PRINCETON, N. J. The Stephen Collins Donation. No. Ca^c, ^ " No. >s/?4/;^^^^"^ S^--- -- -^-^\ BX 9053 .H4 1868 Hetherington, W. M. 1803- 1865, History of the Westminster \ m HISTORY or THE \^ ESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY DIVINES BY THE REV. W. M. HETHERINGTON, AUTtiOR OK THE ' HIS rnRY OF THK C HIRCH OF SCOTLAND NEW YORK: aOBERT CARTER & BROTHERS No. 530 BROADWAY. 1868. TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. INTBODUCTORY. Page Importance of the Westminster Assembly, - - 13,14 Quarrel between Henry VHI. and the Pope, - - 15 Cranmer's Suggestion, ------ ib. 1531 Henry styled Supreme Head of the Church, - - - 17 Effects of the Power thus Assumed, . _ . 17,18 Six Articles of Religious Agreement, - - - - 19 Reformation promoted by Edward VI., _ - . 20 The Liturgy and Book of Ordinations, - - - -21,22. 1550 Hooper refuses the Episcopal Vestments, - - - 22 Articles of Religion, -23 *' Bloody Mary," and Persecution, - - - - 24 " Frankfort Troubles" — Contests about Ceremonies, - 25-27 Queen Elizabeth — Act of Supremacy, - - - 27 Renewed Contests about Vestments and Ceremonies, - 29 1562 Convocation — Close of Reforming Period, - - 30 General View of the Grounds of Controversy between the Court Divines and the Reforming Party, - - 31-33 Despotic Injunction of the Queen, _ - . - 34 Suspension of those who refused to Conform, and who, wishing greater Purity, were now called Puritans, - 35 Remonstrances of Foreign Churches, _ - - 36 1566 The Puritans begin to form a separate Body, - - ib. Chief Differences between them and the Church, - 37, 38 1567 Their first Communion interrupted, - - - - 39 Parliament attempts to interpose, but in vain, - 39, 40 State of Religion in England, 40,41 Associations for Worship, Discipline, « Prophesyings," 41 Cartwright and Whitgift, 42 I57S First Presbytery constituted in England, - - - 43 66 ]y table of contents. Pape Grindal interposes, but in vain, ----- 44 Puritan Writings proliibited, ----- 45 Rise of the Brownists, 46,47 Whitgift's Articles — Hisrh Commission, - . - 48 J 588 Bancroft's Theory of jwrc divino Prelacy, - - - 49, 50 The Martin Mar-Prelate Tracts, . - - - 51 Attempt of Parliament to interfere— Sufferings of Puritans, 51, 52 Controversy on Sabbath-keeping, - - - - ^-' Growth of Arminianism among the Prelatists, - - 53 King James— The Millenary Petition, - - - 53,54 Hampton Court Conference, ' ' ' ' ' ^^ Bancroft and the High Commission, - - - 57 Civil Liberty manifestly endangered, - - - - 58 1616 Rise of the Independents, or Congregationalists, - 59 1618 The King's Book of Sports, i*^- The King's Despotism begins to rouse Parliament, - 61 Accession of Charles I., ._---- 62 Despotic Principles of the High Church Party, - 63 The Parliament begins to defend Liberty, Civil and Re- ligious, -------- lb. 1633 The Book of Sports revived, 64 Continued Contest between the King and Parliament, 65 Laud's cruel Treatment of Leighton, Burton, Bastwick, and Prynne, Hampden and the Ship-money Tax, - - - - 66. 67 The Emigration of Hampden and Cromwell prohibited, 67 Laud reaches the climax of Prelatic Usurpation, - - 68 Abortive attempt to force Prelacy on Scotland, - ib. 1640 The Long Parliament called— Its vigorous measures, 70, 71 Laud and the Earl of Strafford impeached, - - - 71 Prelatic Controversy — Smectymnuus, - - - 72 Parliament declares its own sittings permanent, - - 74 Protestation of Parliament, ----- 75 The King in Scotland, - - - - - - 76, 77 Remonstrance of the House of Commons, - - 78 Impeachment of the Bishops, ib. The King attempts to seize the five Members, and then leaves London, -------79 1642 The Royal Standard raised at Nottingham, - - 80 Bill for t^e Abolition of Prelacy, - - - - 81 Ordinance calling the Assembly of Divines, - - 84 Outline of Scottish Affairs, ----- 87 Reflections suggested by the preceding Narrative, - 93 CHAPTER II. MEETING OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 1643 List oT the Assembly of Divines, • - - -97,98 First Meeting of the Assembly — Its Theory, - 99, 100 T^BLF. OF CONTENTS. V Page Greneral Regulations of the Assembly, - - - JQI Baillie's Account of its Order of Procedure, - • 102 Prelatic members of Assembly, - . , „ 104 Fasts and Sermons of the Assembly, _ . . jb Intercourse with the Church of Scotland, - - - 105 Deliberations respecting a League or Covenant, - 106 The Solemn League and Covenant, - - - 111 Remarks concerning it, _ _ _ . _ 115 Parties in the Westminster Assembly, - - - 116 Episcopalians, -_---._ ib. Presbyterians, - - - - - - - - 1J7 Independents, r - - - - - - 118 Erastians, -_--___- 120 Remarks concerning these Parties, - - . 123 The Scottish Commissioners to the Assembly, - - 124 Characters of Henderson, Gillespie, Rutherford, and Baillie, 125 Numerous Sects in England, ----- 128 Causes of these numerous Sects, - - . _ 129 Effects on the Assembly and the Kingdom, - - 132 Political Independents — Toleration, - - - - ib. CHAPTER III. THE INDEPENDENT CONTROVERSY. Order to frame a Directory of Worship, - - - 135 Deliberations concerning Office-bearers in the Church, 137, 138 Concerning the Office of Apostles, . - . - 139 Concerning Pastors and Teachers, or Doctors, - 140 Concerning Ruling Elders, _ - _ - - 141 Concerning Deacons, ------ 143 Suggestions respecting the Supply of Vacant Charges, 144 1644 The Subject of Ordmation introduced, - - - 146 The Struggle between the Parties begun, - - - 148 Proposition of the Independents concerning Ordination, 149 Consent of the Congregation to, or Election of the Pastor, 151 Alterations made by the Parliament in the Doctrinal part of Ordination, successfully resisted by the Assembly, 152 Directory for Public Worship, ----- 153 Form of Church Government and Discipline, 154 Opposition made by the Independents, _ - _ ib. Their " Apologeti.cal Narration" — Extracts, - - 156 Answers to that Work — Antapologia, _ - - 164 Remarks on the Independent Controversy, - - ib. The Arguments on both sides stated, . . - 165-170 Admission of a close approximation, - _ - 171 " Many Congregatitf ns under one Presbytery" debated, 172 TABLE OF CONTENTS, Remarkable Debate between Selden and Gillespie, - 172, J 73 Nye's argument against Presbytery censured, - - 174 Admissions by the Independents, _ - . - 176 Debate on Congregational Ordination, - - ^ - 179 Suspension from Sacraments, and Excommunication, - 180 Committee of Accommodation, _ - - - 182 Proceedings of that Committee, _ . . _ 183 Reasons of Dissent by the Independents, - - 185 The Assembly's Answer, ------ 186 Reasons of Dissent, and Answers, or Grand Debate, 191 Independents requested to state their own Model, - 192 They decline, and publish '' A Copy o^? Remonstrance," 193 Answer to this by the Assembly, - - - - ib. Committee of Accommodation revived — Abandoned, - 194 Remarks on this Controversy and its consequences, 195 CHAPTER IV. THE ERASTIAN CONTROVERSY. Preliminary Remarks on the Erastian Theory, - - 200 Selden's Hint respecting Excommunication, - - 203 His Argument on 1 Cor. v. 4, 204 Selden's Argument on Matt, xviii. 15-18, - - 205, 206 Answered by Gillespie, - . - - - 206, 207 Whitelocke's Argument and Suggestion on Divine Right, 207 Firmness of the Assembly — Successful, _ - - 208 Whitelocke and the jus divinum Claim in Parliament, 210 t645 Conduct of Parliament on the Suspending of Ignorant and Scandalous Persons from the Lord's Table, - 212 Selden's Argument on that Subject, - - _ 213 Whitelocke's Argument, 214 Remarks on these Arguments, - - - - 216 Ordinance about Suspension, &,c. — Erastian Clause, - 219 Petitions from London and the City Ministers, - 220 1646 Ordinance for the Choice of Elders— Erastian Clause, 222 Remonstrance of the Scottish Parliamentary Commis- sioners, __------ 224 Haughty Conduct of the English Parliament, - - 226 Petition of the Assembly — How received, - - 227 The Parliament's ;m.v diyiimm Questions, - - 227,228 The Assembly's Deliverance on the essential element of the Controversy — Firmness of the Assembly, - 229 The Assembly prepares Answers to these Questions, 231 The jus fiiymM/n Treatise by the City Ministers, - 232 Outline of Political Events, ^ 233 The King retires to the Scottish Army — Altered tone of Parliament, ...---- ib. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Vll Pa^e Erastian Clause removed from the Ordinance for the choice of Elders and erection of Presbyteries, - 234 The King in the Scottish Array — Negotiations, - 235 Vindication of Scotland from the accusation of having sold the King— True state of the matter, - - 236-239 1647 Removal of obstructions, and erection of Presbyteries and Synods, 239, 240 Negotiations with the King — Votes of Parliament con- cerning Church Government and Toleration, - 240 Preparation of the Confession of Faith, - 242 Not the slightest Erastian modification admitted, - 243 Presented to Parliament — Scripture proofs required, 244 1648 How far ratified by Parliament — What alterations sug- gested — What topics recommitted — Remarks, - 245 Literature of the Erastian Controversy, - - - 246 Theories of diflferent shades of Erastianism, - - 247 Coleman's Sermon, __.--- 249 Gillespie's Brotherly Examination, . - - - 250 Controversy between Coleman and Gillespie, - - 251 Gillespie's Aaron's Rod Blossoming, _ - - 252 Rutherford's Divine Right of Church Government, - 254 Treatise by ApoUonius, .-..-- 255 Concluding Remarks on Erastianism, _ - - 256 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION OF THE WESTMINSTER ASSEIWBLY. 1647-8 The Catechisms COMPOSED, 257 Inquiry concerning the Authorship of the Catechisms, 259 Departure of the Scottish Commissioners, - - - 260 1649 Dissolution of the Assembly, 262 Ratification of the Westminster Assembly's productions by the Church of Scotland, with explanations, - 263 Outline of subsequent events in England, - - 264 Usurpations of the Army and Cromwell, - - - 265 The King in the Isle of Wight— Negotiations, - 266 Death of Charles I., ------ - 267 Dissolution of the Long Parliament and the Westminster Assembly, 268 The Engagement — Ejection of Presbyterians, - 269 Committee of Triers, ----- 7 ' }^' 1658 The Independents in Power — The Savoy Confession, 271 Death of Cromwell — Restoration of Charles II., - ^ 272 Prelacy Restored — The Savoy Conference, - - 272, 273 1662 The Act of Uniformity— Two Thousand Presbyterian Ministers ejected on St. Bartholomew's Day, - 274 Divines of the Westminster Assembly ejected, - 275 Retrospective view of the whole subject, - - - 276 VUl TABLE OF CONTENTS. Pase Main object of the Westminster Assembly, . - 276 Advanlasres of Religious Uniformity, _ _ - 278 Effects of the Assembly — On Universities, - - 279 On Theolo2:ical Literature, . . - - - 280 On the State of Education in England, - - - 280,281 Sectarianism — Slate of the Army, . _ . - 281 On Religions Toleration, ----- 282, 283 Its True Nature intimated, ----- 284 Liberty of Conscience, ----- \h. How Misunderstood by both Parties, - - - - 285 Unlimited Toleration not granted by the Independents when in Power, - 286 Opinions of the Early Reformers — of the Church of Scot- land — of the Westminster Assembly, - - -286,287 Fundamental Principles of Faith, by the Independents, 289, 290 Great Idea of a General Protestant Union entertained by the Westminster Assembly, - - - - 290, 291 Coincidences between that Period and the present, - 294 How Union yet Attainable — And imperatively Necessary, 297 Conclusion, -------- 298 APPENDIX. I. Religious Uniformity Recommended by the Scottish Com- missioners in 1640-41— Their Views, - - 300 II. Extracts from Gillespie's Manuscripts; and Extracts on Election of Ministers, 307 III. Ordinance about Suspension, &c., - - - - 31 J IV. Ordinance for the Choice of Elders, - - - - ib. PREFACE. In common with all true Presbyterians, I have often regretted the want of a history of the Westminster Assembly of Divines, by whose labors were produced the Confession of Faith, the Directory of Public Worship, the Form of Church Government, and the Catechisms, which have so long been held as the Standards of the Presbyterian Churches through- out the world. Especially in such a time as the present, when all dis- tinctive Presbyteriaii principles are not only called in question, but also misrepresented and condemned, such a want has become absolutely un- endurable, unless Presbyterians are willing to permit their Church to perish under a load of unanswered, yet easily refuted, calumny. And as ihe best refutation of calumny is the plain and direct statement of truth, it is by that process that I have endeav^ored to vindicate the principles and the character of the Presbyterian Church. When contemplating the subject, there were two not very reconcilable ideas before my mind. The one was, to restrict the Work to such a size as might keep it within the reach of all Presbyterians, even those wnose means were more limited than their inclinations, but who equally needed and desired information ; the other was, to give details suffi- ciently minute and conclusive to place the whole matter fully and fairly before the mind of the reader, that he might be able to form an accurate judgment respecting the character and proceedings of the Westminster Assembly, and also of the Church and people of Scotland, who were so intimately connected with it. How far these conflicting purposes have been reconciled it is for others to judge ; this, however, I may be per mitted to say, that no pains have been spared in the endeavor to ascer- tain the truth in even the most minute points which required ii vestiga- lion ; almost every book or pamphlet of any importance written at the time, or by men whose course of inquiries liave led them to traverse thai X PREFACE. period, having been carefully read. I had, indeed, entertained the de- sign of giving a complete list of all the productions, in book or pamphlet form, which have been consulted or perused ; but, in honest sincerity, I confess that I shrunk from doing so, lest it might seem too like mere ostentation. For a similar reason, but one or two references to author- ities have been given, when it would have been equally easy to have produced half a dozen ; and I have chiefly referred to original authori- ties, rather than to those which may be got in the common histories .of the period ; for there can be little use in quoting Hume, and Brodie, and Laing, and Godwin, and D'Israeli, when we have before us the original authorities on which their statements are founded. By adopting this method, I have also avoided the necessity of encumbering my Work with digressive corrections of the erroneous or distorted views generally given by these historians, in their accounts of the Westminster Assembly, and of the conduct of the Presbyterians. Inquiries have been frequently made respecting the manuscript of the Westminster Assembly's proceedings, kept by the scribes or clerks of the Assembly; but that important document appears to be irrecoverably lost. One account states, that it was burned in the great fire of London, in the year 1666. It was long thought that a copy of it had been taken, and was preserved in the Library of Sion College; and some aver that this was actually the case, and that it, too, was destroyed in the fire which burned the House of Commons in 1834, having been placed there, along with other manuscript records relating to the Church of Scotland, during the inquiries of the Committee on Patronage. We are informed by Baillie, that many members of the Assembly em- ployed themselves in taking copious notes, during the course of the dis- cussions in which they were engaged. It might have been expected that several of these manuscript note-books would have been still extant, by comparing which, the