.D. 1793. The Methodist controversy was not the only controversy which attracted pubHc attention at this period. Once more the relative merits of the Established Church and of Dissent, which every generation, from the time of the first Separatists, has discussed anew, were brought under consideration. The literature of this question received, from the active and inquiring intellect which character- ized the nation during the greater portion of George the Second's reign, more important additions than had been made to it since the time of the later Puritans. The new controversy arose from a pubUcation by Dr. Watts. When the causes of the decay of the Dissenting interest were under discussion, Watts wrote a solemn and im- passioned appeal to Dissenters to live in a manner which should be worthy of the principles which they professed, and the position which they occupied.* He considered that these were eminently favourable to a rehgious life, and that therefore Dissenters were under special obliga- tions to adorn the Christian profession. Their religious * "An Humble Attempt towards tlie Revival of Practical Religion among Christians. " a.d. 1731. 412 ECCLESIASTICAL CONTROVERSIES, [a.d. 1731.] advantages he considered to be numerous and important. They, for instance, were in no danger, such as Church- men were in, of mistaking baptism for mward and real regeneration ; they were freed from the impositions and incumbrances of human ceremonies in Divine worship ; they were not confined to set forms of prayer; they could not only worship God in their ordinary way, but they could choose their own ministers ; the communion of their Church was kept more pure and free from un- worthy and scandalous members, and their conduct was strictly observed, and their behaviour watched with a narrow and severe eye. The real reason why they ■dissented from the National Church, was that they might make better improvements in religion than if they con- tinued in her communion. What is this, he mquired, that we mean by asserting the right and freedom of conscience in our separation, but more effectually to pro- mote the kingdom of God amongst men, to do more honour to the name of Christ in His institutions, and better to carry on the work of the salvation of souls? As was the case with the disciples when they followed after Jesus, so, he remarked, it was and would be generally the case with all honest and smcere persons in their religious separation from any Established Church. A¥hat advan- tage did they derive if it were not that they hoped to advance in godliness ? To be an irreligious Dissenter he counted as a degree of folly that wanted a name, for such a man got nothing by his profession but re- proach and contempt in this world, and damnation in the next. Notwithstanding that Watts was careful to eschew ■ecclesiastical controversy in this work, he could not [A.D. 1739.] WATTS ON STATE-GHUBCRES. 41S avoid frequent reference to the points of difference be- tween the ecclesiastical constitutions of the Established and of the Dissenting communities. He also plainly stated his conviction of the unscripturalness of any National Church. "Christ," he said, "has not esta- blished any such church on earth. God alone is the Lord of the conscience, and He has appointed His Son Jesus to be King and Ruler of His Church." The whole question of a Civil Establishment of religion he sub- sequently discussed in another publication.* In this, one of the most careful of all his writings, he laid down the proposition that the civil government, in its proper aims and designs, had no object beyond the benefit of men in this world, nor did the things of religion nor the affairs of a future state come mthin its cognizance. No civil ruler, he held, had any right to require or command the people to profess or practise his own religion, nor to levy tithes or other compulsory dues for its support. The usurpation of the civil power in things sacred, or of the ecclesiastical power in things civil, had, he said, produced nothing but infinite confusion, persecution, hypocrisy, slavery of soul and body, fraud and violence of every kind. With his characteristic speculativeness of intellect, however, Watts proceeded to inquire whether a certain establishment of a national religion was not within the sphere of the civil government. He held that it was ; that every government should make an ac- knowledgment of the existence of a God ; that it should impose oaths ; that it should employ public teachers of * " An Essay on Civil Power in Things Sacred ; or an Inquiry after an EstaLlislied Eeligion, consistent witli the just liberties of mankind and practicable vmder every form of Civil Government." a.d. 1739. 414 B0BDRIBG:E [a.d. 1739.] morality who should be sustained by taxation ; and that all people should be compelled, under penaltj^, to hear such teachers. The ground on which he based this scheme — which he afterwards discovered to have a singu- lar resemblance to the constitution of China — was that the laws of the land on moral questions, such as theft, adultery, and truth, ought, in justice, to be made known to those who would be punished for not obeying them. Like the " Republic " of Plato and the " Utopia " of More, this scheme is to be classed with the many in- genious theories of inventive minds. It is astonishing to notice that, while Watts had every confidence that religion could take care of itself, he forgot that, in such a case, religion would certainly take care of morality ; that if men could not be made religious, neither could they be made moral, by legislative machinery. Such questions, and more especially the question of Church Establishments, were, however, he says, frequently de- bated in private circles, and it was to give form and order to his own thoughts upon them that he composed this treatise. It was not the first declaration of anti- state-church principles that had been made by a Dissenter, but it was the first formal statement and defence of them by a Congregational minister. It is doubtful whether Watts would have been sus- tained in his condemnation of Church Establishments by the majority of Dissenters of his time. Doddridge, certainly, did not agree with him. While expressing his utmost abhorrence of all forms of persecution, and his sense of both its folly and its wickedness,* Dod- dridge did not hesitate to express his opinion that a civil * Sermon on the " Iniquity of Persecution." Works, iii. 117. [a.d. 1739.] OiV STATE CRUBCRE&. 415 establishment of religion, combined with its compulsory support, was not contrary to the laws of justice and equity. While some persons, he remarked, had repre- sented all encouragement given to one religious profes- sion in preference to another as a degree of persecution, he thought that such sentiments carried matters to a con- trary extreme. He held that both a regard to the honour of God and the good of society must engage the magis- trate to desire and labour that his people might be in- structed in what they believed to be truth ; that they could not be instructed without a public provision being made for those who instructed them ; that if the magistrate had a discretionary power with respect to any branch of the public revenue he might apply it to that purpose, even though most of his people should be of a diiFerent religious persuasion from himself. He thought, however, that such an establishment should be made as larsre as possible, so that no worthy or good men, who might be useful to the public, should be excluded. If the majority of the people agreed with the magistrate in such an establishment, the minority, he thought, should be thank- ful that they were left in possession of their own liberties. On the critical question whether Dissenters might be properly compelled by the magistrate and the majority to assist m maintaining established teachers of whom they did not approve, he was of opinion that it stood upon the same footing Avith their contributing towards the expense of a war which they might think to be neither necessary nor prudent. None, he said could reasonably blame a government for requiring such general contributions. However, if the majority should disapprove of the conduct of the government, they had 416 BODDUIDGE ON STATE CRURCEES. [a.d. 1739.] the same right of resistance which they had in any other case.* Doddridge, in this instance, was guilty of the fallacy which Paley subsequently held, namely, of resolv- ing a question of right and wrong into a question of majorities and minorities. Not merely a majority in a question, but every man, has an equal right to justice. Not merely a majority, but every man, has an equal claim to the protection of his conscience and his property. If Doddridge had formally argued this question from an exclusively scriptural point of view, he might have expressed himself -svith more hesitation upon it, but it does not appear to have been one to which he attached a paramount importance. Persecution he could not but hate; but, providing it were sufficiently "large," he might even have jomed an Established Church. But the two principal representatives of the Free Churches were not the only persons whose thoughts were directed to this topic. By the failure of the old argu- ments in support of Church authority, which had been exploded durmg the Bangorian controversy, Churchmen were being driven to find new defences for the establish- ment of their religion. Formerly, it had been sufficient to urge that they belonged to the Church of the suc- cessors of the Apostles, and had therefore inherited peculiar gifts, and were entitled to peculiar privileges ; but this style of argument was no longer of any avail amongst intelligent men. It might be accepted amongst the bucolic tenants of bucolic country gentlemen — men who considered that Charles II, had been an anointed king, and who still had a profound reverence for the ser- vices and the reputation of the great Dr. Sacheverell, — * « Lectures on Etliics." Works, iv. 503, 504. [a.d. 1736.] TFAUB VRTON ON CRUBGR AND STATE. 417 but within the confines of intelligent Christian civiliza- tion it was received with a smile and a shrug of con- tempt. It was necessary, therefore, to justify the con- nection between the Episcopalian Church and the State by another theory. This work was accomplished by a clergyman who afterwards became one of the most emi- nent of all the bishops of the Establishment. In the year 1736, the Rev. William Warburton, incumbent of Brant-Broughton, published a treatise on the " Alliance between Church and State." Warburton is entitled to the credit of framing a new and ingenious theory of this aUiance. Treatmg the Church and the State as two separate and independent powers, he argued, from the analogy of civil government, that when the Church entered into an alUance with the State she necessarily sacrificed her independence. In return for this, she re- ceived peculiar privileges and a public endowment for her ministers. This was her benefit ; but the State was equally benefited, for the Church exerted her influence and authority on the side of pubHc virtue and social order. The advantages of a public endowment were defended by Warburton at great length. He considered it rendered the clergy independent of the people, and did not subject them to the temptation of pandering to their passions. When Selden denied the divine authority of English tithes, he was compelled to recant his opinions, but Warburton equally abandoned that basis of ecclesiasti- cal taxation. He considered it to be merely an eligible and convenient method of providing for the maintenance of the clergy, and he therefore approved of it. He defended the presence of "superior members" of the Church in the legislature of the nation as being a just concession to the 27 418 WABBUBTOJTS ''ALLIANCES [a.d. 1736.] reasonable expectations of a church which had surrendered to the State her own independence and authority. Starting with these primary principles, he proceeded to inquire what religion should be selected for such an alliance, and replied that, from motives of policy, it should be the strongest. Such an alliance could, however, subsist only so long as the selected church might maintain its relative superiority over other sects. When that su- periority should cease to exist, it would be the duty of the State to select the body which had taken the place of the other. In any case, other religious societies should have free toleration ; but not so as to injure the established religion, and there should therefore be " tests." Dis- senters, he argued, ought not to complain of being com- pelled to support the established religion, because it was maintained not for the promulgation of any particular religious opinions, but for the benefit of the State, of which they themselves were members. Warburton's theory was evidently constructed to suit the actual position of the English Church. It is the lowest theory of an estabUshed religion that could be framed. It ignores the difference between truth and error, and justifies the State in propagating one as well :as the other. It degrades the clergy to the rank of a body of police, and the Church to a mere office of Government. How far such a connection was consistent with the nature of religion, or how much it would be likely to hinder the design of the founders of Christianity, or whether it must not misrepresent the character of the Gospel, Warburton never inquired. He wrote his book, avowedly, in the interests, not of the Church, but of the State. The subject was, with him, not a religious, but [A.D. 1743.] WRITE AND TOWGOOB. 419 a political one. That Warburton did not stand alone in this idea is proved by the sudden popularity of his treatise, and by Bishop Horsley's criticism upon it — that it was an admirable specimen of scientific reasoning applied to a " political " subject.* While Warburton' s work, smgularly enough, excited no public controversy, and provoked only one public re- ply, Watts's " Humble Attempt" was vigorously assailed. In a series of letters f especially addressed to " a gen- tleman dissenting from the Church of England," the Kev. John White, vicar of Osprihg, attacked the argu- ment of Watts that the principles of Dissent and the position of Dissenters were more favourable to the growth of piety than those of Churchmen. After denying the fact, the author proceeded to the proof of the contrary position. He then examined the reasons of Dissent, going over the principal grounds of the old con- troversy on this subject. White's " Letters," written, as they were, in a pointed and popular style, went quickly through several editions. They found, however, an opponent far more able and astute in controversy than White himself This was Micaiah Towgood, a Presbyterian minister of Crediton. Towgood replied to the whole of White's letters. His Avork, which for three generations remained the standard work on this subject, and which has been more frequently reprinted, both in England and America, than any other publica- tion of the kind, derives its chief merit from the promi- nence which it gives to the unscriptural character of * Watson's " Life of Warbui'ton," p. 57. t " Three Letters to a Gentleman Dissenting from the Churcli of England." By John White, B.D., a.d. 1743. 27* 420 TOWGOOB ON [a.d. 1746.] the constitution of the Established Church. For the manner in which it exposed the subjection and depend- ence of the Church on the State, and the inconsistency of such a position with the rights of the Church, and in which it contrasted the character of a Christian with the character of the Established Church as such, this work had, for nearly a hundred years, no equal. Previous writers had confined their arguments mainly to a discussion of liturgies, rites, ceremonies, and other incidental characteristics of the State Establish- ment. Towgood, making less of, but not undervaluing, these points, boldly attacked the foundations on which the Church rested. He denounced it for having sur- rendered its Christian liberty, for being not an " ally," but a mere creature of the State. He exposed its am- bitious and persecuting spirit. Subjection in religious matters, he held, was due to Christ alone, and civil governors had no right to intermeddle with them. He agreed that with the alteration of what was unscriptural in its character, Dissenters would be glad to return to the Church. They bore it, he said, no enmity. They wished it prosperity and peace, and the glory of being formed according to the perfect plan of the primitive Apostolic Church. They wished to see it established upon a broad and catholic foundation, Jesus Christ himself being its only Lawgiver and King. As for the Church as it was, he denied that it was any essential part of the British constitution, or that it and the State must fall together. He asked any one to annihilate, in his imagination, its present form; to suppose that its clergy, liturgy, articles, canons, ceremonies, and rites, were entirely vanished from the land; its immense ,[a.d. 1748.J j)ISSJSJ!fT. 421 revenues applied to the ease of taxation, and the payment of public debts, and the preachers to be paid only by voluntary contributions — where, he inquired, would be the essential loss to the State? AVould the monarchy be overthrown, the courts of judicature shut up, parlia- ments no more meet, commerce and trade be brought to stagnation — because what people called their " Church " was no more?* This was the boldest suggestion that had yet been made on this subject. The author did not enlarge upon it, but left it to bring forth fruit in suc- ceeding generations. White added five other publications on this subject, continuing the controversy to the year 1751, but he never grappled with Towgood's leading argument in proof of the natural freedom of the Christian Church from State control. Towgood himself lived until nearly the close of the century in which he wrote, dying in A.D. 1791, at the great age of ninety-one. Though a keen controversialist he was a man of singular modesty, and he was satisfied, to the end of his life, with the pas- torate of a country cont^regation.f The earher editions of his answers to White were all published anonymously. His ministerial activity, his devoutness, and his pubHc spirit, were acknowledged by all his contemporaries. His service in vindication of the principles of the Free Churches has made his name one of the most eminent and honourable in their literature. Those persons who have the most clear conception of the proper functions of the State, are also those who will be found to obey, with the greatest willingness, such * " The Dissenting Gentleman's Answer to the Reverend Mr. White's Letters," etc. a.d. 1746, 1747, 1748. t Manning's " Life and Writings of Towgood." a.d. 1792. 422 BI^BELLION OF [a.b. 1745.] laws of the State as are in harmony with the ever- lasting principles of justice. That the growing percep- tion of the injustice involved in the connection between the Church and the State did not tend to alienate the Dissenters from the established Government was apparent in the rebellion of a.d. 1745. While the Jacobites and High-Churchmen received the news of the Pretender's landing with satisfaction and dehght, Dissen- ters of all classes at once rallied in defence of the Crown. As soon as the news of the event was received, the Committee of the Dissenting Deputies passed a reso- lution recommending the whole body of Dissenters throughout the kingdom to join with others of his ]\Iajesty's subjects in support of the Government. They next despatched a circular letter throughout the country, ex]3ressing their earnest desire that in \dew of the dan- gerous situation of public affairs. Dissenters would act in the most zealous mamier.* This appeal was responded to "with enthusiastic alacrity. Armed associations of Dissenters were formed m all parts of the kingdom ; j* chapels were converted into parade grounds ;| and ministers became voluntary recruitmg officers. Dod- dridge was especially active in furthering this movement. He addressed letters to his friends, went personally amongst his own people in Northampton, encouraging them to enlist, and printed a private address to the soldiers of one of the regiments of foot, afterwards en- gaged in the battle of Culloden, encouraging them in their duty.§ The Dissenting pulpits resounded with * " Sketch of the History," &c., p. 21, 22. f II). X " History of the Baptist Chapel in Little "Wild Street," p. 36. Iviiuey,. iii. 239. § Orton's " Life of Doddridge," p. 208. [a.d. 1745.] A.D. 1745. 423 the call to arms, and the king was addressed to assure him that, whoever besides might fail him, he might rely with confidence on the loyalty of the Protestant Dis- senters.^' Even the Quakers could not refrain from giving an expression of their active sympathy with the Government. Their principles forbade them to incite men to shed blood ; but they contributed to the health of the regiments under the command of the Duke of Cumberland, by supplymg all the soldiers with flannel for their winter campaign.f The reward which the Dissenters received for this service, apart from the earnest thanks of the king, consisted m their inclusion in the Act of Indemnity, and in the royal pardon for the rebels who had taken up arms against the Government. In accepting commissions in the volunteer army, they had incurred the penalties of the Test Act. As in the rebellion of a.d. 1715, so in this more serious crisis, they had broken the letter of the law in order to save the Crown and Government. Those who would have sacri- ficed both for the sake of increased ecclesiastical pre- dominance, were still too powerful to prevent the test from being taken off. J * Ivimey, iii. 238. t " Journey along with tlie Army of the Duke of Cumberland," p. U. X The manner in which the Dissenters were treated on these occasions was severely commented upon by Fox, in his speech in favour of the repeal of the Test Act, on March 2nd, a.d. 1790. The great orator said that "a candid examination of the history of Great Britain would, in his opinion, be favourable to the Dissenters. In the rebellions in 1715 and 1745, this country was extremely indebted to their exertions. During those rebellious periods they had acted with the spirit and fidelity of British subjects, zealous and vigilant in defence of the Constitution ; at both these periods they stood forward the champions of British liberty, and obtained an eminent share in repelling the foes of the House of Hanover. Their exertions then were so magnanimous that he had no scruple to assert that to their en- deavours we owed the preservation of Church and State. What was the 424 DEATH AND [a.d. 1748.] From this time, and for many years, the life of the Free Churches flowed with smooth, and miless disturbed by death, with almost unruffled course. The first amongst eminent men to drop from their living ranks was Watts, who died in a.d. 1748. For a long period this ablest of their representatives had been in feeble and declining health, but his intellect, until very lately, had been in ceaseless activity. Judging from his writings, it would seem to have been the noble ambition of this man to render the utmost service of which he was capable in the instruction and guidance of the human mind in all its spheres of action ; and in all its spheres he was one of the few men competent both to instruct and to guide. As a mental philosopher he ranked next to Locke. Had he written only his " Logic," his essay on the " Improve- ment of the Mind," his "Philosophical Essays," his essay on the " Freedom of the Will," and on the " Civil Power in Religion," his name would have occupied a high and honourable place amongst the philosophical writers of his country. But he rendered greater service than this. At a time when infidelity was making the boldest assaults on the grounds of the Christian faith, he was one of the first to stand forward in defence of revealed religion and reward they obtained ? We generously granted tlieni a pardon for their noble exploits, by passing an act of indemnity in their favour. Gentlemen should recollect that, at the times alluded to, the High Churchmen did not display such gallantry, for many appeared perplexed and pusillanimous. Hence, the superior glory of the Dissenters, who, regardless of every danger, had boldly stood forth in defence of the rights and liberties of the kingdom. The Dissenters, regardless of the foolish Acts existing against them, drew their swords in defence of their fellow- subjects, and made the scale imme- diately preponderate in our favour. The Church, as a very liberal en- couragement for their achievements, adopted the plan already described, by passing an act of indemnity or pardon for the henious crime of defending the Constitution." — Parliamentary History. [A.D. 1748.] CSABACTEB OF WATTS. 425 scriptural truth. Unlike many men, however, he was as capable of pressing the Gospel on the hearts and con- sciences of men as on the intellect alone. He believed that the Christian should be characteristically a whole man, with his affections going out in deep and spontaneous feeling towards his Maker, his Redeemer, and his fellow- men, his conduct being guided by a devout and culti- vated intellect, and an enlightened conscience. His ser- mons and practical writings, therefore, while they indi- cated a strong and polished mind, and an accurate taste, were full of chastened feelmg and of close application to the conscience. Havmg added to his Hymns a metrical version of the Psalms of David, he had given the church a collection of poetry for its assistance in public worship, which, with all the great additions that have since been made to that department of religious and poetical com- position, has been rivalled by no other single -writer. Nor was he satisfied to serve only the grown man and Christian. He therefore added, to his Divine Songs for children, books for the guidance of their education in re- lio:ion, and in the most familiar of the arts and sciences. Having thus, in nearly fifty years of active life, given to his own and succeeding generations the fulness of the strength of a mind of the highest order of Christian ex- cellence and aim, he died, at the age of sixty-four, an humble and devout death, He chose to rest where so many of the confessors of the Free Churches had rested, and was therefore, in the presence of an immense con- course of spectators, buried in Bunhill Fields. Those who attended his funeral must have felt a gratitude for his work such as can be excited by but few men. The poorest as well as the richest in intellectual gifts, the 426 JDEATR AND [a.d. 1751.] oldest Christian as well as the youngest child, might have been almost equally indebted to him. As Dissenters, they owed to him esj)ecial gratitude. In ^dication of their principles he had done no more than man^^ had done, but he had, in one conspicuous manner, given strength to the Free Churches. Although of high literary renown, and brought into constant contact with the most eminent scholars in the Established Church, he had re- mained inflexible in his principles as a Congregational Dissenter. It was a fashion for vulgar writers in that, as it has been in more than one subsequent age, to identify Dissent with vulgarity of manners and narrow- ness of mind. In Watts, at least, it was seen that a man might belong to one of the most democratic sections of Dissent and write in favour of the separation of the Church from the State, and yet be a cultured scholar and a Christian gentleman. After Watts's death the most eminent j)osition amongst Dissenting ministers was occupied* by Doddridge. Doddridge had now been about twenty years at North- ampton. He had not been allowed to assume the office of tutor without opposition. He was summoned by a clergyman for non-compliance with the provisions of the Test Act respecting Dissenting teachers, but the prosecution was stopped by order of George II., who declared that he would have no persecution for con- science' sake during his reign.* His life, since that period, had been one of singular industry and usefulness. He was the model Christian pastor and minister, and the most eminently successful tutor who had ever been comiected with the Free Churches. Doddridge's, how- * Ortou's " Life of Doddridge." Works, i. 149. [a.d. 1751.] CHABACTEB OF JDOBDBIDGE. 427 ever, was not a seminary intended only for the education of young men for the ministry : he received into it any who would go there, — noblemen's and gentlemen's sons, and persons of all religious persuasions, whether Epis- copalian, Presbyterian, Unitarian, Baptist, or Congrega- tionalist. He incurred some censure from his stricter brethren for this, and was to some extent beset by what he terms "Orthodox spies," in consequence; but he chose not to relinquish his system. He was conse- quently accused, during his lifetime, as most eminent men of his class are, by the envious and the less eminent, of looseness of theology. The fact that an Unitarian Avent to his seminary, was allowed to remain there as an Unitarian, was not dishonourably interfered with by his tutor, and, when he left, was an Unitarian still, was considered to indicate the possession of a laxity of sense of duty on the tutor's part. But Doddridge could not have done what would have pleased such men. He was not above all things, but he valued highly the reputation of being a gentleman and a man of honour, and therefore his orthodoxy was suspected. Those who, wherever the Anglo-Saxon language is spoken, have read and sung his hymns ; those who have been brought to the feet of their Saviour by his " Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul;" those whose Christian affec- tions have been warmed, and whose judgments have been enlightened by his " Family Expositor," may well wonder how such a man could have been even suspected by the worst minded of all his contemporaries. But Doddridge, while he held fast to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the " anchor of his soul," held intercourse with some whom others denounced. Whitefield, as has- 428 DJEATR AND [a.d. 1751.] been seen, was one of these ; but Warburton, who had written a massive book to prove that Moses and the Israelites knew nothing of the doctrine of a future state, was another, and Doddridge, mth Warburton's consent, had written, in a popular publication, a com- mendatory review of this work. Gentleness, goodness, and love were in his heart wherever he went, and if he erred it was from excess of the amiability of his disposition. This, however, as is natural, so far from interfering with his duty, stimulated him towards its performance. He preached constantly, and lectured before his pupils on almost every subject of human study. The accounts which have come down to us from his own pen, and from the description of his pupils, of the range and method of his teaching, give a high impression of the breadth and thoroughness of his in- tellectual culture. His academy took the highest rank amongst all similar institutions. Doddridge's preaching was experimental and practical rather than formally •dogmatic. His theological creed is to be found inter- woven in all his sermons and writings, but he evidently ■cared less for creeds than for a Christian life. One of his greatest services to religion in his o^vn neigh- bourhood was the institution at Kettering, in the year 1741, of an association for the reformation of religion and for evangelistic purposes in Northampton. A special object of this association, it is worth noticing, was the propagation of Christianity in heathen lands.* To this movement, and to the great impulse which Dod- dridge's own zeal gave to all forms of rehgious activity * " The Evil and Danger of Neglecting the Souls of Men." Dedication. Works, iii. 229. |_A.D. 1751.] GSABAQTEB OF BOBBBIDGK 429' in Northamptonshire, is probably to be attributed the generally high, consistent, and bold character of Dissent in the midland counties. This admirable man died at Lisbon in the year 1751. The expenses of the journey thither, taken with a forlorn hope of recruiting a con- stitution which, for years, had been slowly undermined by excess of zeal, were defrayed by the Countess of Huntingdon and her Church friends, and his widow found means of subsistence from the same source. With the death of Watts and Doddridge the leadership of Dissent passed from the Congregational body. No man was left who was m any manner competent to take their places. The comparative inaction which followed on the death of Doddridge was broken only by a legal con- troversy with the City of London concerning the com- pulsory liability of Dissenters to serve the office of sheriff. This case is interesting for the protection which it secured for Dissenters against the arbitrary claims of the Corporation, and for the interpretation which it gave of their rights under the Toleration Act. In A.D. 1742, a Mr. Robert Grosvenor had been elected to the office of sheriff, but, on refusing to qualify for the office by taking the sacrament according to the rites of the Established Church, was cited by the Corporation before the Court of Queen's Bench. The defence of his case was undertaken by the Committee of Deputies, and the Court decided against the claim. To meet, as it judged, any future case of this kind, the Corporation, in A.D. 1748, passed a bye-law, imposmg a fine of four hundred pounds and twenty marks upon every person who should decHne standing for the office after he had 430 TRE SHERIFF'S [a.d. 1757.] been nominated to it, and of six hundred pounds upon every person who, after having been elected, should refuse to serve. The fines thus obtained were to be appropriated towards the building of a new Mansion House. The scheme was worthy of the lowest type of commercial chicanery, and the Corj)oration of London must have sunk infinite degrees below its ancient spirit for it to have been entertained for an hour. Had there been occasion for a Pym or an Eliot to have taken refuge in the metropolis at this period, they, too, would probably have been sold to the Government, and the proceeds devoted to the erection of the Mansion House. It was carried into operation with all the cunning and greed by which it is possible — but which, m the case of the City of London, it had not hitherto been common — for such a body to be distinguished. Whenever a sheriff was required to be elected, a Dissenter was immediately nominated. One after another declined to serve, and was at once mulcted of the fine. This system had gone on for six years, during which the fines had produced more than fifteen thousand pounds, when, in a.d. 1754, a spirit of resistance was raised. Li that year three Dissenters, Messrs. Sheafe, Streatfield, and Evans, were successively elected to office. On consulting the Depu- ties they were advised to refuse service, and to resist the payment of the fine. The Corporation at once com- menced proceedings against them in the Sheriff's' Court. The case against Mr. Streatfield fell to the ground, inas- much as he was proved to be out of the jurisdiction of the Court. In the year 1757, after prolonged delays, judgment was given against Mr. Sheafe and Mr. Evans, who then appealed to the Court of Hustings — now abo- [a.d. 1767.] 6^^^. 431 lished — of which the Recorder of the city was the sole judge. The Recorder hving confirmed the judgment of the Sheriffs' Court, Mr. Sheafe and Mr. Evans sued for a special cormnission, consistmg of five judges, who, with one exception, reversed, in 1762, the decisions of the Courts below. The Corporation then brought a writ of error before the House of Lords, but before the case could be tried there, Mr. Evans, by the death of Mr. Sheafe, was left sole defendant. The case was argued at great length before the Lords on the 21st and 22nd of January, a.d. 1767. On the 3rd and 4th of February following, six out of seven judges gave judgment in favour of Mr. Evans. The decision of the Lords was then delivered by Lord Mansfield, who, in the highest strain of eloquence, expressed his abhorrence of the persecution which Dissenters had suffered, and vindi- cated the principles of English law with respect to religious liberty. Of the attempt of the Corporation, to make two laws — one to render men incapable of servino- ofiice, and another to punish them for not serving, "If," he said, "they accept, punish them; if they refuse punish them; if they say ' Yes,' punish them; if they say ' No,' punish them. My Lords, this is a most ex- quisite dilemma, from which there is no escaping : it is a trap a man cannot get out of; it is as bad a persecution as that of Procrustes: if they are too short, stretch them; if they are too long, lop them." "The law of the Corporation," he went on to remark, " was made in some year of the reign of the late king — I forget which ; but it was made about the time of the building of the Mansion House. . . Were I to dehver my own sus- picion, it would be, that they did not so much wish for 432 LORD MANSFIELD ON [a.d. 1767.J their (the Dissenters') services as for their fines. Dis- senters have been appointed to the office — one who was blind, another who was bed-ridden ; not, I suppose, on account of their being fit and able to serve the office." He proceeded to state his belief that they chose them be- cause they were incapable of serving. In his vindication of the principles of religious liberty, the judge remarked that it was now no crime for a man to say he was a Dis- senter ; nor was it any crime for him not to take the sacrament according to the rites of the Church of Eng- land. " There is no usage or custom," he went on to say, " independent of positive law, which makes noncon- formity a crime. Conscience is not controllable by human laws, nor amenable to human tribunals. Prosecutions, or attempts to enforce conscience, will never produce conviction; and are only calculated to make hypocrites or martyrs. My Lords, there never was a single instance from the Saxon times do^vn to our own, in which a man was ever punished for erroneous opinions concerning rites or modes of worship, but upon some positive law. The common law of England, which is only common reason or usage, knows of no prosecution for mere opinions. For atheism, blasphemy, and reviling of the Christian religion, there have been instances of persons prosecuted and punished upon the common law, but bare nonconformity is no sin by the common law ; and all positive laws inflicting any pains or penalties for noncon- formity to the established rites and modes, are repealed by the Act of Toleration; and dissenters are thereby exempted from all ecclesiastical censures. What blood- shed and confusion have been occasioned from the reign of Henry IV., when the first penal statutes were enacted, iA.D. 1767.] TOLHItATIOK. 433 down to the Revolution, in this kingdom, by laws made to enforce conscience. There is nothing certainly more um-easonable, more inconsistent with the rights of human nature, more contrary to the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion, more iniquitous and unjust, more im- politic, than persecution. It is against natural religion, revealed religion, and sound policy."* With this° de- nunciation the Corporation was ignominiously dismissed. The end of the thirteen years' prosecution found the defendant, Mr. Evans, dying, but he was sufficiently conscious to express the satisfaction which the judgment gave him. To his firmness, supported by the Dissent- ing Deputies, is owing the fact that Church and Tory corporations, all through the Idngdom, had not the legal ability to use their power for the oppression of their Nonconformist neighbours. When this cause was decided, George III. had been king for nearly seven years. By the death of his pre- decessor, the Dissenters had lost a firm and sincere friend to their liberties. George the Second's attachment to the principles of constitutional freedom was almost the only redeeming feature in that monarch's character. He had inherited the traditions of the Revolution, and would allow neither civil nor ecclesiastical politicians to sway his mind in opposition to them. It was one of the hap- piest circumstances for English freedom, that the two sovereigns who succeeded to Anne were not natives of England. Had they been so, the probability is, that they would have succumbed to the influences of the terri- torial aristocracy and of the Church, whose predominant dispositions were in favour of a more or less arbitrary * " History and Proceedings of the Deputies," 25, 38. 