loss of the Assembly's own record might have been in a great measure supplied. None, however, have been published, except Lightfoot's Journal and Baillie's Letters ; which are accordingly the most minute and authentic accounts that can now be obtained. The edition of Baillie to which I have referred, is that admirable one recently published under the care of David Laing, Esq. To that gentleman, to the Librarians of the Advocates' and the Theoloirical Libraries, to the Rev. Dr. Cunninsham, the Rev. Thomas M'Crie, the Rev. William Goold, the Rev. Samuel Martin of Bathgate, and the Rev. Robert Craig of Rothesay, I take this opportunity of expressing my grateful thankt for the access which they so readily gave me to their literary stores- PREFACE. XI Dr. Thomas Goodwin, one of the leading Independent divines, wrote fifteen volumes of notes or journals of the Assembly's proceedings, as we are informed in a memoir of his life by his son, three only of which are still preserved in Dr. Williams' Library, London. It was my inten- tion to have consulted these, but I found it impracticable at the time. There are in the Advocates' Library, Edinburgh, two manuscript volumes of notes by Gillespie, one in quarto, the other in octavo; both of which I have been courteously permitted to peruse. They seem to be transcripts from the original, and of the two the octavo is the more complete. They both begin February 2, 1644 ; the quarto ends May 22, and the octavo, October 2.5, the same year. Their chief value con sists in the complete corroboration which they furnish to the printed accounts of Lightfoot and Baillie, — as will be seen from an extract in- serted in the Appendix ; but they would be well worthy of publication in any collected edition of Gillespie's works. It has not been thought necessary to present an outline of the doctri- nal productions of the Westminster Assembly, and of the Confession of Faith in particular ; not because these were not in reality the most va- luable of their labors, but because there prevailed such a degree of una- nimity among the Divines in matters of doctrine, that their deliberations on these points did not assume the character of controversy, and fur- nished no materials for historical narrative, however interesting and important to the theologian. In tracins: the controversies by which both Church and kingdom were agitated during the deliberations of the W^estminster Assembly, it has been my endeavor to avoid, as much as possible, giving a controversial uspect to my own production. My duty was, to relate faithfully what was said, written, and done, by the eminent men of that period ; and, in nischarging that duty, I have often felt it expedient to transcribe their own language, as the most impartial way of recording their sentiments; and when occasionally stating my own opinions, I have striven to do so as fairly and impartially as may well be expected from one who does not hesitate to acknowledge that he feels deeply and warmly interested m everything that relates to Presbyterian principles and character. Certainly I have no wish to misrepresent either the opinions or the practice of any body of sincere Christians,— least of all would I censure harshly the errors into which pious and earnest-hearted men were driven by Prelatic persecution, or into which they fell in the sudden revulsion l)roduced by its overthrow, and in the excitement arising from unwonted religious liberty. Let me tru-^t that Evangelical Dissenters will give XU PREFACE. credit to the sincerity of the feelings which I thus avow. There is no pleasure in recording the errors of the good and the follies of the wise, but there may be much advantage, if we are thereby taught to shun the error and the folly, and to imitate only the goodness and the wisdom. The plan of compression within the narrowest practicable limits which I have adopted, has prevented me from recording many particu- lars of much interest and importance ; but should time and health be spared me, I may at some future period resume the task, and attempt to produce a work on the subject at once more minute and more com- prehensive. In the meantime, if my present Work shall be found to have vindicated the character of that truly venerable body of Presbyte- rian f^ivines from the unjust aspersions by which it has been so long assailed, and to have rendered the principles which they held, and the objects which they sought to accomplish, more clear and intelligible than they have hitherto been, I shall be amply recompensed, — especially if, in pointing out the errors into which contending parties fell, and the way in which these errors and contentions might have been avoided, I shall have succeeded to any degree in directing the minds of all sincere Christians to contemplate the necessity and the practicability of realizing now the great idea of a general Evangelical Union, far more extensive ant' complete than could have been either hoped for or attained at the per'od of the Westminster Assembly. ToKPHicHEN Manse, Mayy 1843. HISTORY WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY. x, p. 295, WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 37 This most important event took place in the summer of the jear 15(36, and from that time onward the Puritan party may be regarded as forming a body dis- tinct from the Church of England, although they were the true successors of the first and greatest reforming fathers of that Church. It would be a great mistake to suppose, that the only subject in dispute between the Puritans and their antago- nists was that respecting clerical vestments. That formed, indeed, a very prominent point in the controversy, because it was so apparent, and so easily brought under the terms of a royal proclamation. But there were many, and these still more important matters which they wished to have reformed. Of these, the most prominent were the follow- ing. They regarded the assumed superiority of bishops over presbyters as a higher order, and the claim on their part, of the sole right of ordination, discipline and gov- ernment, as unscriptural in itself, and tending both to secularize them, and to produce an intolerable despotism. Along with this, they complained of the whole array of cathedral office-bearers as of the same character, and equally unwarranted. They lamented the want of disci- pline, in consequence of which, it was impossible to main- tain the purity of the most sacred ordinances. Regarding set forms of prayer as properly intended to meet the ne- cessities of a time of ignorance, they did not dispute their lawfulness, while they wished a greater liberty in prayer, where such help was not required ; and they disapproved also of too many repetitions, of responses, and of several exceptionable expressions, particularly in the marriage and funeral services. They disapproved of the reading of the Apocryphal books in the church ; and while they re- garded the homilies as in themselves valuable, they held that no man should be ordamed to the ministry, who was not himself able to preach and to expound the Scriptures. While they complained of pluralities, non-residence, and an unpreaching clergy, they viewed these as caused chiefly by patronage exercised by the queen, bishops, and lay-pa- trons, and held that it ought to be abolished, and ministers to be appointed by the election of the people. They cou- * Strjne^s Lif^ of Parker, p 241. 4 38 HISTORY OF THE demned, on the one hand, the keeping of the church-festi- vals and saints' days ; and on the other, the open and fla- grant violation of the Lord's day, as equally contrary to Scripture. Cathedral worship, chanted prayers, and instru- mental music, they also condemned, as tending rather to amuse than edify. And they declared their great reluc- tance to comply with certain rites and ceremonies which w^ere strictly enjoined, and which they regarded as super- stitious or unmeaning, such as — the sign of the cross in baptism, baptism by midwives, the exclusion of parents and the employment of godfathers and godmothers, the rite of confirmation, kneeling at the communion, as im- plying transubstantiation, bowing at the name of Jesus, the ring in marriage, and certain foolish words used in the ceremony, and the wearing of the surplice and other cere- monies used in divine service. When so many, and such important topics were all equally in dispute, and not the slightest redress could be obtained, but conformity in every particular was enforced with the most oppressive and unrelaxing rigor, it was not strange that the persecuted Puritans should determine to separate themselves from a Church which they regarded as but half reformed, and which sternly refused to advance to a more pure and perfect reformation, according, not to the will of princes, but to the word of God. And the time may come, when the Church of England Avill bitterly be- wail the insane conduct of those, who, in that reforming period, took up and pursued a course which crushed the life-spring out of its heart, and swathed up the cold and paralyzed remains, to lie in state, a decent but a dead for- mality. [1567.] The chief leaders of the separation, according to Fuller, were the Rev. Messrs. Colman, Button, Haling- ham, Benson, White, Rowland, and Hawkins, all of whom held benefices within the diocese of London. No sooner Avas the queen informed that the Puritans had begun to form separate assemblies for worship, than she commanded her commissioners to take effectual measures to keep the laity to their parish churches ; and to let them know that if they frequented conventicles, or broke the ecclesiastical laws, they should, for the first offence, be deprived of the freedom of the city, and then abide what further punish- WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 39 inent she would direct. But the requirements of con- science are stronger than a sovereign's threats. They continued to hokl their private meetings; and on the 19th ot June, 15G7, they agreed to have a sermon preached and the communion dispensed at Phmiber's Hall, which they engaged for that day.* The day came, and they assembled to worship the God of peace, but their peaceful worship was rudely interrupted by the entrance of the armed officers of the civil power, who seized upon the chief, dispersed the rest, and dragged their victims to prison. Next day they were brought before the bishop of London, and the chief magistrate of the city, charged with the heinous offence of forsaking the Church which persecuted them, and setting up separate assemblies for worship. They defended their conduct ably ; but because they would not yield, they were, to the number of twenty-four men and seven women, sent to Bridewell, where they endured the hardships of more than a year's imprisonment. . [1571.] A parliament was held in l.o71, in which there were some attempts made to procure a further reformation. One member, Mr. Strickland, proposed to bring in a bill for that purpose, asserting that the Prayer Book,^vith some superstitious remains of Popery in the Church, might be altered without any danger to religion. Her majesty was so displeased, that she sent for him to the council, reproved him sharply, and forbade his attendance in Parliament ; but this caused such an alarm in the House of Commons, as a dangerous invasion of their privileges, that she found it convenient to remove her prohibition. An act was passed, ratifying the Thirty-nine Articles, which had been framed by the Convocation of 1562; and one clause in that act admitted the validity of ordination by presbyters alone, without a bishop.f This clause was greatly disliked by the bishops, and has been repeatedly condemned by their • Strype'sLife of Grinda],pp. 115, and 135, 136. j In none of the MS. copies of the Thirty-nine Articles, either as pass- ed by the Convocation of 1562, or as ratified bv the Parliament of 1571, IS the clause in the 20th article to be found, by which the Church of England claims the power " to decree rites and ceremonies." It must have been surreptitiously introduced afterwards by some of the Prelatic party, without civil or ecclesiastical authority.— See Historical and Cru tical Essay on the Thirty-nine Articles^ pp. 277-279. 40 HISTORY OF THE successors, bnt remains still unrepealed. The House of Commons were desirous also that articles of discipline should be framed and enacted ; but ^vhen this was discoun- tenanced by the bishops, they presented an address to the queen, representing the grievous injuries sustained by the Church and kingdom for want of true and efficient disci- pline, supplicating her majesty that proper laws might be provided and enacted for t'he reformation of these abuses. Butt the queen dissolved the Parliament without answering this supplication. Although little was done in the Parliament to relieve the oppressed Puritans, some steps were taken by the Convo- cation which tended to increase their oppression A canon of discipline was framed, empowering the bishops to call in all their licences for preaching, and to issue new licen- ces to those only whose qualifications gained their appro- bation ; and among the qualifications specified, subscrip- tion to all the points of which the Puritans complained was particularly mentioned. These canons were not sanctioned by royal authority ; but the bishops, knowing well the queen's inclinations, did not hesitate "to enforce them with great rigor. Numbers of the Puritan divines were imme- diately deprived of their licences to preach, because they refused to subscribe canons not yet legalized; and it be- came apparent that a formidable crisis was at hand. At the very time that the bishops were thus silencmg the persons whom they themselves admitted to be the best preachers in the kingdom, the state of religion throughout the country was truly deplorable. Of this Strype, no Pu- ritan, presents the following outline : — " The Churchmen heaped up many benefices upon themselves, and resided upon none, neglecting their cures ; many of them alienated their lands, made unreasonable leases, and wastes of their woods ; granted reversions and advowsons to their wives and children, or to others for their use. Churches ran greatly into dilapidations and decays ; and were kept nasty and filthy, and indecent for God's worship. Among the laity there was little devotion. The Lord's day greatly profaned, and little observed. The common prayers not frequented. Some lived without any service of God at all. Many were mere heathens and atheists. The queen's own court an harbor for epicures and atheists, and a kind of laAV WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY 41 less place, because it stood in no parish. Which things made good men fear some sad judgments impending over the nation."* Perceiving that there was no prospect whatever of any further reformation in religious matters proceeding from either the sovereign or the convocation, and lamenting the wretched ignorance and immorality which prevailed in the kingdom, the Puritans now resolved to •. xert themselves to the utmost of their means and opportunities for their own instruction, and that of their perishing coimtrymen. And as Dr. Scambler, bishop of Peterborough, was less intole- rant than many of his order, the ministers within his dio- cese, particularly those of Northampton, with his approba- tion, and that of the mayor of the town, formed an associa- tion for promoting the purity of worship and the mainte- nance of discipline. The regulations of this association were very tempeiate, involving no departure from any of the established modes of worship, nor any rigid disciplinary arrangements. And as they were aware of the extreme inability to preach instructively, which characterized very many of the clergy, they endeavored also to provide a remedy for this evil. For this purpose they instituted what they termed " prophesyings," taking the designation from 1 Cor. xiv. 31, "Ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all maybe comforted." In these prophesy- ings one presided, and a text previously selected was explained by one of the ministers to whom it had been assigned. After his exposition, each in turn gave his view of the passage ; and the whole exercise was summed up by the president or moderator for the day, who concluded by exhorting all to persevere in the discharge of their sacred duties.f This scheme, it is evident, w^as admirably calcu- lated to increase the scriptural knowledge, and promote the usefulness of the clergymen who engaged in it ; and it deserved the cordial approbation of all who were desirous to promote the religious welfare of the community. But it was regarded with jealousy by the bishops, and ere long encountered the keen hostility of Elizabeth herself. [1572.] When the Parliament met in 1572, an attempt •Strype's Life of Parker, p. 395., t Slrype's Life of Grinda], pp. 175, 176. 4* 42 HISTORY OF THE was made by the House of Commons to mitigate the suf- ferings of the Prritans, and they passed two bills for that purpose This gave such offence to the queen, that she sharply reproved them for interfering in such matters, and commanded them to deliver up the bills. One of the mem- bers boldly complained of this conduct, as trenching upon the liberty of Parliament, and for his boldness was sent to the Tower. The Puritans, who had reason to expect some countenance from the Parliament, prepared a full statement of their grievances and their desires, in a treatise entitled "An Admonition to the Parliament." But while the Par- liament was not permitted to grant any redress, the authors of the Admonition were cast into prison, and treated with great severity. Whitgift was appointed to answer the Admonition, and Cartwright answered Whitgift, which led to a lengthened controversy between these learned and able men. Each, and still more eagerly the partisans of each, claimed the victory ; but the controversy did not terminate with the writings of these antagonists, nor is it yet terminated. It is waged in the present day with equal keenness, and not inferior ability ; it may be added, with no novelty in its leading principles, and very little in its^ arguments. Cartv/right maintained that the Scriptures were not only the sole standard of doctrine, but also of discipline and government, and that the Church of Christ in all ages was to be regulated by them. Whitgift held, that the Scriptures were a rule of faith; but not designed to be a standard of discipline and government — that this was changeable, and might be adapted to the civil govern- ment of any country — and that the times of the apostles could not be the best model, but rather the first four cen- turies of the Church, during which she had reached a ma- ture development. In what do these views essentially differ from the advocates and opponents of Patristic theo- logy in the present day 1 Till men agree in some leading principles by w^hich any great controversy must be ruled, it is vain to expect that it can ever be brought to a satis- factory conclusion; yet those who appeal to Scripture authority alone, must surely be held to be following the most proper and authoritative method in discussions of that nature. All hope of legislative assistance in prosecuting further WRSTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 43 reformation beinsr cut off by the queen's arbitrary proce- dure, the Puritans resolved to take another step still more daring and decisive than any on which they had previously ventu'i-ed. Several of the ministers of London and its vicinity met tooether and determined to form themselves into a presbyteiy, to be held at Wandsworth, a village on ihe banks of the Thames, about five miles from the city. On the 20th of November, 1572, about fifteen ministers met, eleven elders were chosen to form members of the body ; their otlices were described in a register, entitled, *' The Orders of Wandsworth ;" and this was the first fully constituted Presbyterian Church in England.* The intel- liirence of this event soon reached the bishops ; the Court of High Commission took the alarm ; the queen issued a procUfmation for enforcing the Act of Uniformity ; but the Presbytery of Wandsworth for a time eluded the fury of their enemies, and other presbyteries were formed in neighboring counties. There was now little possibility of reconciliation be- tween the High Church and the Puritan parties ; for the unbending determination of the former not to grant the slisrhtest relief to the sufferings of their brethren, nor the lea^st accommodation to their aggrieved consciences, had driven them from mere non-conformity into the adoption of a different form of Church polity, possessing in itself the elements of perpetuity and growth. Puritanism had thenceforward not only a vital principle, but also system- atic ors-anization, enabling it to live on, and increase in spite of any amount of persecution ; for a system dies not with the individuals that held it, but draws into itself the fresh life of succeeding generations. Having thus traced the rise of Puritanism, and seen its systematic organization, it will not be necessary to follow its progress so minutely in what remains of this introduc- tory outline. We shall content ourselves with touching briefly on the main events which mark the growing devel- opment of the leading principles characteristic of the two contending: parties. The sufferings of the Puritans continued unabated dur- ing the remainder of the life of Archbishop Parker ; many of^'them being silenced, imprisoned, banished, and other. • Neal, vol. i. p. 198; Collier, vol. ii. p. 541. 44 HISTORY OF THE wise oppressed by that relentless prelate. In vain did the House of Commons, and several influential noblemen, re- peatedly interpose in their behalf; they were detested by the queen, and Parker was ready to gratify her majesty without scruple, and to any extent. In particular, he strove to suppress the "prophesyings," declaring that they were nests of Puritanism ; and by his complaints he succeeded in directing against them the vengeance of the despotic sovereign. He did not, however, live to direct the storm v/hich he had raised, but died in May, 1576, and was succeeded by Grindal. Grindal, aware of the opposition to the exercises or prophesyings which had been raised by his predecessor, attempted to regulate them so that no offence might be taken, or at least, that they might be the more easily de- fended. But the queen had formed her resolution, from which she could not be moved by the most respectful and elaborate arguments, and the most urgent and humble en- treaties of the afflicted archbishop. She " declared her- self offended at the numbers of preachers, and also at the exercises, and warned him to redress both, urging that it was good for the Church to have few preachers^ and that three or four might suffice for a county ; and that the read- ing of the homilies to the people was enough. In short she required him to do these two things, — to abridge the number of preachers, and to put down the religious exer- cises."* This peremptory command both grieved and alarmed Grindal, who knew the excessive ignorance which prevailed both among the preachers and the people, and was anxious to promote whatever tended to the increase of religious knowledge and purity. He wrote to her ma- jesty a long and earnest letter, entering fully into the sub- ject, pleading the importance of preaching as the divinely appointed method of communicating religious instruction to the people, — showing how admirably these exercises were fitted to improve the ministers who joined in them, and consequently to qualify them for the discharge of their chief function; and after imploring her not to suppress so valuable an institution, and stating his readiness to resign his office if that were her pleasure, declared that he could not, without offence to the majesty of God, send out in- • Strype's Life of Grindal, p. 221. ^vl:sTMI^sTER assembly. 45 junctions for suppressing the exercises. To this solemn appeal the queen's answer was — an order for the imprison- ment of Grindal in his house, and his suspension from his functicns for six months; and an immediate suppres- sion of the prophesyings by the authority of a royal pro- clamation. k^ucil were ihc fruits of the Crown's ecclesias- tical supremacy, when possessed by a despotic monarch. It may be added, that Grindal had the firmness to main- tain his integrity for eight years, during which his suspen- sion continued, and his archiepiscopal functions were generally performed by a commission ; but at length he yielded so far as to suppress the exercises within his own jurisdiction, though he would not issue injunctions to that effect to the bishops. Unhappily it was not necessary ; they were in general but too ready to obey the arbitrary commands of their haughty and despotic sovereign. [1580.] A few years afterwards another development of regal and prelatic tyranny appeared, in an act passed by the Parliament of 1580, prchibiting the publication of books or pamphlets assailing the opinions of the Prelates, and de- fending those of the Puritans. In the same session of Par- liament another act was passed, one portion of which em- powered the infliction of heavy fines and imprisonment upon those who absented themselves from " church, chapel, or other place where common prayer is said, according to the Act of Uniformity." The apparatus of persecution was now nearly complete ; and the pernicious character of the Crown's ecclesiastical supremacy was sufficiently evident in at least its main aspect, although it subsequently reache(^ a far more terrible degree of persecuting intolerance. The&' harsh and oppressive measures had, however, as might hav, been expected, an effect the very reverse of that which their authors intended. Some of timid and wavering minds might be terriffed and subdued; but the bolder and more high- principled men became only the more determined in pro- portion to the severity and intolerance of the treatment which they had to encounter. In their indignation they began to entertain feelings and opinions from which they would have shrunk, had they not been driven to extremities. Ceasing to complain of Popish vestments and ceremonies, and to supplicate a further reformation, some began to ques- tion whether the Church of England ought to be regarded 46 PIISTO.CY OF THE as a true Church, and her ministers true Christian ministers. They not only renounced communion with her in her forms of prayer and her ceremonies, but also in the dispensation of word and ordinance. The leader of these men of extreme views was Robert Brown, a person who held a charge in the diocese of Nor- wich, whose family connexions gave him considerable influ- ence, and procured him protection, he being nearly related to Lord Treasurer Cecil. Brown appears to have been a man of hot and impetuous temper, rash and variable except when opposed, and then headstrong and overbearing. Throwing himself headlong into the Puritan controversy, he traversed the country from place to place, pouring out the most fierce and bitter invectives against the whole Pre- latic party, and also against all who could not concur v/ith him in the rude violence of his mode of warfare. After repeated imprisonments, and many attempts to form a new part}'^, he at last partially succeeded in collect ing a small body of like-minded adherents ; but was soon afterwards compelled to leave the kingdom, and to with- draw to Holland with a portion of his followers. There he formed a Church according to his own fancy ; but it Avas soon torn to pieces with internal dissension, and Brown returned again to England, and exhibiting one of those recoils by no means rare with men of vehement temperament, he renounced his principles of separation, conformed to that worship which he had so violently as- sailed, and became rector of a parish in Northamptonshire. The remainder of his life was by no means distinguished by correctness of deportment, or purity of manners j and at length he terminated his unhonored days in the county jail, in the eighty-first year of his age.* From this per- son the first form of what has since been termed the Inde- pendent, or Congregational system of Church government, appears to have had its origin, the great majority of the Puritans either retaining their connection with the Church of England in a species of constrained half-conformity, or associating on the Presbyterian model. Brown not only renounced communion with the Church of England, but also Avith all others of the reformed Churches who would not adopt the model which he had constructed. The main • Neal, vol. i. pp. 245-247; Fuller, vol. iii. pp. 61-65. WESTMINSTKR ASSEMBLY. 4<1 principles of that model were, that every church ought to be confined within a single congregation; that its govern- ment should be the most complete democracy ; and that there was no distinction in point of order between the office-bearers and the ordinary members, so that a vote (V the congregation was enough to constitute any man an office-bearer, and to entitle him to preach and administer the sacraments. Those who adopted these opinions, and formed Congregational Churches on the same model, were at first termed Brown ists, and were regarded by the main body of the Puritans with nearly as much dislike as they were by the Prelatists. In stating that the Independent or Congregational system of Church government may be said to have originated with Robert Brown, it is not meant that those w4io at present adhere to that form of ecclesiastical policy are Brownists, as that term was applied at first ; but merely that Brown appears to have been the first who actually, in the forma- tion of a Church, embodied that idea, and that too in a much more rigid and repulsive form than it subsequently assumed, when again taken up and reconstructed by wiser and better men. But it is of importance to mark begin- nings, especially when these teach lessons of great practi- cal value. One of these may be here very easily learned. The extreme pertinacity with which the queen and her obsequious servants the bishops strove to enforce entire conformity, produced an antagonist principle, whose very essence was direct antipathy to their eager wish, render ing it for ever impossible that their purpose could be ac r.omplished. Another remark may be made ; the systeip devised by Brown was, in its first appearance, altogether as intolerant, both in principle and in practice, as that of its opponent. Prelacy ; but in the stern strife which af- terwards ensued between these equally intolerant anta- gonists, they so far neutralized each other, as to give occasion to the gradual, though even yet incomplete, development of the great principle of religious tolera- tion — a principle utterly unknown to any party at the time, even Avhile its rainbow-form was beginning to bend its gentle radiance across the thunder-gloom of their contention. [1583.] The death of Archbishop Grindal gave the 4-8 HISTORY OF THE queen an opportunity of promoting to that influential sta- tion which he had held a person more according to her own mind, who would feel no compunction in proceeding to extremities against the Puritans. Her choice was easily mf de. Whitgift had already distinguished himself by his controversial writings against Cartwright, and was well prepared to enforce by power what he had failed to accom- plish by argument. Scarcely was Whitgift placed in his seat of power, when he began to show how that power would be used. He drew up and published three articles, requiring that none be permitted to preach, or execute any part of the ecclesiastical function, unless he should sub- scribe them. These articles were to the following effect : — 1st, The queen' s supremacy over all persons, and in all causes, civil and ecclesiastical. 