28 434. GEORGE THE TRIED. [a.d. 1767.] system of government. As regards civil liberty, the first two Georges were constitutional from in- terest as well as from principle. Their maintenance of the doctrines of the Eevolution was necessary to the establishment of their dynasty, and it was not until the suppression of the rebellion of a.d. 1745, that the Hanoverian dynasty was finally secured from every prospect of successful assault. George III., if he es- caped some of the vices, inherited, unfortunately, none of the virtues of his grandfather. His political position was secure, and, so far as English parties were concerned, he had nothing to do but to hand it down in undisturbed safety, to his children and his children's children. The Jacobites had cast their last die; they had lost all hope of changing the succession to the Crown ; but the spirit of Jacobitism yet remained. In- stead, however, of making a party, they adopted a wiser course; they alhed themselves to the extreme section of the Tories. In George III. they found a man after their own heart. Ignorant, in consequence of the shameful manner in which he had been educated, to almost the last degree; bigoted and prejudiced as a sacerdotal priest ; more obstinate than a mule, and more jealous of his prerogative than a workhouse official, he was born and bred to favour a high Tory and High Church system of government. His one governing prmciple of action was the governing principle of all weak and obstinate men who have no natural moral force. "I will be master," was his self-assumed motto, and any one who would let him be master was sure of his favour and patronage. Notwithstanding an early moral failing, he had, and sustained, a good domestic [a.d. 1767.] STATE OF TRE GRTIBQR. 435 • character, the character of a respectable ploughman. He would have made a good overseer of the poor m his time, when that office was executed somewhat after the manner of a slave-driver ; but by disposition, intellect, and education, he was the less fitted for a king than almost any man who ever sat on a throne. Such a person the High Church party, however, could work mth. Their leading idea was the same — to promote and sustain pre- scriptive power, whether just orimjust, whether adapted to a nation's welfare — as it sometimes is — or injurious to her best interests and her legitimate prosperity and in- fluence, as was the case with England during the Avhole of the reign of this narrow-minded, selfish, and therefore unfortunate monarch. The state of the Church in the earlier portion of George III.'s reign was what it had been for the last thirty or forty years, — as respects the bishops and the clergy, one of scandalous indifference to the claims of reUgion, as well as to the claims of ecclesiastical duty. Pluralities and non-residence were universal,"' and none rose to condemn them. Wesley and his fellow-labourers were still the object of sarcasm and scoff, and vital religion was almost as Httle known amongst the clergy as it was amongst the people whom they taught. Yet there were men eminent for their great intellectual abihty in the Established Church. Foremost amoDgst them was Joseph Butler, Bishop of Durham, whose " Analogy of Natural and Revealed Religion" had placed him amongst the greatest of all theological writers. Butler, however, in the proportion that he excelled in his own department of thought, failed in other departments. * Perry's " History of Churcli of England," pp. 398—399. 436 BJJTLEB AND WABBUBTON. [a.d. 1767.] The work by which his name has been immortalized will always remain one of the masterpieces of human reasoning, and the greatest of all the intellectual defences of the Christian rehgion. As a preacher, however, Butler partook of the tendency of the times in which he lived. His theology was broad and liberal in tone ; but, in common with many men of his school, and with most men of his peculiar intellectual culture, he preached with little religious feehng. His sermons are cold and colourless essays, as deficient in spiritual as they are superior in intellectual power. But no man, by his natural and acquired strength of mind, and his unequalled service to the literature of Christian evidences, ever adorned the Episcopal bench m a greater degree than Joseph Butler. Next to Butler, but of later period, was William Warburton. Warburton, after the publication of his " Alliance," attracted more attention than any other ecclesiastic. The extraordinary extent of his reading, and his bra'svny power of brain, are cer- tified in his " Divine Legation of Moses," and in his many controversial works; but he wrote scarcely a single work in which he did not degrade himself by his coarse and vituperative abuse of every person who happened to difi^er from him. Not to agree, to the minutest and most unimportant point, in all that he said, was to be paraded through the literary world as " an ass" and "a fool."* To oppose him was to be "a wretch," " a rogue," and " a scoundrel." Warburton was one of the bishops who led the opinion of the * See Watson's "Life of Warburton," cap. xxxiii., for specimens of this style. [A.D. 1767.] LOWTH, SECKEB, AND BLAOKBUBNK 437 Church respecting the Methodists. Whitefield was, in his view, "quite mad." * John Wesley did nothing but "turn fools into madmen," and was himself "a hypo- crite." t " What think you," he asks a friend, "of our new set of fanatics called the Methodists?" + Warbur- ton wrote against Wesley's doctrine of grace. § His friend Hurd, afterwards himself made a bishop, pro- phesied that the discourse would, " like Pascal's Letters, and for the same reason — the singular merit of the com- position— be read when the sect that gave occasion to it is forgotten, or, rather, the sect will find immortaUty in this discourse." 11 This work is now never read, and its only importance is derived from the fact that it was written against the great and successful body of the Methodists. If, amongst other bishops, Lowth, by his learning and his ivit, served to re- deem the character of the bench, Lawrence Sterne, by his profligate life and coarse if humorous writ- ings, dragged down the reputation of the clergy. Archbishop Seeker, who filled the primate's chair, was mferior in ability to any of these. He was pos- sessed of some learning, which he used to its fullest extent in ecclesiastical controversies, but as a preacher he was scarcely resj)ectable. Archdeacon Blackburne, at this time, scandaHzed the Church by writing against its doctrines, orders, and ceremonies, and yet remaining within its bor- ders. Blackburne had the dexterous force and the * lb. p. 524. t lb. p. 535. % lb. p. 523. § " The Doctrine of Grace ; or, the Office and Operations of the Holy Spirit Vindicated from the Insults of Infidelity and the Abuse of Fanati- cism," A.D. 1762. II Watson's " Life," p. 539. 438 TRE " METHODIST' CLUBGY. [a.d. 1767.] happy directness of style which are necessary to the successM controversialist, and he would have wielded his powers with a moral as well as an intellectual success, if he had supported his doctrines by his practice. But when he, a Church dignitary, proceeded to denounce all creeds and confessions of faith,'" to assert the right of private liberty in theological matters, and to hold up his Church to scorn and opprobrium, men, however they might acknowledge the accuracy of his judgment and the truth of his criticism, saw that he lacked the neces- sary evidence of moral sincerity. His works are an armoury of sharp and polished weapons of attack against the Established Church ; but Blackburne himself should have been the last man to invent or to use them. But anything, and almost any man excepting one of great spiritual earnestness, could have been borne with at a period when all that was expected of a bishop was that he should be sufficiently obsequious to the Crown and its ministers, and of a clergyman, that he did not turn a Methodist. Justice Blackstone, who made a point, at this time, of hearing the most celebrated preachers in London, states that, in all his visits to the churches, he did not hear a sermon that had more Christianity in it than a speech of Cicero's, and that it would have been impossible for him to tell whether the preacher was a Mohammedan or a Christian. f Scat- tered through England were a few "Methodist" clergy, the founders of the Evangelical party in the Esta- blished Church, who laboured incessantly for the advancement of religion; but they were outnumbered by thousands, and froAvned upon by all who were in * In " The Confessional," a.d. 1766. f Christian Observer, 1858. , I A.D. 1767.] FLETCREB, GBUfSSAW, Bi:RRII)GE,mc. 439 authority. Of these clergy Fletcher of Madeley, Yenn of Hudclersfield, Grimshaw of Haworth, Romaine of Blackfriars, and Berridge of Everton, were the chief. Hervey, the author of " Theron and Aspasia," had died in A.D. 1758. To Fletcher, Methodism in the Church owed more than it did to any excepting its original founders. Fervour of feeling, holiness of spirit, and simplicity of character were combined in him m degrees that have seldom been equalled in any other man. Venn made Huddersfield the centre of the most untirmo- evangehstic labours ; and Grimshaw, of Haworth— that Haworth which the three dauo^hters of a succeedino- mcumbent have made more celebrated than it was made even by Grimshaw — brought thousands of Yorkshiremen to hear him preach the new Gospel. Romaine was the Evangelical preacher of the metro- polis, proclaiming the "doctrines of grace" with a power that had seldom been equalled. But of all the founders of the Evangelical party, Berridge, of Everton, was the most conspicuous. He was the only one whose preaching produced the abnormal and painful physical effects which often accompanied the preaching of the Wesleys and Wbitefield. His evangelistic powers were surpassed only by the three apostles of the early movement. Everton, in his time, was a place where thousands from all the country round about crowded to hear its extraordinary preacher and to share in the wonderful revival of religion of which it Wcas the centre. Berridge' s eccentricity probably contributed in no small degree to his personal popularity. He was possessed of a rough and knotty wit, which he used unspar- ingly in his public addresses, as Avell as in private 440 MEIRODISM AND [a.d. 1755.] intercourse. But he was far removed from vul- garity. None of these men were, in any sense, vulgar men, unless, as it undoubtedly was at that time, vulgar to be pious, and to yearn for the salvation of souls. Out of the Church, Methodism was increasing with marvellous rapidity. Its preachers, gomg through the length and breadth of the land with an energy and rapidity that had never before been seen in the history of Christianity in England, left, wherever they went, new friends and converts. AU these did not, however, for- mally identify themselves with the Wesleyan societies. The continued opposition of the clergy had aroused in many minds a corresponding spirit of opposition to the Established Church. Lay preachers began to assert their right to administer the sacraments, and members began to secede to one or other of the Free Churches. In this crisis it was resolved to bring the relations of the Methodists towards the Church before the Conference. This was done in a.d. 1755, and after three days'" debate, which was attended by sixty-three preachers, it was resolved that, whether it was lawful or not, it was not expedient to separate from the Church.* This decision was arrived at mainly, no doubt, through the personal influence of John and Charles Wesley. It is easy to understand Wesley's position with respect to the Establishment. He was rapidly seceding from his former Church views ; he had given up apostoHcal suc- cession and the divine origin of Episcopacy; he had scorned the authority of ecclesiastical law, but it would have been inconsistent with his original purpose to leave * Wesley's "Journal," A.D. 1755. [a.©. 1755.] TRU CHUBCn. 441 his Church. That purpose had been to arouse the sense of religion within her own borders, and Wesley beheved that if his societies once separated themselves from her — once became sectarians — they would have no in- fluence whatever upon her future character. He went on, hoping against hope that the clergy would one day join him, and that, though their union, the Church itself would become one vast Methodist organization; but none of these hopes were ever realized. As Methodism grew, it receded further and further from the Establishment, until it became necessary formally to separate from it. Nor did Wesley, in another sense, succeed. The revival of religion which ulti- mately took place in the Church was in the direction of Whitefield's, and not of Wesley's theology. The fore- runners of the Evangelical party were Calvinists, and more closely associated with the Countess of Huntingdon than mth Wesley. But, while still determined to remain a member of the Church, Wesley candidly avowed that he "could not answer" the arguments of those Methodists who advocated secession.* But this deter- mination need not have excited bitter feelings towards the Free Churches. Yet, when the Baptists drew away some of his members, he could not restrain the expres- sion of his indignation ; while Charles, to whom Christian charity was almost an unknown feeling, railed against them as the " cavilling, contentious sect, always watching to steal away our children," f — the very charge which the Church herself brought against John and Charles Wesley. * " Letter to the Kev. Mr. Walker," printed in the " Arminian Maga- zine," A.D. 1779. t Jackson's " Charles Wesley," cap. 20, U2 TRE GOJSTGBJSGATIOJSrALISTS [a.d. 1767.J The decision of this Conference modified, in no degree whatever, the feelings of the clergy, and had probably a most injurious influence upon the spread of Methodism itself,* The Congregationalists possessed, at this period, no man of a very high order of genius, but many who were more or less eminent for their scholarship and their abilities. Amongst these Dr. Thomas Gibbons, pastor of the Haberdashers' Hall Church, and one of the tutors of the Mile End Academy, occupied a conspicuous position. He was one of the most active preachers of the metropolis and the author of a great variety of published works. His name is best known in connection with his intimacy with Watts, of whom he was the earliest biographer. It was probably from this intimacy that he conceived the purpose of writing a volume of hymns, a few of which are to be found in most modern selections.f At Pinners' Hall preached Dr. Caleb Fleming, almost the only Congregational minister in the metropolis who held Unitarian views. Fleming was most conspicuous as an advocate of these opinions ; but few men did greater service in his generation than he, in writing against the civil establishment of religion. He was the only Dissenter who replied to Warburton's * I cannot avoid quoting the criticism of the able historian of Methodism, Dr. Abel Stevens, whose work is the most exact and comprehensive of all the histories of this movement, on the decisions of the Conference of a.d. 1755 : — "Had Methodism," he says, " taken a more independent stand at this early period, when it had so many intolerable provocations from the Establishment, and the popular mind so little ground of sympathy with the clergy, it is the opinion of not a few wise men that it might, before this time, have largely superseded the Anglican hierarchy, and done much more than it has for the uuscriptural connection of the Church and State." —"History," i. 399. f Wilson's " Dissenting Churches," iii. 178—183. [A.D. 1767.] IN LONDON: 443 "Alliance," and probably the first who pubHcly assigned the increase of infidelity and of Eomanism to the exist- ence of an Established Church.* For more than forty- five years he maintained, with undiminished ardour, the cause of religious liberty. Dr. John Guise, of Kew Broad Street, one of Doddridge's most intimate friends, was, " though dead, yet living." He is still known as the popular author of a carefully composed paraphrase of the New Testament, and was a man greatly honoured and loved by his people. In his latter days he became blind, having suddenly become so while leading the devotions of his congregation, but he continued preaching while health remained, and, it was said, with greater spiritual power than he had ever before shown. Guise's successor at New Broad Street, Dr. Stafford, occupied also a respectable position as a metropolitan minister. In the pulpit of Owen and Watts, was Dr. Samuel Morton Savage, a man of equal learimig and power, and one of the professors at the Hoxton Academy.' Dr. David Jennings was professor in the same academy. At Jewin Street Joseph Hart, a man of remarkable religious experience, and one of the most popular min- isters for the brief period of his ministerial life, was pastor. Hart is weU known as the author of a volume of rather sensational hymns, abounding in extravagant expressions, but which are still prized by a certain class of religious people. Although he entered the Christian ministry at forty-eight years of age, and died eight years afterwards, he had become so known and esteemed that his funeral at Bunhill Fields was attended by no * lb. ii. 232, 243. 444 COVNTBT CONGBEGATIONALISTS. [a.d. 1767.] fewer than twenty thousand persons.* The Weigh- house Church was presided over by Dr. William Long- ford, a useful and ingenious, rather than powerful preacher, who was assisted by the more eminent Samuel Palmer, afterwards of Hackney, who subsequently be- came one of the most eminent Congregational ministers of London, f The names of a few country ministers of this denomination obtained a deserved eminence amongst their contemporaries. Dr. Addington, of Harborough,, and Kibworth, the successor of David Some, and,, some years afterwards, pastor of Miles' Lane Church, London, was an admirable specimen of a devoted country minister. An impressive preacher, and a dili- gent and conscientious pastor, he belonged to the large class of ministers of the Free Churches, who, in country districts at that time, kept alive the flame of religion and adorned the profession of Christianity. Such a man also was Benjamin Fawcett, of Kidderminster, one of the suc- cessors of Baxter, and who, in thirty-five years' ministry, almost equalled Baxter in labour and in diligence. And another was Darracott, of Wellington, a man of refined manners, who attained the rare success, for such a man, of great spiritual uifluence amongst the poor of an agricultural district. The Rev. Job Orton, of Shrews- bury, the friend and biographer of Doddridge, was another of the best known and most highly respected Congrega- tional ministers in the Midland Counties. Doddridge wrote of him, "Not merely my happiness, but that of the public, in him, is beyond all my hopes." Educated at Northampton, and preaching statedly there for Dod- * lb. iii. 343, 347. f lb. i. 183, 187. [a.d. 1767.] TRE BAPTISTS— DB. GILL. 445 dridge, he obtained that intimate knowledge of the great divine which no other man could have obtained. It was natural that he should have been invited to succeed Doddridge, but he declined to remove from Shrewsbury. His publications on rehgious subjects — nearly all of a practical character — were very numerous, and to his suggestion the " Nonconformist Memorial " is owing. As far as can be ascertained, he was the only minister who commemorated the centenary of the Ejectment of a.d. 1662. His personal manners were rough, and his habits eccentric, but Dr. Kiffin states that he was the most strik- ing preacher he ever heard.* None of these were what would be considered great men. The Congregationalists were now more eminent for teaching than for pulpit power. With considerable foresight, they had engaged their ablest men for their educational institutions. Such were Drs. Jennings and Savage, and Walker, Gibbons, and John Conder, the three last of the Mile End — afterwards the Homerton academy — under whose tutorship many of the ablest ministers of the succeeding generations were educated. Dr. Ashworth, of Daventry, whither Doddridge's academy had been removed after his death, was of equal if not greater eminence. For theological scholarship, however, no minister amongst the Congregationalists could compare with Dr. John Gill, one of the ablest divines which the Baptist denomination has ever produced. Gill was elected pastor of the Baptist Church at Horselydown in the year 1720, and continued in that position for more than fifty- one years. As a biblical commentator and a theological controversialist few persons have surpassed this able man. * Biog. Brit., Art. Orton. Protestant Dissenters' Magazine, May, 1795. 446 TRE BAPTISTS. [a.d. 1767.] With a mind enriched with all the stores of biblical learning, and a bram of singular strength and capacity, he was able to do great service in behalf of the prm- ciples to which he was attached. His " Exposition of the Scriptures " is a work which can never lose all its value, and his Defences of Calvinism and Adult Baptism are, as they deserve to be, works of the highest authority in his own denomination. Gill did, for the dogmas of Calvinism, a work which was more needed in his day than it has since been. Never were they so posi- tively unpopular, or viewed with so much indifference, as in the middle of the eighteenth century. Gill brought to their defence the mind of a refined scholar, as well as the heart of a Christian. He showed that they could at least be defended by powerful reasoning, and that they were not to be driven from the behef of men either by the sneer of the Deist or the shrug of the latitudinarian. His style, however, was not equal to his learning, and one of his own denomination has characterized his works as a " continent of mud."* In Gill's church at Horselydown was a schoolmaster and deacon, named Thomas Crosby, who deserves mention as the first historian of the Baptists, Crosby -^vi'ote his work mainly to supply the deficiencies of Neal's History. The charge against Neal, that he had not done justice to the Baptists, must be acknowledged to have been correct, and Crosby's design was therefore a laudable one. He has furnished subsequent writers with many materials which would probably have perished but for his care, and his zeal and industry are unquestionable ; but, beyond this, his history is destitute of every literary excellence, * Robert Hall. Works i. 125 : ed. 1832. [a.d. 1767.] EOBEBT ROBINSON, 447 The name of Stennett had been connected with Bap- tist Church history for nearly a hundred years : the third of the name — Samuel Stennett — was now preach- ing at Little Wild Street. Not less eminent than his father and grandfather, he lived to adorn the Christian ministry, and add, by his genius and his character, strength and stability to all the Free Churches. Samuel Stennett was, after Bunyan, the first Christian hymnolo- gist amongst the Baptists. There is now scarcely any selection of hymns which does not contain some of his pro- ductions. In Eagle Street, Dr. Andrew Gifford, one of the greatest antiquarians of the eighteenth century, preached. From his remarkable acquaintance with literature, and especially with numismatics, Gifford was chosen, in a.d. 1717, to the post of assist ant -librarian of the British Museum. He was one of Whitefield's most intimate friends. Gifford, like Gill, belonged to the strictest school of Calvin, and was an eminent favourite with the earliest Evangelical ministers, such as Romaine and Toplady.* Just rising into prominence was a man of very different order from any of these — Eobert Robinson, of Chester- ton. For boldness, versatility, vivacity, and wit, this remarkable man had no equal amongst his brethren. These qualities do not always consist with prudence, and Robinson was not a prudent man. But he was intensely sincere, and one of the most ardent lovers and teachers of Christian and civil liberty who ever lived. Hierarchies, priests, and the superstitions and traditions by which these characteristics of corrupt churches are mainly sustained, found, in Robinson, a vigorous and persistent" * Ivimey, iii. 591, 613. M8 GENEEAL BAPTISTS— DAN TA TL OB. [a.d. 1770.] enemy. He had something of the spirit which ani- mated De Foe, united to a finer but to a more irregularly developed intellect. Robinson began his church life as a Calvinistic Baptist, but subsequently lapsed — without, however, ceasing his pastorate — to anti- Trinitarian views. His writings are wanting in coherence, but they contam some of the most vigorous thought, expressed in vigor- ous language, to be found in ecclesiastical literature. His *' Arcana," and his " History and Mystery of Good Friday," are the best of his works; his unfinished *' History of the Baptists" is a strange and unsuccessful medley.* Amongst the General Baptists there were few who had retained the theological principles of the founders of that body. A large majority had embraced Unitarian views; but in a.d. 1770 a " New General Baptist Asso- ciation " was formed, which adopted for its creed the characteristic principles, which, at one time, had dis- tinguished the denomination. The principal founder of this Association was Dan Taylor, a man of naturally vigorous and able intellect, whose earliest religious impressions were due to the Methodists. Taylor's views on the subject of Baptism chang- ing, he joined the General Baptist Association in Lincolnshire, and was pastor of the Church at Wadsworth, in that county. Disapprovmg of the theological views of most of his brethren in the ministry, Taylor, in conjunction with "William Thompson, of Boston, and nine ministers from the churches in Leices- tershire and the neighbouring counties, established a new association. The distinctive creed of the new body * Dyer's Life of Robinson. Robinson's Works. [a,d. 1770.] THE PBESBJTEBIANS.—LABDNEB. 449 was contained in the small compass of six articles, which declared the natural depravity of man ; the obligations of the moral law ; the divinity of Christ, and the universal design of his atonement; the promise of salvation for all who exercise faith ; the necessity of regeneration by the Holy Spirit, and the obUgation, upon repentance, of baptism by immersion.* This creed especially guarded the new Association, by its third article, both from the Unitarians and from the Particular Baptists. Taylor subsequently removed to London, where he became pastor of the General Baptist Church in Virginia Street, RatclifFe Highway, and was the recognized leader of the denomination. He was held in high estimation, both for his abilities and for his character, by all bodies of Christians. In a controversy on the nature of human inability with the more celebrated Andrew Fuller, he gave a remarkable illustration of his power as a theo- logical reasoner. But neither the Baptists nor the Congregationalists, nor both combined, could at this period compare, for mental power, and public service to civil and religious freedom, with the Unitarian Presbyterians. The his- tory of the latter half of the eighteenth century is the history of the most rapid growth and, on the whole, the most powerful representation of Unitarianism in England. For more than forty years had Nathaniel Lardner now been labouring in defence of the evidences of the Christian religion, and was still pouring forth the trea- sures of his vast learning on that subject. Lardner, however, was not so zealous a politician as he was a * Adam Taylor's History of the General Baptists, ii. 133, 143. Life of Dan Taylor, by Adam Taylor. 29 450 PRIESTLEY AND PRICE. [ad. 1770.] scholar. He belonged now, at about eighty years of age, to a past generation. Next in repute stood Dr. Joseph Priestley, who was as distinguished for his philosophical attainments, his bold, and, to himself, perilous advocacy of liberty, as for his love of truth, his simplicity of character, and his purity of life. The theological works of Priestley are an armoury of the most advanced Unitarian doctrine, but to whatever extent he offended the great majority of his countrymen by the extreme- ness of his views, he could not offend them by his manner of argument. No more candid or gentlemanly contro- versialist ever defended an unpopular cause, and no man less deserved the disgraceful treatment which he received from his countrymen. His name is inseparably con- nected with one of the most melancholy periods of English history, Avhen, as will have to be told, he stood most prominent amongst a noble band, in defiance of the arbitrary political and the unjust ecclesiastical govern- ment of England. Almost equally eminent in science and politics was Dr. Richard Price, lecturer of the Old Jewry, Jewry Street, pastor of the church at Newington Green, and afterwards of Hackney. As a mathematician. Dr. Price had few equals ; as a political writer on the side of liberty, no man equalled him in vigour. He was one of the class who are the natural product of an age of arbi- trary power. Possessed of a keen sense of justice and right, and of an undaunted courage, he expressed his thoughts on the political situation of his time with an energy and indignation which would have brought a fatal revenge on a less eminent man. He was the leader, in the metropolis, of those Dissenters who upheld the [a.d. 1770.] KIPPIS AND FUBNEAUX. 451 rigfhts of the American Colonies in the War of Inde- pendence, and of those who, in the first period of its history, most actively sympathized with the French revolutionists. In the same period Dr. Andrew Kippis, the successor of Calamy and Say, preached to the Presbyterian Church at Westminster. Kippis was not eminent as a preacher ; but in literature and in ecclesiastical politics he held a distinguished position. He was best known by his contemporaries in these two capacities; now, his celebrity is confined, for the most part, to his literary labours. As a writer in the " Gentleman's Magazine " and the "Monthly Eeview;" as the editor, for many years of the last-named periodical, and as the editor of the " Biographia Britannica," Dr. Kippis rendered an unusual service. Standing at the head of two fountains of literature, he did what no man before him had done, — gave a just proportion to Dissenting politics, history, and biography. His activity on behalf of the civil rights of Dissenters was equal to his attachment to them. For forty years — until nearly the close of the century — no movement in connection with their common interests took place without its securing his open and un- daunted support. Another name which was never missed in any move- ment connected with the extension of religious freedom was that of Dr. Philip Furneaux, of the Presbyterian Church at Clapham. Dr. Furneaux was celebrated for his extensive and accurate memory, to which the pre- servation of Lord Mansfield's judgment in the City of London Sherifi's' case is due. He was the author of 29* 452 BB. GHANDLEB. [a.d. 1770.] an admirable essay on Toleration, in which the principles of Dissent were argued on the broadest ground. He also, with Dr. Priestley, defended the Dissenters, with great vigour and ability, from the malicious and un- worthy attack on their principles made by Justice Blackstone, in his " Commentaries on the Laws of Eng- land." Dr. Furneaux, towards the end of his life, entirely lost his reason. Dr. Samuel Chandler, of the Old Jewry, was of still greater eminence. In the contemporary histories of this period his name is to be found occupying a position similar to that which was formerly occupied by Calamy. He headed deputations, and more often apparently, than any other man, presided at public and private conferences. He was far, however, from being a merely ornamental member of the Presbyterian body. He was one of the first and ablest writers against the Deists, and the author of a " History of Persecution," in which the interference of human law with religious matters was assailed as being necessarily opposed to justice, as well as to liberty. On dissenting questions he was one of the most frequent and vigorous writers of his age. It appears, however, that Dr. Chandler would not have been unwilling, providing that the constitution of the Established Church were altered, to belong to that Church. He was, at one time, engaged with Archbishop Herring, Goold, Bishop of Norwich, and Sherlock, Bishop of Salisbury, in discussing terms of comprehen- sion for Dissenters, in which he does not appear to have advanced very greatly, if at all, beyond the ground adopted by the later Puritans. As a writer on the Evidences of Religion, on Biblical Exegesis, and on La.d. 1770.] BELIGIOVS LIBERTY. 4i53 Eeligious Liberty, he had few equals,* and no man, for nearly fifty years, was more honoured by his generation. f His successor in the ministry at the Old Jewry, Dr. Thomas Amory, the editor of Chandler's works and the writer of his life, carried on the same work, but while Chandler was one of the few eminent Presbyterian ministers who were not either Arians or Socinians, Dr. Amory was inclined to Arianism. % The defence of the public interests of Dissenters was undertaken, for the most part, by the Unitarians. Although the creed of this section of the Free Churches was still under the ban of law, that law had ah'eady become a dead letter. No one presumed to put it in operation. There were churches which openly declared themselves to be Unitarian. Presbyterian they still were in name, and in one characteristic of old Presbyterianism they were also Presbyterian in practice. They recog- nized no creeds, and no confessions of faith were adopted by them. But they had abandoned the doctrinal founda- tions of the later Puritans. Instead of Baxter and Howe, Samuel Clarke and Whiston were their favourite authors. But, in relation to the civil liberties of Dissenters, such men as Priestley and Price were far in advance of their ancestors. It is remarkable that the class of which these eminent men were the principal representatives, in- stead of suffering in numbers because of their conspicuous advocacy of their liberties, were, at this time, rapidly * As an indication of Dr. Cliandler's industry, it may be stated that the list of his writings in the new Catalogue of the British Museum Library, occupies seventeen pages. Some publications, of course, are duplicates. t" Protestant Dissenters' Magazine," vol. 1. Wilson's "Dissenting Churches," ii. 360—385. I "British Biography," art. ''Amory." 454 CLEBIGAL SUBSCRIPTION. [a.d. 1771.] increasing. Amongst the Congregationalists the only man who apparently took a very active interest in public questions was Caleb Fleming, and his doctrinal sym- pathies were with the Unitarians. The Baptists were somewhat better represented, but the body, as a whole, was not in a prosperous condition, and was largely occu- pied with the discussion of distinctive Baptist and Cal- vinistic doctrines. Two new sects had just made their appearance in England — the Sandemanians and the Swedenborgians ; but, as yet, their influence on religious thought was only nominal. The Established Church, drugged by an indolent and luxurious spirit, was asleep, and, while it slept, Methodism on the one hand, and Uni- tarianism on the other, were gaining ground on every side. It was f) wing, mainly, to the existence of the Unitarian element in the Church that a movement was commenced in the year 1771 for the abolition of subscription to the Articles by clergymen and other professional men. In that year Archdeacon Blackburne published "Proposals" suggesting that a petition to Parliament for relief should be drawn up, and a meeting was held for organizing a movement in its favour. Blackburne's proposals met with considerable approval, and on July 17th a meeting of the clergy was held at the Feathers' Tavern, and a form of petition, drawn up by Blackburne, adopted. The petitioners enlarged on the rights of reason and con- science, and maintained that each man had been consti- tuted a judge for himself in searching the Scriptures, and what might or might not be proved thereby. Their subscriptions, they said, precluded them from exercising this right; they were a hindrance to the progress of [i.D. 1772.] AGITATION. 455 religion, they discouraged inquiry, and they gave a handle to unbelievers to vilify the clergy by representing them as guilty of prevarication. The cases of the clergy and of professional men were separately stated, and both parties prayed earnestly for relief* This petition was no sooner adopted than vigorous measures were taken to procure support for it. The most active person in this work was the Rev.Theophilus Lindsey,vicar of Catterick, afterwards one of the most eminent Unitarian ministers in London, who, in the following winter, travelled two thousand miles to obtain signatures. His success, however, was but small. Most of the clergymen he found to be indif- ferent, while from the Methodists he met nothing but opposition and repulse. f This body, indeed, used its utmost influence to prevent the prayer of the petition being granted. Lady Huntingdon, especially, exerted herself with all her characteristic activity against it. She procured counter petitions ; she waited on members of the House of Commons, and she obtained from Lord North, then First Lord of the Treasury, and from Edmund Burke, a promise to oppose the bill.^ The measure was introduced into the House of Com- mons on February 6th, a.d. 1772, by Sir William Meredith, who, in his opening speech, enlarged on the imperfection, absurdity, and unintelligibleness of the Articles, and stated that there was no clergyman who thoroughly believed them in a literal and grammatical sense, as he was required to do by the nature of his sub- scription. The most obvious line of argument against ♦ "Parliamentary History," xvii. 245. t Bel sham's " Memoirs of Lindsey," p. 49. X " Memoirs of the Countess of Huntingdon," ii. 286. 456 CLI:BI0AL subscription. [a.d. 1772.] the petitioners was immediately adopted by Sir Roger Newdigate, who asked, with what face persons, who had subscribed, Avho did not believe in what they had sub- scribed, and who were therefore devoid of common honesty, could come to the bar of that House? After several speeches had been delivered, Lord North rose and stated the views of the Government. The most effective part of his speech was that which exposed the confusion which would be likely to follow the adop- tion of the bill. The rector, he remarked, would be preaching one doctrine and his curate another; the morning lecturer would preach in favour of the Trinity, and the evenino- lecturer aojainst it. Burke followed Lord North. References having been made to the Dissenters by one speaker, who had suggested the danger to the Church which might ensue if they, also, were to be relieved from subscription, " Let him recollect," said Burke, "along with the injuries, the services which Dissenters have done to our Church and to our State. If they have once destroyed, more than once they have saved them. This is but common justice, which they and all mankind have a right to." The ablest speech in favour of the bill was delivered, at the close of an eight hours' debate, by Sir George Savile, whose impassioned eloquence is reported to have pro- duced an astonishing impression on the House. Sir George Savile derided the notion of confining the Church within the narrowest limits, and he had no fear of sectaries. " Sectaries," he cried; "had it not been for the sectaries, this cause had been tried at Rome. Some gentlemen," he added, " talk of raising barriers about the Church of God, and protecting His honour. Barriers [a.d. 1772.] AGITATION. 