2(/, That the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordination contained nothing con- trary to the Word of God ; and that they will use it, and no other. 3(/, Implicit subscription of the Thirty-nine Articles.* The Puritans would readily have acknowledged the queen's supremacy over all persons, and in all causes civil, but not in causes ecclesiastical j the second article they could not subscribe ; the third they were ready to subscribe with little difficulty. But they were all rigidly enforced ; and in a short time several hundreds of the best ministers in England were suspended for not subscribing. Not thinking even this sufficient, Whitgift applied to the queen to institute a new High Commission, that he might be enabled to wield a direct and irresistible power. She readily consented, and even gave to it an additional ele- ment of despotism, empowering the commissioners to impose an oath ex officio, — by means of which persons accused were bound, on their oath, to answer questions against themselves, and thus become their own accusers, or to be punished, by fine or imprisonment, for refusing to take such an oath, or to criminate themselves. The pre- latic inquisition was now complete in its apparatus, and Whitgift was well qualified to act as the grand inquisitor [1584.] The work of oppression went on now rapidly. Mercy to preachers or people there was none. Elizabeth's wisest statesmen stood aghast, when they beheld the deso- lating effect of Whitgift's measures ; but they interposed in • Nea!, vol. i. pp. 2G0-263 ; Fuller, vol. iii. p. 68. WESTMIxNSTER ASSEMBLY. 49 vain. Cecil, Burleigh, and Walsing-ham, had less influence with the queen than Whitgift ; because their advice was but accordant with the dictates of prudence and Chris- tianity, — his with those of vanity and despotism. When Parliament met, the House of Commons attempted to stem the tide of persecution ; and having received several peti- tions from the Puritans, they prepared various bills to abridge the power of the bishop^, to reform abuses, and to promote discipline- But, with considerable dexterity, Whitgift suggested to the queen, that if the Parliament were to pass any such measures, they could not be repealed by any other authority, whereas, whatsoever she should her- self, or by the convocation, enact, her own authority could at any time repeal.* Elizabeth welcomed the suggestion. She reprimanded the Commons for interfering with eccle- siastical matters, which was touching her prerogative, and they w^ere compelled to yield. [1586.] The Puritans, thus driven from all legislative remedy, yet regarded it as their duty, in their character of Christian teachers, to exert themselves to the utmost for their own improvement, and for the instruction and refor- mation of the ignorant and neglected people. They accord- ingly formed a Book of Discipline, for their own direction in the discharge of their ministerial and pastoral duties j and this book was subscribed by above five hundred of the most eminently pious and faithful ministers in the king- dom. f This body was far too numerous and important to be easily or wantonly crushed ; and yet, as Neal informs us, it formed, in reality, but a small portion of those over whom the terrors of suspension at that period hung, amounting to not less than a third part of the ministers of England. [1588.] A new principle was now promulgated for the support of prelatic power, of a more formidable nature than any that had hitherto appeared, and destined to produce the most disastrous results. Dr. Bancroft, the archbishop's chaplain, in a sermon which he preached at Paul's Cross, January 12, 1588, maintained that.bishops were a distinct order from priests or presbyters, and had authority over Life of Whit-ift, p. 198. f Neal, vol. i. pp. 314, 315. 5 50 HISTORY OF THE them jure divino^ and directly from God.* This bold assertion created an immense ferment throug-hout the king- dom. The Puritans saw well, that, if acted upon, this principle would increase their oppression to an incalcula- ble degree, inasmuch as it must subject them to an accu- sation of heresy, in addition to that of resistance to the queen's supremacy. The greater part of even the prelatic party themselves were startled with the novelty of the doctrine ; for none of the English reformers had ever regarded the order of bishops as anything else but a hu- man institution, appointed for the more orderly government of the Church, and they were not prepared at once to con- demn as heretical all Churches where that institution did not exist. Whitgift himself, perceiving the use which might be made of such a tenet, said, that the Doctor's ser- mon had done much good, — though, for his own part, he rather wished than believed it to be true. On the other hand, the legal assertors of the queen's supremacy assailed this theory, as subversive of her majesty's prerogative ; for, as they reasoned, if the bishops are not under-gover- Rors to her majesty of the clergy, but superior governors over their brethren, by God's ordinance, it will then follow that her majesty is not supreme governor over her clergy, Bancroft answered, that this inference was not a necessary consequence of his doctrine; because the sovereign's au- thority may, and very often does, corroborate that which is primarily from the law of God. This evasive reply seems to have satisfied the queen, aided, perhaps, by her own knowledge of its direct purpose, and of the character of her bishops, who longed for the extirpation of Puritan ism, but had no desire to encounter her leonine wralh. The terrific power of this despotic principle did not, indeed, appear till after the lapse of two generations, — when, wielded by Laud, it convulsed the kingdom, and overthrew the monarchy. Its portentous reappearance in modern times may well excite alarm ; embodying, as it does, the very essence of despotism, civil and religious, and possess- ing an energy that nothing human can control without «i struggle, wide, wasting, * and deadly, — too fearful even to be imagined. • Life of Whitgift, p. 292; Collier, vol. ii. p. 609 ; Neal, vol. i. pp. 321-323. ■WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 51 [lf)S9.J The struggle assumed a less serious aspect for a short time, in consequence of the publication of the famous ]\Iartin Mar-Prelate Tracts. Some of the Puritan party had ?^jrocured a printing-press, the liberty ol the press having brrn taken away previously, and commenced a s ries of pamphlets, containing attacks of wit, ridicule, mockery, rnd keen vituperation, against the bishops and their supporters. Many of these tracts displayed very considerable power of sarcasm and invective ; and as they were written intentionally for the mass of the nation, they were com] osed in a style not merely plain, but affectedly rude and vulgar. Th^y were not, however, to be despised. Amidst mi;ch coarse vituperation, they contained state- ments of facts which could not be disputed, set forth with such home-thrusting vigor as caused every direct and strong-aimed blow to ♦ell upon the assailed prelates. Great was the indignation aiid dismay of the bishops and their friends, and every e^vertion was made to detect and seize the hidden armory of this unseen aesailant. For a consi- derable time thepe efforts were unsuccessful, and the pre- latic party were constrained to attempt their own defence in literary uarfare. But although they displayed conside- rable talent and activity in this attempt, they were not able to match their unknown antagonists, whose writings pro- duced a deep and wide-spread impression on the public mind. At length the Martin Mar Prelate press was seized, with several unfinished tracts, and that aspect of the strug- gle terminated, but not till the Prelatic cause had sustained very considerable injury. In the year 1591 the i'arliament again met, and the House of Commons once more attempted to rescue the suffering Puritans, by instituting an inquiry into the conduct of the High Commission, in imposing oaths and subscriptions not sanctioned bylaw. The queen was highly incensed, com- manded them not to meddle with matters of state or causes ecclesiastical, and threw several of the members, and even the attorney-general, into prison. The Parliament, with a tameness unworthy of the spirit of free-born Englishmen, not merely yielded, but passed an act for the suppression of conventicles, by which was meant all religious meetings, except such as the queen and the bishops were pleased to permit, on pain of perpetual banishment. The principle of 52 HISTORY OF THE this act was of the most despotic nature, converting any difference from the religion of the sovereign into a crime against the State, and rendering the mere want of confor- mity equivalent to a proof of direct opposition. Great num- bers were subjected to the most grievous sufferings through this enactment. Some went into voluntary exile, to escape the horrors of imprisonment ; some endured a lengthened captivity, and then were banished ; and some, chiefly of the Brownists, were condemned to death, and on the scaf- fold declared their loyalty to their sovereign, while they ceased not to testify against the tyranny of the prelates. [1595.] The controversy between the High Churchmen and the Puritans obtained the full development of all its main principles in the year 1595. At this time Dr. Bound published a treatise on the Sabbath ; in which he maintained its perpetual sanctity, as a day of rest equally from business and recreation, that it might be devoted wholly to the wor- ship of God.* Ail the Puritans assented to this doctrine, while the Prelatists accused it as both an undue restraint of Christian liberty and an improper exalting of the Sabbath above the other festivals appointed by the Church. About the same time a controversy arose in Cambridge respecting those doctrinal points which form the leading distinctions between the Arminian and the Calvinistic systems of theo- logy. Till this period there had existed no doubt in the minds of any of the English divines that the Thirty-nine Articles were decidedly and intentionally Calvinistic. In- deed they could ha/e no other opinion ; because they were perfectly aware how much influence the writings of Calvin exercised over the minds of those by whom these Articles were framed. After the controversy had prevailed in the university a short time, an appeal was made to Vvhitgift, who, with the aid of other learned divines, prepared nine propositions, commonly called The Lambeth Articles, to which all the scholars in the university were strictly enjoin- od to conform their judgments.! These Lambeth Articles were more strictly Calvinistic than Calvin himself would have desired ; and certainly prove that, in its early period, the Church of England was anything but Arminian, what- ever it may have since become. But though Whitgift was himself still a thorough Calvinist, considerable numbers of * Fuller, vol. iii. pp. 143-146. f Fuller, vol. iii. pp. 147-150. WESTIMhNSTKR ASSKMBO. 53 the Prelatic party were veering towards Arniinianism ; so that, partly on that account, and partly on account of tlieir more strict observance of the Sabbath sanctity, the Puritans were now led to a more important field of conflict than that on which they had hitherto striven aijiiinst their antagonists, and instead of contending about vestments and ceremonies, they now strove respecting great and important doctrines, and began to be termed Doctrinal i^uritans. This led to two directly opposite results. Il caused the Prelatists to swerve more and more widely from those doctrines which tlie Puritans maintained ; and it impelled the Puritans to prosecute a profound study of those points, which had thus become the elements of controversy. This may account for the remarkable power and accuracy with which the Puritan divines of that and the Succeeding generation state and explain the most solemn and profound truths of the Christian revelation. At length what may be termed a cessation of hostilities ensued. The queen was now evidently sinking under the infirmities of age, and both parties began to speculate on the probable measures which might be adopted by her successor, James VI. of Scotland. The Puritans hoped that his Presbyterian education might predispose him to be favorable to their v^iews ; and the Prelatic party were unwilling to exasperate, by continued sev^erity, those who might possibly, ere long, be the ruling body in the Church. Both parties paused, at least in action ; but there is no reason to suppose that their feelings of mutual jealousy and dislike were abated. Nor was it consistent with the usual policy, or king-craft of James, to declare his sentiments and intentions, but rather to hold out plausible grounds of expectation to both parties, — thereby to secure the support of boUi, or at least to disarm the direct hostility of either. [1603.] Queen Elizabeth died on the 24.th day of March, IG03, in the seventieth year of her age, and forty-fifth of her reign. In the following month James left his native land, commencing his journey to London to take posses- sion of the English throne, to which he v.'as now the direct heir. On his progress southward, the Puritan ministers availed themselves of the opportunity to lay before him what is commonly termed the Millenary Petition. This name it did not receive because it was signed by onethou- 5* 54 HISTORY OF THE sand ministers, for the actual number was seven hundred and fifty j but because, in the preamble, it is said by the petitioners, "That they, to the number of more than a thousand ministers, groaned under the burden of human rites and ceremonies, and cast themselves at his majesty's feet for relief." That their number was not overstated is evident from the fact that the petition was subscribed by the ministers of no more than twenty-five counties, chiefly those of the northern, westland, and midland parts of the kingdom; so that probably not more than one-half of the Puritan ministers had an opportunity of signing their mil- lenary petition.* On the other hand, the Prelatic party were at least equally strenuous in their endeavors to secure his majesty's favor ; and, as might be expected from their practised courtier- arts and ready obsequiousness, were more successful. But as James hud given a friendly reception to both parties, and as he was vain of his own acquirements in theology, and of his skill in polemical discussions, which he wished to exhibit to his new subjects, he thought proper to appoint a conference between the two parties, to be con- ducted in his own presence, as final judge in all such mat- ters. This gave occasion to the famous Hampton Court Conference, an account of which was afterwards published by Dr. Barlow, Dean of Chester, one of the disputants on the Prelatic side. The Puritans complained that Barlow gave a partial account of this conference, representing the Prelatic arguments in the best manner of which they could admit, and weakening and abridging those of the opposite party. Even from the outline given by Fuller and Collier this is evident ; and yet so futile are the arguments of the king and the prelates, that one is ashamed to read them, as reproduced by their own historians. In Barlow's own treat- ise, which is now lying before me, the mean and abject servility of manner, and the gross and fulsome flattery of language, employed by the prelates towards James, are such as to cause the cheek of every person of generous and manly nature to burn with indignant scorn. A very brief account of this conference is all that can be given here The place appointed for this conference was the drawing- ♦ Fuller, vol. iii. p. 172 ; Collier, vol. ii. p. 672 ; Neal, vol. i. pp. 391, 392. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 55 room at Hampton Court. On the high Church side the disputants were, — the Archbishop of Canterbury, Whit- pift ; bisliops, Bancroft of London, JMatthew of Durham, Bilson of Winchester, Babington of Worcester, Rudd of St. David's, Watson of Chichester, Robinson of Carlisle, and Dove of Peterborough ; deans, Andrews of the Chapel, Gveral of St. Paul's, Barlow of Chester, and Bridges of Salisbury; and Dr. Field and Dr. King. On the part of the Puritans there were only four ministers, — Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Sparks, professors of divinity in Oxford ; and Mr. Chadderton and Mr. Knewstubbs of Cambridge. The first day was a conference between the king and the prelates, in which his majesty praised the Church of England, and expressed his wish for satisfaction on a few points in the Prayer-Book, respecting excommunication, and about pro- viding mhiisters for Ireland. By this an opportunity was given to the king and the prelates to form a mutual under- standing before they encountered their opponents. On the second day Dr. Reynolds stated, in the name of the Puritans, and in the briefest possible form, the points on which the controversy chiefly turned, humbly requesting, — " 1. That the doctrine of the Church might be preserved in purity, according to God's Word. 2. That good pastors might be planted in all churches to preach the same. 3. That the Church government might be sincerely minis- tered, according to God's Word. 4. That the Book of Common Prayer might be fitted to more increase of piety."* Had these points been fairly discussed, the whole con- troversy might have been investigated, and some approxi- mation might have been made towards an agreement, or at least a pacific arrangement, between the contending par- tics. But the king interrupted, reviled, and stormed j the courtiers laughed and mocked ; and the prelates, by insinua- tions, interruptions, flatteries addressed to the king, and sneers directed against the Puritans, succeeded in prevent- ing such a discussion as would have brought out the great principles of the controversy, and in assisting to overbear the Puritans with insult and ridicule. The king repeated his favorite maxim — " No bishop, no king j" and, at the close of the day, asked Dr. Reynolds if he had anything else to off'er. He, perceiving the futility 6f continuing • Hampton Court Conference, p. 23. 56 HISTORY OF THE such a discussion, answered, " No more, please your majesty." " Then," said the king-, " if this be all your party have to say, I will make them conform, or 1 will harrie (spoil) them out of the land, or else do worse." The greater part of the third day's conference was oc- cupied by the king and the prelates in matters relating to the High Commission, the oath ex officio and the slight al- terations proposed in the Prayer-Book. Of all these the king expressed his approbation ; and then the Puritan di- vines were again called into this mock conference. They now knew that no alterations such as they had desired would be obtained j and, therefore, they contented them- selves with supplicating some concessions in point of con- formity, in behalf of those ministers who could not in con- science submit to the rites and ceremonies of the Church. The king sternly declared that they must conform, and that quickly too, or they should hear of it. Thus ended the Hampton Court Conference, "which," says Dr. War- ner, " convinced the Puritans that they were mistaken in depending on the king's protection; which convinced the king that they were not to be won by a few insignificant concessions; and which, if it did not convince the privy council and the bishops that they had got a Solomon for their king, yet they spoke of him as though it did."* Even this does not fully express the extravagant strain of adulation in which they spoke. The Archbishop of Can- terbury (AYhitgift) said "that undoubtedly his majesty spake by the special assistance of God's Spirit." Ban- croft, Bishop of London, "upon his knee protested, that his heart melted within him with joy, and made haste to acknowledge to Almighty God the singular mercy we have received at his hands, in giving us such a king, as since Christ his time the like he thought hath not been."f Little wonder that the vain and pedantic monarch was de- lighted with his bishops. [1604.] In the Convocation which met in 1604, Ban- croft presided, Whitgift having died a short time previ- ously. Soon after they met, Bancroft laid before them a Book of Canons, collected out of the articles, injunctions, and synodical acts passed in the reigns of Edward and * Ecclesiastical History, vol. iii. p. 482. t Hampton Court Conference, pp. 93, 94. WESTMINSTER ASSEMI5LY. 57 Elizabeth, to the mimhcr of one liundred and forty-one. To these canons both Houses of Convocation assented, and they were ratified by the king's letters patent, but not confirmed by act of Parliament, so that, though binding on the clergy, they have not the force of statute laws. Of these canons, about three dozen are expressly directed aoainst the Puritan opinions, rendering their junction with the Church impossible without sacrifice of con- science ; and one of them requires that no person be or- dained, or sufiered to preach or catechize, unless he first subscribe willinfrly, and ex animo^ the three articles already mentioned as \Vhitgift's articles. Bancroft was promoted to the archbishopric of Canter- bury, vacant by Whitgift's decease, and immediately proved how well quaiilied he was to discharge the function of grand inquisitor. He enforced subscription to canons and articles with the utmost rigor, silencing or deposing those Puritan ministers who refused to comply. Considerable numbers were thus reduced to the greatest distress, and some were driven into foreign countries to escape from persecution in their own. And that the archbishop's per- secuting zeal might obtain as full a sanction as could be given to it by a partial and one-sided process, the king summoned the twelve judges to the Star-Chamber, and, in answer to three interrogative propositions, obtained as their legal opinion. That the King having the supreme ecclesi- astical power, could, without Parliament, make orders and constitutions for Church government ; that the High Com- mission might enforce them, ex officio^ without libel; and that subjects viight not frame petitions for relief without being guilty of an ojjhice finable at discretion, and very near to trea- son and felony* This strange opinion ascribed to the king power in ec- clesiastical matters of the most arbitrary and despotic kin-d, without limitation or redress; and as the enforce- ment of it necessarily required the exercise of civil power in the infliction of punishment, it deprived one large class of subjects of all liberty, civil and sacred, and if allowed in one class, might naturally introduce an equal exercise of despotism over every other. This may be regarded as perhaps the first distinct intimation to the kingdom at * Neal, vol. i. pp. 416,417. 58 Hi STORY OF THE large of the peri] in which civil liberty was placed by the arbitrary proceedings of the sovereign and the prelates in religious affairs ; and it is not undeserving of notice, that it was founded on the opinion of civil judges, who, in their interpretation of law, were the subverters of the constitu- tion, and the destroyers of both civil and religious liberty. In consequence of the authority thus acquired, the pre- lates urged on their persecuting career with double eager- ness and severity ; and the Puritans became, in conse- quence, so much the more determined in their adherence to their principles. Not merely suffering, hut calumny of the grossest l:, and to be reconciled.! The reconciliation, however, appears to have been but superfi cial, and to have required the interposition of the mairis- tracy ere it could be even plausibly efTected. Such divi- sions might have caused these divines to entertain some suspicion that the model of Church government which they had adopted was not altogether so perfect as they wished it to be thought ; but so far as their subsequent conduct, as members of the Westminster Assembly, is concerned, this does not seem to have been the case in even the slightest degree. When the contest between the King and the Parliament had become so extreme that the Parliament declared its own continuation as permanent as it might itself think necessary, and began to threaten the abolition of the whole prelatic hierarchy, the above-named five Inde- pendent divines returned to England, prepared to assist in the long-sought reformation of religion, and to avail them- * Brook's Lives of the Puritans, vol. iii. p. 312. t Brook, vol. ii. p. 454; Edwards' Autorologia, pp. 115-117; Bail- lie's Dissuasive, pp. 75-77. 120 HISTORY OF THE selves of every opportunity which might occur to promote their favorite system. And admitting them to be conscien- tiously convinced of its superior excellency, they deserve no censure for desiring to see it universally received. In every such case, all that can be wished is, that each party should prosecute its purpose honorably and openly, in the fair field of frank and manly argument, with Christian can- dor and integrity ; and not by factious opposition, or with the dark and insidious craft too characteristic of worldly politicians. Of these five leading Independents, often termed " The Five Dissenting Brethren," Goodwin appears to have been the deepest theologian, and perhaps altogether the ablest man ; Nye, the most acute and subtle, and the best skilled in holding intercourse with worldly politiciiins ; Burroughs, the most gentle and pacific in temper and character ; Bridge is said to have been a man of considerable attainments, and a very laborious student ; and Simpson bears also a respec- table character as a preacher, though not peculiarly distin- guished in public debate. To these Baillie adds, as Inde- pendents, Joseph Caryl, William Carter (of London), John Philips, and Peter Sterry,— naming nine, but saying that there were '' some ten or eleven."* Neal adds Anthony Burges, and William Greenhill.f Some of the views of the Independents were occasionally supported by Herle, Marshall, and Vines, and some few others ; but none of these men are to be included in the number of the decided Independents. The third party in the Assembly were the Erastians; so called from Erastus, a physician at Heidelberg, who wrote on the subject of Church government, especially in respect of excommunication, in the year 1568. His theory was, — That the pastoral office is only persuasive, like that of a professor over his students, without any direct power j that baptism, the Lord's supper, and all other Gospel ordinan- ces, were free and open to all ; and that the minister might state and explain what were the proper qualifications, and n)ight dissuade the vicious and unqualified from the com- munion, but had no power to refuse it, or to inflict any kind of censure. The punishment of all offences, whether oi' a civil or a religious nature, belonged, according to this • Bnillip, vol. ii. p. 1 10. f Neal, vol. ii. pp. 275, 360. ^VESTMI^STER ASSEMBLY. 12J theory, exclusively to the civil magistrate. The tendency of this theory was, to destroy entirely all ecclesiastical and spiritual jurisdiction, to deprive the Church of all power of government, and to make it completely the mere " creature of the State." The pretended advantage of this theory was, ihat it pre\entcd the existence of an imperium in imperio^ or «!ie government within another, of a distinct and indepen- dent nature. But the real disadvantage, in the most miti- gated view that can be taken, was, that it reproduced what may be termed a civil. Popery, by combining civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and giving both into the posses- sion of one irresponsible power,— thereby destroying both civil and religious liberty, and subjecting men to an abso- lute and irremediable despotism. In another point of view, t!ie Erastian theory assumes a still darker and more formi- dable aspect. It necessarily denies the mediatorial sove- reignty of the Lord Jesus Christ over his Church, — takes the power of the keys from his office-bearers and gives tl.em to the civil magistrate, — destroys liberty of con- science, by making spiritual matters subject to the same coercive power as temporal affairs naturally and properly are ; and thus involves both State and Church in reciprocal and mutually destructive sin, - the State, in usurping a power which God has not given ; and the Church, in yield- ing what she is not at liberty to yield — the sacred crown- rights of the divine Redeemer, her only Head and King. But as the Erastian controversy will come fully before us in the debates of the Assembly, it is unnecessary to enter upon it here. There were only two divines in the Assembly who advocated the Erastian theory ; and of these, one alone v.as decidedly and thoroughly Erastian. The divine to whom this unenviable pre-eminence must be assigned, was Thomas Coleman, minister at Bliton in Lin- colnshire. He was aided generally, but not always, by Liglitfoot, in the various discussions that arose involving Erastian opinions. Both of these divines were eminently distinguished by their attainments in Oriental literature, particularly in rabbinical lore ; and their attachment to the study of Hebrew literature and customs led them to the conclusion, that the Christian Church was to be in every respect constituted according to the model of the Jewish Church : and having formed the opinion that theio 11 122 HISTORY OF THE was but one jurisdiction in Israel, combining both civi and ecclesiastical, and that this was held by the Hebrew monarchs, they concluded that the same blended govern- ment ought to prevail under the Christian dispensation Of the lay assessors in the Assembly the chief Erastians were, the learned Selden, Mr. Whitelocke, and Mr. St. John ; but though Selden was the only one of them whose arguments were influential in the Assembly itself, yet nearly all the Parliament held sentiments decidedly Eras- tian, and having seized the power of Church government, were not disposed to yield it up, be the opinion of the as- sembled divines what it might. Hence, though the Eras- tian divines were only two, yet their opinions, supported by the whole civil authority in the kingdom, were almost sure to triumph in the end. This, in one point of view, was not strange. The kingdom had suffered so much se- vere and protracted injury from the usurped authority and power of the prelates, that the assertors of civil liberty almost instinctively shrunk from even the shadow of any kind of power in the hands of ecclesiastics. A little less passion and fear, and a little more judgment and discrimi- nation, might have rescued them from this groundless ap- prehension ; and they might have perceived that freedom, both civil and ecclesiastical, would be best secured by the full and authoritative recognition of their respective juris- dictions, separate and independent. But indeed this is a truth which has yet to be learned by civil governments, — a truth unknown to ancient times, in which religion was either an engine of the State or the object of persecution, — a truth unknown during the period of papal ascendency, in which the Romish priesthood usurped dominion over civil governments, and exercised its tyranny alike over the persons and the conscience of mankind, — a truth first brought to light in the great religious reformation of the sixteenth century, — but not then, nor even yet, fully de- velo} ed, rightly understood, and permitted to exercise its free and sacred supremacy. That it will finally assume its due dominion over the minds and actions of all bodies of men, both civil and ecclesiastical, we cannot doubt ; and then, but not till then, will the two dread counterpart ele- ments of human degradation, tyranny and slavery, become alike impossible. ■^VESTIMIASTKIl ASSE-AlDLy. 