457 about the Church of God, Sir ? The Church of God can protect itself." The debate had a curious ending by Lord North, in reply to Sir William Meredith, deny- ing that he had said that the Articles were conformable to Scripture. The bill was then thrown out by 217 to 71 votes.* The motion was renewed in the two following years, and defeated with equal decision. After the third defeat several clergymen left the Church, and openly joined the Unitarians.f Blackburne, how- ever, the promoter of the movement, retained his prefer- ments, openly saying that he could not afford to give up his means of living. The movement, from the be- ginning, had no chance whatever of success. The ma- jority of the people cared nothing for it, and statesmen and bishops were far too conservative to pull down one of the oldest foundations of the Established Church. But the rejection of the bill did not secure any greater luiity of thought than had hitherto been characteristic of the Church. The Articles were signed, and not believed, just as before. It does not seem to have occurred to the Government, or to the clerical opponents of the bill, that the scandals attending subscription might have been removed without removing subscription itself — that boys of sixteen years of age, and physicians, might, at least, have been exempted from confessing their belief in the Thirty-nine Articles. The clergy could not reasonably have expected exemption. Church Establishments and liberty of thought cannot. co-exist; or, if they do, those in the Church who exercise that liberty will always expose themselves to a reasonable suspicion of their * " Parliamentary History," xvii. 245, 296. t Belsham's Memoirs of Liiidsey." 458 DISSUJ^Ti:ilS' SUBSCRIPTION. [a.d. 1771.] intellectual, if not of their moral, dishonesty. One of the first objects of the Established Church in England, and one of the reasons of its foundation, was to limit the liberty of opinion respecting theological and ecclesiastical subjects, and to do so by two methods — first, by con- ferring pay and privilege on those who would come into the terms of the State ; and, secondly, by punishing all who would not accept those terms. The petitioning clergy had both pay and privilege : it was hardly to be expected that they should have liberty as well. In the gallery of the House of Commons, during the first debate of this question, there sat two Dissenting ministers — the Rev. Edward Pickard, of Carter's Lane Presbyterian Church, and Dr. Furneaux. These gentle- men heard several members sugo-est that the Dissenters might apply, with good prospect of success, for their relief from subscription. Amongst others. Lord North remarked that, had a similar application been made by them, he should have seen no reasonable objection to it; for, said the premier, " they desire no emoluments from the Church."* Pickard and Furneaux accordingly laid the matter before their brethren, and it was resolved by the General Body of Dissenting Ministers, and by the Committee of Deputies, that a Bill should be prepared and brought in. At this time the law, as defined by the Toleration Act, required all Dissenting ministers, tutors, and schoolmasters, to subscribe the doctrinal Articles. Those who did not were subject to fines, imprisonment, and banishment. It was impossible for Unitarians to do this, and they therefore braved the consequences of refusal. It was now proposed to sub- * Belsham's " Memoirs of Liudsey," pp. G5, C6. [a.d. 1771.] AGITATION. 459 stitute for this subscription a declaration in the following words: — "That we believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to contain a revelation of the mind and will of God, and that we receive them as the rule of our faith and practice." No time was lost in forwarding this measure, for on the third of April, in the same year, the Bill, which was in charge of Sir Henry Hoghton and Edmund Burke, was under debate in the House of Commons. Although it gave great alarm to High Churchmen, and excited one member, Sir William Dolben, to characterize it as a " wicked " measure, it passed its first stage without a division, and on April 14th the second reading was carried by 70 votes to 9.* It reached the House of Lords in the next month, but was not debated until it was before the Committee of the House. Here it received the support of the most eminent men amongst the peers, Lord Chatham, Lord Camden, and Lord Mansfield, amongst the number. The weight of the Court and the Bench of Bishops was sufficient, however, to defeat it. Five bishops, headed by the Archbishop of York, spoke against it, and only one. Green, Bishop of Lincoln, in its favour. "Green! Green!" exclaimed the king, when he heard of this, "he shall never be translated." f The Bill was lost by 86 to 28 votes. It was on this occasion that, in reply to Drummond, Archbishop of York, the Earl of Chatham made a memorable defence of the Dissenters. The Archbishop had charged the Dissent- ing ministers with being men of a " close ambition." "This," exclaimed the statesman, "is judgmg unchari- * " Parliamentary History," xvii. 431. t Dyer's •' Life of Robert Robinson," p. 78. 460 I>ISSI:NTERS' subscription. [a.d. 1773.] tably; and whoever brings such a charge, without evi- dence, defames. The Dissenting ministers are represented as men of close ambition : they are so, my lords ; and their ambition is to keep close to the college of fishermen, not of cardinals; and to the doctrines of inspired apostles, not to the decrees of interested and aspiring bishops. They contend for a scriptural and spiritual worship ; we have a Calvinistic creed, a Popish liturgy, and Arminian clergy. The Reformation has laid open the Scriptures to all ; let not the bishops shut them again. Laws in support of ecclesiastical power are pleaded, which it would shock humanity to execute. It is said religious sects have done great mischief when they were not kept under restraints ; but history affords no proof that sects have ever been mischievous when they were not oppressed and persecuted by the ruling Church." Having nearly the whole weight of the popular branch of the legislature in their favour, the Dissenters were not dismayed by their treatment from the Lords. On March 2nd, a.d. 1773, the Bill was again brought in, carried on the second reading by 87 to 34 votes, and through Committee by 69 to 16 votes, and at the last stage by 65 to 14 votes. A new feature was introduced into the question this year, and threatened, at one time, to be fatal to it. Several Dissenters, including some in London, Liverpool, Bolton, Exeter, Dursley, and Wotton-under-Edge, petitioned against it, on the ground, amongst other reasons, that " if it should pass into law it would undermine the establishment of religion."* A meeting of Dissenting ministers was also held in London * " Parliamentary History," xv. 786. [a.d. 1773.] AGITATION. 461 to oppose it, at which resolutions were passed protestino- against the measure. It appears from these resolutions that fears were entertained of the growth of Popery and Unitarianism,* but how the former would be affected it is difficult to see, while the latter had obviously increased and was increasing in spite of all legal pro- hibitions to the contrary. These petitions, however, had no weight, nor did the second successful passage of the measure through the Commons at all affect the determination of the king and the bishops. It was again decisively rejected. From the Lords the Dissenters had, as had been their habit, appealed to the people. An admirable opportunity had been given to them to re-affirm and defend the principle of religious liberty, and they took the utmost advantage of it. The Rev. Ebenezer Radcliffe, of Poor Jewry Lane, boldly attacked the bishops ;t the Rev. Isaac Maudit, Kippis, Furneaux, Gibbons, Stennett, and Robert Robmson, laid down anew the rights of conscience. These were well-known men, and they were the customary standard-bearers of Dissent. But another name, destined to acquire an equal eminence, now appeared. This was that of the Rev. Joshua Toulmin, Presbyterian minister of Birmingham, who, in two " Letters on the late applications to Parliament of Protestant Dissenting Ministers," ably dealt with the , whole question. Most of these publications breathed a stronger spirit of defiance of the bishops and clergy than had ever before been shown by Dissenting ministers. • lyimey, iv. 31, 32. t " Two Letters addressed to the Right Reverend Prelates who a second time rejected the Dissenters Bill," a.d. 1773. 462 BISSEJ^TERS' SUBSCRIPTION. [a.d. 1773.] They indicate that since the Toleration Act had passed there had been a growth, not merely of opinion respect- ing the claims of the Church, but of determination* to resist those claims. RadclifFe, while he protested that "the oratory of all the Dissenting ministers in this kingdom could not prevail upon one man to attempt so ridiculous a project as that of pulling down the hier- archy," protested, with equal force, that he looked upon the conduct of the hierarchy with pity, indignation, and contempt. " You have put," he said, " a negative upon the lawful exercise of our religion ; but you cannot make the world believe that religion itself depends upon, or is connected with, the will of the magistrates ; you have limited the freedom of the Gospel, but you have not destroyed Christianity. Do you expect we should com- ply with your requisitions?" " Do not confound your principles with those of the State, nor your cause with that of Christianity, for fear they should disown your alliance."* "Many Dissenting ministers," said Dr. Stennett, " cannot conscientiously subscribe the Articles, as they apprehend the civil magistrates' re- quiring subscription to explanatory articles of faith, to be an invasion upon the rights of conscience, and the sole authority of Christ as King in His Church." Kippis declared that the Dissenters now denied the right of any body of men, whether civil or ecclesiastical, to impose human tests, creeds, or articles, and that they protested, against such an imposition as a violation of men's essential liberty to judge and act for themselves in matters of religion." f Maudit, also, frankly acknowledged the change ♦ Eadcliffe's Letter, pp. 83, 96. t Kippis'.s " Vindication," p. 29. [A.D. 1773.] AGITATION. 463 which had taken place.* But no writer more clearly illustrated this change than Robert Kobinson, who, with unparalleled vigour and vivacity, attacked the whole system of human authority in matters of belief and of human legislation for the Christian Church. " Let any impartial inquirer," he said, "take up the Holy Scriptures, and ask whither do all the contents of these ancient writ- ings tend ? History, prophecy, miracles, the ceremonies of the Old, and the reasonings of the New Testament ; the legislation of Moses, and the mission of Jesus Christ, to what do they tend? What is their aim? The proper answer would be, their professed end is to give glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, and benevolence amongst men. . . . Now, to be a Christian is nei- ther more nor less than to concur with this desiofn : so much of this, so much true religion, the rest is vox prw- tereaque nihil. . . . What are the proper means of obtaimng this end? One sect of Christians proposes oaths, subscriptions to creeds, fines and imjmsonments ; another proceeds to execrations, corporal punishments, and death, in various frightful shapes, itself. The present petitioners, supposing these means contrary to the nature of things, contrary also to the means prescribed by the Founder of religion, propose the abolition of the present penal means, and the introduction of the original mode of tuition." f " Piety and plunder," he exclaimed, " religion and murder, the service of God and the slaugh- ter of His image ! " Three years after writing this, Robmson, in the " History and Mystery of Good * Maudit's " Case of the Dissenting Ministers," p. 15. f " Arcana ; or, the Triumphs of the late Petitioners to Parliament for Belief in the Matter of Subscription." Preface, a.d. 1774. 464 TRE BISSENTEBS [a.d. 1779.] Friday," returned to the attack. Dealing with the hierarchy, he wrote — " The cool, disinterested part of mankind consider a hierarchy as they consider a stand- ing military force in absolute monarchies, where the main principle of the constitution is that of governing by fear — an hierarchy is essentially necessary to the despotism of the prince ; but in free states an hierarchy will always justly be an object of jealousy. Hierarchical powers have found many a state free, and reduced each to slavery ; but there is no instance of their having brought an enslaved state into Christian liberty." He then pro- ceeded to dwell upon the vices that disgraced the priest- hood. They were six — ignorance, perjur}?-, ambition, avarice, time-serving, and hypocrisy: "Perjury," he said, " if they subscribe upon oath their belief in propo- sitions which they have either not examined, or do not believe." Avarice, " ten thousand times more tenacious of a fourpenny Easter offering than of all the Ten Com- mandments." " What said you," he inquired, addressing a clergyman, "to the Dissenting clergy, whom you flatter and soothe, and call brethren in Christ? Are they freed from oaths, and subscriptions, and penal laws ? Christian liberty ! thou favourite offspring of Heaven ! thou first- born of Christianity ! I saw the wise and pious servants of God nourish thee in their houses, and cherish thee in their bosoms ! I saw them lead thee into public view : all good men hailed thee ! the generous British Commons caressed and praised thee, and led thee into an Upper House, and there — there thou didst expire in the holy lap of Spiritual Lords ! " Such attacks, renewed and reiterated, the bishops of this period could, of all men, least afford to have brought La.d. 1770.] BELIEVED. 465 against them. Nor could the Church afford to have her foundations re-examined and her breastworks so ruth- lessly assailed. "Whether from fear of prolonging the controversy, therefore, or whether from a desire of en- gaging the Dissenters in measures for the relief of Roman Catholics, they suddenly and unexpectedly sur- rendered. Preaching, on January 30th, in the [year 1779, before the House of Lords, Ross, Bishop of Exeter, took occasion to express his earnest wish that toleration might be extended, and that Dissenters might have a legal security for the free exercise of their worship. Acting upon this hint, the old Bill, slightly modified, was again brought in, and passed both Houses with scarcely any opposition. The declaration, substituted by this Act* for the previous subscription to the Articles, required Dissenters, as a condition of exercising the of&ce of minister or preacher, to assert their personal Christianity and Protestantism by their behef in the Scriptures. This was the first step in the direction of enlarged toleration for ninety years, and at the end of even this long period it could not be accomplished excepting by a compromise. While the attention of Dissenters was thus enofa 518 THE BIBLE SOCIETY. [a.d. 1806.] religious society with us, they will — and it is natural for them — endeavour to gain the ascendancy, and to sup- plant us whenever they find the opportunity."* The Bishop of Winchester denounced it because it " was not framed with a sufficient security to the Church of Eng- land." t Dr. Herbert Marsh, Margaret Professor of Divinity, and afterwards Bishop of Peterborough, ad- dressed a memorial to the Senate of the University of Cambridge, protesting against the constitution of a society where an equality of power and interest between Dissenters and Churchmen was admitted, in which there was an "evident danger that the pre-eminence of the estab- lished religion would be gradually forgotten and lost." " That Churchmen," he added, " by their association with Dissenters in this modern Bible Society, increase both the political and the religious importance of the latter, is too obvious to require illustration." J The Society, it was said, would have only a "baneful" operation, calcu- lated to interfere with, impede, and retard the inestim- able interests of piety, and peace, and true religion." § " Supply these men," cried a country clergyman, " with Bibles (I speak as a true Churchman) and you will supply them with arms against yourself" || " Dissenters," cried another, " can now get Bibles more easily than ever." It was gravely argued that, without the Liturgy, men were left in doubt whether the principles of the Established Church should be embraced by them or not ; * Letter to the Rev. R. Yorke. "Anti- Jacobin Eeview," vol. xxxvi. p. 108. f Letter to the Eev. H. Venn. " Papers relating to the Bible Society," pp. 4, 5. t Memorial, etc., ibid., pp. 7 — 11. § "Reasons for Declining to become a Subscriber to the British and Foreign Bible Society." By Christopher "Wordsworth, D.D., j). 9. II " A Country Clergyman's First Letter to Lord Teignmoutli," ]). 12. [A.D. 1812.] CLERICAL OPPOSITION. 519 that they wanted a guide to lead them into the Church, and that unless they were supplied with the Prayer Book, the Bible might be misapplied to doctrine and dis- cipline most discordant with those of the Church.* It was further urged, that the political consequence of such a society would be damaging to the very stability of the State."!' For these and similar reasons Churchmen were exhorted not to support the new institution. If an ad- ditional argument were needed, it was conveyed in the statement that the two archbishops, by far the greater part of the Bishops, and the majority of the clergy, had shown a repugnance to acting with it.;}: The most able writers amongst the opponents of the Society were Dr. Ayordsworth,§ Dr. Marsh, Archdeacon Daubeney, and Dr. Edward Maltby, afterwards Bishop of Durham.jl Dr. ]\larsh's pen was the most prolific, and pamphlet after pamphlet ap]3eared from it. On the other side, the Rev. William Dealtry, the Rev. Charles Simeon, and the Rev. Dr. Isaac Milner, were its most conspicuous defenders. It was not a controversy in which Dissenters were called to take a prominent part, but the Rev. Robert Hall, in a speech delivered at Leicester, presented perhaps the ablest argument in favour of the circulation of the Bible, and the Bible alone,^ which appeared * " An IiKiuirj' into the Consequences of Neglecting to give the Prayer Book with the Bible." By Herbert Marsh, D.D., p. 18. t "Objections of a Churchman," etc. By the Eev. F. Nolan, p. 41. X " Twenty facts in addition to twenty Keasons for not supiwrting the Bible Society," p. 19. a.d. 1819. § The late Canon Wordsworth . II " It was this, among other causes of the prevailing enthusiasm, which made me take the side I did about the Bible Society, which was certainly set on foot by the sects, although encouraged now by persons of a very different and more meritorious description." — Bishop Maltby to Bishop Blomfield. Life of Blomfield, i. 74. ^ Speech on April 13th, 1812. 520 DAT SCHOOLS. [a.d. 1796.] during the whole of the fifteen years' war. To rebut the distinct charge, made in very offensive language by a clergyman of the name of Woodcock, that Dissenters had connected themselves with the Society for the pur- pose of "carrying on their evil designs against Church and State," Mr. John Bullar, of Southampton, wrote a vio;orous defence of them.* The influence of the con- troversy, as a whole, undoubtedly tended to increase the popularity of the new society. It came out from it with vast pecuniary resources, and with the unquestioned adhesion to it of the greater part of the members of the Established Church. f While these great religious agencies were being strengthened and extended, another work of equal national importance was undertaken. It is difficult, at the present time, to form an adequate conception of the neglected state of education amongst the poor at the close of the eighteenth century. Not one in twenty of the children of England was at school. It was a rare circumstance to meet a poor man who could read. This ignorance was accompanied, as it generally is, by de- praved minds and brutish manners. But in the year 1796 a young Quaker, Joseph Lancaster, opened a school in his father's house in Southwark for the educa- tion of the children of the poor. Lancaster's motives sprung from an ardent and benevolent disposition. So strong: was his zeal, and so successful his labour, that in * A Refutation of the False Assertion against the Dissenters," etc. By John Bullar. t The library of the Bible Society contains twenty volumes of pamph- lets, besides several detached publications, on this controversy. I have read one half of them, or rather more than seventy publications. No one need do more than this. lA.Ti. 1808.] JOSUPH LANCASTER. 521 two years his scholars were more than a thousand in num- ber. The impossibility of personally teaching the whole of these suggested to him the idea of employing his elder and better educated boys as monitors to the younger scholars. Some years afterwards an angry controversy arose as to whether Lancaster was the originator of the monitorial system, the invention of which was claimed for Dr. Bell, formerly of Madras, who certainly used monitors in the military school in that city as early as the year 1792. There was some difference, however, between Lancaster's and Bell's systems, and whatever may be claimed for the latter, it is certain that Lan- caster, knowing nothing of Bell's theory, introduced the practice into England.* Its extraordinary success soon attracted general attention, and it became one of the fashions of the day to visit Lancaster's schools. Royalty even took an interest in them, and George III. did honour to himself by the open and constant encou- ragement which be gave not only to the young Quaker, but to the unsectarian principles upon which his schools were founded. In a.d. 1808, after years of devoted, although sometimes ill-advised, labour, Lancaster had the satisfaction of seeing the formation of " the Royal Lan- * " The system was first introduced, into this country at least, by .Joseph Lancaster, a man so well known to all our readers, that it would be imperti- nent to detain them with any praise of his universally acknowledged merits. This much is admitted on all hands: whether he invented the plan himself, or only imported it from Madras, or took a hint from that scheme and improved upon it, is an open question ; but there is no one who has ever denied that he was the first who established in England (we may say in Europe) a system of education whereby one master can teach a thousand, or even a greater number of children, not only as well, but a great deal better than they can possibly be taught by the old methods, and at an expense of less than five shillings a year for each." — Edinburgh Review, Nov., 1810, p. 67. 522 DAY SCHOOLS, [a.d. 1808.] castrian Institution for Promoting the Education of the Poor," which subsequently received the title of the " British and Foreign School Society." Through his own personal exertions, and the aid of this society, schools of an unsectarian character were soon established in all the principal towns in England. But this work was not effected without the most for- midable opposition. The bishops and clergy of the Established Church, as soon as Lancaster's scheme became popular, at once sounded the note of alarm. It is almost incredible that not merely an unsectarian edu- cation, but education of any kind for the poor was op- posed by some of these parties.* The King was gravely remonstrated with for the countenance which he had given to Lancaster ; but happily, the remonstrance failed of its intended effect. "j* Finding that it was impossible * " The charge most constantly brought against the Church, in the course of the discussions respecting education which have arisen within the last twelve years, has been that of disinclination to have the poor taught. If, instead of disinclination, carelessness or indolence in the cause had been alleged, the accusation would have been better founded as far as regarded the general body of the Church, both lay and clerical, and as ftir as regarded the beginning of the period to which we are referring. That some leading persons in the hierarchy were averse to education, cannot be doubted, but, upon the whole, there was rather a want of diligence than of good wiU, until the great exertions of the Dissenters stirred up a corresponding spirit in the Ckaxch.."— Edinburgh Review, March, 1821, p. 228. t " The press and the pulpit in vain sounded the alarm, with which those • reverend personages were willing to reform the Church and the State. It was proposed to wean the Sovereign from his unfortunate predilection in favour of those who wished to diffuse on the cheapest terms, the most use- ful kinds of knowledge amongst the poorer subjects. Persons were not wanting, nor those in the lowest ranks of the Church, who volunteered their services on this occasion. They remembered the excellent use which had been made of the No Pojyery cry ; and vainly imagining that the King had been the dupe of that delusion— that his royal mind had in good earnest been alarmed for the safety of the Church— they concluded that it was peculiarly accessible to alarms of this description ; and they took every means to magnifv the dangers which must result from his IMajesty's con- [a.d. 1806. J GRURCH OPPOSITION. 523 to check the success of the new schools, the old cry was once more raised. The Church was again " in danger." In charges and pamphlets almost without number, Lan- caster was denounced, and his schemes were derided m the most unmeasured terms of abuse. It was enough, it was said, to observe that the new plan had for its author a Quaker,* who could only be compared for mischievous- ness to the apostate Julian ;t that it must, therefore tinuing to patronize a sectary who taught reading, and put the Bible itself into children's hands, without the safeguards of proper gloss and comment- ary, and a regular assortment of articles. We are credibly informed that the utmost effect of these artifices was to provoke the steady contempt of the exalted personage in question ; and that he never could, by any efforts, be induced to get over the first difficulty which met him in the fine-spun Jesuitical reasonings of those ghostly counsellors, ' the evils of being able to read,' ' the dangers of reading the Bible.' The tempters soon perceived that they had made another mistake ; and once more they shifted their ground. ... If the poor mitst be educated, let them be educated by the clergy of the Establishment. If anything so unworthy of his station as patronizing the teachers of ragged beggarlings must occupy the mind of the Sovereign, let him bestow those favours exclusively on the members of the Church. What though Dr. Bell's plan is more limited in its efficacy, infinitely in- ferior in economy, crude and imperfect in many of the most essential points, still it comes oft" a right stock, and is wholly in regular Episcopal hands." — Edinburgh Mevieiv. * " Some of those persons who, being on the look out after comfortable temporalities, have a peculiarly nice sense of the approach of danger to the spiritual concerns of the community, soon discovered that this plan of edu- cation was fraught with moral dangers both to the Church and to re- ligion itself. Mr. Lancaster was a sectary, a respected and cherished member of that peaceful body of Christians who alone never either persecuted, nor fought, nor intrigued, nor ruled, and who, having no establishment, nor, in- deed, any order of priests, are not much in favour with such as delight to mingle with the pure clerical functions of Christian ministers, the enjoyment of patronage, wealth and power. If, then, the first alarm was given by the idea of ' thejjoor being taught,' a louder note was soon soimded when it was found that ' the i)oor vjere to be taught ly a Quaker.' What more deadly- attack upon religion than teaching children to read the Bible, without pre- scribing also the gloss and commentary which Episcopacy has sanctioned ? AVhat greater injury to the Establishment, than to instil the Christian re- ligion, pure as it flows from the inspired penman, without conveying along with it the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England?" — Edinburgh Review, 2^ov. 1810, pp. 67-8. f Charge of Archdeacon Daubeny, a.d. 1806, p. 33. 524 OJPFOSITION TO DAT SCHOOLS, [a.d. 1806.] operate to the disadvantage of the Establishment; that it was " a wild, absurd, and an ti- Christian" scheme,* and *' calculated to answer no one purpose so much as that of amalgamating the great body of the people into one •great deistical compound. "f " The plan," said another writer, " was the plan of a Quaker," and Quakerism " meant nothing but Deism, and a disgusting amalgam of all those anti- Christian heresies and blasphemies which were permitted to disgrace and disturb the Church in her primitive days." J This style of attack, however, assisted rather than hindered Lancaster's scheme. § His system was carrying all before it. It was spreading with immense rapidity ^through the kingdom, || and seriously affecting the interests of the Church. " It cannot be dissembled," wrote Dr. Bell, "that thousands in various parts of the kingdom are drawn from the Church by the superior attention paid to education out of the Church. The tide is fast setting in one direction, and if not speedily stemmed, it may run faster and faster."^ " Of all the plans," wrote Mrs. Trimmer to Dr. Bell, " that have appeared in this kingdom likely to supplant the Church, Mr. Lancaster's seems to me the most formidable. . . . A few years hence, were Mr. Lancaster's plan to be fully adopted, the common people would not know that there * Charge of Archdeacon Daubeney, a,d. 1807, p. 32, t Daubeney's "Sermon at St. Paul's Cathedral." June 1, 1809, p. 17. % " Letter to the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England, •on Joseph Lancaster's Plan." a.d. 1806. § " Many attacked him because he was a Quaker, and the ignorance and bigotry with which he was thus assailed, gave him all the advantages he could wish." — Robert Southey, in the Quarterly Revieiv, Oct. 1811. Art, " Bell & Lancaster's System of Education," pp. 288. II lb. Sept., 1812, pp. 1—4. ^ Letter to Dr. Barton, Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, March 30, 1807. " Southey's Life of Bell," ii. 182. U.D. 1811.] MSS. TRIMMER AND JDB. BELL. 525 was such a thing as the Established Church in the nation."^'' In Bell's reply to this letter the germ of a Church Society for the education of the people is first seen. " What you say," he wrote, " of preventing the spread of this scheme against the Church, is what some years ago occurred to me; and I then said what I shall never cease to repeat, that I know of but one way efi*ec- tually to check these efibrts, and it is by able and well- directed efforts of our own hands. A scheme of educa- tion patronized by Church and State, originating in Government, and superintended by a member of the Establishment, would most effectually promote our views."t "I cannot," wrote Mrs. Trimmer to Bell at another period, "see this Goliath of schismatics bearing down all before him, and engrossing the instruction of the common people, without attempting to give him a little check." + Something, it was urged, must now be done.§ "If," said Dr. Herbert Marsh, Margaret Pro- fessor of Divinity, and afterwards Bishop of Peter- borough, "we cannot recall the thousands who have deserted the Church, let us double our efforts to retain the faithful band which rally round her standard. Let both the clergy and the laity, who are still attached to the Church, combine for mutual defence." \\ * " Southey's Life of Bell," ii. 135—138. t lb. ii. 150. \ Letter to BeU. lb. a.d. 1805. § '■' The cry, therefore, now became prevalent among the same persons, that it was the province of the Establishment to educate the poor ; that a sectary could only teach sectarianism, or, at any rate, latitudinarian prin- ciples. Therefore, in order to supplant the sectary, there must be found a Churchman ; and the irregular empirical scheme, abeady spreading with the rapitUty of error, and the steadiness of truth, must be succeeded by some more correct, orderly, clerical system which should at once resemble it, and coincide with the Establishment."— ^d^iJur^^iZeweu;, Nov. 1810, p. 70. II Sermon on the " National Religion the Foundation of National Educa- tion," June 13, 1811. 520 TEE NATIONAL SOCIETY. [a.d. 1811.] The ''check" that was ultimately devised was the formation of the National School Society in the year 1811."* Lancaster's princij^le, which he had ardently and successfully advocated, was, that education ought not to be made subservient to the prgpagation of the peculiar tenets of any sect. To meet, however, the feelings of some persons, he was willing that religion should be taught. " Either," he said, " let the religion of Quakers be taught if a Quaker school is founded upon this method of teaching, writing, and reading ; or I will confine myself to those general practical principles which are suitable to all sects, if you choose to found a general school for the instruction of the indigent; or I will meddle only with the temporal instruction of my pupils, and you may confide their religious instruction to whom you please." t The British and Foreign School Society was, therefore, founded upon the broadest and most unsectarian principles ; the National Society, on the other hand, made it a condition that all children should be instructed in the liturgy and catechism of the Church, and be compelled to attend the public worship of the Establishment on the Sunday. The founders of this Society, which included most of the prelates of the Church, advanced, at the outset, the principle that if any education was to be given to the poor, the Estab- lished Church alone had the right to give it. But when Dr. Bell first urged that something should be done, he deprecated the poor being taught either to write or to cypher. The diffusion of general knoAvledge amongst * '' The friends of the Establishment have been roused. The enemy set up their song of triumph before they had won the field. This insolent minority dared even to menace the Establishment." — Robert Soutliey, in the Quarterly Revieio, Oct., 1811, p. 302. t Edinburgh Bevmv, Oct., 1807, p. 65. [a.d. 1800.] STATE OF THE CHVRCR. 527 them he stigmatized as " Utopian;" as calculated to confuse the distinctions of ranks and classes of society, and to make those who were doomed to the drudgery of daily labour discontented and unhappy in their lot.* This narrow scheme had however, when Lancaster's great success made it imperative to outbid him, to be abandoned, and the author of the Church system of education finally consented that both writing and cypher- ing should be taught. All classes, therefore, were now being instructed. Instead of opposition to education, the strife was who should educate the greatest number, until, ultimately, from being the opponent, the Church became the principal agent of popular instruction. Taking into consideration the general character of the Established clergy at the commencement of the nineteenth century, it is not difficult to understand the opposition which they gave to all movements for the moral and religious improvement of the people. With the exception of the Evangelical section — nowminbering, perhaps, nearly a thousand ministers — it is not an exagger- ation to say that personal religion and a personal sense of duty were almost unknown amongst them. Racing and drinking were their favourite occupations, and com- paratively few were resident upon their benefices, f It is only just to state that their opposition to the more zealous members of their own profession was equal to that which was encountered by the Dissenters. The most eminent for piety amongst its bishops was Beilby Porteus, Bishop of London, the friend of Hannah More and Wil- * Bell's Madras School, 3rcl Ed. p. 90. t The state of the clergy at this period has been vividly described in chap. iii. of the " Memoir of Bishop Blomfield," and is indicated with equal truthfulness in Dean Stanley's " Life of Bishop Stanley," p. 8. 528 STATE OF THE CRTTBCE:. [a.d. 1800.] berforce, and a leader in most of the religious and charitable enterprises of the time. The see of Canter- bury was filled by John Moore, who considered it to be his chief duty to provide for his relatives. Brownlow North, Bishop of Winchester, George Pretyman Tom- line, Bishop of Lincoln, and Lewis Bagot, Bishop of St. Asaph, were conspicuous for the same tendency. The scandalous malpractices of these prelates, in respect to the appropriation of Church patronage and the manage- ment of their episcopal revenues, formed some of the chief points of comment when the state of the ecclesiastical revenues of England was subsequently brought before the nation. Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, was, in most respects, superior to these. He possessed both scholarship and piety, but in love of personal display he surpassed all his brethren. It was his custom to travel in a coach and six, attended by twelve liveried servants.* Watson, Bishop of Llandafi^, was far more qualified, in some respects, to sit on the Episcopal bench, and in replying to Paine's "Age of Reason," he did the work appropriate to a father of the Church. Archdeacon Paley, of Carlisle, illustrated the low tone of moral opinion by basing the Church establishment and moral conduct on principles of expediency alone. The amount and ad- ministration of church property, and the origin, character^ and unjust incidence of the tithe system, now began to be discussed in many pamphlets, and an impetus given to Church reform in this direction. f But the high cha- * Watson's " Life of Warburton." t The early pamphlets on this subject are well worth perusal. There is a large collection of them in the library of the "Liberation Society." The estimates of the value of church property which they [a.d. 1800.] ; THE UNITABIAN8. 529 racter of the arduous labours of the evangelical section of the Established Church was as conspicuous as were the neghgence and the laxity of the majority of their brother clergymen. Through such men as John Kewton, Richard Cecil, Joseph Milner, and Charles Simeon, and rural clergymen like Legh Richmond, the Established Church wielded a spiritual power which probably equalled in its influence for good that of all other denominations. Nearly all classes of Dissenters were now rapidly increasing in number. The sole exceptions were the Presbyterians and the Unitarians, and the former had become almost identified with the latter. The most eminent of their ministers were Dr. Abraham Rees, Theophilus Lindsey, Thomas Belsham, and Joshua Toulmin. Dr. Rees, who was a Welshman by birth, had succeeded to the pastorate of Chandler's Church, m the Old Jewry, but he was more eminent as a scholar than as a preacher. The forty-five volumes of the "Cyclopedia" which is distinguished by his name,— the greatest work of its kind which had ever been published, the whole of which was projected and the greater portion written by himself,— testify to the immense extent of his learning and of his in- 'dustry. Nor was he less zealous in ecclesiastical than he was in literary labour. Whenever the liberties of Dissenters were attacked, he threw the whole energy of his mind into their defence. He was one of the most active members of the Committee of Dissenting Deputies, and was a liberal benefactor of his own countrymen. Few men exceeded him in public service, and none in <:ontam are very exaggerated, but they poiut to many reforms wMch have emce been accomplished. 34 530 THE UNITARIANS. [a.d. 1800.] dignity of character and appearance. He was pastor of the Jewin Street Church from a.d. 1783 to a.d. 1825, when he died. Theophilus Lindsey was one of the clergymen who left the Established Church at the time of the Subscription agitation, after which he became pastor of the Essex Street Church. Here he occupied one of the most influential positions in connection with Unitarianism in England. His popularity as a preacher was very considerable, and he was the means of convert- ino- to his own views the Duke of Grafton, who attended his ministry. He was the author of "An Historical Review of Unitarian Doctrine and Worship," and of an answer to Robert Robinson's " Plea for the Divinity of Christ," which appears to have had some influence in inducing Robinson to abandon Trinitarian views. The characteristics of his mind were natural devout- ness and transparent conscientiousness. The latter quality compelled him to leave the Church, and gradually to abandon, as evidence, in his judgment conclusive, was brought before him, the doctrines of the Evangelical faith.* Thomas Belsham was the biographer of Lindsey. He succeeded, at the request of Mr. Coward's trustees, to the ofiice of principal of Daventry Academy, nearly the whole charge of which devolved upon him. He left this honourable post in consequence of the decisive change of his doctrinal views, and succeeded Priestley as pastor of the Hackney congregation, at the same time taking the post of theological tutor at Hackney New Col- lege, which had recently been established on avowedly " liberal " theological principles. Next, he succeeded * Belsham 's " Memoirs of Tlieophihis Lindsey." La.d. 1800.] THE TTNITARIANS. 531 Lindsey in the pastorship of the Essex Street Church, which Lindsey had raised to a position of great denominational eminence. Belsham, like Lindsey, was a vigorous defender of Unitarian doctrine; but he brought to that defence a greater philosophical power, and a better trained mind than Lindsey possessed. His "Calm Inquiry into the Scripture Doctrine of the Person of Christ," is one of the most able exami- nations of that subject from the Unitarian point of view. Belsham was also the author of several works bearing upon the nature of civil government and upon English history. In these, and in three sermons on '' The Connexion of Christianity with the Civil Power," the author defended, with great laboriousness, the prin- ciple of a State Church in all its applications, excepting the penal punishment of Dissenters. He was in favour of the State both educating and endowing ministers of religion, of its providing a liturgy, and of its erecting places of worship ; and was of opinion that the Christian Church had derived more benefit from the patronage of the State than it had received injury. He confessed, how- ever, that he made very few proselytes to his principles, and that amongst his old friends he did not know one who thought with him. His influence upon the opinions of the generation of Unitarians that succeeded him, was, however, probably greater than that which he exercised upon his contemporaries.* Dr. Joshua Toulmin, of Taunton, and subsequently of Birmingham, where he became pastor of Dr. Priestley's Church, was not less eminent than either of these men. He was both an able preacher and an industrious writer. His " History of * Williams's "Memoirs of Belsliam." 34-* 532 THE C0NGREGATI0NALI8TS. [a.d. 1800. 1 Dissent to the Year 1717," is one of the standard works in Dissentino; historical literature. His edition of Neal's "History of the Puritans" has superseded all previous editions, but in a controversy with Andrew Fuller upon Calvinism and Unitarianism he exhibited less ability than he did in his historical studies. The prominent position of Unitarianism at this period, as has been the case throughout its history, was owing for the most part, not to the extent to which its doctrines had been received, for they were declining in influence, but to the high character and great abilities of a few preachers and writers. On the religious thought of the nation at large, however, unless by the destruction of the old Presbyterian interest, Unitarianism may be said to have exercised little positive influence. In the number of remarkably useful, if not great men, the Congregationalists stood far more conspicuous. Dr. David Bogue, Samuel Palmer, George Burder, William Bengo CoUyer, William Bull, William Jay, Thomas Toller, John Clayton the senior, stood pre-eminent amongst their brethren. Dr. Bogue, when a young man, had employed his j3en in defence of the rights of Dissenters in connexion with the Test and Corpora- tion Acts, but his greatest service to the Christian religion was given for the advancement of missionary efforts. To this work he was devoted, and he gave to it the best energies of a good and able man. As one of the founders of the London Missionary Society his zeal in its behalf increased with his years, and he was= selected to preach the first anniversary ser- mon of that institution. One who knew him best, and who was to him what Orton was to Doddridge, has [A.D. 1800.] THE CONGREGATIONALISTS. 533 said that " it would require a volume to record his labours in that great cause." * His peculiar fitness for such a post led to his appointment as principal of an academy at Gosport for the training of young men for the ministry. Many of the most eminent missionaries of the London Society were educated by him. Dr. Bogue died, where probably he would have chosen to die, at a meeting of the Society, in a.d. 1825. No name was more familiar to the Congregational Churches of England at the begimiing of this century than that of Samuel Palmer, of Hackney, who served equally in the pulpit and in literature, the interests of spiritual religion and of Christian freedom. In the "Protestant Dissenters' Magazine," in the "Noncon- formists' Memorial," — an improvement on Calamy's well- known work, — and in the " Protestant Dissenters' Cate- chism," he still lives to serve the principles which he held to be more precious than life itself, t George Burder, the author of "Village Sermons," and in earlier life, when at Lancaster and Coventry, one of the most active evangelists, was now at Fetter Lane Chapel, and one of the secretaries of the London Mis- sionary Society, as well as editor of the " Evangelical Magazine." He died at nearly eighty years of age, in A.D. 1832. Dr. CoUyer, of Hanover Chapel, Peckham, was one of the fashionable ministers of his time, a little given to personal display, and though an elegant, a useful preacher. This popular religious author and minister was, for twelve years, one of the most intimate * "Dr. James Bennett's Life of Bogue." " History of Dissenters," p. 144. t There is a memoir of Palmer, in two parts, in the " Congregational Magazine," for a.d. 1819, but the writer, singularly enough, omits all re- ference to the " Nonconformists' Memorial." 534 THE CONGBEGATIONALISTS. [a.d. 1800.] friends of the Duke of Kent, over whom he had great personal mfluence, and who occasionally attended his chapel.* William Bull of Newport-Pagnel, who en- joyed the friendship of Cowper and Newton, and was the first principal of the Newport-Pagnel Institution, was one of those rarely gifted natures who are con- tent to devote some of the highest of human abilities to apparently moderate uses. Although a man of un- tiring energy and of great pulpit power, which, if he had chosen, would have placed him in one of the most eminent positions in the metropolis as pastor of the Weigh-House Church, he saw that the spiritual interests of the few hundreds of a country town were enough to engage the whole labour of a Christian minister. f Three generations of William Bull's family have now filled for a hundred years the same pulpit at New|3ort- Pagnel. The same can be said of another family, one member of which now occupied the position of pastor of the Congregational Church at Kettering. Thomas Northcote Toller was at this time the most eminent minister in the Midland Counties. A man of rare devotional spirit, of intense zeal in Christian work, of unusual eloquence, and of unblemished integrity and consistency of life, he exercised an influence over his own congregation, and in the neighbouring district, which few men of even the highest mental qualifications have obtained. Into the work of the Bible Society he threw all his spiritual force, and by his eloquent and unremitting advocacy of its claims, greatly aided the * " Erskine Neale's Memoir of the Duke of Kent. Preface;'' "Memoir of the Duke of Kent " in the Congregational Magazine," May, a.d. 1820 ; CoUyer's Funeral Sermon for the Duke of Kent, a.d. 1820. t Memoir of William Bull." By Josiah Bull. [a.d. 1800.] THE CONGBEGATIONALISTS. 535 success of that institution. Living in the same town with Andrew Fuller, the two ministers united in all common Christian enterprises, and, when the Baptist leader died his Congregational associate preached his funeral sermon.* At Bath William Jay, the favourite of the almost equall}^ celebrated Cornelius Winter, though young in years, was already rising to the height of that remark- able reputation as a Christian preacher, which crowded the Argyle Chapel, and every place of worship where he preached. Jay's published discourses have exercised a more extensive influence in England and America than almost any similar works.f John Clayton, senior, of the Weigh-House Chapel, had been one of the favourite stu- dents of the Countess of Huntingdon, but, from con- scientious motives, had left the Established Church. An active pastor and effective preacher, and a man of strict holiness of life, he contributed more than most of his contemporaries to the dignity and reputation of the Congregational ministry. Mr. Clayton, however, was a Tory, and his opinions on political subjects were therefore opposed to the sentiments of most of the Dissenters. As the father of three equally celebrated mkiisters, his name has lived more familiarly than is common in the memory of the generation which he preceded. J High character, but not the highest order of genius belonged to the Congregational ministers of this period. * A. G. Fuller's Memoir of Andrew Fuller. Robert Hall's Memoir of the Rev. T. N. Toller. Mr. Hall's Estimate of Mr. Toller's character in this memoir is one of the most exquisite productions of the kind in the English language. t Jay'« Memoir of Cornelius Winter. Cyrus R. Jay's Life of William Jay. X Memoir of the Clayton Family. By T. W. Aveling. 536 THE BAPTISTS. [a.d. 1800.] There were many of singularly equal powers, but none who stood on the loftiest intellectual platform. It is remarkable that some of the most eminent preachers stood aloof from the public controversial advocacy, and even from the expository statement of the grounds of their Dissent. This was especially the case with Clayton and Jay ; to Palmer, Bogue, and Collyer, however, the principles of Dissent owed no small indebtedness. The Nestor of the Baptist denomination was Abraham Booth, who, in very early life, had been brought under religious influences through the ministration of some General Baptist ministers in Northamptonshire. Booth was originally a weaver, but while pursuing his occupa- tion, was encouraged to preach in the villages around his residence. Separating, afterwards, from the General Baptists, he composed, while working at his stocking loom, a work on the " Eeign of Grace," the manuscript of which, coming into the hands of Henry Venn, the Evangelical minister of Huddersfield, Venn visited the author, whom he found at his ordinary occupation^ strongly urged its being printed, and secured him from all pecuniary loss. The remarkable ability sho^vn in this work attracted the attention of the denomination to him, and he was invited to become the pastor of the- Prescott Street Baptist Church in London. He now, by severe and unremitting application to] study, made himself master of the classical languages and of nearly the whole rano-e of ecclesiastical and theolojrical litera- ture. He was one of the first Dissenting ministers who identified himself with the slave-trade agitation, and was recognized as the leader of the close commu- nion party in his denomination. The question of admit- [a.d. 1800.] THE BAPTISTS. 537 ting members of Psedobaptist churches to the privilege of the Lord's Supper was warmly debated in Booth's time, and, after Kiffin, he was the ablest advocate of the propriety of excluding all persons who had not re- ceived adult baptism by immersion. Bunyan's catholic principles on this subject were received by but few churches excepting those which he had himself founded in Bedfordshire. Andrew Fuller agreed with Booth, and the joint intellectual authority of these two great men was sufficient to preserve, for years, the maintenance of the exclusive practice of strict communion by the large majority of Baptist churches. Booth's reputation as an extensive and accurate scholar placed him in the front rank of the ministers of the Free Churches. He was the counsellor not only of his own denomination, but of many Christians of all parties. A man of majesty of de- meanour and of profound learning, he was also as remark- able for the humility of his disposition and the simplicity of his life.* Dr. Rippon, of Southwark, stood, in London, next to Booth. Dr. Rippon was known for his literary, poetical, and musical qualifications. As the projector and editor of the " Baptist Register," an occasional periodical devoted to the interests of his denomination, he rendered effective service not merely to his own distinctive prin- ciples, but to the work of the Christian Church. He was a poet of accurate taste, if not of vigorous thought, and he was the first person to compile, on an extensive scale, a book of tunes, with a companion Hymn-book, suitable for the devotional exercises of religious worship. A hundred years before this time, a Baptist minister who * Ivimey, iv. 364—379. 538 THE BAPTISTS. [a.d. 1800.] had performed such a work would probably have been unable to obtain a pastorate. Dr. Ryland, formerly of Northampton, and the son of the Rev. John CoUett Ryland, of the same town, afterwards pastor of the Broadmead Church, Bristol, and theological tutor to the Baptist Academ}'-, from the ex- tent of his erudition, the lofty honourableness of his cha- racter, and the wisdom of his judgment, was held in the highest veneration. Ryland followed Bunyan and Robinson in defending the practice of open communion. His son, the friend and biographer of John Foster, also named John Ryland, and also of Northampton, inherited both his father's principles and his father's abilities. Dr. John Fawcett, one of the converts of Grimshaw of Haworth, for a long period the minister of a church at Hebden Bridge, where he was John Foster's pastor when Foster was a child, and then the president of the Bristol Education Society at Bristol, was an author of religious works of considerable usefulness, and a Chris- tian poet, whose hymns are to be found in almost every selection.* At Oxford James Hinton,t a man of an exquisite susceptibility to devotional feeling, and of inflexible moral courage, ably sustained the reputation of Dissent in the principal University town. "What energy," inquired Foster, writing to Joseph Hughes, "does fire Pearce, Hinton, and yourself? "J Joseph King- horn occupied a similar position at Norwich, where he remained pastor of the church for forty years. Kinghorn was almost the last persistent Hterary opponent of open * Ivimey, iv. 568—575. t Father of the late Isaac Taylor Hinton, and the present John Howard Hinton, M.A. X Foster's Life and Correspondence, i. 113. [A.D. ISOO.] BOBERT HALL. 539 communion. For eleven years he endeavoured to blunt the force of Robert Hall's argument on this question, but Hved to see all his endeavours frustrated.* Two names, in addition to these, threw a lustre on the Baptist denomination, and on all the Free Churches of England, which neither death nor time has dimmed. Amongst all the preachers of the Christian religion, from the time of Chrysostom to his own, Robert Hall is pre- eminent for majesty of thought and dignity of language. Others have equalled, but few have excelled him in freedom of utterance, in the capability of instantaneously choosing the exact word to fit the sentiment he would ex- press, and none in the lofty height to which his mind would ascend when speaking of the transcendant glory of the Christian scheme of redemption. To his self- chosen work as a preacher of the Gospel amongst one of the least popular of the Christian sects, he brought not merely the natural genius with which he had been en- dowed, but a mind trained to the familiar consideration of the most abstruse philosophical problems. In the rescion of thousrht which the intellects of other men would scarcely find without his guidance, he appeared to be a customary inhabitant. But he had the rare and precious faculty of making all who heard him, live while they heard, according to the measure of his mental and spiritual Hfe. If his o^vn mind, by the touch of a sacred fire, was transmuted, the fire was felt by all who came within its range. Nor did he sacrifice the duty of his office to the exhibition of his marvellous mental powers. He was not — what South, to some extent, was — a mere * " Wilkins's " Life of Kinghom." " Kinghorn's " Baptism, &c." King- dom's " Defence, &c." 540 MOBEBT HALL. [a.d. 1800. J showman of his abilities. The message he had to de- liver was ever upon his heart,'and was the poAver that, in the secret chambers of the soul, drove forth his eloquence. Robert Hall was now nearly forty years of age. His principal published works had been his " Apology for the Freedom of the Press," and his sermons on " Modern Infidelity." In the first he had vindicated political liberty, and especially the public rights and services of Dissenters; in the second he had examined, held up to light, and exposed the causes, features, and tendencies, of the unbelief which was then characteristic of a large class of even educated men. His fame Avhile occupying Robert Robinson's pulpit at Cambridge had already ex- tended far beyond the circles of his o^vn people. These works made it a national prize. What Avas remarkable in them was that they had none of the one-sided de- ficiencies that had often attached to great orators. Burke could write almost unequalled speeches, but when he spoke what he had written, he spoke to a gradually di- minishing audience. Fox could speak with a fulness and power of eloquence which transfixed his hearers, but when he wrote, he became weak, tame, and loose. But Hall was an equally finished writer and speaker. The rhythm of his thought lost none of its perfection be- cause it was not perfectly spontaneous ; his sentences lost none of their natural force, because they were ex- quisitely polished ; his thought lost none of its freshness and weight, because it had been considered and re-con- sidered. Hall's greatest reputation was yet to be made.. He had yet to preach the discourse occasioned by the- anticipated invasion of England by Napoleon, when, pic- turing to his imagination the possible effects of its sue- [A.D. 1800.] ROBERT HALL. 541 cess, he appealed to the people mth an eloquence that rivalled the loftiest oratory of Greece and Rome, to save the liberties of their country. He had yet to vindicate the connexion between Christianity and the love of freedom, and yet to break down the barrier that fenced, in Baptist churches, the immersed from communion with the sprinkled. He had yet to make the old city of Bristol famous, as though it were the cathredal town of the Free Churches, and to make Leicester the heart of English Dissent, whence, for a time, flowed its best and richest blood. The especial influence of Robert Hall upon his own denomination has never been fully con- sidered. When it comes to be, it will probably be judged that, in modern times, it has owed more to him than to any other man. Andrew Fuller, following, but with greater strength, Robert Hall, senior, of Arnsby, the father of Hall himself, made the way for a broader style of preaching than had been commoii before his time. He vindicated not merely the ri^'it but the duty of preaching to the unconverted and the heathen " so that they might be saved;" but he repaired and strength- ened all the barriers which guarded Baptist churches, as such, from Christian fellowship mth other Christian bodies. Hall followed, and, as far as Christian reason- ing could do, took the barriers down. Through him, also, the Baptist churches gained an elevation in the eyes of their countrymen which they had not before enjoyed. It was impossible to sneer at the sect with which such a man had deliberately chosen to identify himself. In the first year of the century John Foster, then settled as the pastor of the small village church of Downend, near Bristol, met and heard Robert Hall. 542 JOHN FOSTER. [a.d. 1800.] He wrote, after hearing him, " In some remarkable manner, everything about him, all he does 'or says, is instinct with power. Jupiter seems to emanate in his attitude, gesture, look, and tone of voice. Even a common sentence, when he utters one, seems to tell how much more he can do. His intellect is peculiarly po- tential, and his imagination robes without obscuring the colossal form of his mind."* Foster's parents, and, through them, Foster himself, aiFord another illustration of the practical effect of the Methodist movement. They had been brought to a sense of religion by Grimshaw of Haworth, but subsequently connected themselves with the Baptist Church of which Dr. Fawcett was pastor. Foster, excepting from the fact of having been preacher for three months to a church at Newcastle, which was in an " upper room," then, for a year, preacher to a small church at Dublin, and then to another small church at Chichester, was, as yet, unknown to the public; but his correspondence gives proof that he was, in all the essential respects of personal disposition and habits of thought, what he was throughout the remainder of his life. The predominant tendency of his intellect was to indulge in analysis. As respects himself this tendency had already exhibited itself in a somewhat morbid degree. His self-introspection, or what may be described as his curiosity about his own character and abilities, is exhi- bited in almost every page of his earliest as well as of his latest familiar letters. But he judged others with the same minute discrimination. In thus giving way to the bent of his natural genius, he was, unconsci- ously, preparing himself for the peculiar service which * "Ryland's Life and Correspondence of Jolm Foster,"!. 74. [A.D. 1800.] JOHN FOSTEE. 543 he afterwards rendered to religious and critical litera- ture, when, in his "Essays," in some of his contri- butions to the "Eclectic Keview," and m other writings, he dealt, in the exhaustive manner which characterized his habit of thought, with some of the most important questions relating to the political, social, and religious welfare of a people. It would have been remarkable if, exceptmg as a writer, Foster had been popular. He did not believe in eternal punishments ; he shrank from ordinary church life; he assailed, with pitiless severity, the connexion be- tween Church and State, and all that such a connection involves, and he was a " radical " in politics. With the ordinarily just balance of his intellect and the frankness of his mind, he viewed abuses in ecclesiastical and poli- tical life with a moral abhorrence which he never hesi- tated to express. It was, however, in his case, the abhorrence of conscience and reason; not of passion. He described dispositions, characters, symptoms, and tendencies, as a surgeon would describe them : but his judgment concerning injustice was the judgment of a righteous moral indignation. His peculiar office was to give sincerity of tone to the inner life, — an office that he will render as long as the English language exists. Wesley had died in a.d. 1791, beseeching his adhe- rents not to leave the Estabhshed Church. On his decease there were two hundred and seventy-eight ministers in connexion with the Wesleyan societies. Scarcely was he dead when a spirit of revolt agauist the ecclesiastical subserviency of the societies to the laws of the Church arose. Wesley had been careful that no meeting for religious worship should be held at the cus- M4i THE METHODISTS. [a.d. 1800.] tomary time for public worship in the Establishment : the ministers and people now demanded that they should hold their assemblies at any convenient time "svithout being restricted to the mere intervals of the hours appointed for the Church services. Wesley had been careful not to allow the celebration of the ordi- nances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper by the minis- ters : the people now claimed the right to receive these ordinances at the hands of their own ministers, in their own places of worship. A similar revolt arose against the semi-sacredotal power which Wesley had lodged in the body called the "Legal Hundred" or Conference, by which all the affairs of the societies were governed : the itinerant preachers and laity now claimed a share of that power, so that there might be some form of po- pular government in the body. After four years' dis- pute the two former rights were conceded, and the Wes- leyan body was formally separated from the Church. Some minor concessions were made, in a.d. 1797, re- lating to the right of the laity to decide as to fitness of persons wishing to become communicants, but their claim to be admitted to the Conference was peremptorily rejected. The ministers were willing, that is to say, to increase their own power, but not to give power to others. A secession, led by the Rev. Alexander Kilham, of Ep- worth, at once took place, and a " Methodist New Con- nexion " was established. The rights claimed by the laity were fully conceded by the new body, which, though small at first in numbers, gradually grew to a position of considerable ecclesiastical importance.* * "Smith's History of Wesleyan Metliodism," Vol. ii. '< Ckioke's His- tory of Kilham. [a.d. 1800.] THE METHODISTS. 545 In the beginning of the century the number of min- isters in connexion with the old Methodist Society, had increased to four hundred and fifty-two. Amongst them were some men who, for piety and ability, had few equals. The ecclesiastical successor of Wesley was Dr. Thomas Coke, who had been educated at Oxford for the ministry of the Established Church, but, at South Petherton, becoming zealous in his religious work, and adopting out-door preaching, was first admonished by his bishop, then dismissed by his rector, and lastly rung out of the town — a victory over him which the mob celebrated by drinking barrels of cider in the streets. In zeal, he was equal to Wesley himself; he was the soul of the foreign missionary enterprise of Methodism, and he was the founder — ordained a " Bishop " by Wesley — of the Methodist Episcopal denomination of the United States. Coke had some of Whitefield's as well as of Wesley's qualities — all the impulsiveness and ardour of the one, united to all the sagacity of the other,* Joseph Benson Avas lost to the Church in the same manner that all the founders of Methodism were lost. He was refused " orders " on account of Metho- distic tendencies, and at once began field preaching. Benson was remarkable for his biblical scholarship and his active literary enterprise. The humorous but sublime preacher, Samuel Bradburn, " the Demosthenes of Methodism," followed next in order of power. The joint biographer of Wesley — Henry Moor — who died in A.D. 1842, the patriarch of the denomination, and the last surviving preacher who had been ordained .by Wesley, was esteemed not less for his literary qualities, * Stevens's History, ii. cap. v. 35 ()46 BELIGION IN [a.d. 1800.] than for his sound judgment. Adam Clarke, the com- mentator, the linguist, the unwearied preacher, the genial companion, the man who combined more than any other in the denomination, a capacity for power, with a love of liberty,* may fitly close a list of the great imme- diate successors of John and Charles Wesley. But extensive as was the work in which these men were engaged, and great as were their zeal and their strength, they were far surpassed, in some of the highest qualifications of Christian orators, as well as in the results of their work, by the second generation of the Calvinistic Methodists of Wales. During ten years, the people of this country had been subject to an extraor- dinary series of revivals of religion, which, if attended on some occasions, with extravagant manifestations, had been productive of religious results which had no parallel in the British dominions. Susceptible, more than any other people, to the influence of religious emo- tions, the fire of the divine word penetrated the hearts of multitudes, who by their after life witnessed to its purifying as well as its exciting powers. The history of the progress of religion in Wales possesses one remark- able characteristic. It is a history of the success of lay evangelization. The few clergymen, not exceeding four or five in number, who were, in its first period, in the front of this movement, were merely the staff" of the army. Those who carried on the warfare throughout all the mountains and villages of Wales were, like Howell Hari'is, self-ordained preachers. If the clergy- men had been wholly inclined, as Wesley once was, to keep the work in their own hands, they could not have * " Adam Clarke Portrayed." By James Everett. [a.d. 1800.] WALES. 547 done so. As has often been the case, they exhibited some jealousy of their lay helpers. Amongst other symptoms of this feeling, they gave them the title of "Exhorters" instead of preachers. But amongst these "Exhorters" were men who, in the rarest gifts of the Christian preacher, surpassed all the ordained clergymen, DanielRowlands, perhaps, excepted. The same thing then occurred, but later, that occurred in the Wesleyan movement in England. The people, acknowledging the ordination of God, if not of men, inquired why they should not administer the sacraments. It was after this period that the inquiry met with a reluctant response from the clerical leaders of the movement. The clergy resisted it to the utmost of their power,* but in a.d. 1810 the Rev. Thomas Charles promised to consent to the ordination of preachers for the administration of the sacrament, and the performance of all the other offices of the Christian ministry. Others of the clergy, imagining that the people would follow them, drew back from the proposals, and were left in sudden and unexpected obscurity. As the most rapid success of English Methodism dates from the decision of the Conference of a,d. 1795, so the most rapid success of Welsh Methodism dates from the Association meeting of a.d. 1811. It is owing to the labours of the unordained "Exhorters" that Welsh Methodism obtained a permanent hold upon the people. They, and the few clergymen who abetted them, were of course charged with irregularity; but to their irregular labours is owing a state of society in Wales which, m regard to the high character of religion, to purity of * Life of the Eev. T. Charles, of Bala. Sir Thomas Phillips's " Wiilers," p. 151. 35* 548 RELIGION IN [a.d. 1800.J morals, to the activity of religious enterprise, and to the creation and use of the means of religious worship, has no parallel in Great Britain. Of the clergymen who were connected with the second generation of Calvinistic Methodism, Thomas Charles, of Bala, stands pre-eminent. Before the year 1784, Charles had been ejected from three churches, when his Christian instincts compelled him to break through canonical rules, and take the gospel to whomsoever would hear it. After he had gained the hearts of his countrymen, he was offered promotion, but he wrote, " I really would rather have spent the last twenty-three years of my life as 1 have done, wandering up and down in this cold and barren country, than if I had been made an archbishop." Charles threw himself with intense ardour, into not merely the ordinary Avork of the Church, but into the work of all benevolent insti- tutions. Through him, through the agency of the Bible Society — which might justly have been termed his Bible Society — the love of the Scriptures was planted in the hearts of the people, and from him popular education in Wales received another impetus. John Elias was, in an episcopal sense, a layman, but was Charles's equal in all the divine qualifica- tions necessary to the awakening of a people. Of this Apostle of Anglesea, a living writer has said, "In all my journeys through AVales, I have not lieard of any one minister whose preaching has been so universally blessed to the conversion of sinners as John Elias. In almost every country place, village, or town you can find some person who will ascribe his conversion to one of his ser- . mons. This I have witnessed in very many cases. [a.d. 1800.] WALES. 549 You know that we are accustomed to very powerful preaching in Wales, indeed, I may say with truth, that there is no ministry on earth that can compete with the Welsh in solidity, warmth, and 'energy. Yet John Elias was remarkable amongst the Welsh." * After Charles, he was the most efficient co-operator amongst his people m the work of the Bible and the London Missionary Societies. In South Wales, religion owed most of its power and progress to the agency of three men — Ebenezer Morris, David Charles, and Ebenezer Richard. The princely presence and the majestic oratory of Morris are still re- membered ; but he is more to be remembered for the fearless courage with which he withstood the indignant Church Methodists, who charged the people with the sin of schism, for desiring ministers of their own. To his self-possession, his calmness of judgment and his inflexible firmness, was owing, in great degree, the success of the laity over th^ clergy on this occasion. David Charles was chiefly eminent for might and in- fluence in council, but amongst all the three, the Rev. Ebenezer Richard,t of Tregarvon, contributed most to the success of Methodism in South Wales. He had much of Whitefield's pathos, and Wesley's faculty of organization. He was the principal organizer of the new Methodist body, and, by the recommendation of Thomas Charles, was appointed general secretary to the South Wales Association. To his rare skill and inde- fatigable exertions was, also, principally owing the extra- * The Rev. Dr. Charles, of Trevecca, in the Eey. J. K. Foster's " Memoir of John Elias," pp. 152, 153. t Father of Henry Eichard, Esq., M.P. for MerthjT. 550 GENERAL CHARACTER [a.d. 1800.] ordinary success of the Sunday-school system in South Wales. The character of Dissent, as such, at the beginning of the century, was less obtrusive than it had been in most former periods of its history. The odium which had been incurred by the participation of its leaders in the opposition to the American War, and by their sympathy with the earlier struggles of the French Revolutionists, had induced the same feeling that had characterized their predecessors in the latter years of the reign of Queen Anne. The Five Mile, Conventicle, and Blas- phemy Acts were still on the statute book, and it was competent for any man, as Mr. Beaufoy had said in one of the debates on the Test and Corporation Laws, to " earn damnation" by putting them in force. The King's Ministrj^ was known to be favourable to some restriction of the practically unlimited right of preaching that ex- isted. It was, therefore, deemed politic to keep silence concerning all the legal disabilities which attached to the profession of Dissent. Even Robert Hall deprecated the idea of Dissent becoming, in any way, " political," or of its being based upon any but the "old grounds."* There were o.thers, chiefly those who had been under the Countess of Huntingdon's influence, whose sympa- thies with the Church were almost as strong as their sym- pathies with Dissent. Rowland Hill, although he had been cast out from its communion, avowed, to the end of his life, his attachment to it, and his approval of its civil establishment. John Clayton, although from con- scientious motives he had declined to become one of its ministers, had little sympathy with the deepest grounds * Letter iu Olinthus Gregory's Memoir. "Works, i. 92. Ed. 1832. [a.d. 1800.] OF DISSENT. 551 of Dissent, and did not hesitate, in political action, to separate himself from his brethren. Mr. Jay, Dr. Col Iyer, and nearly all the most eminent of the Con- gregational ministers were in intimate intercourse with the leaders of the Evangelical party, and, in that intercourse, as was natural, community of faith and sentiment kept out of sight diversity of prin- ciple. There was a tacit compact that the Church should not be attacked. Its intolerance met, therefore, with no rebuke; its laws with no condemnation; and its frightful abuses, sufficient, at that time, in grossness, to make men atheists, with no denunciation. Its liturgy was praised, and its Evangelical clergy were affectionately reverenced. The Methodists, with charm- ing simplicity, denied that they were Dissenters at all. The phase in the history of religion in England which was exhibited at this period, in the cordial, although necessarily unequal, intercourse which existed between a section of the clergy of the Established Church and some of the more conspicuous members of the Free Churches, had two equally operative causes — first, iden- tity of faith and aim, and, secondly, similarity of po- sition. Both parties believed in the same truths, and both were equally conscious of the supreme importance of these truths. The product, to a large extent, of the same revolution in religious thought and life, they occu- pied, in doctrinal belief, and in characteristically religious action, almost the same position with respect to the predo- minant High Church and Indifferent parties in the Estab- lishment. They believed in the same modes of action, — in Sunday-schools, in Tract Societies, in Bible Societies, and in evangelization. Their union was, for certain pur- 552 GBAHAM'S " BEVIEWr [a.d. 1800.] poses, and for a time, of advantage ; but it was a union that could not, in the nature of things, be lasting. Its condition was silence on one side respecting a funda- mental principle. At this period the silence was honest, but it was impossible that it could remain so. When silence became dishonest, and the touchstone of " re- ligious equality " was applied to the union, the two par- ties drew asunder, and the Dissenters saw that, under the mask of fraternity, there had ever been concealed the hateful features of ecclesiastical supremacy and pride. Dissent, however, owed much of its increase to the labours of the earlier Evangelical party. This was the case in town as well as in country districts, where, when an Evangelical minister was removed, and was replaced by a man of another character, the people, in almost all instances, turned Dissenters.* Such persons, however, could not be supposed to have a very intelli- gent appreciation of the reasons of Dissent. They left the Church, not from any conviction of its unscriptural character, but from the accident of what they con- sidered to be unscriptural preaching in the pulpit, or the intrusion into the parish of an irreligious incumbent. Several circumstances soon contributed to strengthen the tone of most of the Free Churches in this respect. Towards the close of the previous century, the Reverend William Graham, a Presbyterian minister at ISTewcastle, published an elaborate " Eeview of Ecclesiastical Estab- lishments in Europe,"! "^ which he traced the rise of the system and its disastrous influence upon the religious, * Andrew Fuller, on " The Decline of the Dissenting Interest." Works^ p. 845. t " A Review," &c. a.d, 1792. [a.d. 1809.] BULIGIOUS LIBEBTT IN JAMAICA. 