123 Into these three great parties, Presbyterian, Independent, and P>astinn, was the Westminster Assembly of Divines divided, even when Hrst it met; and it was'inevitable that a contest should be waged among them for the ascendency, ending most probably either in increased hostility and ab- sohite disruption, or in some mutual compromise, to which all might assent, though perhaps with the cordial approba- tion of none. The strength of these parties was more evenly balanced at first than might have been expected. The l*u riians, though all of them had received episcopal ordination, and had been exercising their ministry in the Church of England, under the hierarchy, were nearly all Presbyterians, or at least quite willing to adopt that form of Church gov- ernment, though many of them would have consented to a modified Episcopacy on the Usserian model. Their in- fluence in the city of London was paramount, and through- out the country was very considerable ; and as they formed the most natural connecting link with Scotland, they occu- pied a position of very great importance. Although the Independents were but a small minority in the Assembl}', yet various circumstances combined to render them by no means a weak or insignifi<:ant party. They were supported in the House of Peers by Lord Say and Sele, and frequently also by Lords Brooke and Kimbolton, — the latter of wliom is better known by his subsequent title of Lord Manches- ter. Philip Nye, one of the leading Independents, had been appointed to Kimbolton by the influence of Lord Kimbol- ton, and continued to maintain a constant intercourse with him, both while he was acting as a legislator, and when leading the armies of the Parliament. It is even asserted by Palmer, in his " Non-Conformist's Memorial," that Nye's advice was sought and followed in the nomination of the divines who were called to the Assembly.* And when, further, it is borne in mind that Oliver Cromwell was an Independent, and acted as lieutenant-general under Lord Manchester, it will easily be perceived that Nye's inter- course with the army was direct and influential, and that thus the Five Dissenting Brethren were able to employ a mighty political influence Nor can the Erastian party be justly termed feeble, though formed by not more than two "Jivines, and a few of the lay^ assessors, who were not al' • Pahnei's Non-Confonnist's Memoriab V')l. i. p. 96. I'li HISTORY OF THE ways present ; for both Coleman and Lightfoot were influ ential men, on account of their reputalion for learning, in which they were scarcely inferior to Selden himself, in the department of Hebrew literature. So high was Selden's fame, that any cause might be deemed strong which he supported ; and Whitelocke and St. John possessed so ni'ich political influence in Parliament that they could not fail to exercise great power in every matter which they promoted or opposed. But the main strength of the Eras- tian theory consisted in the combination of three potent elements, — the natural love of holding and exercising pow- er, which is common to ail men and parties, tending to render the Parliament reluctant to relinquish that ecclesi dstical supremacy which they had with such difficulty wrested from the sovereign ; their want of acquaintance with the true nature of Presbyterian Church government, which led them to dread that if allowed free scope it might prove as oppressive as even the Prelatical, beneath whose weighty and galling yoke the nation was still down-bent andbleeding ; and the strong instinctive antipathy which fallen human nature feels against the spirituality and the power of vital godliness. It is easy to perceive, that the theory which was supported by these three elements in tho- rough and vigorous union, was one which it would be no easy matter to encounter and defeat ; or rather, was one over which nothing but divine power could possibly gain the victory. The Scottish commissioners cannot with propriety be regarded as forming a party in the W^estminster Assem- bly, as they and the English Presbyterians were in all important matters completely identified. Still it may be expedient to give a very brief account of men who occu- pied a position so important, and exercised for a time so great an influence on the affairs of both kingdoms. Their names have been already mentioned ; and it has also been stated, that neither the Earl of Cassilis, p Jr the Rev. Rob- ert Douglas, ever attended the Westminster Assembly. Lord Maitland, and Archibald Johnston of Warriston, gave regular attendance, and took deep interest in the proceed- ings. At that time Lord Maitland appeared to be very zealous in the cause of religious reformation, and a tho- rough Presbyterian ; but, as afterwards appeared, his zeal WRST^riNSTRR ASSF,3<1!LV. 12fi was more of a political than of a relifrioiis character. ..i- ter the restoration of Clmrles II., he conformed to Pre i.cy, became the chief adviser of that monarch in Scottish aflairs, received the title of Duke of Lauderdale, and is too well known in Scottish history as a ruthless and bloody perseciitin". Johnston of Warristou was in heart and soul a Covenanter on religious, not political principles, from which he never sv*^erved. One only stain appears in his life, if stain it can be called, — his consenting to receive office under the government of Cromwell, after that remark- able man had reduced the three kingdoms to his sway, and v.hen there was every reason to expect that his dominion would he lasting. Such being the case, Warriston had but to choose to serve his country under Cromwell, or not to serve it at all, — he chose the former alternative ; and after the Restoration, was constrained to flee from Scotland to escape the mean vindictive hostility of the king. Having been at length seized by his pursuers, he was dragged back to his native country, that his enem.ies might sajiate their malice by murdering the inch of life that existed in his aged and feeble form. He was a man of great strength and clearness of intellect, fervidly eloquent in speech, and of inflexible integrity. The four Scottish divines were in every respect distin- guished men, and would have been so regarded in any age or country% Alexander Henderson was, however, cheer- fiiUy admitted to be beyond comparison the most eminent. His learning was extensive rather than minute, correspond- ing to the character of his mind, of which the distinguish- inor elements were dignity and comprehensiveness. AVhcn called to quit the calm seclusion of the country parish where he had spent so many years, and to come to the rescue of the Church of Scotland in her hour of need, he at once proved himself able to conduct and control the com- plicated movements of an awakening empire. Statesmen sought his counsel ; but with equal propriety and disinter- estedness he refused to concern himself Avith anything beyond what belonged to the Church, although the very reverse has often been asserted by his prelatic calumniat- ors. Though long and incessantly engaged in the most stir rino" events of a remarkably momentous period, his actions, his writings, his speeches, are all characterized by calm* 11 126 HISTORY OF THE ness and ease, without the slightest appearance of heat oi agitation, — resulting unquestionably from that aspect of character generally termed greatness of mind ; but which would in him be more properly characterized by describ- ing it as a rare combination of intellectual power, moral dignity, and spiritual elevation. It was the condition of a mighty mind, enjoying the peace of God which passeth understanding, a peace which the world had not given and could not take away. George Gillespie was one of that peculiar class of men who start like meteors into sudden splendor, shine with dazzling brilliancy, then suddenly set behind the tomb, leaving their compeers equally to admire and to deplore. When but in his twenty-fifth year, he published a book against what he termed the "English Popish Ceremonies," which Charles and Laud were attempting to force upon the Church of Scotland. This work, though the produc- tion of a youth, displayed an amount and accuracy of learn- ing which would have done honor to any man of the most mature years and scholarship. In the Assembly of Divines, though much the youngest member there, he proved him- self one of the most able and ready debaters, encountering not only on equal terms, but often with triumphant success, each with his own weapons, the most learned, subtle, and profound of his antagonists. He must have been no com- mon man who was ready on any emergency to meet, and frequently to foil by their own acknowledgment, such men as Selden, Lightfoot, and Coleman, in the Erastian contro- versy, and Goodwin and Nye in their argument for Inde- pendency. But the excessive activity of his ardent and energetic mind wore out his frame ; and he returned from his labors in the Westminster Assembly, to see once more the Church and the land of his fathers, and to di^. Samuel Rutherford gained, and still holds, an extensive reputation by his religious works ; but he was not less eminent in his own day as an acute and able controversial- ist. The characteristics of his mind were, clearness of intellect, warmth and earnestness of affection, and lofti- ness and spirituality of devotional feeling. He could and did write vigorously against the Independent system, and at the same time, love and esteem the men who held it In his celebrated work, " Lex Rex," he not only entered the WKST.^IINSTER ASSEMHLY. 127 regions of consiitutional jurists, but even produced a trea- tise unrivalled yet as an exposition of the true principles of civil and relifrious liberty. His '' Relifrious Letters" have been long admired by all who could understand and feel what true religion is, though grovelling and impure minds have striven to blight their reputation by dwelling on occasional forms of expression, not necessarily unseem- ly in the homeliness of phrase used in familiar letters, and conveying nothing offensive according to the language of the times. His powers of debate were very considera-' ble, being characterized by clearness of distinction instat- ing his opinions, and a close syllogistic style of reasoning, both the result of his remarkable precision of thought. Robert Baillie, so well known by his " Letters and Jour- nals," was a man of extensive and varied learning, both in languages and in systematic theology. He rarely mingled in debate ; but his sagacity was valuable in deliberation, and his oreat acquirements, studious habits, and ready use of his pen, rendered him an important member of such an Assembly. The singular ease and readiness of Baillie in composition, enabled him to maintain what seems like a universal correspondence ; and at the same time to present in a vivid, picturesque, and exqiiisitely natural style, the very form and impress of the period in which he lived, and the great events in which he bore a part. And when it was necessary to refute errors by exhibiting them in their real aspect, the vast reading and retentive memory of Baillie < nabled him to produce what was needed with mar- vellous rapidity and correctness. Scarcely ever was any man rriore qualified to " catch the manners living as they rise," and at the same time to point out with instinctive sagacity what in them was wrong and dangerous. Such were the Scottish commissioners; and it may easily be believed that they acted a very important and in- fluential part in the Westminster Assembly of Divines. But there was another party in England, though not re- presented in the Westminster Assembly, which exercised a commanding influence in the afil\irs of that momentous period. Perhaps it is not strictly correct to call that a party which was rather a vast mass of heterogeneous ele- ments, without any principle of mutual coherence, except that of united resistance and hostility to everything that 128 KISTORY OF THE possessed a previous and authorized existence. But the effect on the country was even more powerful for evil than it could have been, had the numerous sects to whom, we are referring been organized into a party ; for in that case their strength could have been estimated, their demands brought forward in a definite form, what was right and reasonable granted, and what was manifestly wrong and unreasonable detected and exposed. Even before the meeting of the Long Parliament, there had sprung up a great nlimber of seels, holding all various shades of opi- nion in religious matters, from such as were simply absurd, down to those that were licentiously wild and daringly blasphemous. It is almost impossible even to enumerate the Sectarians that rushed prominently into public mani- festation, when the overthrow of the prelatic hierarchy and government rendered it safe for them to appear ; and it would be Avrong to pollute our pages w^ith a statement of their pernicious and horrible tenets.* These may be seen at large in Baillie's " Dissuasive from the Errors of the Times," " Edwards's Gangraena," "A Testimony to the Truth of Jesus Christ" by the London ministers, and other similar works by Prynne, Bastwick and others. The question may be fairly and properly asked, how it happened that so many strange and dangerous sects ap- peared at that peculiar juncture 1 Prelatic writers have been in the habit of asserting that it was in consequence of the overthrow of the Prelatic Church government, \yhen people were left to follow the vagaries of their owm unguided imagination, by w4iich they\vere led into all the errors of enthusiastic frenzy and fanatical darkness. But this solu- tion does not touch the essence of the inquiry : How came men to be so prone to follow these insane and dangerous errors 1 In answer to this question there are at least two points to be carefully considered — how had Prelacy gov- erned, and how had Prelacy tavght, the people of England % It has been already shown, that from the very commence- * " John Lillburn related it unto me, and that in the presence of others, that returning from the wars to London, he mei forty new sects, many of them dangerous ones, and some so pernicious, that howsoever, as he said, he was in his judgment for toleration of all religions, yet he professed he could scarce keep his hands off them, so blasphemous they were in their opinions." — Baslwick^s Second Part of Ijidependency, lost script, p. 37. Lillburn was himself a Leveller. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 129 entrnt of the Reformation in England, the principle of the king's supremacy in matters ecclesiastical— a principle essentially despotic by its combination of civil and spirit- ual jurisdiction — had been the governing principle in the English Church. At first it showed its tyrannical tendency by imposing ceremonies not warranted by the Word of God and associated with Popery, and by enforcing these without the slightest regard to tenderness of feeling, or liberty of conscience. Advancing on its despotic career, it interfered with the forms and the language of worship, prescribing to man after what manner, and in what terms, he was to address his Creator, without regard to that Creator's own commands. At length it reached its extreme limits, and presumed to exercise absolute control over the doctrines which Christ's ambassadors were to teach, thus rashly interfering not merely with man's approach to God, but also with God's message to man. This extreme point of spiritual despotism was reached, when the king and his prelates authoritatively commanded the Lord's day to be vifdated, and forbade any other but the Arminian system of doctrine to be preached. Hence it appears, that Prelatic Church government had proved itself to be a complete and oppressive despotism, increasing in severity as it increased in power. And let it be observed, that during its progress it liad silenced or ejected great numbers of the ablest and best ministers throughout the kingdom, without scruple and without mercy. Such a course of tyranny could not fail to produce a strong reaction in a high-minded people like the English, causing them, in the violence of the re- vulsion and recoil, to regard every form of ecclesiastical government as inevitably tyrannical, just as the extreme of civil despotism tends to throw a nation at one bound into the extreme of republicanism. In this manner prelatic tyranny was the very cause why so many sects sprung up, repudiating every kind of ecclesiastical government. Afjain, with regard to how Prelacy had taught the people of England, there needs but little to be said. For it is a melancholy truth, that teachvig the peo/)/e seems never to have been regarded by the Church oi^ England as necessa- rily any part of its duty. In a Church where a despotic monarch exercises the supremacy, this is not surprising ; for it requires no great degree of penetration to perceivo 130 HISTORY OF THE that an intelligent and truly religious people cannot be enslaved. This Elizabeth well knew, and therefore she dis- approved of preaching ministers. For the same reason, what were termed " prophecyings," or meetings for mutual instruction, and also lecturings, were prohibited. And per- haps it would not be far from the truth were we to conjec- ture, that the reason why parochial schools were never instituted in England, is to be found in the same despotic principle which led the English kings and Church to v/ish the people to remain ignorant, that they might be the easier kept in a state of blind subjection. It will be remem- bered also, that whenever the Puritan ministers became what was thousfht troublesome in their endeavors to teach their poor and ignorant countrymen, they were immediately silenced ; and as toleration was then unknown, they w^ere compelled to desist from their hallowed labors, on pain of iniprisonment, exile, or death. Taking this view, which is the true one, it is mere mockery to say that Prelacy had ever even attempted to teitch the people of England at all, — unless, indeed, we were to say that it had striven earn- estly to teach them, that external rites and ceremonies of man's institution are more important than the word of God, and that it was right to profane that day w^hich God has commanded to be remembered and kept holy. Such had been the governing^ and such the teaching of Prelacy in England ; and it Avas not strange that men, groaning under oppression, and kept in utter darkness, should wrench asunder their fetters furiously, and should be dazzled when they rushed at once into unwonted light. It was not strange that they should hastily conclude that whatever was remotest from such a system was best ; and should therefore be eager to destroy that form of ecclesi- astical government, and to resist the establishment of any other, lest it should prove equally despotic. Nor w^as it strange, that people strongly excited on the subject of religion, and uninstructed in its great leading truths and principles, should very readily adopt any and ev^ery theory which was boldly and plausibly promulgated. Thus it was easy for any man who possessed sufficient fluency of speech to impose upon an excited and ignorant people, to gain a number of adherents to his opinions, and to become the founder and eader of a sect. It has often been said by WESTMI.NSTKU y\SSnMHI.Y. 131 those who support Prelacy, not as of divine authority, but as a useful and suitable form of Church government, that it was devised for the purpose of producing and preserving uniformity in the Church. Unfortunate device ! It never could have had a more full and authoritative sway than that which it enjoyed during the reigns of Elizabeth, James, and Charles I. ; and it produced the most complete anarchy, and gave rise to Sectarianism to the greatest extent, and in the most repulsive forms, that ever shocked the Christian world. It at once kept men in ignorance, and drove them to madness ; and ever since it has appealed to their frantic conduct as a proof of its own calm excellence. The truth of this view may be shown bj'^ a parallel, but a strongly contrasted instance. After the restoration of Charles II., the Presbyterian Church of Scotland was vio- lently overthrown, and its adherents subjected to twenty- eight years of terrific and relentless persecution. Did the people of Scotland split into innumerable and extravagant s cts, when thus deprived of their religious teachers, and oppressed w4th the most remorseless cruelty ] They did not. One sect alone appeared, after the persecution had lasted t\venty years, and in a parish where there had been a prelatic incumbent all that time ; it never mustered more than four men, and twenty-five or twenty-six women, and it perished Avithin a few months. What caused this remarkable difTerence ? One answer only can be given, — the superiority of the Presbyterian system, which had so thoroughly instructed the people, that they could and did retain their calm and regulated consistency of doctrine and clinracter in the midst of every maddening and delusive element ; while, on the other hand, when the prelatic gov- ernment of England was broken up, its oppressed and igno- rant people rushed headlong into the most wild, extrava- gant, and pernicious errors. This we believe to be the true explanation of the matter, though we are well aware that it will not be readily admitted by the admirers of Prelacy. But the truth must be stated, be ofiended who may ; and it will be well for Britain and for Christendom, if, should a period of similar breaking up and reconstruction arrive, men will learn by the sad experience of the past, and never more presume, either to supersede God's insti- tutions with man's inventions, or, in their violent recoil, 132 HISTORY OF THE refuse to submit themselves to what God has appointed, and has so often and so manifestly honored and sanctioned with His blessing. The pernicious effect of these multitudinous sects upon the proceedings of the Westminster Assembly, we shall have occasion hereafter to show. It will be enough here to suggest what will then be proved. Although the Inde- pendent party in the Assembly did not openly avow, or rather disclaimed connection with the Sectarians that swarmed throughout the kingdom, yet they so far held intercourse with them, and occasionally defended them, as to secure their support, and thereby to render themselves in some measure the representatives of a large portion of the English community. For this purpose they strove to retard the progress of the Assembly, while they were mustering their adherents and concentrating their strength, — evidently expecting that they would eventually secure the establishment of their own system. In the Assembly and Parliament both, they had the aid of Sir Harry Vane the younger, one of the most subtle politicians of the age, — a man whose mind was full of theoretic and impractica- ble speculations, and whose restless activity of temperament kept him perpetually scheming or executing something new, — whose very constitution of mind was sectarian^ because it was constructed in sections, without continuity or harmony. And in the Parliament and army they had the far more important support of Oliver Cromwell, with whom they held constant intercourse, and by whom there is every reason to believe they were employed and over- reached. It is not meant, that the Independent members of Assembly were completely identified with the political Independents of the army; but there was so much of a community of feeling and interest between them, that it was not difficult for such a man as Cromwell to employ both in the promotion of his own objects. What we have termed the political Independents of the army, virere composed of sectarians of every possible shade of opinion; and from them, rather than from the religious Independents in the Assembly, arose the idea of toleration, of which so much use was subsequently made. As used by those military sectarians, the meaning of the term was, that any man might freely utter the ravings of his own WESTMINSTF.R iASSEWBLV. 133 heated fancy, and endeavor to proselytize others, be his opinions what they might, — even thousfh nianifestly sub- versive of all morality, all government, and all revelation. Such a toleration, for instance, as would include alike Antinomians and Anabnptists, though teaching that they were set free from and above the rules of moral duty so completely, that to indulge in the grossest licentiousness was in them no sin ; and Levellers and Fifth-Monarchy Men, whose tenets went directly to the subversion of every kind of constituted government, and all distinctions in rank and property. This was what they meant by tolera- tion^— and this was what the Puritans and Presbyterinns condemned and wrote against with startled vehemence. And it is neither to the credit of the Independent divines of that period, nor of their subsequent admirers and followers, that they seemed to countenance such a tolera- tion, the real meaning of which was, civil, moral, and reli- gious anarchy. It is, however, true, that out of the discus- sions which this claim of unbounded and licentious tolera- tion raised there was at length evolved the idea of religions toleration, such as is d manded by man's solemn and dread characteristic of personal responsibility, and consequent inalienable right to liberty of conscience. And let it be noted, that this g-reat idea Avas fully admitted by those who reasoned nnd wrote most strongly against the " un- bounded toleration" claimed by the Sectarians ; although, in their opposition to that claim, they occasionally used lan- guage which might seem to condemn what in reality they both demanded for themselves and readily allowed toothers.* It is us'ial for a certain class of writers to accuse the Presbyterians of wishing to seize and wield a tyranny as severe as that of Prelacy, against which they raised such loud complaints. Without undertaking to defend all that they said and did, this may be safely affirmed, that both the principles and the constitution of a rightly formed Presbyterian Church render the usurpation of power and the exercise of tyranny on its part wholly impossible. A Presbyterian Church in the process of formation, still * We shall have occasion in a subsequent part of this work, to prove that the true idea of toleration, in its right moral and religious sense, was first tau£:ht and first exemplified by the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, next by the Puritans, and tlien adopted, but corrupted, by th^ Sectarians and Independents. 12 134 HISTORY OF THE trembling from the savage grasp of Prelacy, and surround' ed by wild and fearful forms of sectarianism, as was its condition at the time of the Westminster Assembly, might act with some rashness and severity ; a corrupt Presbyte- rian Church, such as was that of Scotland during the do- mination of Moderatism, might act despotically ; but in its own nature, with its subordination of courts, and an equal or preponderating admixture of elders in them all, it can neither usurp clerical domination nor sink into jar- ring anarchy. In its purest state and its fullest exercise, it gives and preserves both civil and religious liberty, — both doctrinal truth and disciplinary purity, — both national instruction and national peace. On the other hand. Pre- lacy, in its most powerful and active state, has ever tended to destroy both civil and religious liberty, — has checked doctrinal truth, and disregarded disciplinary purity, — has never attempted to instruct the nation, but left it a prey to ignorance and errors, — and has, both in Scotland and Eng- land, inflicted the most cruel persecution, and given rise to bloody civil wars. This is a startling contrast, but not more startling than true. There is yet another point of contrast. During the past century Prelacy sunk into dor- mancy, and became mild and inoffensive : Presbytery sunk into dormancy, and became cruel and oppressive, as if agitated by wild dreams under that fierce incubus, Mode- ratism. Prelacy has awoke, and begins to mutter words of fearful import, indicating the return of its oppressive spirit : Presbytery has awoke, and has begun her hallowed work of instructing her own people, while she offers her cordial fellowship to all who love her Divine and only Head. The inference is obvious, and may be thus stated. When the vital spirit of Prelacy is inert, it becomes com- paratively harmless: when the vital spirit of Piesbytery is inert, or repressed, it becomes oppressive. Again, when the vital spirit of Prelacy is active, it becomes despotic and persecuting, intolerant and illiberal : when the vital spirit of Presbytery is active, it becomes gracious and compassionate, tolerant of everything but sin, and gener- ous to all who believe the truth and love the Saviour. Let the thoughtful reader say, which system is of human, and which of divine institution, — which shows a spirit of the earth, earthly, and which, of heavenly origin and character 1 CHAPTER III THE INDEPENDENT CONTROVERSY, ANNO 1644. The Assembly directed to begin the Subjects of Discipline, Directory of Worship, and Government — The Subject of Church-otticers staled and Dicussed — Pastor — Doctor — Ruling Elder — Deacon — Widow — Ordination of Ministers — Opposition of the Independents — Consent of the Congregation, or Election — Contest with the Parliament about Ordination — Directory for Public Worship — Propositions concerning Presbyterial Church Government — The Apologetical Narration by the Independents — Answers to it — The Antapologia — Views of the Independents — Keen and Protracted Debates — Excommunication — Selden and Gillespie — Nye — Attempt to Accommodate — the Power of Congresation — Suspension and Excommunication — Committee of Accommodation — Proceedina:s of that Committee — Suspended — Rea- sons of Dissent by the Independents — Answers by the Assembly — General Outline of these Reasons and Answers — The Independents Requested and Enjoined to State their own Model of Church Gov ernment — The Publication of a Copy of a Remonstrance — Assem bly's Answer to it — The Committee of Accommodation Revived — Additional Papers Prepared — Ends without Eileciing an Accommo- dation — Brief Summary of the Points of Disasrieemeni between the Presbyterians and Independents — Political Intrigues — Errors of both Parties. About a fortnight after the House of Commons had taken the Solemn League and Covenant, and while the Assem- bly of Divines were eng-ajred in discussing the doctrinal tenets of the sixteenth of the Church of England's Thirty- nine Articles, on tlie 12th of October, 1643, they received an order from both Houses of Parliament, requiring them to direct their deliberations to the important topics of dis- cipline, and a directory of worship and government. The order was as follows : — ■ ^'IJpon serious consideration of the present stale and conjuncture of the affairs of this kingdom, the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament do order, that the Assembly of Divines and others do forth- with confer and treat among themselves, of such a discipline and gov- srnment as may be most agreeable to God's Holy Word, and most apl 136 HISTORY OF THE to procure and preserve the peace of the Church a! home, and nearci agreement with the Church of Scotland, and other Reformed Churches abroad, to be settled in this Church in stead and place of the present Church government by archbishops, bishops, and their chancellors, commissaries, deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical officers, depending upon the hierarchy, which is resolved to be taken away ; and touching and concerning the Directory of Worship, or Liturgy, hereafter to be in the Church ; and to deliver their opinions and advices of, and touching the same, to both or either House of Parliament with all the convenient speed they can." By this order the attention of the Assembly was turned from any further examination of the Thirty-nine Articles, and fairly directed to the important task lor the accom- plishment of which they had been called together. Baillie informs us that Henderson did not entertain any sanguine expectations of their conformity to the Church of Scotland, till they should have experienced the advantages of the Scottish army's presence in England.