553 social, and political character of the people, and argued that all alliances between the Church and the State had deeply injured both of the parties to them. He proceeded to advocate their total separation as a just and necessary thing, if religion was to be advanced, as it might be, and the head of the Church to be o-iven the honour that was exclusively his due. The work of this author was re- markable as well for the vigour of its tone as for the comprehensiveness of its argument, and had unques- tionably great influence in forming the opinions upon this subject, of the generation that succeeded him. In the periodical press, and especially in the '' Congregational Magazine," and the " Eclectic Review," able service was done in the same direction. No man contributed more to this than John Foster, who demanded the settlement of the last named, and, at that time, powerful journal, on the basis of opposition to all Church Establish- ments.* But, while some of the reasons of their separation from the EstabHshed Church were freely stated, little disposition practically to assert either their ecclesiastical or their civil rights was exhibited by the Free Churches. The sole exception, for some years, was a tardy but ultimately effectual protest made by Abraham Booth, Andrew Fuller, and Robert Hall, on behalf of the Baptist Missionary Society, against two Acts of the Jamaica Assembly, which virtually suspended the Tole- ration Act, and prohibited all Dissenters from preaching to the slaves. Backed by the Committee of Deputies, the memorialists succeeded in obtaining, in a.d.. * Eyland's "Life," &c., i. 375. 554 BIGHTS OF BURIAL. [jl-d. 1800.] 1809, the reversal of these laws by the King in Council.* In A.D. 1808, an occasion arose for enforcing the right of burial against a clergyman who had refused to inter a child who had been baptized by a Dissenter, and ad- vantage was taken of the opportunity to procure an authoritative decision respecting the law upon this ques- tion. The refusal by High-Church clergymen to bury the children of Dissenters was a matter of ordinary occurrence, but hitherto it had not been necessary to enforce the law against the offending person. In this year, however, the rector of Wardly-cum- Belton, in Rutland, the Kev. John Wright Wickes, openly and persistently refused to give burial to a child. The Committee of Deputies, after giving him the opportunity of complying with what was believed to be the law upon this question, instituted proceedings against him in the Court of Arches. On December 11th, 1809, Sir John Nicholl, Principal of the Court, delivered judgment. After reciting the pro- visions of the canons and the rubrics respecting burial, the learned Judge proceeded to state the law and practice of the Church respecting baptism, and decided that persons who had been baptized by Dissenters, or by any layman, were baptized within the meaning of the law. "Is it just," Sir John Nicholl further inquired, "to exclude from the rites of the Church persons who are obliged to pay tithes, church-rates, Easter offerings, and other dues, and contribute to the support of the Church and its ministers ? " Whether just or not, it was not leffal, and Mr. Wickes was therefore condemned to sus- * " Sketch of the History," &c., pp. 61—64. [a.d. 1811.] VISCOUNT SIDMOVTE' 8 BILL. 555 pension for three months from his office, and to pay the whole costs of the suit.* In the year 1810, an event occurred which at last aroused the Dissenters from their comparative apathy. On February 27th, Viscount Sidmouth rose in the House of Lords, for the purpose of drawing attention to the returns of preachers and places of worship that had been licensed between the years 17 GO and ISOS.f On June 18th he indicated that it was necessary to restrict the Uberty which persons enjoyed of becoming preachers of the Christian rehgion, and announced his intention of bringing in a Bill upon the subject. :{: On April 29th, in the following year, the noble lord gave notice of his purpose to call attention to the pro- visions of the Toleration Act of the 19th of Geo. III. cap. 44, with respect to Dissenting ministers. On May 9th, his lordship rose, not merely to caU attention to, but to bring in a Bill upon this subject. Prefacing his speech with an avowal of his attachment to religious liberty, he proceeded to say that the mode in which Dis- sentino; ministers assumed their offices was an abuse of this liberty. It was, he said, a matter of importance to society, that persons should not be allowed to assume the office of instructing others in the Word of God, without some check. He stated that many improper persons had assumed the office — persons who were " cobblers, tailors, pig-drovers, and chimney-sweepers," and he proposed that, in future, no person should be al- lowed to obtain a certificate as a minister, unless he were * " The Judgment of Sir John Nicholl," &c., a.d. 1810. " Sketch of the History," &c., pp. 68—82, t Pari. Debates, xv. 633. % Pari. Debates, xvii. 750. 556 VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH'S [a.d. 1811.] recommended by six respectable housekeepers of his own denomination. He concluded by calling attention to the claims of the Church, and stating the necessity for new church edifices.* As soon as notice had been given of this measure, the General Body of Protestant Dissenting ministers met, passed resolutions to oppose it, and decided to organize a special agitation with reference to the danger by which they Avere threatened. Into this movement, the Metho- dist body, acting, for the first time, with other Dissenters in a political question, threw the whole of their in- fluence. At a public general meeting, held early in the year 1811, which was attended by Dissenters from all parts of England, a Committee, consisting, amongst others, of the Rev. Robert Aspland, Unitarian, Henry Burder, William Bengo Colly er, John Leifchild, Thomas Rafiles, and John Pye Smith, Congregationalists, Rowland Hill, of the Countess of Huntingdon's Con- nexion, and Matthew Wilks, of the Calvinistic Metho- dists, was appointed to conduct the agitation. f The brief notice given of the second reading of the proposed measure compelled the Committee to use the most vigorous measures to oppose it. No time was lost in waiting upon Members of Parliament, and, in forty-eight hours, three hundred and thirty-six petitions against it were procured from Dissenting congregations within a hundred and twenty miles of London. On May 21st, Viscount Sidmouth moved the second readinjr of the Bill, when the table of the House of Lords was loaded with petitions from all parts of the • Pari. Debates, xix. 781, 1128. t Evangelical Magazine, a.d. 1811, p. 241. [a.d. 1811.] BILL. 557 country against it. Lord Holland, Earl Grey, and Earl Stanhope, caused some of those which they presented to be read. One out of several petitions presented by Lord Holland was signed by four thousand persons ; the Earl of Moira presented fifty petitions ; the Earl of Lauder- dale's petitions contained more than ten thousand signa- tures; Lord Erskine presented two hundred petitions from all parts of England, with an " immense number " of signatures. The Marquis of Lansdowne presented more than a hundred, several of which, he said, were signed by beneficed clergymen of the Established Church. Viscount Sidmouth then rose, and defended his measure against the charges which had been brought against it, declaring, at the close of his speech, that his wish had been to render a benefit to Dissenters, by instituting a measure intended to promote the honour, the dignity, and the sanctity of religion. The Archbishop of Can- terbury, while he approved of the Bill, « msidered it unwise to press it against the wishes of tho. o who were the best judges of their own interests. Lord Erskine, venerable alike for age and learning, vehemently de- claimed against it, saying that it was aimed at two millions of persons, whom he recollected as having been in the bosom of the Church, but who had been driven from it by persecution. He moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Lord Holland de- nounced it as ojDposed to the principles of the Toleration Act. Earl Stanhope pointed to the immense heap of petitions that was strewed upon the floor and piled upon the table of the House, and declared that he would not argue upon a measure that was evidently beyond human help, for it was already '' dead and gone." There were 558 FOEMATION OF TEE [a.d. 1811.] three hundred laws respecting religion, he said, in the statute book, which would disgust the members of the House, and make them ashamed of their ancestors if they were to read them, as he had done. He stigmatized this proposal to add to their number as detrimental to the best interests of religion, and dangerous to the ex- istence of any Government. After explanations from Lord Holland and Viscount Sidmouth, the Bill was thrown out without a division, and Lord Erskine's amendment declared to be carried. Three days after the defeat of this Bill, another general meeting of Dissenters was held, when it was resolved to form a new society, to be called, the " Pro- testant Society for the Protection of Religious Liberty," Mr. Thomas Pellatt, and Mr. John Wilks, member of Parliament for Boston, being appointed its honorary secretaries.* The formation of this Society was hailed with unbounded enthusiasm by all classes of Dissenters. On an appeal for subscriptions being made, two hun- dred congregations gave collections for its support. Of these, the Moorfields Tabernacle sent two hundred and ninety-three pounds, the Weigh- House Church seventy- five pounds, the Monkwell-street Church sixty-two pounds, and the Silver-street Church forty-six pounds. The publicly specified object of this Society was to " obtain the repeal of every penal law which prevented the complete enjoyment of religious liberty."*!" The leader in this movement was Mr. Wilks, whose high personal character, commanding eloquence, and un- swerving devotion to the principles and interests of Dissent, naturally pointed him out as the most fit person * lb. pp. 278—284. t lb. a.d. 1812, p. 44G. [a.d. 1811.] " PROTESTANT SOCIETY:' 559 to occupy such a position. John Wilks was the son of the Rev. Matthew Wilks, of Moorfields, and was one of the most popular and effective speakers of his genera- tion. At the annual meetings of the Protestant Society his presence would draw thousands of hearers, whom, in stating the work of the committee for the past year, and in dwelling upon the claims of Dissenters to the enjoyment of a greater degree of religious liberty, he would hold, for three hours, in eager attention. The objects of the Protestant Society were, however, of a more limited character than its constitution would appear to indicate. The reforms at which it aimed in- cluded the Test and Corporation, the Marriage, the Burial, and the University Laws. Church-rates, as Mr. Wilks remarked on making his official statement at one of the later annual meetings of the Society, were not con- sidered to involve any injustice to Dissenters, nor was it intended to ask for their repeal.* The Society took notice of illegal acts on the part of Churchmen, such as refusals to bury Dissenters, or to marry unbaptized persons, or refusals of certificates to ministers, and of pro- secutions for the violation of the Five Mile and Conven- ticle Acts, which, after having been dead for a hundred and fifty years, were now again being put into force by clergymen in countiy districts, and heavy fines laid by the magistrates u])C)n ])ersons who had violated them. The number of sucli cases, at this time, was extraor- dinary; and wherever they occurred, legal proceedings were promptly instituted and the defence of prosecuted persons undertaken hv the Committee. Before the society had been in existence a year it had ♦ Speech of Jolin Will - t^sq. Congregational Magazine, a.d. 1824. ceo NEW TOLERATION ACT. [a.d. 1813.] succeeded, acting in conjunction with the Dissenting Deputies, in obtaining the repeal of the Quakers' Oaths, the Conventicle, and the Five Mile Acts. Com- munications were opened with the Ministers of the Crown, and in July, a.d. 1812, a Bill was brought in by Lord Castlereagh, in the House of Commons, and Lord Liverpool, in the House of Lords, for the repeal of these Acts. It met with no opposition, and at once passed into law. By this Act* the three statutes of Charles II. were abrogated, and the Free Churches were placed, in respect to legal protection from, disturbance during times of public worship, on an equality with the Established Church, it being providedf that any person who should wilfully, maliciously, or contemptuously annoy any Dissenting congregation, or any preacher, while officia- ting to such a congregation, should, upon conviction of the offence, pay a penalty of forty pounds. The terms of this Act were drawn up by the Wesleyan Methodist Society. During the brief conversation on the Bill, Mr. Vansittart, Chancellor of the Exchequer, remarked that he could not understand how religious liberty could now proceed any further. J In A.D. 1813 the Free Churches were called upon to make another united eflfort on behalf of the liberty of preaching the Gospel. In that year the Charter of the East India Company expired. The Baptist missionaries to the heathen of India had hitherto been subject to the arbitrary caprices of the East India Company, who, besides refusing them permission to go in English ships to their territories, suspended and imprisoned them at * 52 George III,, c 155. t lb, sec. xii. X Pari. Deb. xxiii. 1107. [A.D. 1812.] EAST INDIAN CRARTEB. 561 their discretion, and exhibited the utmost opposition to their labours. When the renewal of their Charter came under the consideration of the Government the utmost endeavours were used to procure the insertion of a clause which should give the missionaries the right of passage to India, and protection when there. The Company opposed these endeavours with all the power at its command. They asserted that the preaching of Christianity in their territories would destroy the Empire, and that it was impossible to convert the people. At their instance the evidence of " old Indians" was taken, week after week, in the House of Commons, to prove these allegations. The Rev. Sidney Smith came to their assistance in the "Edinburgh Review," sneering at the "consecrated cobblers" who had undertaken to convert a heathen people. But the obstinate attitude of the Company only served to provoke the enthusiasm of the Dissenters. The rights of the missionaries were taken up by all classes of Christians. Petitions from the Protestant Society, the Dissenting Deputies, the London, the Baptist and Church Missionary Societies and congregations through- out the country, poured in upon the Legislature, until, upon seeing their magnitude, the Prime Minister exclaimed, " It is enough !" and consented to insert the desired clause. To the last moment the Company fought for its exclusive privileges. But the exertions of Andrew Fuller, the eloquence of Wilberforce, and the weight of religious opinion by which they were sup- ported, gained Christian liberty for the missionaries. The Legislature resolved that it was really desirable that useful knowledge and the means of religious and 36 562 TRINITY ACT. [a.d. 1813.] moral improvement should be introduced amongst the native inhabitants of India, and that " sufficient facilities should be afforded by law to persons desirous of gomg to and remaining in India for the purpose of accomplish- ing those benevolent designs." The Company was defeated, and the Christian missionaries were given their Christian rights.* In the next Session of Parliament Mr. William Smith brought in a Bill for the repeal of the statutes of Wil- liam the Third and George the Third, which made it blasphemy for any person to deny the doctrine of the Trinity, and exempted all such persons from the benefit of the Toleration Act. During the whole time of their existence the Unitarians had been under the ban of the law, and had not merely conducted their worship, but published their opinions, by sufferance. It was compe- tent for any informer to bring them under the severest penalties which, next to death, can be inflicted upon any human being. Mr. Smith's Bill passed f with almost the same ease that the new Toleration Act had passed. The Unitarians now enjoyed all the rights which belonged to other classes of Dissenters. J These liberties may, however, be said to have been purchased. Recent Parliamentary returns had shown that while half the incumbents of the Established Church were non-resident, a large majority of the benefices were of an extremely small value ; out of the whole number, 3,998 were proved to be worth less than * Pari. Deb., vols, xxv., xxvi ; Ivimey, iv. 134 — 157; Marshman's " Carey, Marshman, and Ward," cap. vi.; Evangelical and Baptist Magazines' A,D. 1813. t 63 George III., cap. 160. J Pari. Deb. xxv. 1147. 1^A.D. 1813.] SUPPORT OF THE CRTIBOR. 663 a hundred and fifty pounds per annum. At the same time, if was shown that the Free Churches were increasing in far greater proportion than the places of worship belonging to the Establishment. It appeared, that in the parishes containing more than a thousand inhabitants, while there were only 2,547 places of worship connected with the Establishment, there were 3,457 places, besides many private houses for religious worship, which were not enumerated, connected with the Free Churches. In only five dioceses did the Church possess a majority of public edifices in the towns.* It was accordingly urged that the State should go to the rescue of the Establish- ment, by building new churches, and increasing the incomes of the poorer clergy. While the former propo- sition was postponed, the Government decided to adopt the latter, and in the yearly Appropriation Bills brought forward successive measures for granting £100,000 in increase of the revenues of Queen Anne's bounty. In A.D. 1810, this grant was strongly opposed by Lord Holland and Earl Stanhope, the latter peer remarking, in reply to the Earl of Harrowby, who had dwelt at length upon the poverty of the clergy and the increase of Dissent, that Dissenters would continue to increase while they found that the advocates of the Established Church conceived that the best means of securing it was to be continually applying for public money. " Whether," said the noble earl, " you vote six millions or sixty milHons, whether you build churches or no churches, whether you calumniate Dissenters or other- wise, the number of communicants of the Established Church will decrease, and that of Dissenters increase, so * " Annual Eegister," a.d. 1810, p. 268. App. 36* 564 FABLIAMENTABT GBANTS [a.d. 1818.] long as the Church of England is made the engine of State policy, and its prelates are translated and pre:^erred, not for their religious merits, but for their staunch sup- port to the minister of the day."* In a.d. 1812, the grants for the augmentation of Church livings had^ according to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, amounted to £400,000; besides which, land taxes on livings had been relinquished to the extent of ^200,000.f No opposition was made to these grants by the Dissenters, whose silent acquiescence in them appears to have been taken as a matter of course. The continued increase of the Free Churches, com- bined with the apathy, in respect to church extension, of the Establishment, led to the proposal, in a.d. 1818, of a special grant for building new places of worship in connection with the Church. The Prince Eegent, in his speech in opening Parliament in that year, directed particular attention to the deficiency which had so long existed in the number of places of worship belong- ing to the Established Church, J and earnestly recom- mended that the subject should be taken mto the con- sideration of the Legislature. In accordance with this recommendation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer brought forward a bill for the appropriation of a mil- lion pounds for this object, to be invested in a commis- sion called the " Church Building Commission." After dwelhng upon the failure of the effect of the similar grant made in the reign of Queen Anne, which was to have led to the erection of fifty new churches, but which had resulted in an increase of only eleven to the * " Pari. Deb." xvii. 769. t Ibid, xxiii. 1107. \ Ibid, xxxvii. 2. tA.D. 1820.] FOR THE GRUBCR. 565 previous number, the minister remarked that the Church had, by an unfortunate train of circum- stances, shut her doors upon the people,* as though this were a reason for increasing the number of closed •doors. No adverse criticism was passed upon the proposal, unless by one member, who observed that, according to his experience, " where there were the most churches belonging to the Establishment, the people were the least moral." f When the Bill reached the Upper House, Lord Liverpool, in introducing it, de- clared that its object was to "remove Dissent," and enforced its claims by asserting that it was the duty of the Legislature to afford the Church the means of ba- lancing the efforts of Dissenters, J upon which Lord Holland said that its language, as regards Dissenters, was " You, gentlemen, who pay for yourselves, who pay for your own chapels and your own clergy, in addition to paying tithes to ours, shall also contribute to the erection of these churches, in which you have no inte- rest whatever." § The Bill passed without a division, but, singular to say, it did not effect the " removal of Dissent." Whether or not encouraged by the virtual con- sent of Dissenters to such measures, Mr., now Lord Brougham, introduced, in a.d. 1820, a Bill for the Edu- cation of the People, which, but for the unexpected opposition that it encountered, would have secured to the clergy the sole control over all the schools of the poor. Mr. Brougham stated the nature of his Bill in an elaborate speech in the House of Commons, on June .28th. After giving some of the educational statistics * Pari. Deb. 1125. f lb. 1128. X lb. xxxviii. 710, 713. § lb. 716. 566 MB. BBOV GRAM'S EDUCATION BILL. [a.d. 1820.]. of the country, as shown in a recent Parliamentary in- quiry, he proceeded to propose the levy of a parochial school rate, by means of which school-houses should be built and teachers supported. Every schoolmaster was to be nominated by the clergyman and two or three parishioners, and was to be a communicant of the Estab- lished Church, and the clergyman was to fix the whole course of teaching. He remarked that, on this point, he. feared " the sectaries " would be against him, and that he " dreaded " their opposition, but it appeared to him that the system of public education should be closely connected with the Church. After vindicating this position at consi- derable length, he moved for leave to bring in his Bill.* But, whatever else might have been borne, it was impossible to bear such a proposal for mcreasing the power and privileges of an already too powerful and too greatly privileged Church. An opposition was accordingly organized against it, before which the author of the measure was reluctantly compelled to give way. He was told that he was rooting out the last remains of religious liberty in the country, and that another sacramental test would not be tolerated. This he was willing to abandon, but the attitude that he had assumed prevented any prospect of the success of his measure. In boAving to the opposition, Mr. Brougham passed a high eulogium on the character of Dissenters,^ which would have been of greater value if he had not shown such utter contempt of their public spirit. Throughout the succeeding eight years the claims of Dissenters were kept, through the means of the Protes- • Pari. Deb. New Series, vol. ii, 50—90. f lb. 366. [A.D. 1820.] THE PBOTUSTANT SOCIETY. 567 tant Society, prominently before the public. The annual meetino-s of this institution were characterized, year by year, by increasing enthusiasm. It had become a recognized power in the State. The leaders of the Whig party now formally identified themselves with it. In one year the Duke of Sussex took the chair ; in another, Lord Holland occupied the same position; Sir James Mackintosh delivered from it a defence of religious liberty, such as had scarcely been given to the English people since the time of Locke ; and Lord John Kussell, boldly identifying himself and his party with the political interests of Dissenters, came forward, as chairman in another year, to advocate the full civil and religious rights of the three millions who were now openly con- nected with one or other of the Free Churches.* The period of the Revolution, when Somers, Halifax, Burnet, and their associates, laid the foundations of a constitu- tional government seemed to have returned. The whole Whig party entered, once more, into a close and hearty alliance with the Dissenting body, an alHance that, as far as regards the express purpose for which it was formed, was honourably and faithfully preserved. One subject, which at the meetings of the Protestant Society, was more frequently referred to than any other, was the Test and Corporation Law. The claims of the Roman Catholics to be emancipated from the disabilities to which they were subjected, was, at this time, engaging the prominent attention of statesmen. Ireland was threatening rebellion, and, in the person of Mr. O'Connell, had found a leader who possessed both the * The Congregational Magazine of the period contains very full reports of the meetings of this Society. 568 TEST AND COET ORATION [a.d. 1827.] will and the power to wrest, from a reluctant and panic- stricken government, a concession to the demands of his countrymen. It was while the cabinet of Wellington and Peel were deliberating upon the course which they should pursue with respect to the Roman Catholics, that the Protestant Dissenters put forth their claim for a total repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. On the 9th of March, a.d. 1827, the Committee of Deputies, who had long been watching for a favourable opportunity for renewing their application for the repeal of the ob- noxious Acts, held a special meeting for the purpose of considering the propriety of adopting immediate measures for securing that object. It was then stated that the British and Foreign Unitarian Association, the Board of Congregational Ministers, and other bodies, were prepared to take action. At a second meeting of the Committee, it was resolved to summon a conference consisting of the Committee of the Deputies, and depu- tations from the Protestant Society, the Unitarian Association, the Ministers of the Three Denominations, and the Board of Congregational Ministers.* On the 26th of the same month the subject was formally brought before the Committee of the Protestant Society, who passed a series of elaborate resolutions, in which the injustice to which Dissenters were subjected, was set forth, and it was decided that, in obedience to the instruc- tions which they had repeatedly received from their constituents, consisting of many liberal members of the Established Church, and of several hundred congrega- tions of Dissenters and Methodists of all denominations in England and Wales, an appUcation should be made to * Test Act Reporter, p. 2. [a.d. 1827.] AGITATION. 569 Parliament. On the 28th the proposed Conference was held, the chau-man of the Committee of Deputies, Mr. "William Smith, M.P. for Norwich, who, forty years before had, in his place in the House of Commons, sup- ported Mr. Beaufoy's and Mr. Fox's motions, presiding. It was resolved by the conference to appoint a deputa- tion to consult with members of parliament on the sub- ject. The members having recommended an immediate application to Parliament, the conference held another meeting, and unanimously resolved that the proposed Bill should be placed in the hands of Lord John Russell, and that, with a view to secure united action, a united committee, drawn from the various public bodies, should be formed, such committee being invested with power to conduct all the measures necessary to obtain the desired object. The Committee consisted of forty-three members, including Mr. William Smith, M.P., chairman; J. T. Rutt, Benjamin Hanbury, Dr. Baldwin Brown, Serjeant Bompas, William Brodie Gurney, and Mr. Wilks, from the Deputies; the Rev. R. Aspland, Dr. Rees, Dr. Winter, Dr. Humphreys, Dr. Cox, and Dr. Newman, from the Three Denominations ; Mr. Christie, Mr. Bowring, and Mr. Edgar Taylor, from the Unitarian Association ; and the Rev. Dr. Waugh from the United Associate Presbytery of London.* The Protestant Society subsequently joined the united committee, send- ing, amongst others as a deputation, Dr. Styles, Mr. Pellatt, and Mr. Wilks.f Petitions to the Legislature were at once drawn up and presented, a statement of the case of the Dissenters was sent throughout the kingdom, and a periodical, — the "Test Act Reporter," — was estab- * Test Act Reporter, pp. 5, 6. f lb. pp. 439— 44^. 570 TEST AND COBPOBATION [a.-d. 1827.] lishedtogive information concerning the proceedings taken in connection with the movement. Towards the close of the year it was resolved, in deference to the judgment of several members of Parliament and others, to post- pone the Bill, of which Lord John Russell had already taken charge. During the following winter the Com- mittee were in constant communication with Lord John Russell, Lord Holland, the Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Althorp, Lord Milton, Mr. Henry Brougham, Sir Francis Burdett, Sir James Mackintosh, and other leaders of the Whig party, concerting measures for ob- taining success. The establishment of the "World" newspaper, an unsectarian ecclesiastical journal, edited by Mr. Stephen Bourne, aided, at the time, very con- siderably in increasing public interest in the question. Early in the year 1828 the Common Council of London, on the motion of Mr. Favell, supported by Mr. Peacock, and Mr. Apsley Pellatt, set an example to other muni- cipal corporations, by resolving to petition in favour of the bill.* As soon as Parliament assembled. Lord John Russell, amidst loud cheers, gave notice that on the 26th of February he should move for a repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Petitions at once began to pour in from all parts of England, Ireland, and Scotland. City and Borough Corporations, members of the Established Church in England, the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and of every Dissenting community, contributed to swell the number. Before the measure was brought forward, it began to be seen that the Established Church would * World Newspaper, January, a.d. 1828. Teat Act Reporter, pp. 85—93. [A.D. 1828.] AGITATION. 571 offer no opposition to it. Even the Universities were dumb, and scarcely a voice was heard to cry that the Church was in danger. Lord John Kussell brought forward his measure on the day appointed. In the course of a bold and animated speech, he reviewed the history of the Acts, but stated that he could not agree with the abstract principle upon which Dissenters based their claims. This principle, he stated, was, that every man should be allowed to form his religious opinion by the impression of his own mind, and that, when that was formed, he should be at liberty to worship God according to the dictates of his conscience, without being subjected to any penalty or disqualification whatever ; and that every restraint or disqualification imposed upon any man, on account of his religious creed, was in the nature of persecution, and was at once an offence to God, and an injury to man. He thought that when the religion of any body of men was found to contain political principles hostile to the State, a restrictive test would be justifiable. The noble lord did not appear to see that, in making this exception, he was justifying all the penal statutes that had ever been passed against any body of religionists. He proceeded to enforce the propriety of the demands now made, and concluded by appealing to the House to render this act of justice to three millions of their fellow sub- jects. Mr. John Smith, who seconded the motion, in enlarging on the loyalty of Dissenters, called attention to the fact of two hundred thousand persons of various bodies having volunteered for the defence of the kingdom when an invasion had seemed imminent. In the debate which followed, Sir Robert Inglis led the High-Church party, and openly justified the predominance of an estab- 572 TEST AND COBPOEATION [a.d. 1828.] lished religion, the existence of which implied preference, and preference implied exclusion. The friendly feelings of Dissenters towards the Establishment were frequently alluded to. It was said that they would never be mad enough to conspire for its overthrow, and that, if the tests were abolished, mutual respect and amity must increase. On the part of the Government, the Bill was opposed by Mr. Huskisson and Mr. Peel. Lord Althorp and Lord Nugent effectively supported it. Towards the close of the debate, Mr. Brougham rose and delivered the most powerful speech that had yet been made in its favour. When he sat down, Lord Palmerston argued that it was due to the Roman Catholics that their claims should receive a prior attention, and he announced that he should vote ao^ainst the Bill. The division was then taken, when there appeared 237 votes for the motion, and only 193 against it, showing a majority of 44 in its favour. On Thursday, February 28th, the bill, on Lord John Russell's motion, was considered in Committee, when Sir Thomas Acland suggested a com- promise by the introduction of a Declaration pledging all members of corporations, and other persons holding civil offices, not to use their power to the injury of the Estabhshed Church, and subsequently gave notice of his intention to move an Amendment to that effect. Lord John Russell immediately rose, and said that was possible something might be introduced which would be palate - able and welcome to the Church, and, at the same time, not wound the feeUngs of Dissenters, and he was ready to agree to a form of words having that object in view, if the Government would pledge itself to them. Mr. Peel replied that the majority in favour of the measure had [a.d. 1828.] BILL. 573 been so decisive, that he should not persevere in a course of opposition which would be only calculated to engender religious animosities, and that, if a modified measure were proposed, he should not object to it. He suggested that the Bill should be postponed, a suggestion which called forth indignant denunciations from Lord Althorp and Lord Milton, the latter saying that the only object of such a proposal was to enable the Government to regain the vantage ground they had lost, and, by delay, to defeat the Dissenters. In the angry turmoil which followed, Mr. Peel declared, on his honour, that his suggestion had been made with an honest intention, and that after what had occurred, he should not vote upon the motion. Followed by all the members of the Administration, Mr. Peel then walked out of the House, and the Committee, without going to a division, agreed to report in favour of the Bill. On March 18th, the clauses were discussed, when Mr. Sturges Bourne sug- gested the insertion of a Declaration in substitution for the Test, providing for the security of the Church ; a declaration which Lord John Russell at once said he could not accept. Mr. Peel followed, and supported Mr. Bourne, recommending an arrangement which would give a reasonable proof to the Church of England that in the repeal of these Acts, the Legislature still required a security for its predominance. The Church, he held, had a right to demand such a security, and, if it were given, he hoped that the question would be at once, and for ever, settled. He then proposed a form of declara- tion to be made by all municipal officers and magistrates, pledging the declarator never to " exert any power nor any influence " which he might possess, "by virtue of his 674 THJE BILL IN [a.d. 1828.] office, to injure or subvert the Protestant Church, by- law established, or to disturb it in the possession of those rio-hts and privileges to which it is by law entitled." Mr. Peel's suggestion having received a general support from both sides of the House, Lord John Russell stated that, although there might be something in the imposition of such a security which would be calculated to raise doubts in the minds of Dissenters, he indulged the hope that those doubts would be removed by a conciliatory conference. The Bill then passed through Committee. The introduction of Sir Thomas Acland's and Mr. Peel's amendments was viewed with considerable alarm by the Dissenters. At conferences with Lord John Russell, and other supporters of the measure, on the 25th March, the noble lord stated that with a moderate Declaration the measure could be carried through both Houses of Parliament, but that if no Declaration were inserted, it would be thrown out by the House of Lords. Upon this the united committee resolved to leave the question in the hands of those who had the conduct of the measure in Parliament, and at the same time passed a resolution stating that they considered such a plan un- necessary, impolitic, and inconsistent with the course taken towards Irish Dissenters. Subsequently a formal protest against it was adopted, and it was resolved "• that if the Dissenters be reduced to the alternative of submitting to the incorporation of a declaratory test into the Bill of Repeal, or of risking the defeat of the measure, it is the judgment of this committee that the declaration should be so shaped as to be least injurious and offensive, and that it should be fully explained to the Legislature and the country that it is imposed upon |^A.i). 1«28.] TRE COMMONS, 575 them, and not devised by them nor agreeable to their mature sense of right." If the Declaration could not be so modelled as to be considered comparatively innoxious, it was, at the same time, resolved that the Bill should be abandoned.* When the form of Mr. Peel's Amend- ment was printed the Committee again met and resolved that it would be inexpedient to oppose it, although they objected to any new Test or Declaration whatsoever. f On the 24th of March the Bill came up again before the House of Commons, when Lord John Russell stated that he should not offer any objection to Mr. Peel's Amendment. It then passed, and went through its final stage on the 27th of the same month. Lord Holland took charge of the measure in the House of Lords, where it was read a first time on April 1st. On the 17th of the same month, after some hundreds of petitions had been presented, the noble lord, in a speech remarkable for its comprehensivii reach and exhaustive character, moved the second readii: ^. It was significant of the great change which had taken place in public opmion, that the peer who rose immediately upon Lord Holland resuming his seat, was the Archbishop of York, who, in a brief speech, declared that he felt himself imperatively bound to vote for the repeal of an Act which led to the profanation of one of the most holy ordinances of the Christian religion. The Bishop of Lincoln and the Bishop of Durham, in speeches remark- able for their generous as well as their just tone, followed on the same side. The Bishop of Chester added that it was the interest of the Church itself to stop the odium which this Act had occasioned. One * Test Act Re;)orter, pp. 450, 453. f I^id. p. 457. 576 THE BILL IN [a.d. 1828.] speaker only, Lord Eldon, spoke in opposition to tlie whole bill. The Duke of Wellington stated that the Government accepted the measure in the interests of religious peace. The Bill then passed a second reading AYithout a di%dsion. The ease with which this rapid progress had been made, if it lulled the friends of the Bill into a feeling of security, had an effect which was very speedily dissi- pated. For four nights the House of Lords was occu- pied in dealing with hostile amendments. Lord Eldon proposed nearly twenty of these amendments, and spoke, in their support, no fewer than thirty-five times. With impassioned zeal and pertinacious obstinacy, he en- deavoured to destroy all that was of value in the measure. He denounced it as a virtual separation between the Church and the State, and that no consider- ation on this side of the grave should ever induce him to be a party to it. It was " formed upon principles which no man could deny were revolutionary," and he " would rather suffer death than have it told that he supported such a Bill." It changed the constitution, and, said the noble lord, "for the constitution of the country I will struggle, in order to leave it when my days are closed, as they soon will be, as I hope to God I shall leave it, to our posterity." His first amendment was, however, lost by a vote 100 to 32, and a similar fate befell every other amendment that he moved. The Whig lords, backed, when necessary, during the discus- sions, by the whole authority of the Government, com- bated, mth untiring perseverance, every proposal cal- culated to afiect the integrity of the measure. Fore- most amongst them were Lord Holland, the Marquis of {a.d. 1828.] TRE LORDS. 577 Lansdowne, Lord EUenborough, the Earl of Harrowby, and Earl Grey. One of the last speakers against it, as it was nearino- its final stag-e, was the Duke of Cumber- land, who, striking his breast, declared that his con- science compelled him to oppose it. At a little before eleven o'clock on the 28th April, after all the amend- ments had, at last, been disposed of. Lord Holland rose and said, " My Lords, it now becomes my duty, to move your lordships that this Bill do pass. In so doing I hardly know whether I should make use of the language of congratulation or gratitude. Both are equally be- commg the present occasion and circumstances. I ex- press my gratitude to your lordships for the manner in which you have acted. I congratulate the country on the event of the night. I congratulate also your lordships on the manner in which you have discharged your duty to the country ; and I congratulate both the House and the country on the achievement of so glorious a result." The motion having been put, the Bill passed without a division. The Lords' amendments having been agreed to in the Commons, the Act received the Royal Assent on the 9th of May, and immediately became law.* The United Committee, to whose vigorous conduct the success of this measure was mainly due, as soon as the Bill had left the Legislature, passed votes of thanks to their Parliamentary supporters, including the Bishops and the Government. Lord John Russell's and Lord Holland's services were acknowledged with the grateful expressions which were certainly theu' due. Reference * The most complete report of the debates on this measure is contained, in the "Test Act Eeporter," where nearly every speech is given verbatim- 37 578 REVIEW OF [a.d. 1828.] was also made to the liberal and conciliatory spirit evinced by the Bench of Bishops, and by the Church generally, in abstaining from opposition to the measure. In acknowledgment of the services of their secretary and solicitor, Mr. Robert Winter, the Committee voted that gentleman the sum of two thousand guineas.* On the 18th June a public dinner, presided over by the Duke of Sussex, and attended by four hundred gentlemen from all parts of England, was given at the Freemasons' Tavern, when the Duke of Sussex stated that the King and the heir to the throne were absent only on account of illness. The assembly was addressed by Lord Stourton for the Roman Catholics ; Lord John Russell, Lord Holland, Mr. William Smith, Lord Althorp, Mr. Brougham, Lord Carnarvon, Lord Nugent, Sir Francis Burdett, and Mr. Spring Rice, amongst the members of the Legislature, and the Rev. Dr. F. A. Cox, who proposed a vote of thanks to the bishops and clergy, the Rev. R. Aspland and Dr. Baldwin Brown amongst Dissenters. One subject was alluded to by nearly every speaker — the necessity of continuing public exertion until complete religious liberty was attained. f The principal characteristic of this last and successful struggle for the repeal of the Tests and Corporation Acts was the friendly attitude assumed by the members of the Established Church towards the Dissenters. After a controversy that had extended over a hundred and forty years, the representatives of that Church had * The total expenses incurred were £3,000, of whicli £2,000 was given by the Committee of Deputies, and £1,000 by the Protestant Society. "Test Act Reporter," pp. 470, 482. t World Newspaper, June 23, 1828. [a.d. 1828.] THE STBVGOLE. 579 finally become convinced that the prostitution, for its own apparent protection, of one of the most sacred acts of religious worship for the purpose of obtaining public office and employment, was acting in a manner that was detrimental to the interests of the Church itself. It may appear extraordinary that this should not have been seen and acknowledged before; but every page of history shows that ecclesiastical prejudices exercise a stronger influence in binding the judgment, and in hardening the heart and conscience, than any other influences, except the operation of moral ini- quity, that can be brought to bear upon the minds of men. It is natural that, in a Church endowed with special privileges, elevated, by law, into a predominant position, and attacked on all sides, as it must be, by those who dissent from it, such prejudices should last longer and exhibit themselves in a more marked degree than they can in any other Christian community. The love of power, fostered by the superiority of position, has invariably become, in such a case, a vice which only change of position has been effectual to root out. After the judg- ment has been convinced, and the conscience enlightened, the will is reluctant to give effect to the discoveries which have been made. The arguments upon this question were exhausted in the debates which took place towards the close of the previous century, but the generation which listened to them had to pass away, and another to rise to full manhood, before practical effect cduld be given to them. It is a usual characteristic of English politics that the thought of one generation should wait for the act of the next. In not waiting longer than this, and in assuming, for the most part, a passive attitude, the 37* 580 BFFEGT OF THE AOT. Established Church, on this occasion, gained the first victory over her inherent tendencies that it had gained for five generations. It is very probable, however, that the importance of the step which was now taken was not seen by the majority of those who took it. Lord Eldon scarcely exaggerated when he said that it was a virtual separation of the Church from the State. It was an abandonment by the Legislature of the prmciple of protection to one sect. AU other reforms in the same direction could, hence- forward, be merely instances of the practical application of this princij)le. That conceded, as it now was, and the removal of all ecclesiastical disabilities remaining on the statute book of the kingdom could safely be left to the sure progress of the intellectual powers and the re- ligious conscience and affections of the people. CHAPTER IX. FROM THE REPEAL OF THE TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS TO THE CENSUS OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. A.D. 1828— A.D. 1851. In the year which followed the repeal of the Test and Corporation laws the Eoman Catholics wrested from the Government, by the Catholic Emancipation Act, a concession to their demands, similar to that which the Protestant Dissenters had obtained. In return for the support which Mr. O'Connell and many of his co-reli- gionists had given to their Protestant fellow-subjects, the leading representative bodies of the Dissenters gave their hearty assistance towards the successful passage of this measure. There were some who, remembering the past history of their country, but not remembering the change which had taken place in the relative positions of different faiths, as well as in the character of the people, viewed with undisguised apprehension, the pros- pect of increased political and civil power being given to the members of a Church whose annals had been written in the blood of their ancestors. But, in the most influential sections of the Free Churches there existed no such fear, and, if there had, there existed, at the same time, a sense of justice which could not refuse to 582 CATSOLIC EMANCIPATION. [a.d. 1829. J others what had already been bestowed upon themselves. Protestantism stood, in relation to the Roman Catholics, in the same position that the Established Church had stood in relation to Dissent. If it was right for the latter to make a concession, it was equally right for the former. Fear is a sign of conscious weakness, and what fear, in a fair encounter, could the Protestants entertain of the Roman Catholics ? The freer the intellectual atmosphere which men breathe, the less possibility is there of the permanent success of an intolerant faith. Catholic emancipation was, therefore, so far as the ma- jority of Dissenters were concerned, hailed with an openly expressed satisfaction.* The service which they rendered was acknowledged, in the same year, by Mr. O'Connell, on the platform of the " Protestant Society," when he said, " I have come here as the representative, not of the intellect, for of that I am incapable, but of the warm-hearted feelings of the people of Ireland. I stand here, in the name of my country, to express our gratitude, in feeble but in sincere language, for the exertions made in our behalf by our Protestant Dissent- ing brethren. I have come here to express my thank- fulness for the support which they have given to the great cause of my country." Relieved from the strain of agitation for the accomplishment of a special object, it was now thought desirable to establish anew the foundation principles upon which the Free Churches were based. After one or two preliminary conferences it was re- • See Reports of the Dissenting Deputies, and of the Protestant Society, for the years 1829 and 1830, in the Congregational Magazine, io\ih&s,^yea.x&- t Congregational Magazine, A.D. 1829, pp. 336, 337. [a.d. 1829.] ECCLESIASTICAL KNOWLEBQJESOCWTT.^SZ solved to establish a society to be termed, " The So- ciety for Promoting Ecclesiastical Knowledge," the work of which should be the publication and dissemina- tion of essays and tracts upon the principles of Dissent. The Society was formed at the favourite meeting place of Dissenters, the King's Head, Poultry, in May, a.d. 1829, when Mr. Benjamin Hanbury occupied the chair, and Dr. James Bennett read a preliminary address. With one exception, none of those who took a jDublic part at this first meeting for the creation of a literature of Dissent, are now living. Mr. Hanbury, whose own literary service to the Free Churches, in his laboriously compiled " Memorials of Independency," and in his notes to Hooker's " Ecclesiastical Polity," was of no mean order ; Dr. James Bennett, the historian of Dissent, the vigorous writer, the full scholar, the man of liberal intellect, and upright mind; Dr. F. A. Cox, the active, busy, zealous worker in all philanthropical and reli- gious movements; John Blackburn, of Pentonville, then editor of the "Congregational Magazine," and Samuel Murch, of Stepney College, have finished their work on earth. Amongst the names of the speakers, how- ever, Avas also that of the Eev. Robert Yaughan, then of Kensington, who is the sole survivor of those who ad- dressed the meeting.* Others who connected themselves with the Society were the Rev. Dr. Andrew Reed whose name and labours now adorn one of the brightest pages in the history of philanthropy in England ; Dr. Thomas Price, then of Devonshire Square Chapel, afterwards the historian of Nonconformity, and the editor of the *' Eclectic Review," to whose sagacity, wisdom, and * Since the first edition of this work, Dr. Vaughan, also, has gone to his rest. 584 THE BEFOEM [a.d. 1832.] judgment, the civil liberties of Dissenters will always owe the profoundest obligation; Dr. Pye Smith, author of " Scriptural Testimony to the Messiah," and the greatest theologian, after John Owen, who had adorned the his- tory of the Free Churches ; John Burnet, of Camberwell, the grave and solid preacher, and the happy, genial, and humorous orator on every platform where political, social, civil, or religious rights were to be advocated ; Thomas Binney, Arthur Tidman, Apsley Pellatt, John Hoppus, and John Matheson. In their first public address, the Committee of the Society stated, as one of the reasons of their organization, that the principles of Dissent had been found to be imperfectly felt and under- stood by the majority of their fellow worshippers. They accordingly projected a series of original and reprinted works, explanatory of the nature and history of the Christian Church, and of the claims of religious liberty. Works on Tithes and Church Establishments, and biographies of eminent Dissenters were added. The j)roject, under Dr. Bennett's guidance, was carried into execution with great ability and success, and during the subsequent ecclesiastical agitations, many of the publications of the society, especially those on Tithes and Keligious Establishments, were referred to as indicative of the " revolutionary " spirit and aim of Dissenters.* Scarcely was this Society organized before events occurred which indicated that the principles which it was intended to promote, would be the subject of dis- cussion throughout the kingdom. A demand for political reform suddenly arose, and for two years the whole nation • Congregational Magazine, a.d. 1829, 1830, etc. [a.d. 1832.] agitation: 585 was convulsed with the agitation of this great question.. The Dissenters, with scarcely a single exception, sup- ported the Liberal party ; the clergy, with equal unani- mity, gave the weight of their influence to the Tories.* When, in a.d. 1831, the second reading of the Reform Bill was thrown out of the House of Lords by the votes of twenty-one bishops, the nation began to inquire into the condition and expediency of the Established Church. The conduct of the bishops exasperated the people to a state of fury. "Will no question," asked the Times- newspaper,t "occur to the people of England touching my lords, the bishops ? Will nobody ask, What business have they in Parliament at all ? What right have these Tories ex officio to make or mar laws for the people of England ? Let them confine themselves to superintend- ing the souls of the faithful, and let them begin with their own." Large public meetings were held, at which their expulsion from the Legislature was voted; con- srresfations in their own dioceses would not hear them preach ; they were hooted wherever they went, and burnt in effigy by the mob. Earl Grey had previously warned them, but warned them in vain, that if they should contribute to the rejection of the Bill they must * ' ' The clergy, especially, remembering the fate of the French priesthood, and the spoliation of the French Church, were almost unanimous in their hatred of the proposed innovation. Already highly unpopular, partly on account of the determined opposition which as a body they had offered to every proposal for the extension of civil and religious liberty, and partly on account of the vexations and disputes attendant on the collection of tithes, they rendered themselves still more odious by their undisguised, detestation of the new measure. . . Under the influence of terrors thus excited, the clergy set themselves to oppose that which the nation fondly and almost unanimously desired." — History of the Reform Bill, 1832. By Rev. W. N. Molesworth, M.A., Incumbent of St. Clement's, Rochdale. Second: Edition. Pp. 156, 157. t Oct. 10, A.D. 18311 586 TRE VOLUNTARY CONTROVEBST [a.d. 1830.] "set their houses in order," and the Archbishop of Can- terbury replied, that if popular violence should result from their vote, he, at least, would cheerfully bear his share of the general calamity.* After the division, Lord King took occasion to remind the country that the bishops had invariably supported every arbitrary Govern- ment. The Bishop 'of Exeter complained that never had they been so vilified and insulted. He stated that they had opposed the measure because they could not conscientiously approve of it, and they were ready to brave the censures of the mob.f A year afterwards, what the Bishop had described as the " censures of the mob," had so enlio^htened the consciences of the members of the Episcopal bench, or so tamed their courage, that they consented, as a body, that the Bill should pass. But the opposition which they had given to the measure was never forgotten by their generation, and to it the subsequent rise of the demand for Church-reform, and the sudden increase of Dissent may chiefly be traced. While the Established Church was thus subjected to increasing odium, an agitation arose which threatened, for some years, to uproot her very foundations. In a sermon preached in a.d. 1830, by the Reverend Andrew Marshall, a minister of the United Secession Presby- terian Church, at Kirkintilloch, in Scotland, the author assailed, with great vigour, the principle of Church Establishments, asserting them, especially, to be contrary to the Word of God, and an invasion of the rights of Christ. J The sermon gave occasion to one of the most memorable controversies that have taken place either in * Speeches, Oct. 7, 1831. f lb. Oct. 11. X Ecclesiastical Establishments Considered, &c. {a.d. 1830.] ZZV SCOTLAND. 587 England or Scotland, since the Reformation. Mr. Mar- shall at once received a reply. A rejoinder followed. The controversy widened and deepened as it grew, until most of the eminent ministers of the Established and the Voluntary Churches of Scotland were engaged in it. No men could have been more peculiarly fitted for the defence of the Voluntary argument than were the Pres- byterian and Congregational ministers who conducted their side of the controversy. The intimate knowledge of, and great reverence for, the Scriptures, which have always distinguished the Scottish ministry, gave them the first qualification for such a work. The remarkable culture of the reasoning faculties, which had, for many generations, characterized the Scottish mind, and the high academical training of all sections of the Presby- terian ministry, gave them a second qualification. Their historical antecedents and their peculiar relation to the Scottish Establishment, ofi^ered another advantage. Such a controversy could not, as in England, be mixed up by either side, or be confounded in the popular mind with questions of theology or ecclesiastical polity. Both parties, with one or two exceptions, were Presbyterians, having a common ancestry, accepting the same standard of faith and order, and worshipping in the same manner. The sole difference between them was that one party was considered to have surrendered to the State, for the sake of its support and patronage, the necessary rights of a Christian Church, while the other received and main- tained an unfettered ecclesiastical and spiritual liberty. On no soil, therefore, could the battle of Church Estab- lishments have been fought to so great an advantage as on the soil of Scotland ; and those who fought it were 588 THE VOLUNTARY CONTBOVEBST [a.d. 1834J men of exceptional spiritual and intellectual endowments. The names of Andrew Marshall, of Dr. John Brown, of Dr. David Young, of Dr. David King, of Dr. John Peddie, of Dr. Harper, of Dr. Kitchie, of Mr. Ballantyne, of Andrew Coventry Dick, of Dr. Ralph Wardlaw, of Dr. Heugh, and of Greville Ewing, are names that adorn the history of British Christianity, as well as Scottish Presbyterianism and Congregation- alism. Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Andrew Thompson, and John Inglis, on the other side, gave to the controversy the reality, as well as the aspect, of a grave and formidable discussion of the greatest question connected with the polities of Christianity, and the rights and duties of a Christian State. At an early period of this controversy, the Volun- taries of Scotland were aroused to an active expression of sympathy with their leaders. Voluntary Church Associations were formed in Glaso;ow, Edinbur2:h, and all the larger towns. Public meetings were held, and lectures delivered throughout the country. A periodical — "The Voluntary Church Magazine" — was established to aid the work. Year after year, the pulpit, the plat- form, and the press, were used to enforce, on the loftiest religious grounds, the duty of separating the Church from the State. The enthusiasm excited by the con- troversy equalled the enthusiasm that was excited in England during the Reform agitation, but it differed from the English movement in being characterized by a deep religious feeling, and by an entire absence of the more vulgar incidents of popular agitation. The Scottish nation — where every Church member has thought out most theological and ecclesiastical problems — is most lA.i). 1834.] IN ENGLAND. 589 easily excited upon questions that relate to the character and constitution of the Christian Church ; and, upon this question, there were found to exist profound and well- defined convictions. But it was impossible for the Scottish Dissenters alone to bring the argument be- tween their antagonists and themselves to a practical issue without the aid of their English brethren. Com- plaint was frequently made, at the earlier stage of the controversy, of the indifference and quietness of the English Dissenters, and there was, undoubtedly, good ground for such a complaint. Although the Ecclesias- tical Knowledge Society was issuing, with great rapidity, works of considerable value, that were charac- terized by an equal comprehensiveness of design and boldness of thought, upon the very fundamental question that was agitating the people of Scotland to the depths of their deepest feelings, there existed in England no public movement at all similar to their own. The Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society confined its labours to ihe issue of publications ; the Protestant Society had performed the chief work at which it had aimed ; the Dissenting Depu- ties had never contemplated anything beyond the re- moval of certain practical grievances, and the defence of certain already recognized legal rights. Information, however, of the proceedings of the Scottish Dissenters was widely distributed in the south, and, in a.d. 1834, Voluntary Church Associations began to be formed. In a few months there were societies at Birmingham, Liverpool, Ashton, and many of the larger towns. Young Men's Associations were established in conjunc- tion with them. The whole machinery of popular agi- tation was put in motion, and it appeared that English 590 TRE CONGBJEGATIONAL UNION, [a.d. 1833.] Dissent was, at last, organized for the overthrow of the Church Establishment. In the midst of this agitation the Congregational Union of England and "Wales was established. Pro- posals for such an organization had been discussed, for some time previous, in the pages of the "Congregational Mao-azine." In a.d. 1831, a provisional committee, composed of the most eminent ministers of the body, met in London, and resolved upon summoning in the next year, a meeting of Dissenters from the various country associations for the purpose of discussing the plan of the proposed union. At this meeting, which was held in May, A.D. 1832, it was resolved to form such an organization. One question, however, was postponed. It Avas a matter of doubt, as expressed in one of the resolutions, whether, in accordance with the example of their Nonconformist ancestors, it was desirable for Congregationalists to pre- sent to the public a declaration of the leading articles of their faith and discipline. A proposed declaration was submitted, and the opinion upon this question, of the associated ministers and churches, was invited. The difficulties and dangers of such a declaration were obvious, A Congregational Union could never be more than a fraternal meeting. Whatever creed it might adopt, could carry with it none other than a moral in- fluence. It could be merely the general belief of the persons adopting it. But did not Presbyterianism grow from such a root, and did not Episcopacy ultimately spring from Presbyterianism? And would not this voluntary creed have as tyrannical an influence as one that could be enforced by pains and penal- ties? Such were the difficulties which stood in the I A.D. 1833.] THE CONGBEQATIONAL UNION. 591 way of the proposed Declaration, but they stood equally in the way of the proposed union, and the history of the past had demonstrated that no danger had arisen from previous declarations, nor from the country associations, of which the Union would be merely a practical aggrega- tion. At the first annual meeting of the Union, there- fore, inA.D. 1833, the Declaration was adopted, but with the distinct understanding that it was not intended as a test or creed for subscription. The Declaration itself, in fact, precluded its being accepted in such a sense, for the fourth article affirmed, in the most explicit language, the independence of every distinct Church ; and the tenth declared that no Church, or union of Churches, had any right or power to interfere with the faith or discipline of any other Church. In the ninth article the principles of the Union with respect to Established Churches were set forth. " They believe," said this article, " that the power of a Christian Church is purely spiritual, and should in no way be corrupted by union with tem- poral or civil power." This was the first occasion that any general assembly of the Congregational Churches of England had affirmed such a principle. The last Assembly, held in Richard Cromwell's time, had affirmed the opposite. One of the subjects brought before the meeting of a.d. 1833 was the grievances of Protestant Dissenters, which Dr. Baldwin Brown urgently pressed upon the attention of the Union. On the motion of that gentleman, a series of elaborately prepared resolu- tions, affirmative of the voluntary character of a Scrip- tural Church, of the unjust oppression of the Establish- ment, and of the rights of Dissenters with regard to all ecclesiastical dues, including Church-rates and tithes. ^92 MB. BINNEJ ON TRE CHVBCm [a.d. 1833.] University education, Burial and Marriage, was passed. Finally, the Congregational body were called upon to make strenuous efforts to obtain relief from the humi- liating impositions which they, and all other Dissenters, had so long endured.* A circumstance occurred in the year in which the Union was organized, which contributed to deepen the spirit expressed in these resolutions, as well as to quicken the yet slowly rising agitation. In laying the founda- tion of the new Weigh-House Chapel, the Rev. Thomas Binney delivered an address, which he afterwards pub- lished with some remarks upon the characteristics of the times, and the duty of Nonconformists in relation there- to. Mr. Binney declared himself, in these remarks, to be an enemy to the State-Church, to the principle apart from the persons of Churchmen, of the National Religious Establishment. " It is with me," he said, " a matter of deep, serious, religious conviction, that the Established Church is a great national evil; that it is an obstacle to the progress of truth and godliness in the land; that it destroys more souls than it saves ; and that, therefore its end is most devoutly to be wished by every lover of God and man." Mr. Binney's declaration that the Estab- lished Church destroyed more souls than it saved, was at once fastened upon by Churchmen, and its author was assailed with the most opprobious epithets. The agitation soon assumed a practical character. The first sign of this was given in the demand for the •abolition of Church Rates. One after another of the city and suburban parishes refused to make a rate. Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham, in contests * Congregational Magazine, a.d. 1831-1833. Patriot Newspaper, 1833. [a.d. 1834.] GRUBCR-BATi: AGITATION. 593 which excited national attention, led the way for the larger towns to adopt the same course. In a.d. 1834, the first of a series of Church-Rate Abolition Bills was brought forward in the House of Commons by Mr. Divett, then member for Exeter. This Bill, which con- templated total and immediate abolition, was withdrawn at the instance of Lord John Russell, who wished that the Liberal Government should have the opportunity of settling the question. The nature of the settlement con- templated by Lord John Russell was indicated in a Bill introduced by Lord Althorp in the same year, which proposed to transfer the burden of repairing churches to the land-tax. This unexpected compromise encountered the vehement opposition of the friends of the Dissenters. Both Mr. Hume and Mr. Wilks divided the House upon it, but lost their amendments, and the measure was suf- fered to drop. It was universally felt by the Dissenters, at this period, that the Liberal Government had attempted an unworthy artifice by bringing forward such a measure, and that the Whigs, having obtained power through their means, now intended to desert them. The pubhc afikirs of Dissenters were now in the hands of three bodies — the Committee of Deputies, the Protestant Society, and a United Committee, the last being similar in constitution to that which was established during the Test and Cor- poration agitation. This Committee summoned, in May, A.D. 1834, a General Convention from all parts of Eng- land, which was attended by several hundred delegates. The Convention resolved that only by a full and com- plete separation of Church and State could equal rights and justice be secured to all classes of ^the people ; that 38 594 DISSUHTUBS' CONVENTION. [a.d. 1834.] they deeply regretted that the reasonable expectations of Dissenters, founded on the admissions of his Majesty's Ministers of the justice of their claims, had been frus- trated by the Ministers; that Lord Althorp's proposals respecting Church Rates would only change the name, while they prolonged the burden of the imposition, and that the Established Church possessed, in the property then at her disposal, and in the wealth of her individual members, resources abundantly adequate to defray all expenses of upholding the edifices in which her mem- bers worshipped. The Convention claimed the entire abolition of Church Rates on the principle of the mea- sure for the abolition of Vestry Cess in Ireland — that is to say, the transfer of the charge to the ecclesiastical revenues of the Kingdom. Finally, the formation of Voluntary Church Societies was recommended, and a deputation appointed to wait upon the Government.'"' This meeting was one of the most influential that had €ver been held in. connection with the public interests of Dissenters. Mr, Edward Baines, Member of Parliament for Leeds, occupied the chair, and amongst the names of speakers were John Angell James, Josiah Conder, Thomas Wilson, Thomas Stratten, William Howitt, Richard Winter Hamilton, Dr. Baldwin Brown, Dr. Payne, John Howard Hinton, John Robert Beard, and Charles Hindley. It fairly indicated the state of feeling with respect to ecclesiastical reform then existing. While it advocated the separation of Church and State, it virtually indicated its opinion that Church j^roperty belonged to the Episcopalian sect alone. This, however, was not the doctrine held by the Ecclesias- * Patriot Newspaper, a.d. 1834. Circular of the time.^ Ia.d. 1836.1 BJEGISTBATION ACT. 595 tical Knowledge Society, some of whose most valuable and widely-distributed publications went to prove the secular origin and national ownership of all the revenues of the Established Church. The Convention had, however, one good effect — it compelled the Government to with- draw their Bill, and to introduce a measure relating to two other questions — the Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, and the Solemnization of Marriages by Dissenters. Measures for the accomplishment of these objects had been discussed for several years. Before the Test and Corporation Acts were abolished, Mr. William Smith, at the instance of the^ Unitarian Association, had, on several occasions, passed a Bill through the Commons for the relief of Unitarians, to whom the marriage service was especially distasteful. As uniformly, however, as the Bill had passed the Commons, it was rejected by the Lords. In] the early part of the Session of a.d. 1836, after having been pressed on all sides by the Dis- senters, Lord John Russell brought in two Bills for the relief of Dissenters. U^d to this period the births of Dis- senters were not registered, and the only means that exist- ed of legally proving their dates were by entries in family Bibles, or by voluntary registers, usually kept by minis- ters, and deposited, in some instances, with the trustees of Dr. Williams's Library. Nor did parochial church registers give any evidence of birth, the sole fact certified in them, being the fact of baptism. Lord John Russell's Bill provided for the uniform registration of births, deaths, and marriages, and appointed public officers for the purpose of carrying out its provisions. The Bill passed both the Commons and the Lords without a division. 38* 596 MABBIAQE ACT. [a.d. 1836.] The measure for the reform of the marriage laws met with no greater opposition. In introducing it Lord John Russell stated that the grievance of Dissenters, on thia question, was justly regarded by them as of very serious importance. They could be married nowhere but in the parish churches belonging to the Establishment, and with no service but one to which they conscientiously objected. Marriage he held to be a civil ceremony only, and he thought that people were entitled, if they chose, to have it performed by civil officers. His Bill provided that, under certain restrictions, the registrar might per- form this ceremony within his own office, or in any Dissenting place of worship. Sir Eobert Peel said that he had no objection in principle to offer to such a Bill, and it passed without a division. The Registration Bill was read a third time in the House of Lords on August 1st, and the Marriages Bill on August 4th, a.d. 1836. One more step towards the attainment of reli- gious equality was thus made, but Church-rates were still left, and it was resolved to organize, at once, a spe- cial agitation for obtaining their repeal. In order to accomplish this purpose the means were adopted that had been found to be effectual in previous agitations. After some preliminary meetings it was resolved, in October, a.d. 1836, to form a Church Rate Abolition Society. On the 29th of that month a public meeting was held in London, Mr. Charles Lushington, member for the Tower Hamlets, in the chair, when re- solutions were passed expressive of disappointment at the conduct of the Government, of condemnation of the impost, and of the feeling of the meeting that nothing but " utter extinction " could be accepted. A Society 1;a.d. 1836. J CRUBCH-RATE abolition society. 597 was then formed, with instructions to summon a general conference of delegates from local societies previous to the opening of Parliament in the next year. The principal founders of this Society were Mr. Joseph Hume, M.P., the Rev. John Burnet, Daniel Whittle Harvey, M.P., the Rev. Thomas Adkins, of Southampton, Mr. William Ewart, M.P., the Rev. John Howard Hinton, Mr. T. S. Duncombe, M.P., Mr. John Easthope, Mr. John Childs, Mr. Benjamin Hawes, M.P., and Mr. Josiah Conder. Previous to holding the Conference, meetings of Congregational and Baptist Associations, of Voluntary Church Societies, and of inhabitants and ratepayers, took place in all parts of England and Wales, at which the rate was condemned, and petitions against it adopted.* These vigorous pro- ceedings at last induced the Government to move. When the Parliament of a.d. 1837 met, upwards of two thousand petitions, some of them praying for the separation of the Church from the State, were presented. On the part of the Liberal Ministry, Mr. Spring Rice (after- wards Lord Monteagle), then moved a resolution to the effect that the expenses provided for by Church- rates should, in future, be paid out of the Church lands and pew rents, the rate itself ceasing altogether. After a debate of several days, this resolution was carried by 273 to 250 votes. But, when the resolution was after- wards brought up, although the number of its supporters was increased, the number of its opponents was increased in greater proportion, and it was only carried by 287 to 282, the majority having sunk from twenty-three to five. A few days afterwards. Lord John Russell announced that * Voluntary Church. Magazine, a.d. 1836-7. Patriot Newspaper, ib. 598 CHTTRCR-BATE BILLS. [a.d. 184S.] the Government had abandoned its intention of taking- the question to the Upper House. From this period the Whig party, as a party, not only dropped the sub- ject, but opposed, for many years, all the attempts of private members for its settlement. When Mr. Harvey subsequently moved a resolution for abolition, both sides of the House of Commons combined to defeat him; when Mr. Duncombe, in a.d. 1839, moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the Relief of Dissenters, the Whigs opposed and again defeated it; when Mr. (now Sir John) Trelawny, in a.d. 1849, brought in a similar re- solution. Lord John Russell's Ministry led the opposition to him, and procured his defeat also, as well as that of Mr. Page Wood's amendment in favour of the exemption of Dissenters alone. At this point the Parliamentary agitation was suspended, and remained so until another and a stronger force than had yet been used was brought to bear upon it. Meanwhile, the supporters of this ex- action were contributing to its unpopularity, ^y the imprisonment, for non-payment of Church-rates, of Mr. John Thorogood, of Chelmsford, of Mr. John Childs, of Bungay, of Mr. William Baines, of Leicester, and of Mr. John Simonds, of Aylesbury, they added a feeling of exasperation to the sense of injustice. When, at the same period, the Churchwardens of Braintree denied the right of a majority of rate-payers to refuse a rate for Church purposes, they provoked a contest which, whatever might be its legal issue, could only result in the ultimate extinction of the rate. This history, however, belongs to a period which it is beyond the scope of this work to enter. When this agitation was commenced, both the poll- [a.d. 1836.] CAVSES OF FAILVBE. 599 tical and ecclesiastical state of the nation appeared to be eminently favourable to its being conducted to a satis- factory issue. The Church was in the depth of its unpopularity. A Government Commission appointed to examine into the value and the administration of the eccle- siastical revenues of the kmgdom had been appointed. Popular indignation at the abuses which had been dis- covered was at its height. The immense wealth of the bishops, amassed by granting leases at the expense of the future welfare of the Church, had brought the highest officers of the Establishment into a disrepute that seemed likely to lead to their extinction. Pamph- leteers derided both their office and their character. The public journals teemed with exposures of their mal- practices and with ironical criticisms of their consis- tency. Any lampoon was popular of which the subject was a bishop. It was felt to be impossible that, with a reformed Parliament, the Church could be allowed to continue in a condition which was a reproach to the State and a dishonour to religion. When, however, the Commissioners of Ecclesiastical Revenues came forward with a recommendation of reform that included a reduc- tion of the incomes of the bishoprics and other dignities, and the application of the surplus revenues to the extension of religious agencies in populous districts, and when the Government brought forward and carried a measure in harmony with these recommendations, the passions of the people cooled. What had been hatred, turned to in- difference, and there was a tacit consent that the Estab- lishment should be allowed another trial. The same course was taken with the Irish Church, and, different although the position of that Church was with 600 CRVBCH REFORM. [a.d. 1837,] respect to the people upon whom it was imposed, it was taken with the same success. The measure of reform with reference to this Church was more comprehensive, as well as more severe, in character. It included the abolition of the Irish Church Rate and the extinction of several bishoprics, and was intended by its authors to include, also, the partial secularization of its revenues. The two former proposals were carried ; the latter was surrendered by the Whig party, who, having obtained office upon this question, as soon as they ob- tained it, ignored the very principles by which they had regained their Parliamentary ascendancy. But the Church was unquestionably reformed, and public de- nunciation, as in the case of the English Church, died with the death of the greatest administrative abuses. The course that was taken by the Government upon another question, assisted to confirm this state of feeling. The direct levy of tithes, both in England and in Ire- land, was abolished. For forty years, public economists and Church Reformers had insisted on the expediency of providing a more equitable and less offensive mode of collecting the clerical revenues than that of seizing them in kind, at the point of the bayonet, or by the aid of the bailiff's staff. When Church Reform became necessary to save the Church itself, this subject also was dealt with, and tithes were converted into rent-charges. Be- fore this took place, the abuses under the old system had converted almost every payer of these onerous ecclesi- astical dues into an enemy of tithes in any form, but as soon as their incidence was changed, the enmity was perceptibly lessened. By these politic measures the [a.d. 1837.] ANTI-SLAVERY MOVEMENT. 601 Establishment was saved, and, when its safety was assured, the Dissenters were ignored. But some causes of their failure existed in the condi- dition of the Free Churches themselves. At the time that they were urging their claims for greater liberty, they were engaged in another agitation that, to a great extent, absorbed their energies. They had resolved upon the abolition of slavery, and the men who were foremost in one work were foremost also in the other. Joseph Sturge, John Burnet, Daniel O'Connell, and all the leaders of the anti-slavery party, were the leaders, also, of the party of religious freedom. The sympathies that excited them to declaim against the injustice and inhumanity of the slavery of soul and body to which the negroes of the West Indies were subjected, excited them, as well, to declaim against the oppressiveness of those laws which gave privileges to the Churchman and refused rights to the Dissenter. The eloquence of Knibb and Thompson was heard by the same people who listened to the eloquence of Wilks. In achieving the liberty of the slave, the force of agitation was, in a large measure, spent. Men cannot be always straining their moral strength to the utmost pitch, and it is not surprising if, after years of public struggle, they should suffer from a natural relaxation. There was, also, a want of unanimity in the councils of Dissent. Some, and those amongst the most con- spicuous members of the Free Churches, deprecated the manner in which the agitation for an extended liberty was conducted. A celebrated and fashionable minister wrote to the Bishop of London to express his entire disapproval of what was being said of the Estab- 602 THE RELIGIOUS [a.d. 1839.] lished Church, and he stated that he did not stand alone in his sentiments.* Another person, Mr. Josiah Conder, who, from his literary abilities and his position as editor of the then two principal organs of the Free Churches — the "Eclectic Review" and the "Patriot" newspaper — occupied a post of considerable power and influence, avowed his antipathy to the Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society, and congratulated himself upon having induced some persons to withdraw from it.t The Wesleyans, although a few of their members petitioned for the abo- lition of Church Rates, held all attacks upon the Church itself as so contrary to the constitution and purpose of their society, that they passed, after a formal trial by the Conference, an official vote of censure upon one of their ministers, the Rev. D. R. Stephen, of Ashton, and sus- pended him from the ministry, for having taken part in the organization of a Voluntary Church Association in that to^vn.:j: With such want of unity, and such elements of weakness, few parties can successfully contend. Yet, there undoubtedly existed a strong feelmg that the union between the Church and the State was utterly unscriptural, opposed to the best interests of religion, and contrary to the sense of justice. Whether or not animated mainly by a dislike of the Ecclesiastical Know- ledge Society, Mr. Josiah Conder, in a.d. 1838, issued a plan of a general union for the promotion of religious equality. The plan was comprehensively conceived, and * Letter of the Kev. Jolux Clayton to Bisliop Blomfield. " Memoirs," vol. i. f " I eschew the Ecclesiastical Society and all its works, and glory in having induced Vaughan and some others to retire from it." Life of Josiah Conder, p. 275. X Smith's History of Wesleyan Methodists. Vol. iii. book 4. [a.d. 1839.] FREEDOM SOCIETY. 60S well defined, and met with such favour that, In May^ A.D. 1839, it was resolved, at a general Conference of Dissenters, to establish a society to be called the "Reh- gious Freedom Society," which should have for its funda- mental principles the declaration of the inalienable right of every man to worship God according to his own reli- gious convictions ; that all compulsory support of reli- gious institutions was manifestly unjust, and at variance with the spirit and principles of Christianity, and that State estabhshments of religion were to be condemned on every consideration of Scripture, and social and poli- tical equity. The time for forming such an association was well chosen. Dr. Chalmers had recently been in London, and, there existing no person in all the Established Church of England possessed of sufficient intellectual capacity for such a work, had been engaged to deliver a series of lectures in defence of Church Establishments. To these lectures Dr. Kalph Wardlaw, of Glasgow, had replied. The subject was engaging the attention of all the most thoughtful minds in the various religious communities. The claims of the Church with respect to national education Avere, then, especially and offen- sively prominent, and a new party was rising at Oxford, afterwards known as the Tractarian party, which gave promise of bringing the Church into disrepute even amongst her most zealous members. There was a readiness, on the part of some Dissenters, for action, if action could be well sustained. And, if apparent solidity and exten- siveness of organization could alone have made this Society successful, it might have succeeded. Mr. Charles Lushington was chosen chairman, and it included 604 EVANGELICAL ASSOCIATION, [aj). 1839.] upon its council the well-known names of Edward Baines, Dr. F. A. Cox, Josiah Conder, John Howard Hinton, David King, Dr. Thomas Price, and Dr, Ralph Ward- law. It was inaugurated at a public dinner, when Churchman and Dissenter, Catholic and Protestant, Christian and Jew, united to attest their determination to use all available means for the separation of the Church from the State. No uncertain sound went forth from this meeting. Mr. Charles Lushington, Mr. Charles Langdale, the Rev. John Burnet, Mr. Remington Mills, Dr. Ralph Wardlaw, Dr. David King, Dr. Cox, Mr. Ewart, M.P., Mr. Charles Buller, M.P., Mr. Baines, M.P., Mr. Hawes, M.P., and Mr. Goldsmid, avowed their undisguised sympathy with the principles and ob- jects of the Society.* Local organizations also were connected with it. Yet it lasted not so long as either the Protestant Society or the Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society. It failed, like the Voluntary Church Society, for lack of practical wisdom and strength of leadership. The same fate befel another and somewhat similar society, entitled the Evangelical Voluntary Church As- sociation, of which the principal members were Sir Culling Eardley Smith, a member of the Established Church, the Rev. Dr. John Young, Dr. F. A. Cox, and Dr. John Campbell. The distinctive characteristics of this society were abstinence from political agitation, and the exclusion from it of all persons but such as professed Evangelical views. It received little public support, and was dissolved soon after the dissolution in a.d. 1843, of the Religious Freedom Society. * " Plan, &c. " A.D. 1838. " Proceedings, &c," of the Religious Freedom Society, a.d. 1839. Patriot Newspaper, ib. [A.D. 1840.] CAUSES OF FAILURK 605 If Dissenters themselves had been animated by a stronger faith in their own principles, if they had been possessed by a greater consciousness of the injury done to religion by its connection with the State, or if they had been characterized by a little more moral courage, it is possible that these organizations would not have declined with such rapidity. Many amongst them were, however, alarmed at the prospect of such agitations separating them from some of their political allies in Parliament. The hereditary attachment of Dissenters to the Whig party had been greatly strengthened by the manner in which the leaders of that party had acted in the final Test and Corporation agitation. It was true, and felt to be true, that the service then rendered had been more than repaid. It was true, and it was felt to be true, that that party had afterwards deserted them upon the Church-rate question, but large numbers still looked up to it for the removal of theu* remaining "grievances," and were afraid of doing anything that might cause offence. The political leader of this class was Mr. Edward Baines, senior, then member for Leeds, who succeeded Mr. John Wilks as the representative of the Dissenting interest in the House of Commons, but who had neither Mr. Wilks's courage nor his abihties. The majority, probably, of the Dissenting ministers at that time sympathized with the apparently politic course pursued by this class. They had a sentimental attachment to their principles, but they shrank from applying those principles to the practical conduct of legislation. With the avowed purpose of stimulating the faith and the energies of Dissenters to more consistent and extensive €06 THE " nonconformist:' [a.d. 1841.] action upon the question of Church and State, Mr. Edward Miall, formerly of Leicester, came to London in the year 184 1, and established the " Nonconformist "newspaper. A great portion of the columnsof this journal were devoted, week after week, to the exposition of the fundamental principles of Dissent, and the exposure of what was -considered to be the unchristian, unjust, and mischievous character of the Established Church. It was, however, seen, that there was little prospect of a radically improved system of legislation upon ecclesiastical matters ex- cepting the legislature itself were re-constituted, and therefore, side by side with the question of ecclesi- astical, was urged the question of political reform, not, however, merely as a means to an end, but as, in itself, a just and necessary step. In the year 1843 an event occurred which at last aroused the Free Churches to a renewed sense of danger, and to renewed action. On the 28th of February in that year, Sir James Graham introduced into the House of Commons a Bill for the Education of Children employed in Factories, some clauses of which appeared to be drawn with the distinct purpose of increasing the power and influence of the Church. Sir James Graham proposed to establish dis- trict schools throughout the country, and to attach to each school a chapel with a clergyman, who should teach the Litany and Catechism of the Church, the children of Dis- senters, however, being exempted from attendance upon the clergyman's ministrations, and allowed to receive religious instruction from any licensed minister of their OAvn denominations. The management of all such schools he proposed to invest in seven persons, three of whom were to be the clergyman and two churchwardens of the [a.d. 1843.] THE FACTORY BILL. 607 parish, the remaining four being nominated by the local magistrates. Such an undisguised attempt to hand over the education of the people to theclergy, with such a marked distinction between Church and Dissent, excited the most vehement opposition of all classes of Dissenters to the proposed Bill. Nothing that had occurred since Lord Sidmouth introduced his measure for restricting the liberty of unlicensed preaching had produced such a feeling of exasperation. This feeling was probably stronger than it would have been, from the fact that the measure received the open support of the leaders of the Whig party. When Sir James Graham had made his explanatory statement, Lord John Russell immediately rose, and expressed his opinion that, as between Church and Dissent, it ought not to be opposed by any person who had the object of education at heart. In other words, the Dissenters, in his judgment, ought to sacrifice themselves. Had it been a matter of intellectual or moral impossibility for any measure different from this to have been proposed ; had it been a necessity, arismg from the most inexorable and unvarying of the laws of nature, that a clergyman and two churchwardens of a par- ticular Church, and four other persons nominated by mem- bers of the same Church, should be put at the head of every popular school, it is barely possible that Dissenters would have submitted, with humility, to their inevitable lot. As it was, they did not see that such circumstances actually existed. A few days after Sir James Graham's speech, the " Nonconformist" sounded the note of alarm. An opposition to the measure was at once organized ; meetings were held throughout the kingdom ; petitions poured into the Houses of Legislature ; and eventually, 608 TBACTARIANISM. [a.d. IS^S.} Sir James Graham, after a vain endeavour to modify it, withdrew his Bill. The editor of the "Nonconformist" followed up this agitation by a series of articles urging the necessity of es- tablishing a national association for securing the separ- ation of the Church from the State. During the latter part of the yearl843 and the commencement of the following year these proposals were actively discussed in various parts of the country. Local meetings were held to consider them, and in many districts, especially in the midland counties, resolutions in their favour were passed with unexampled enthusiasm. Ultimately it was resolved that a Convention of Delegates should be summoned to meet in London in the month of April, 1844, with the view of openly forming an Anti- State Church Associa- tion. Independently of the excitement which had been pro- duced by Sir James Graham's proposals, several circum- stances combined to favour the establishment of such an organization. The Oxford Tractarian party, headed by Dr. Pusey, Dr. Manning, and Dr. Newman, by their bold attacks on the characteristically Protestant doctrines of the Established Church, had excited a just alarm amongst Churchmen themselves for the doctrinal securities of the Establishment. The secession of some of the more pro- minent leaders of this party to the Roman Catholic Church had suggested the inquiry whether some of the formularies of the Church did not encourage Romanism amongst its members. What was most serious in this movement was the undisguised sacerdotalism which was professed by all who joined it. There can be little doubt that the rise of sacerdotal pretensions at this time is to |;a.d. 1844.] ANTI-STATE CRUROH CONFEBJENCE. 609 be attributed to the attacks which, in previous years, had been made upon the Established Church. It was the refuge of men whose Church, as it stood, had suffered by the test of reason, and who therefore fell back for support, as Churchmen in all ages have done, upon superstition and authority. The secession, upon the ground of undue secular control in spiritual matters, of four hundred clergymen of the Church of Scotland, with Dr. Chalmers at their head, and their formation of a " Free Church," gave additional impetus to the proposed agitation. One of the Established Churches was now rent in twain. The Dissenters of Scotland were constituted, by this secession, a large majority of the inhabitants of that kingdom, and it was not difficult to foresee that the time could not be distant when it would be impossible to maintain the northern Establishment in its position of ecclesiastical supremacy. The proposed Conference was held in London, on April 30th, and May 1st and 2nd, a.d. 1844. Nearly eight hundred delegates responded to the summons which had been issued. Such a meeting, of such a character, and for such a purpose, was without precedent in the history of English Dissent. Yet, many of the most influential members of the Free Churches held aloof from it. The only general representative body which sent delegates, was the Baptist Union. Only three conspicuous ministers of the Congregational Churches of London were present — Dr. Pye Smith, the Rev. John Burnet, and Dr. John Campbell — and the last-named subsequently retired from the Association. The Congregational Union of Scotland sent, however, 39 610 ANTI-STATE CHUBCR [a.d. 1844.] several representatives, and the Rev. Dr. Wardlaw pre- pared a paper to be read before the meeting. The un- endowed Presbyterian bodies of Scotland sent the Rev. Andrew Marshall, of Kirkintilloch, Dr. Adam Thomson, the Rev. Dr. Ritchie, Professor M'Michael, of Dunferm- line, and the Rev. Dr. Yovmg, of Perth. The Friends were conspicuously represented in Mr. Joseph Sturge, and the Unitarians in Dr. John Bowrmg and the Rev. Dr. Hutton. The Jamaica Dissenters requested the Rev. William Brock, of Norwich, to represent them. The Toller family sent one of its members, the Rev. Henry Toller, of Har- borough. The veteran controversialist, the Rev. William Thorn, of AYinchester, was also there. The section of England which sent by far the greater proportion of delegates was the midland counties. There, also, were Dr. Thomas Price, the Rev. James Phillipo Mursell, of Leicester, Dr. F. A. Cox, Mr. Edward Swaine, Mr. Josiah Conder, Mr. Apsley Pellatt, Mr. Thomas Russell, of Edinburgh, the Rev. Charles Stovel, of London, and Mr. Edward Miall — names most of which now belong to the past history of Dissent. At the first meeting, Dr. Cox presided, and read a history of the circumstances which had led to the Conference, and a justification of the movement. A resolution was then passed to the effect that the period had arrived when a mere defensive policy, on the part of Dissenters, having failed to meet the requirements of their position, an effort to dif- fuse their sentiments with the view of preparing the public mind for the extinction of the union subsisting between the Church and the State was enforced by their interests as Dissenters, and imperatively called for by their obligations as Christian men. A paper, by Dr. [A.D. 1844.] ASSOCIATION. 611 "Wardlaw, on the Principle of Voluntaryism, was also read. On the next day, Mr. Miall read a paper upon the Practical Evils resulting from the union of Church and State, and the Rev. J. W. Massie, of Manchester, a paper on the External Forms in which the Established principle manifested itself. On the third day, Mr. J. M. Hare read a paper on the precise meaning of the phrase, " the Separation of the Church from the State, and the Legal Changes which such separation involved;" and the Rev. J. P. Mursell, of Leicester, a paper on the " Means of Promoting the Object of the Conference, and the spirit in which they should be employed." The proceed- ings of the Conference were, throughout, of a calm and deliberate, yet enthusiastic character. As the practical result of its labours, it resolved to form an association, to be called " the British Anti-State-Church Association,"* the object of which should be the liberation of religion from all sfovernmental and lemslative interference. An Executive Committee of fifty, and a Council of five hundred persons, were appointed to conduct the affairs of the Society. Immediately succeeding this agitation, the Free Churches were greatly excited by the proposal, in Par- liament, of the " Dissenters' Chapels' Bill." The origin of this measure dates back twenty years from the time when it was brought forward. In the year 1824, at a meeting held at Manchester, a Unitarian minister, the Rev. George Harris, took occasion to assail, in the most vituperative strains, the character and tendency of " orthodox " Christianity. His speech provoked a local * The title of this Association has since been changed to " The Society for the Liberation of Keligion from State Patronage and Control." S9* 612 WOLTEBHAMPTON AND [a.d. 1842.] controversy, in which it was suggested that the Uni- tarians had no legal right to many of the buildings which they used for public worship, and that they were prosti- tuting the funds of several charities left by Lady Hew- ley, of which, in course of time, they had become the exclusive trustees, to the sectarian purposes of their own denomination, at the same time, that no portion of these charities legally belonged to them. Inquiry being made into the administration of the funds of the charities, some gross abuses were detected. A list of the old Presbyterian chapels in England, occupied, at the time of the controversy, by the Unitarian descend- ants of the early founders and worshippers, was drawn up, and it was intimated that the whole of these chapels belonged, of right, to the orthodox Pro- testant Dissenters. It so happened that a case was then pending in the courts of law, the decision of which would probably establish the accuracy or inaccuracy of this allegation. There was, at Wolverhampton, an endowed chapel, which, at one time, had been occupied by the early Presbyterians. In a.d. 1782, this place had been forcibly taken possession of by the Unitarian portion of the congregation, who held it until the year 1816, when the minister, the Rev. John Steward, announced his conver- sion to Trinitarian doctrmes. One of the trustees of this place of worship, Mr. Pearson, was a Unitarian, the other, Mr. Benjamin Mander, was a Congregation- alist. After some violent proceedings, by both parties, to obtain possession of the building, and suits and cross- suits for riot and disorderly conduct, in which Mr. Man- der was victorious, the case, in a.d. 1817, was brought before the Court of Chancery, and on a suit for an in- [A.D. 1842.] LADT SEWLUY'S CSABITIES. 613 junction to stop the ejectment of Mr. Steward, Lord Eldon gave his decision in favour of Mr. Mander, direct- ing, at the same time, an inquiry into the nature of the trusts. Before this inquiry was instituted, Mr. Benja- min Mander died, and his son, Mr. Charles Mander, suc- ceeded to the suit. For nineteen years following, the case remained in that grave of equity, the English Court of Chancery, when it was heard on appeal, by Lord Chancellor Cottenham, who postponed his decision until the judgment of the House of Lords, in the case of Lady Hewley's charities, should be pronounced. The dispute of the title to Lady Hewley's charities was commenced in a.d. 1830, at the instance, amongst others, in the first proceedings, of Dr. James Bennett, then of Rotherham College, Mr. George Hadfield,* who had taken a leading part in the Manchester controversy, and Mr. Joshua Wilson. In the suit which was then instituted, Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Thomas Wilson, Mr. Joseph Read, of Sheffield, Mr. John Clapham, of Leeds, and Mr. Joseph Hodgson, of Halifax, were made the plaintiiFs, and the trustees of the Charity, the defendants. The object of the suit was to establish the right of orthodox Dissenters only to the charities founded by Lady Hewley. It was maintained that when Lady Hewley executed her trusts in favour of " poor, godly preachers of Christ's Holy Gospel," for "poor widows of poor and godly preachers of the Gospel," for "the preach- ing of the Gospel in poor places," for "educating young men for the ministry," and for similar purposes, she must have referred to orthodox persons only, because, first, she was a Presbyterian, and the Presbyterians of * Now M.P. for Sheffield. 614 LADY REWLETS CJELARITIES. [a.d. 1844.] that time were orthodox, and because, secondly, she could not have intended to include Unitarians, for Uiii- tarianism, at the period when she lived, was a proscribed faith, and the trusts would therefore have been illegal. The Trustees, in re^^ly, endeavoured to show that Lady Hewley left her charities without any exclusive regard either to peculiar forms of Protestant Dissenting wor- ship, or to the particular doctrines inculcated by the different denominations, and they pointed to the fact that the Presbyterians of her time were distinguished by their opposition to all formal creeds and confessions of faith. The plaintiffs brought a mass of evidence to prove the orthodoxy of the Presbyterians; the de- fendants, on the other hand, met this by the quotation of passages in their writings which might imply their indifference to theological beliefs. Begun in a.d. 1830, the case went through the whole of the tortuous pro- ceedings of a Chancery suit, which was fought, on both sides, with the most intense pertmacity, combined, in some instances, with the most intense acrimony of feel- ing. From the first the decisions were against the Trustees. The final judgment was pronounced in the House of Lords, in a.d. 1842, when six out of seven judges, who had been called in to assist, gave their opinions in favour of the plaintiffs. Lord Lyndhurst then pronounced judgment to the effect that orthodox Dissenters only were entitled to be Trustees of the Charities, and to participate in the funds. New Trus- tees were subsequently nominated by the Court of Chancery. The Wolverhampton case Avas decided in accordance with the law which had now been laid down, and its endowments — or such of them as were left — [a.d. 1844.] JDISSBl^TURS' CHAPULS' BILL. 615 were, in eifect, restored to what had thus been declare d to have been their original use. If exultation characterized the feeling of the orthodox party at the result of these prolonged contests, the feeling of the Unitarians was one of mingled indignation and dismay. The worshippers in more than two hun- dred chapels saw themselves in danger of being ejected from the places in which they and their ancestors had worshipped, in some instances, for three or four genera- tions, which they had themselves repaired, and where their nearest and dearest relatives lay buried. They at once, therefore, took proceedings to procure such an alteration in the law as should leave them in possession of their edifices, and which, at the same time, should prevent the repetition of any similar suits by any sect against other sects. In response to their appeals, a Bill was brought in by Sir Robert Peel's Government in A.D. 1844, the principal object of which was to secure the possession of any place of worship, which had been occupied by a certain congregation for a certain period of years, to the undisturbed use of such congregation. The measure was brought in by Lord Lyndhurst on the 7th of March, and, being supported by the Government and all the Law-lords who had given judgment in the recent case, passed by a majority of 41 to 9. It en- countered the strenuous opposition of the bishops, and, out of Parliament, of the Congregationalists, Baptists, and Wesley ans, who petitioned largely against it. In the House of Commons, where it was supported, not only by Sir Robert Peel, but by Mr. Gladstone, Lord John Russell, and Mr.Macaulay, it was carried by .300 to 119, and finally passed the Legislature, four 616 DISSENTUBS' CEAPELS' BILL. [a.d. 1844.} months after it had been introduced, on the 15th of July. The Act, as it was ultimately settled, provided that the usage of twenty-five years should be taken as conclusive evidence of the right of any congregation to the possession of their place of worship, and of the schools, burial-grounds, and endowments pertaining thereto.* The wisdom, as well as the charity of the Legislature in this remarkable case will now probably- be questioned by very few of those who, at the time, most strenuously opposed it. Whatever legal title the orthodox bodies might have had, and unquestionably did have, to this property, and however wrongfully, although naturally, the Unitarians may have become possessed of it, other questions than those of original title were necessarily in- volved in the case. Litigation such as that which must have taken place if the Unitarians were to be dispos- sessed of nearly the whole of their chapels, however it might apparently have served the purposes of a sect, could not have served the purposes of Christianity, nor have conduced to that public peace which it is one of the principal functions of the Legislature to preserve. Nor was it desirable that a greed for mere property should take possession of any Christian denomination. How much the possession of these places of worship had contributed, and still contributes, to the spread of Unitarian doctrines, it is impossible to say, but it is pos- sible to believe that even successful litigation may do * "The Manchester Socinian Controversy." By George Hadfield. " Debates on the Dissenters' Chapels' Bill." *' The History of the Litigation and Legislation respecting Presbyterian Chapels and Charities." By T. S. James. [a.d. 1845-51.] THE BEGIUM BONUM. 617 more harm to the Christian character and influence of any sect than possession of the coveted property will do them good. The Act, so far as it limited inquiry into the right to property, was in harmony with previous laws, and so far as it was calculated to prevent litigation was in harmony mth the best civil and religious interests of society. One of the first subjects to which the attention of the Anti-State Church Association was drawn was the Regium Donum, and it at once adopted measures for bringing it before Parliament. For ten years past the feeling against this grant had been increasing. It had been condemned by the express resolutions of some of the representative bodies of Dissenters, and Dr. Cox, who had been one of its distributors, felt himself compelled to withdraw from that office. The defence of the grant was undertaken by Dr. Pye Smith, himself a member of the Anti- State Church Association, and one of the distributors of the grant, and a warm public controversy between the Com- mittee of the Association and Dr. Smith upon this sub- ject took place. When Mr. Charles Hindley proposed a resolution in the House of Commons, in a.d. 1845, for the rejection of the grant, he was followed into the lobby by only three members. Year by year, however, these numbers were increased. In the years 1848 and 1849 the question was debated at great length in the House of Commons, and on July 17th, a.d. 1851, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced, that, as such a feehng of opposition to the continuance of the grant had been ex- hibited by the Dissenting body, the Government would not again place it upon the votes. Henceforward, there- •618 TSE MAYNOOTH [a.d. 1845.] fore, the Free Churches could protest against national endowments of religion without being themselves charged with accepting them. The introduction, by Sir Robert Peel's Government, after the formation of this Society, of a Bill to increase the State endowment to the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth, gave to the adherents of the new institution iin opportunity of placing their principles before the Legislature and the public, of which they took a signal advantage. Sir Robert Peel's proposal excited the especial opposition of two parties, one composed of the Evangelical members of the Established Church, the Wesleyans, and the more conservative portion of Dis- senters, who based their opposition upon Protestant grounds only, and the other, composed for the greater part of the more advanced section of Dissenters, who, while holding Protestantism in as great reverence, and serving it with quite as much consistency as the first, based their opposition upon the principle that all endow- ments for religious purposes, whether for Protestantism or for Romanism, were unjust, unscriptural, and mis- chievous. The openly expressed determination of Sir Robert Peel to proceed with his measure, notwithstanding the expressions of indignation and alarm with which it was immediately encountered, led to the formationof a "Central Anti-Maynooth Committee," of which Sir Culling Eardley Smith was appointed chairman, and which was composed of representatives of all the Evangelical denominations. Failing even to delay the progress of the measure through the Legislature, it was ultimately decided to summon a General Council of Protestants from all parts £a.d. 1845.] BILL. 619 of the kingdom, to adopt measures for securing the defeat of the Bill. The prominence that had recently been given to anti- State Church principles led the Com- mittee to intimate to every member of the Conference that, as there was known to be a diversity of sentiment <;oncerning the particular grounds upon which the grant was disapproved, they deemed it to be of supreme im- portance to " bear with one another in regard to mmor differences." The Conference, which numbered more than a thousand deputies from upwards of four hmidred cities and towns, met on the 30th of April, a.d. 1845. It included some well-known Dissenters. At its second sitting it appeared that liberty of speech on the special subject of ecclesiastical endowments would not be al- lowed ; and some of the members, headed by the Rev. James Mursell, of Leicester, accordingly left the Con- ference. The Dissenters at once took steps to summon a Convention of their own. At a meeting, held at Salters' Hall Chapel, presided over by the Rev. Dr. €ox, of Hackney, it was resolved that it was a matter of high importance that the principles on which they ob- jected to the proposed endowment should be clearly and distmctly understood by both Parhament and the country, and that it was expedient to convene a conference of the friends of religious freedom, to adopt measures, to oppose not only the Maynooth Bill, but all other State- endowments of religion. A committee of thirty-five gentlemen was appointed to make arrangements for such a meeting. It included representatives from aU sections of Evangelical Dissent. The proposed Conference was held on the 20th and 21st of May following. It con- sisted of nearly a thousand members. The Rev. John 620 TEE MATNOOTH BILL. [a.d. 1845.] Burnet occupied the chair. Many who had held aloof from the British Anti-State-Church Association, now felt compelled to appear upon what was virtually the platform of that Society. The Conference passed a series of resolutions in harmony with the object of its meeting, and adopted a petition of its own to the Legislature^ Its proceedings attracted universal attention. They gave to public men a distinct indication that bigotry, at least, was not the feeling by which Dissenters were moved in opposmg this measure. Sir Robert Peel had avowed that his object was political, not ecclesiastical, and was met, therefore, on his own ground, for it was argued that the political peace of Ireland would not be secured by any endowment of Roman Catholi- cism, but only by the disendowment of the State- Church.* The principle upon which this Conference based it& action, was acknowledged to be both just and intelligible. The continued efforts of both parties, however, were insuf- ficient to prevent the success of the Maynooth Bill. Sup- ported by the leaders of all parties, both Houses of the Legislature passed it by overwhelming majorities. "What- ever may have been, up to this time, the fundamental theory upon which a state-establishment of rehgion was based, it could not, henceforth, be that it was the duty of the State to endow "the truth." One in- evitable result of this Conference, but one that was fully anticipated by its promoters, was the wider separation of Evangelical Churchmen and Evangelical Dissenters. It had become, for some years, more and more obvious, * "Proceedings of tlie Maynooth Conference." " Nonconformist" News- paper, A.D. 1845. [a.d. 1846.] FREE TRADE. 621 that it was impossible for the two parties to work har- moniously together. When union could only be achieved by the exercise of supremacy by the one, and of sub- serviency by the other ; when it became obvious, in relation to this measure, that the Evangelical Church party had chiefly in view the salvation of the Irish Establishment, and, through it, of the institution which was pressing with intolerable weight upon the liberties of Evangelical Dissenters, the time had come for the proclamation of an honest disunion. If, however, there was disappointment at this appa- rent strengthening of the compulsory principle in matters of religion, the members of the Free Churches had cause to rejoice, in the following year, at the freedom that was given to trade, for Sir Robert Peel's Act, which virtually abolished the Corn Laws, was the end of an agitation in which Dissenters had taken a peculiar interest. At a Free Trade Conference held in Man- chester in January, a.d. 1843, three hundred ministers of the Free Churches were present to give such influ- ence as they could give to promote the success of the Agitation, In that Conference there were not six ministers of the Established Church. As in the Reform, and all similar agitations, the Church was again ranged on the side of monopoly. Before the last year of the half century had arrived the Methodist body was once more divided. To the " Methodist New Connexion" had already succeeded the " Primitive Methodists," who were established because the Conference, proving more conservative than Wesley him- self, and forgetting the origin of their existence, set itself against the general practice of field preaching. The Bible 622 THE CENSUS ^.d. 1851.] Christians, established mainly in Cornwall, through the influence of Mr. "William 0' Bryan, were another oif shoot of the old body. In all the new Methodist organiza- tions the power of the laity was fully recognized. In A.D. 1849 another secession, originating in the arbitrary proceedings of the Conference, took place. For some time previous to this a few persons had expressed, through various publications, their dissatisfaction with the government of the society, which was then principally lodged in the hands of one successfullj^ ambitious man — the Rev. Dr. Jabez Bunting. At the Conference of this year three ministers, the Revs. Messrs. Everett, Dunn, and Griffith, Avere summoned to answer the question, whether they had not written some of these publications. Declining to be parties to a proceeding which savoured more of the Inquisition and the Star Chamber than of any modern English or Christian court, and refusing to reply to such a question, they were forthwith expelled the society. The Methodist laity did not, however, unanimously endorse the sentence which had been passed upon them. In the year after the expulsion the number of members of the society had decreased to the alarming extent of more than fifty-six thousand. The expelled members soon afterwards became kno-wn as the Wesleyan Methodist Reformers, and under that name existed when the Census of Religious worship was taken. This Census was the first of its kind ever taken in England, and its revelations astonished equally both the friends and the foes of Dissent.* It was found that, while there were 34,467 places of worship in England, more than half that number, or 18,077, belonged to the * Census of Keligious Worship, a.d. 1851. [a.d. 1851.] OF BELiaiOUS WOnSRIP. 623 Free Churches. In the manufacturing districts, the Establishment was everywhere in a minority ; in Wales, nine-tenths of the people rejected its ministrations. Of the actual worshipping population of the whole country, only fifty-two per cent, were estimated to belong to the Established Church. The Congregationalists possessed 3,244 places of worship; the Baptists, 2,789; the Wesleyan Methodists, 6,579, and other Methodists, 5,365. The Unitarians had only 229, and the Society of Friends 371 places of worship. Notwithstanding the persecu- tion— ecclesiastical, political, and social^to which they had been subjected, from their rise to the time at which their numbers were authoritatively examined and pub- lished, the Free Churches had dra-svn half the Christian population of England and Wales within their folds. It should be possible to obtain the reason of this, as well as the reason of the slower progress of the Estab- lished Church, from the facts of history. These I have endeavoured to give, and I believe that they sufficiently account for the rapid increase of the numerical, moral, and spiritual power of the unendowed religious com- munities of England. INDEX. American War of Independence, 469 — Sympathy of Dissenters and hostility of Clergy to, 469 to 471 — Agitation in favour of, see Priestley and Price. Anabaptists. Early mention of, 22 — Banished by James the First, 39. Anne, Queen. A High Churchwoman, 197 — Treats the Dissenters' deputa- tion with contempt, 198 — Her declar- ations to Parliament on Conformity, 198, 199 — Dismisses the friends of the Revolution, 199 — Manifests sym- pathy for Dr. Sacheverell, 245 — Her inflexible devotion to the Church and the Stuarts, 265, 266— Endows the fund since known as " Queen Anne's Bounty," 265 — Supported the Schism Bill, and signed it in June, 1714 A.D., 273— Her death, ib. Antinomian Controversy/, The. Described, 178 to 181. Anti- Slavery Society. Formation of, 601. Anti-State Church Association. Forma- tion of, 609 to 611. Arianism. Not organized in England in 1689, 92 — Advocated by John Locke, 296 — Perhaps by Sir Isaac Newton, 297 — Disclaimed by Non- Subscribing Assembly, 308. Arminian Controversy, 466. Arminianism. See Calvinistic Contro- versy. Articles of the Church of England. Henrj' Vlli.'s, 4 — Parliament's " Six Arti- cles," 5, 6 — The forty-two articles, 9 —The Articles of Elizabeth, 13. Avery, Dr. Benjamin. London phy- sician and chairman for 28 years of the Assembly of Deputies, 346. See Deputies. Baines, Edward, Sen., M.P., 59. Bangorian Controversy, The. SeeHoADLY. Baptists. Churches of, in 1589, 22 — First to repudiate all coercive measures over conscience, 24 — Persecutions of, by Whitgift, 24, 25— Reviled by Puri- tans, 25 — Controversy of, -with In- dependents at Amsterdam, 40 — Doctrines of Amsterdam Baptists, 40, 41 — First Anti-Calvinistic Church of, in London, 42 — First Calvinistic Church of, in England, 48 — Immer- sion first practised by, ih. — Spread of, in England,49 — Excluded from West- minster Assembly, 52 — Influence of in the Parliamentary armies, 55 — Status of, during Commonwealth era, 66 — Opposed to singing during ser- vice, 92 — Division of, anent open or strict communion, ih. See also Non- conformists ; James the Second. — Excluded from project of Comprehen- sion, 98 — Exemption concerning, in Actof Tolei'ation,131 — SecFartici/lar Baptists. General Baptists — Decline of, between 1691 and 1702, and causes of same, 164, 165 — Love of Contro- versy of, 165, 166 — Leading men amongst in time of Queen Anne, in town and country, 260 to 263 — Churches of, in London, organized into an association, 1704 a.d., 262 — Ordination and education of Ministers, ib. — Custom of Ministers of, to meet once a month to discuss jmhlic mea- sures, ib. — Public influence of, at that time at least equal to that of CongregationaUsts, 263 — ^Neal's esti- mate of number of Churches of, in 1715 A.D., 280 note — Analysis of seats of Baptist strength and weakness, 281, 282— How Ministers of, divided on the question of subscription raised in. Salters' Hall, 306 note — Number of Churches of, in Metropolis, in 1730, and analysis of doctrines of same, 335 note — Action of in London, in case of Mr. Baskerville, guilty of Occasional Conformity, 346 to 348 — Chapel of, at Kidderminster, opened to George Whitefield, 382 — Review of, about 1767,1445 — "New General Associa- tion" of, 448, 449— Ultra Calvinistic views of, 509 — Leading Ministers of, 536 to 539. 40 626 HTDEX. baptist Missionary Society. Origin of, 507 to 609. Baskeryille, Mr. Member of Baptist Church in Unicorn Yard, elected Common Councilman, and ejected from his Church for repetition of offence of Occasional Conformity, 346 to 348. Bates, Dr. Leader of the Presbyterians, 169— Dcchned to be present at a public Presbyterian ordination, 186. Baxter, Richard. Acti\'ity of last years of, 169. Beaufoy, Mr. Introduces Bill for repeal of Test and Corporation Acts, 494. Bell, Dr., 524. Bennett, Dr. James. Member of Eccle- siastical Knowledge Society, 583. Berridge, of Everton, 439. BiNNEY, Rev. T. Member of Ecclesias- tical Knowledge Society, 584. — De- claration about Church of England, 593. Birminyham Riots, 502. Bishops. See Church of Enylaiid. Blackburne, Archdeacon. Writes against the Church, 437. BRADiitRY, Thomas. Congregational Minister in time of Queen Anne, 258, 259 — His courage as a pulpit politi- cian, ib. — Often mobbed, to. — Inter- view with Burnet on day of Queen Anne's death, 273 — Makes first public proclamation of the accession of the House of Hanover, 274 — Repartee of, to a nobleman, on occasion of a depu- tation to the Crown, 277 — Heads the " Subscribers" at the Salters' Hall meeting, 306 — Violence of, against "Non-Subscribers," 309. British and Foreign Bible Society. For- mation of, 516- — Opposition of clergy, 516. British a)id Foreign School Society, 621 — Opposition of Bishops and Clergy to formation of, 523. Brougham, Mr. Education Bill, 566. Brown, Dr. Baldwin, 689, 594. Browne, Robert. Character of, 23 — Held all the views, but one, of modem Independents, ib. Brownists. Early mention of, 22 — ban- ished by James the First, 39. See also Independents. BuNTAN, John, 76 — First licensed Non- conformist Minister, 78. Burgess, Daniel. Congregational Min- ister in London, in time of Queen Anne, 258 — Sides with the Non- Sub- scribers at the Salters' Hall Confer- ence, 307. Burke, Edmund. Opposes Clerical Sub- scription Relief Bill, 466. Burnet, Bishop. Observations of, on character of Chui-ch of England and Nonconformist Ministers, 97 — Be- came Prince of Orange's chaplain on his landing in England, 99 — Issues pamphlet against Non-jujors, 113 — Rejiresents the Liberal minority of the clergy, 122 — Made Bishop of Salisbuiy, ib. — Character of, 122, 123 — Replies to Dr. Atterbury in Con- vocation Controversy, 193 — Opposes Bills against Occasional Conformity, 217, 219 — Informs Bradbury that Queen Anne is dying, 273 ; that she is dead, 274. Burnet, Rev. John. Member of Eccle- siastical Knowledge Society, 584,609. Butler, Bishop, 435 to 437. Caffin, Matthew. Eminent Minister of General Baptists, 162— Causes a breach among, ib. Calamy, Edmund. Publishes abridg- ment of Life of Baxter, 227— Repre- sentative of moderate Dissent, 229 — Character of, <*.— Works of, 230— Modem style of, 231 — Wrote in favour of repeal of Occasional Con- formity Act, 283— Declines to attend Court to adjudicate in the Exeter disputes, 306— Excuses the acceptance of the Regium Doniun, 320— Advice to Doddridge, 336. Calvinistic Controversy, 32. Carey, William, 507. Cartwright, Thomas. Leader of the Puritans, temp. Elizabeth, 15 — Preaches at Oxford, and is dismissed from the University, ib. — Anticipates Presbyterianisra, ib. Catholic Emancipation. Act passed, 381 Census of 1851, 622. Chandler, Dr. Samuel. An eminent Presbyterian Minister and writer, 462. Charles, Rev. Thomas. Describes the Clergy of Wales, 394, 546. Charles the First. Reissues Book of Sports, 48 — His ecclesiastical policy, ib. Charles the Second. Favourable tea large degree of religious freedom, 72. Chatham, Earl of. Memorable speech of, on Dissenters' relief from sub- scription, 460. Chauncey, Isaac. Eminent Minister of Independents, 168— Withdrew from the United Ministers in 1692 a.d., 180. Childs, John, 597, 598. INDEX. 627 Christian Apologists. See Deisiical Controversy. Church of England. See Heney VIII. ; Elizabeth; Church Services; Uni- formity; Regal Supremacy; Articles; Episcopacy; Coniocation. State of religion amonp clergy- of, after Revolution, 97 — Bishops of, thanked by James II. ; attitude of Bi.shops of, towardis Prince of Orange, 100 — Bishops of, w-ith two exceptions, in favour of a Regency, 101, 105 — Clergy of, opposed to new settlement, 10.5, 106 ; reasons of their opposition, 107 — Constitutional position of, de- bated in House of Commons, 108, 109 — Miiny of the clergy of, decline to take o'lth of allegiance to WQliam and Miirj-, 110 — Sec Xon-jurors ; Convocation ; Occasional Conformity. — Difference of pf, in House of Lords, 233, 234, 23.5 ; in the House of Commons, 23.5 — High Church jwirty in, opfKtsed to Act of Union vdxh Scot- land, 238 — Strong hold of, upon la- bourers and inixiiiinics, temp. Queen Ann<', 24H— Sco Jiigh Church party. — Unitjiriunisni esp^u.-^ed by some of the Clergy of, 297, 298— Effect of dejirivation of power to persecute M\»- of, opix.M- Wliitetield, ;j.).5 to 3.J8, 3G8 ; bImi tlie We-l.y^ and their move- ment, ;k>H, .W.* ; also Jolm NeUon. 373 — lnt«"mp«r«te langtuigo ot Bi'liops of, towards the Methodi«t«, 376 — I'ersonal causes of the oifjKwi- tion of the Clerg)- of, to the Metho- dists, 377, 378— Clergy - of, to education, 523— Schenies lor exten- sion of, .563 to 565— Friendly attitude of members of, to rep«'al of Test and Corporation Acts, 577 to 580— Pro- jects for extension of, .599 to 601. Church Riitc.i. Contests and pnrliamen- tjiry agitation apiinst, 693 — Aboli- tion Society formed, 596. Church Services. No change in, temp. Henry VIII., 7 — Differed according to local custom, ib. — First step to uniformity, ib. — Book of Coumion Pniyer adopted, ib. — Influence of German Reformers upon revised Book of, ib. — Elizibeth's Prayer Book, 13. See also Prayer Book. Clarke, Matthew. Congregational Minister in time of Queen Anne, 259. Clarke, Samuel, Dr. Argues in favour of Arianism and remains in the Church, 298 — Censured by Convoca- tion, ib. Clayton, J., Sen., 535. Clerical Subscription. Agitation for abo- lition of, 455. Commonicealth, The. Religious leaders during, 63— Scholarship during, ib. — Manners of, 64, 65. See also Cromwell; Baptists; In- dependents. Comprehension Bill, The. See Dissenters. Comprehension Commission, The. How constituted, 144 — Minutes of, kept secret Mil 18-54 A.n., 144 note— Pro- ceedings and recommendations of, 144, 145. CoNDBR, JosiAH, 594. Promotes Reli- gious Freedom Society, 603. Congregationalists. See Independents. Congregational Union. Formation of, 590. Controversy. See Baptists ; Indepcn- detits ; Hookeh; Calvinistic Con- troversy ; Sabbath Controversy ; Tithe Controversy ; Xonconformists ; Hoadly; Salters' nail Controversy ; Iteistical Controvrsy ; liothu-tll Con- troversy ; Antinomian Controversy ; Trinitarian Controversy; J'Orticular Baptists ; Occasional Conforntity ; Convocation. Conventicle Act, 75. Convocation. Draws up Canons, 37 — Meets Novoinl)er21, 1089 A.I)., 146— Shows its illilHTil spirit, is prorogued and dissolved, 147— Dr. Bincks ad- vocates rights of, t< meet without Royal Licens<', 191, 192 — Controversy comvming right of, 192, 193 — Met in 1701 A.I)., 193 — .Vrroganco of Ix)wer House of, 193 — Prorogued, 194 — Dissolvtnl, 195 — Pnirogued again by Anne in consequence of the oppti- eition of the Lower House to Union with Scotland, 237 — l/ower House of, makes representation against two of Bishoj) lloailly's Sennon.s, 294 — Its last Act for 150 years, 295. Corporation Act. Tenor and date of, 76 — Propose*! alKilition of, 109, 111 — How Bill for repejil of, was shelved in the Commons, 117 — Protest of Corporation of London against, ib. — Projwsed repeal of, 285 ; rejection of the proposition in the House of Lords, 288 — Organization of Metropolitan Di.ssenters to obtiiin repeal of, 338, 339 — Dissenters move fiir repeal of, in 1735, are opposed bv the Govern- 40* 628 INDEX. ment and defeated, 340, 341 — Re- newed attempt of Dissenters to obtain repeal of, in 1739 a.d., 344 ; ill suc- cess of same, 345. Cox, Dr., F. a. Member of Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society, 583, 610. Cradock, Rev. Walter. A godly clergyman in Wales, 395 — His la* bours, 397— His persecution, 397. Cromwell, Oliver. Toleration pro- claimed by, 57 — Characterized, 60, 61 — Sets free the persecuted Friends, 70. Crosby, Thomas. First Historian of Baptists, 446. Crossley, David. Founder of the Bap- tist denomination in Lancashire and Yorkshire, 262. D. De Foe, Daniel. Writes " Enquiry into Occasional Conformity," .,3:J;5 and note — Organization of, within ten-mile radius from London, for purpose of obtaining repoid of political dis- abilities of, 33H, :«9— Suj.port \yiil- pole'siidministnitiiiniit tieiiernl KKc- ti opixised by NVuljs.le, and defeatf'd, 341— Se<' 7v;)i(^iV*.— Miiny, open their hou^— Attitude of Dis.H, liters towards the Methodist movement, 381 — State of religion an>ong,deHrrilx>d by Jos^'ph Stennett, llii]iiist Mini^tcr, lA. — lle- ceiveWhiteficld mon' wiinnly than the "Wesleys, 3H2 ; No pHnipe- ment of their labours to Ik< found in writings of, 382— Subsemiently acknowliHlge.')— In reference to the French Revolution, 499 to 501 — Increase of, 527 — Unaggressive character of, 650 to 55'2 — Orpinized opposition to Ijord Sidmnuth's pro- posed Religious Census, 55()— Aid in passing Cathohc Emancipation Act, 682 — Ciinvention of, by "Deputies," Protestant Siiciery and" others, 593— Bills for Registration of Buths, Deaths, and Marriages passed, 595, 696. Dissenting Ministers. See Dissenters, Doddridge, Philip. Young Minister at Northampton, 336 — His antece- dents, ib. — Established Academy for training students for the ministry, ib. —His character, 336, 337— Replies to Gough in the discussion on the rea- sons of the decline of Dis.sent, 337, 338 — Courteously receives George ■V\'hitefield, 358— Holds friendly in- tercourse with him, and lends him a chapel, 383 — A friend and correspon- dent of Lady Huntingdon, 389— On State Churches, 415 — Intervention of George II. to secure liberty of con- science to, 426 — Writings, labours, and death of, 427 to 429. Earle, Jauez. Dk. Congregational Mi- nister in time of Queen Anne, 259 — Joins the Subscribing Ministers, 307. Efclesiaxtical Kiioirhdfff Society. For- mation of, 583 — Supported by most eminent Dis.senting Ministers and Laymen, 583, 584. Edwin. Sik Himvuuev. AVhen Lord Mayor carrii^l regalia of office to a Congregational chapel, 187. Elizabeth, Qieen. Assumes the title of " Supremo Governor of the Church," 12— Her absolutism in oc- clesiasticjil matters, 13 — Enforces unifoniiity, 14 — Orders Lambeth Ar- ticles to "be recullwi, 31 — Hauishoa Sejjaratists, 33 — Beconjes less cruel at close of life, 3^5. Emi.vn, Thomas. The most conspicuous of hvowinI Unitarians, 299 — His ante- owlents, ih. — Takes pastorate in Dub- lin, ib. — Is susjK'ndivl by Dublin mi- nisters, ib. — runishf^l by fine and imprisonment for writing against the doitrine of the Trinity, 300. Evanpiliral Parlij in Chitrcli of England. l^Iethodist Clergy the founders of, 438. Evans, Du. John. Co-nastor with Dr. Daniel Williams in Queen Anne's time, 249 — His labours, ib. — Joins the Non- Subscribing Ministers, 307_ Exeter Disputes, The. 302 to 310. F. FiuMiv, Thomas. Principal Socinian, 1691-9 A.D., 18.3. Five Mile Act. 75. 630 INDEX. Fletcher, of Madeley, 439. Foster, Dr. James. Minister at Bar- bican General Baptist Chapel, 328 — Appeals to human reason in defence of Christiani'y, ib. — Wrote one of the two most popular Apologies in the Deistical Controversy, 330 — His an- tecedents, /i.— His great powers as a lecturer, 331 — His sermons are best illustrations of popular Christian ora- tory during the Deistical Contro- versy, 333 — Alleged Socinianism of, 335. Foster, John. Characterized, 541 to 543 — Strengthens tone of Dissent, 653. Fox, C. J. Sentiments regarding public services of Dissenters, 423 — Speech on Test .and Coiporation Acts, 488 — Remarkable speech on religious liberty, 495. Free Churches. Number of, in 1715, ac- cording to Neale's estimate, 280 ; said estimate in tabular form, ib. note ; comments on its accuracy, 281 ; Quakers omitted therefrom, ib. Freethinkers. See Deistical Controversy. French Revolution. Dissenters in refer- ence to, 501. Friends, Society of. Appearance of, 67 — Doctrines of, 69 — Persecution of, 70 — Progress of, ib. — Brutal treatment of, after Restoration, 77 — State of, after Revolution of 1688, 91. See also Cromwell ; James the Second; Penn. Members of, allowed to make affir- mation instead of taking oath, 129, 131 — Dissatisfied with the Toleration Act, 132 — Progress of, after Toleration Act, 151, 153 — Orators and writers of, 152, 153 — Acti\ity and sufferings of, during Queen Anne's reign, 263 — Extol the Queen to her face, 265 — AflBrmation Act relating to, made perpetual, temp. George I., 282 — Leaders of, after Penn's death, 315 — Form of affirmation objectionable to some members of, ib. — Move for its amendnient,316 — Affirmation Amend- ment Act passed, 317, 318 — Sufferings of, in consequence of refusal to pay Tithes and Church Rates, 342— Amendment of Act for the Recovery of Tithes and Church Rates promoted by ; passed House of Commons but defeated in the House of Lords, 341 to 344. Fuller, Andrew, 507. FuRNEAfx, Dr. Philip. His extra- ordinary memory, 451 — Author of Essay on Toleration, 452. G. Gale, Dr. John. Baptist Minister in London in time of Queen Anne, 261 —Replied to Wall's "History of Infant Baptism," ib. — Latitudinarian opinions on subject of the Trinity, 262 — Subsequent tendency of General Baptists to Unitarianism probably to be attributed to, 262, 301— Member of first Non- Subscribing Assembly, 307. General Baptists, The. See Baptists. — Where strength of, lay, 161 — Most eminent Ministers of, in 1691 A.D., 162 — Breach among, concerning Caf- fin's views on tlio Trinity, ib. — As- semblies of, 163 — Confession of Faith of, ib. — Doctrine of same on State Churches, 164 — Tainted with Arian- ism and Unitarianism, 301 ; influence of Dr. John Gale in this direction, ib. — Establish a fund for support of Widows of Ministers, of, 322 — Three Socinian Churches alleged to be among, in London, in 1730 a.d., 335 note. George I. Decline of religion during reign of, 277, 313 to 315 — In favour of religious liberty, 277 — Received an address from the tliree Denomina- tions, ib. ; his reply thereto, 278 — Replies in unprecedented terms to address of Dissenters after quelling of rebellion of 1715 a.d., 279 — Agi- tation for religious liberty in reign of, 283 ; language of, to Parliament in favour of same cause, 285 — Blow which his accession and conduct gave to the Torj- and High Church part}', 289 — Makes withdrawal of Dissenters' claims for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts a matter of personal favour to himself, 290 — Favourable to change in Quakers' form of affirmation, 316 — Grants English llegium Donum on advice of Walpole, and increases same, 319. George II. Secures liberty of conscience to Doddridge, 426. George III., 434 — Characterized, 434, 435. GiFFORD, Andrew. Leader of the Par- ticular Baptists in Bristol ; evange- listic zeal of ; part taken by, in orga- nizing Particular Baptist body, 156. Graham, William. Pioneer of aggres- sive Dissent, 553. Grimshaw, of Howarth, 439. Grosvenor, Benjamin, Dk. Presby- terian Minister of Crosby-square Chapel, in time of Queen Anne, 249 — His parts, i'i.— Joins the Non-Sub- scribing Ministers, 307. INDEX. 631 GnosvENOR, Robert. Cited before Queen's Bench for refusing to qualify as Sheriff, 429 — Defended by Com- mittee of Deputies, 430. H. Habits. Early Reformers hostile or indifferent to, 18. Hall, Rodeut. Characterized, 539 to 541. Hamilton, R. Winter, 594. Hampton Court Conference, 37. Harris, Howel. The Weslev of Wales, 401— Vile treatment of, 402— His at- fcichinent to Church of England, 405. Hart, Joseph. Independent Minister ; author of hjTnns, 443. Hartopp, Sir John. Principal lajnuan of the Congregational Denomination in timo of Queen Anne, 260. Henry, Matthew. Presbyterian Min- ister at Che.ster and Hackney in timo of Queen Anne, 250 — Character of, 2.51. Henry VIII. Claims supremacy over the Church, 3 — Draws up Articles for the Church, 4 — .\uthori7.e8 trans- lation of Bible, 5 — Recjills same, 5 — Issues " Injunctions," 5. See also Articles of tite Church; Unifor- mity. Hbwley, Lady. Died in 1710 a.d., 2-51 — Chief supporter of the Presbyterian ojngregations in the Nurth of Kng- liuid, ib. — Trust deed of, for use of " poor godly prejichers of Christ's Go8p«'l," &c., ib. — " Charity " of, 613. High Church Part;/. See Church of Rnyland. UjM-oivod a blow fn>m tho Bceessinn and conduct of George I., 289 — Opp<)sed at Dissenters, 2H4 — Speaks in favour of the Bill for " Strengthen- ing the Protestimt Interest" in tho House of Lords, 287 — liisume of his sermon on " The Nature of the King- dom or Church of Christ," 291 — His possible ambition as a Reformer of the Church of England, 292; abandonment of that ambition, 293 — The net res\ilt of his activity, ib. — His sermon the cause of the Ban- gorian Controversy, 293 — Sarcastic observations of, on Emlyn's perse- cution, 300 note. HoLLiSES, The. Great benefactors of the Baptist Denomination, 323 — Thomas founds Hollis professorships at Harvard Universitj-, 323 ; tribute to his memory by New Engl.xnd Churches, ib. Hooker. His " Ecclesiastical Polity," 29 — Controversy with Travers, 30. Hooper, John. The first Nonconfor- mist, 8 — Denied the right of State to interfere with religion, ib. — De- manded restoration of primitive Church, and abolition of vestments, crosses, and altars, 9 — His diaracter, ib. — Refuses a bishopric, 10 — Com- mitted to tho Fleet, 10 — Consecratetl Bishop of Gloucester, ib. HoRKLEY', Bishop. Opposes Loudon Missionary Society, 513 to 515. Howard, John, 479. Howe, John. Acted as spokesman of the deputation of Ministers to Prince of Orange, 101 — Publishes anony- mously " The Case of the Protestant Dissenters, &c.," 129 — .Addresses ex- hortation to peace and charity to Churchmen and Dissenters, 132— Laments failure of Comprehension Scheme, 14S — Character and career of, 170— Involved in tho Antinoniian Controversy by Mr. Crisp, 178, 179 — Refuses to be present at public ordination of Ednmiid Calamy, 186 — Replies coarsely to Do Foe's appeal, 190. IIiNTiNODON, CoiNTEss OF, 388 — Her character ; Founds Chcshunt and Trcvccca Colleges, 390. I. Indcpnidciitx. A Church of, in 1.568, 22 — Early Indep^'iidentu ackiiow- leilged the civil inagistnifes" autliority in ecclesiastical matters, 23 — Perse- cution of.byWhitgift, 24 — First Con- tinental Cliurch of, 31 ; their views, ib. — Exiled portion address suppli- cation to James I., 38 — Controversy of, with Baptists at Amsterdam, 40 — Church of, founded in London by Henry Jacob, 4.5 — Last-named Cliurcli in existence in 1633, 48 — A few take part in Westminster Assembly, 52 ; attitude of these thereat, 52, 53 — Their position during the Common- w«dth, 55 — Attitude of, at Savoy Conference, 59 — Establish first Mis- sionary Society in England, 07. See also Broiciiists, yoiicunformists ■; 632 INDEX. James II. Doubtful whether they would have united with the Church on the terms proposed by the Compre- hension Commission, 148, 149 — Open new places of worship after Toleration Act, 166 — Projects of amalgamation • with Presbyterians, 166, 167 — Emi- nent men amongst, 167 — Some mini- sters of in conjunction with some Presbyterian Ministers draw up " Heads of Agreement," 172 ; the same described, 1 73 — Scheme of Union joyfully accepted by, 175 — Events which dissolved the Union; the Roth- well Controversy ; the Antinomian Controversy, 176 to 182 — Ministers of, issue declaration in 1698, to clear themselves of Antinomianism, 182 — Leading Ministers and Laymen of, in the time of Queen Anne, 252 to 260 — Not tainted with Arianism, 301 — Majority of Ministers of, vote for Subscription at Salters' Hall Con- ference, 306 ; and take part in Non- Subscribing Assembly, 307 — Esta- blish fund for relief of Widows of Ministers of, 321 — Number of Churches of, in Metropolis, 1730 A.D., and analysis of doctrines of same, 335 note — Review of, about a.d. 1767, 444 — Leading Ministers, 532 to 535. Indulgence of 1672, 77- James the First. His character and conduct, 35, 37, 38 — Imprisonment substituted in his reign for burning, 39— Issues "Book of Sports," 47— Defeated by Pui-itans on the Sabbath Question, ib. James the Second. Measurably favour- able to religious liberty, 80 — Grants a general amnesty, ib. — Issues declar- ation in favour of liberty of conscience, 83 — Sends the Seven "Bishops to the Tower, 83. James, Rev. J. Axgell, 594. Jay, William, 535. JoLLiE, Timothy. Congregational Mi- nister in Sheffield, in time of Queen Anne, 260. Jones, Rev. Gkiffith. The originator of education in Wales, 401. K. Keach, Benjamin. Leader of the Par- ticular Baptists, 155. Kent, Duke of. Favours establishment of Bible Societj', 517. KiFFiN, William. Leader of the Parti- cular Baptists, 153 — Outline of his life, 154. KiPPis, Dr. Andrew. His literary labours, 451. Knollys, Hanserd. Leader of the Particular Baptists, 155. Lambeth Articles. Issued by Whitgift, 31. Lancaster, Joseph. His system of education, 521. Lardner, Nathaniel. Ablest antago- nist of Woolston, 329- Objects to the punishment of Woolaton, ib. — Young Presbyterian Minister in Poor Jewry Lane, ib. — Published first part of his "Credibility of the Gospel Historj^" in A.D. 1727, 330. An Unitarian Presbyterian, 459. La t/ Preachers. See Methodism. Liberation Society. See Anti-State Church Association. LoBB, Stephen. Eminent Minister of Independents, 168 — Appealed to Drs. Stillingflect and Jonathan Edwards to decide upon orthodoxy of Dr. Williams's views, 182. Locke, John. Dissatisfied with Act of Toleration, 133 — His early training and career, ib. — Argument of his first letter on Toleration, 134 to 136— Pub- lishes two more letters on same sub- ject, 136 — Arguments of, jigainst State Churches, 137— Spirit of the treatises of, compared with those of Milton, 138— Advocates Arianism, repudiates Socinianism, 296. London Missionary Socivtij, Formation of, 511 — Becomes a Congregational Society, 513. M. Mansfield, Lord. Decision in Sheriflfs case, 431 — On religious liberty, 433. Marshman, John, 509. Maxfield, Thomas. The first Methodist lay preacher, 372. Maynooth Bill, 618. Mead, Matthew. Eminent Minister of Independents, 167. Methodism. Becomes an established Institution in 1739, 362— First Me- thodist meeting-hou,se built and INDEX. 633 opened in 1739 A.n., 36J— "Socie- ties " for promotion of, how managed, if>- — Societies of, did not secede from Church of England, nor celebrate Lord's Supper nor administer Bap- tism, ib. — Breaks into two lines, Whitt-ficld preaching CalWnistic, and and the Wesleys Araiinian doctrines, 366 — See Wesley, John. — John Wesley organizes, 371, 372 — Neces- sity of lay preachers for, 372 — Im- mense use of lay preachers to, 374 — First Conference of clergymen and lay preachers of, 1744 a.d., 374 ; transactions of same, 374, 375 ; deny that they are DissenterK, ib. — Was Dissent in snoiiiinatii)ni in Lancashire iiuU Yorkahiro, 262. MoiiK, Hannah. Originator of schools for poor children, 481. MinsELL, J. P., CIO. N. National School Society, 626. Nbal, Daniel. Congregational Minister in London, in time of tjuoon Anno, 2.57 — Autlior of " Hittnry of the Pu- ritans," 2-iH — Estimutos number of Free Chun-h<*» in Enghind und Wales, in 1715 A.D., 280— Declines to adjudi- cate on Exeter disputes, 306. Nelson, John. One of the most power- ful of the early Lay Preachers of Methodism, 373 — His labours and persecutions, ih. — Chamnteristics of Lis preaching, ib. ^^Nonconformist" Newspaper, establish- ment of, 606. Nonconformists. Per.-»erution of, after Restoration, 75, 76, 77 — Indulgence of, in 1672,77 — How availed of by, 79 — Schemes of comprehension for. 78, 79, 80 — Alternately coaxed and persecuted, 80 — Amnestied under James Second, ib. — Alliance of, with Confoniiists against James Second, 84 — Deaths of leading men among, before Revolution, 88— Fair promises of Bishops towards, 89, 90 — State of, after Revolution of 1688, 91— Form of service of, 92 — Preaching of clergy of, 92, 93, 94 — Attitude of aristocracy towards clergj- of, 94, 95 — Moderated tone of controversy with, 95 — Aca- demies established by, 96 — State of religion among, after Revolution, 97 • See Dissenters. Non-Jurors, Tlw. Refu.-^e to take oath of allegiivnce to William and Mary, 112 — Leaders of, enumerated, ib. — Obtain licen.ords, 219, 220 ; third Bill against, similarly re- jected, 224 — Act against, passed A.D. 1711, by a coalition of Whigs and Tories, 266, 267; partially repealed by Act for strengthening the Protes- tant interest, 1718 a.d., 285 to 288— Action of tho I.rf)ndon Baptists upon, in Mr. Buskerville's case, 346 to 348- O'CoNNBLL, Daniel. Acknowledges 8er\nces of Dissenters from platform of Protestant Society, 582. OLDFiELn, Dk. Joshua. First President of tho Non-Subscribers' Assembly, 307 — His antecedents, ib. Ohanoe, Pkince of. See William III.. 634 iin)Ex. P. Papists, The. Excluded from the benefit of Toleration Act, 131. Parker, Archbishop. His character' 14. Particular Baptists, The. See Baptists. Leaders of, after 1689 A.n., 153 to 156 — General Assembly of, in Lon- don, 157— Fallen state of, in 1688—90 A.D., 157 — Proceedings of General Assembly of, 158 ; Coufession of Faith adopted by same, 159 — How Ministers of, were maintained, ib. — Controversy among, concerning singing, and result of same, 160, 161 — Divide into two Associations, 160 — Not tainted with Arianism, 301 — Establish fund for support of widows of Ministers of, 321, 322. Peirge, James. Presbyterian Minister in Exeter, 302 — AVrites able apology for Nonconformity, 302, 303— Holds anti-Trinitarian views, 303 — Is de- nounced therefore by his orthodox brethren in Exeter, ib. — Sec Exeter Disputes. — Locked out from his chapel, 310 — New place of worship built for him, ib. — Set good example in Subscription Controversy, 310. Penn, "William. His familiarity with James the Second, 81 ; characterized, 82 — Conspicuous as a writer and ne- gotiator, at close of 17th cpnturj', 153— Died in 1718 a.d., 315. Penry, John. Describes the clergy of Wales, 393. PiGGOTT, John. Baptist Minister in London in time of Queen Anne, 261. Pitt, "William. Speech on Test and Corporation Acts, 488. Prayer Book. Reading of, tolerated during Commonwealth, 57 — Altered for the worse by the Savoy Confer- ence, 72. See also Church Services. Presbyterians. A Church of, at "Wands- worth, formed in 1572, 21 ; the same dispersed, 22 — Intolerance of, 56 — Rejoiced at the Restoration, 71 — Atti- tude of, at Savoy Conference, 73 — Ejected from the Church, 73, 74. See also Westminster Assembly. James the Second — Leaders of, regret the failure of the Comprehen- sion scheme, 148 — Open new places of worship after failure of Comprehen- sion scheme, 166 — Projects of amal- gamation of, with Independents, 166, 167 — Leaders of, passed in review, 169 to 171 — Some Ministers of, in conjunction with some Independent Ministers, draw up " Heads of Agree- ment," 172; the same described, 173 — Scheme of Union joyfully accepted by, 175 — Events which dissolved the Union ; the Rothwell Controversy ; the Antinomian Controversy, 176 to 182 — Occasional Conformity practised and publicly advocated by same, 18G — Church of England regarded with fondness by older among, ib. — Prin- cipal representative men of, in town and countrj', temp. Queen Anne, 248 to 252 — Largely represented in the Courts of the Aldermen and Common Council of the City, 250— Tainted with Arian tendencies, and why, 302 ■ — Majority of, present at Salters' Hall Conference vote against subscription, and form part of the Non-subscribing Assembly, 306 — Churches of, lapse into Unitarianism, 311 — Establish fund for widows of Ministers, 321 — Number of Churches of, in Metro- polis, and analysis of doctrines of same, in 1730 a.d., 335 note. Presbyterianisin. Almost identified with Unitarianism, 530. Price, Dr. Thomas. Member of Eccle- siastical Knowledge Society, 583. Price, Rev. Richard. A Unitarian Presbyterian, 450 — Agitation in favour of American "War, 471 to 473. Priestley, Dr. Joseph. A Unitarian Presbyterian, 450 — Agitation in favour of American War of Indepen- dence, 471 to 473— Attack on— Bir- mingham Riots, Sympathy of Dis- senters with ; Departure to America, 502 to 505. Pritchard, Rev. Rees. Describes the clergy of Wales, 394— The Welsh "Watts," 396. " Protestant Society," Formation of, 588 — Supported by eminent "Whig Sttitesmen, &c., 567. Puritans. Doctrines of, 16 — Deserved but did not obtain success, 19— Tlioir fortitude, 20 — Hypothesis concerning reason of their want of success, ib. — Had no idea of the exclusively spiri- tual nature of Christ's Kingdom, 21 — The Petition of, to James the First, 36 — Receive Toleration from James the First, 39 — Defeat James on Sabbath question, 47. See also Episcopacy. Pye Smith, John, 556. Member of Ec- clesiastical Knowledge Society, 684, 610. R. Raffles, Thomas, 656. Raikes, Robert. The originator of Sunday Schools, 479. DTDEX. 635 Satiortaltsm. History and development of, in England, 323 to 327— Origri- nates the Unitarian and the Deistical Controversies, ib. — See Deistical Con- troversy. Reed, Dr. Andrew. Member of Eccle- siastieal Knowledge Society, 383. Regal Supremaci/. Doctrine of, 3 — As- serted against the Jacobite clergv, 192, 193. JRegium Douum, The EiigUs]i. Granted by Gr-offre I. on the advice of Sir Robert Walpole, 319 — Increased, ib. — Demoralising effect of, 321 — Abol- ished owing to action of Dissenters, 617. Jieligiou.1 Freedom Society. Formation of, 603. Revival of Religion, 479. RiCHAun, EnF.NEZF.u. Loading Metho- dist preacher in South Wales, 549. Robinson, John. Migrates to HolLmd, 39 — Founds Churcli in Leyden, 42 — Characterized, 42, 43, 44. Robinson, Robert. His works, 447, 44H — Defence of principles of religious liberty, 402. Roman Catholics. See Papists. Rolhwell Controversy, The. Described, 176, 177. Rowlands, Daniel. Extraordinary quiililiuitions of, as a preacher, 406, 407. RvBBRLL, Dr. William. Eminent Minister of Gencnil Baptists, 162. RvsRELL, Lord John. Introduces bill for rept'id of Test and Corporation Acts, 671. 8. Sabbath Controversy, 45, 46, 47- Sachkverell, Henry. Chumrtor and powers of, 200, 201 — Declaims Hgiiinst Dissenting Acadcmirs, 201 — Sermon of, in St. PimlV, 239 — Impeached before Houso of Lords, 240 — Booiunes ii popular idol, 241 — Condemned by the House of Lords, 243 — Rode in triumi)h through the country, 244 — Honoured by Com- mons and rewarded by the Queen, 246 — f^nthusiasm aroused by ; hurls the Whigs from power, 245. Sacramental Ttst, The. Seven Peers pro- test ii^iiinst the imposition of, 115 — Six Peers propose a modification of, 116. Sailers' Ball Controversy, The, 306 to 310 — Puts an end to imposition of human creeds, 313. Sancroft, Ahchbishop. Conduct of, at Revolution, 100 to 104— Heads the Non-juring clergy, 112 — Denounces oath-takers as schismatics, 113. Sandemanians. The, 454. Savoy Conference, 72. Schism Bill, The. Introduced into Par- liament, 269 — Analysed, 270 — Passed through both Houses, 272, 273 — In consequence of death of Queon Anne, the measure never enforc-ed, 274 — Repealed by the Act for Strengthen- ing the Protestiint Interest, 285, 288. Sheriff's ease. The Decision of Lord Mansfield upon, 431. Sherlock, Bishop. Writes the most popular reply to Woolston's Dis- courses on the Christian Miracles 3-29. Shower, John. Presbyterian Minister of Old Jewry Chapel in time of Queen Anne, 249. Slave Trade Agitation. See Quakers. Society of Friends. Sjnnpafhy with the Government in the Rebellion of 1745 — Lead Slave Trade Agitatit)n, 483. Socinians. Doctrine of, was spreading at end of 17th ceutur>', 183 — Litemture of, well written, 183 ; praised by Til- lotson, 184 — Hated by Legislatun', Clergy and Dissenting Ministers, ib. — Houso of Conmions ordered Book agiiiiLst the doctrine of tho Trinity to be burnt, ib. — Invectives of South against, ill. — Dissonting ministers ap- peal to the Kinir to interdict the printing of any Scamin;; of, ;J51 — CalU-d to Geor^ria, .152 ; went thither a Hi^'h Churchman and be- liever in Chri>tiiui niajnc, 352— Visit to .\nierica a faihire, 353 — ConijK-lK-d to return to Kn;:lani, 361 — Bibliomancy and lot dniwinjc of, io detennine if heshall jro to Bristol and preach to the ixM^iple, ib. — His dislike to opon-air preacnintr, 362 — Eoclesi- asticisni of, ib. — VThy ho overcame dislike to open-air preaehintr, ib. — Orpinizes s(M'ieties, 3().'3 — Did not wish to secede from the Church of En^rland, ib. — .\nninianisni of, 364 — Denounces Calvinism, ib. — Pub- licly tears Whiteficld's I.tter of expos- tulation to pieces, 36'» — Receives Whifetield fraternally on latter's re- turn to Loudon, 1^. — Agrees to ditfer with Whitefield about Arminianism and Cahnnism, 366 — Personal friend- ship renewed, ib. — Several clergymen identified themselves with, 368 ; how treated, 369 — Courage of, ib. — Re- luctantly permits of lay preachers, 372 — Eventually allowsThomas Max- well to continue his preaching. 373 — Summons first Conference of Me- thodist clergjTnen and lay preachers, 1744 A.D., 374 — Statement of ditfe- rences between himself and other clerg}' of the Church of EngLind, 376, 377 — Eflfects moral reform among the people, 380, 381— Bitter opponent of Dissent, 381 — Received \vith cool- ness by Dissenters, 382. His %-iews on the relation of Methodism to the Church of England, and his hostility to Baptists, 441 — Sides with High Church party and Government in re- lation to American war, 475. Wesley, Sisaxna. Mother of John and Charles Wesley, 348 — Her cha- racter, ib. — Became Christian teacher of the people in her husband's ab- sence, 349 — Would not discontinue public .services at mere desire of her hu.sband, 349, 'iod — Fond of Law's " Serious Call " and a Kenipis's " Iniitiition," 3.50 — Coun.sels her son to permit of the preaching of Thomas Maxfield, a lajTiian, 372. West initi.it f I- Assembbj of Divines. Re- marks on, 51 — Denounced by Sclden and Milton, 54. Sec also Baptists ; Indtpendfnts. Witigs, The. Attitude of, towards Non- confonnists and Ajigliain Clergy du- ring reign of Willi im III., 121 — Votes of some of, throw out aiul shelve Libcnil measures, ib. — Make Coalition with Earl of Nottingham, to get into power and pa.ss Occasional Confonuity Act, as price of the same, 260 — Denounced by Do Foe, 275. WiiisTON, William. Embraces Ari- anism, and is expelled the University of Cambridge therefore, 298. Whitkkieli), Geoiiok. Beer drawer in Bristol; aftervvanls "poor scholar" at Oxford University, 351 — Read tho " Imitation," and strongly afli'Cted by it, .352— Joinc SYMONDS INN, AND 7, 8, 9, CHLRCH PASSAGE, CHANCERY LANE. mm /^' ! i '