* This proves that he was not overreached by the English commissioners in the framing of the solemn League and Covenant, but was quite aware of the views and feelings which they enter- tained, although he cherished the hope that circumstances might lead to a b tter result. After having made some preliminary arrangements, and prepared their own minds by keeping a solemn fast, the Assembly read the order from Parliament, pointing out the new field of deliberative discussion on which they were to enter. The first question that arose regarded the order of procedure, whether they should begin with government or discipline, and it w^as agreed that they should begin with the subject of Church government. This suggested ano- ther preliminary point, whether the Scriptures contain a rule for government. Goodwin and the other Independents eagerly urged that this question should be first of all de- bated and decided, he expressing his conviction that the Word of God did contain a rule. Lightfoot opposed this course, and wished the Assembly first of all to give a definition of the leading term of all their discussions, "o Church.''^ It is evident that this would have been the most logical course, first to define a Church, then to inquire into its government, and lastly to treat of discipline, which is government in operation. But it was felt that this course * Baillie, vol. ii. p. 104. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. l^H would brinof forward first tlie very points on which tli6 greatest diflerences of opinion were known to exist ; and therefore it was judcred prudent ratlier to adopt a less per- fect order of procedure, for tlie purpose of ascertaining first liow far all could agree, in the liope that then their differences would either disappear, or be capable of being brought into some general accommodation. It was ac cordingly resolved, that since all admitted the existence of a Church, and of Church government, however they might differ regarding their nature and extent, these subjects should be left for the present indefinite, and they should commence with the subject of office-bearers in the Church, or, to use their own term, church-officers.* From this early, and comparatively light discussion, it was evident that both parties in the Assembly were keenly vigilant lest anything should be done which might in any degree prejudge their opinions ; and consequently, that their debates would be eager, animated, and protracted, on every controverted topic. But as the very object for which the Assembly was called was to prepare a form of Church government, of discipline, and of worship for the nation, which was intended to be final and lasting, it was judged right to give to every portion of their great work the benefit of the most full and deliberate discussion, though at the expense of considerable delay. Committees according to the usaal arrangement, had been appointed to prepare the subject of Church-officers, for public discussion, and gave in their separate reports. That of the second committee began thus : — "In inquiring after the officers belonging to the Church of the New Tes- tament, we first find that Christ, who is Priest, Prophet, King, and Head of the Church, hath fulness of power, and containeth all other offices, by way of eminency, in him- self; and therefore hath many of their names attributed to him." To this sacred and comprehensive proposition they appended a number of Scripture proofs, in six divisions. The following names of Church-officers were mentioned as given in Scripture to Christ: — 1. Apostle; 2. Pastor; 3. Bishop ; 4. Teacher ; b. Minister, or Juxyot'og ; but this last name Avas rejected by the Assembly, as not meaning a Church-officer in the passage where it is used. The re* • Lightfoot, p. 20. 138 HISTOUY OF THE port of the third committee was similar in character, ascribing", in Scripture terms, the government to Jesus Christ, who, being ascended far abov-^e all heavens, " hath given all officers necessary for the editicalion of his Church j some whereof are extraordinary, some ordinary." Out of the Scriptures referred to they found the following offi- cers : — Apostles, Evangelists, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers, Bishops or Overseers, Presbyters or Elders, Deacons and Widows.* In the discussion which followed upon the reading of these reports, it is rather remarkable that the Eraslians took no part j although the full meaning of the main pro- position — that Christ contains all offices by way of emi- nency, in himself, and has given all officers necessary for the edification of his Church — seems to contain enough to preclude the Erastian theory. But we shall have occasion to show the reason why they allowed this proposition to pass unchallenged. It did not, however, escape the oppo- sition of the Independents. Mr. Goodwin opposed it, as anticipating the Assembly's work, and concluding that Christ's influence into his Church is through his officers, wiiereas he questions whether it be conveyed that way or not. Again, when the kingly office of Christ was under discussion, Goodvv'in doubted whether the Scriptures prove that Christ is King, in regard of discipline in the Church. He questioned also whether the headship of Christ should be specified, as beinsr no office in the Church. All these objections were overruled, and the reports approved, as the basis of subsequent deliberations. The four following questions were also reported by the third committee : — '' 1. What officers are mentioned in the NcAV Testament % 2. What officers of these were pro tempore^ and what permanent 1 3. What names are common to divers officers, and what restrained 1" 4. What the office of those standing officers? The general names of officers having been already stated, the debate arose on the .second question — *' W^hat officers were perpetual 1" The office of Apostles was declared to bo only pro tempore^ and extraordinary, for the eieht followinnr reasons : — 1. They were immediately called by Christ; 2. 'J hey had seen Christ ; 3. Their commission was throutfh the whole world ; 4<. They were endued with iha • Lightfoc»l, p. 23. WESTMi.NSTKif asi>i:;mi',ly. ]3f? spirit oi infallibility in delivering the truths ofdoctrine to the churclies ; n. They only by special commission were set apart to be personal witnesses of Christ's resurrection; G. They had power to give the Holy Ghost ; 7. They were appointed to go through the world to settle churches, in a new form appointed by Christ ; 8. They had the inspection and care of all the churches. Little opposition was made to these reasons, and that little was chiefly made by Mr. Good- win — particularly respecting the power of the apostles to plant and settle churches ; he being afraid, apparently, that if he admitted this power, even in apostles, it might so far con- demn the practice of the Independents, where ordinary be- lievers formed themselves into churches, and appointed their own officers totally without the intervention or aid of any other church, or of any person previously ordained. Not a single voice was raised in behalf of the theory first started by Bancroft, and carried to its height by Laud — that prelates are the successors of the apostles, and pos- sess their office in its authority, in virtue of unbroken per- sonal apostolic succession, — this extravagant absurdity being abandoned by all. Another point respecting the apostleship was introduced, which led to considerable discussion, not on its own ac- count, but because of its ultimate consequence • — That the apostles had the keys (that is, the power of government, doctrine, and discipline) immediately given to them The importance of this point consisted in its bearing upon the Independent theory ; as also, though not so directly, upon Erastianism. Lightfoot granted that the keys were uni- versally held to mean the government of the Church ; but that in his own opinion the keys were given to Peter only, to open the door of admission to the Gentiles; and that lie regarded the power of the keys as merely the authority to declare doctrinal truths. In this view, as we shall have occasion to show, lay the germ of Lightfoot's Erastianism. The Independent brethren resisted the idea, that the power of the keys was committed to the apostles in any sense implying official authority; it being one of their principles, that the Church, in their sense of that term, namely, ordi- nary believers, possessed all power and authority. Good- win, Simpson, Burroughs, and Bridge, all engaged in this debate ; but the Assembly affirmed the proposition. 140 HISTORY OF THE The next discussion arose respecting tlie otHce (4' pastor which the report stated to be perpetual, and to consist ir feeding the flock, and in the dispensation of sacraments. In the term '^feeding''' was included, to preach and teach, to convince, to reprove, to exhort, and to comfort. Mr. Coleman questioned Avhether a pastor, in the Old Testa- ment, meant the ecclesiastical officer in the Church, and not constantly the civil. This was supported by Lightfoot ; and here also appeared the germ of their Erastianism. A long discussion followed on the question, Whether the public reading of the Scriptures be the pastor's office ] some desiring to retain what was termed " a reader" in each congregation ; but it was at length decided to belong to the pastor's office. The duty of catechising was also assigned to the pastor ; and likewise that of praying when he preached, which had been prohibited by the bishops. It was also held that it belonged to the pastor to take care of the poor, though not to supersede the deacon's office. The next subject which occupied the Assembly's atten- tion vv^as the question, whether pastors and teachers, or doctors, formed one and the same office. The Indepen- dents maintained the divine institution of a doctor, as dis- tinct from a pastor, in everjr congregation. It had been their own practice to have a doctor or teacher, as holding a somevN^hat subordinate position to that of the pastor, — one to which an ordinary member might readily aspire, form- ing" a connecting link between the pastor and the people ; and they were exceedingly desirous to persuade the As- sembly to retain this distinction. On the other hand, this was one of the peculiarities of the Congregational system, difterent from what prevailed in all other Churches, and it was strenuously and even keenly resisted by the Assembly. At length Henderson interposed to procure an accommo- dation and agreement between the contending parties. It was at last concluded that there are difierent gifts, and corresponding difference of exercises in ministers, though these may belong to the same person ; that he who most excels in exposition may be termed a doctor ; that such a person may be of great use chiefly in universities; and where there are several ministers in the same congregation, each may devote himself to that department in which he most excels ; and that, where there is but one, he must to Wl-STMINSTKli ASSEMI5LY. 141 his ability perform tlie wljolc work of the ministry. Hen- derson warned the Assembly that the eyes of all the Re- formed Churches were upon them, earnestly watching whether their proceedinjis would be such as to promote or prevent the desired uniformity of all Protestant Christen- dom; entreating them not to be too minutely metaphysical and abstract in treatiufj of such matters, but rather to direct their attention to leading- and important topics, with the view of securing- a general harmony, though smaller points should be allowed considerable freedom of interpretation.* A still more important subject then came before the As- sembly, — the subject of ruling elders ; on the right under- standing and decision of which depended the adoption or rejection of the distinctive principle of Presbyterian Church government. It was brought forward in the following terms: — "That besides those presbyters that both rule well and labor in the word and doctrine, there be other presby- ters, who especially apply themselves to ruling, though they labor not in the word and doctrine." Aware that this order of Church-officers was almost a novelty in England, Henderson took an early part in the debate, showing that it had been used in the Reformed Churches at a very early- period, — even before its institution at Geneva, — and that it had proved very beneficial to the Church of Scotland. Nearly the whole talent and learning of the Assembly were called into long and strenuous action by this discussion, which began on the 2'2d of November, and was not con- cluded till the 8th of December. The institution of ruling eldei' was opposed by Dr. Temple, Dr. Smith, Mr. Gataker, Mr. Vines, Mr. Price, Mr. Hall, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Cole- man, Mr. Palmer, and several others, besides the Indepen- dents, — of whom, however, Nye and Bridge opposed but partially. It was supported by Mr. Marshall, Mr. Calamy, Mr. Young, Mr. Seaman, Mr. Walker, IMr. Newcomen, MV. Herle, Mr. Whitaker, and the Scottish divines, — of whom Rutherford and Gillespie particularly distinguished them- selves. At length, having thoroughly exhausted their argu- ments, Henderson moved that a committee might be ap- pointed to draw up a statement how far all parties were agreed, with the view of arriving at some fair accommoda- tion ; and being supported by Goodwin, this motion was * Lightfoot, pp. 53, 58; Baillie, vol. ii. p. 110. 142 HISTORV OF THE aoreed to, and the debate terminated. The report of the committee contained ihese three propositions: — '' 1. Christ hath instituted a government and governors eccJesiastrcal in the Church ; 2. Christ hath furnished some in his Church with gifts for government, and with commission to exercise the same when called thereunto ; 3. It is agreeable to, and warranted by, the Word of God, that some others beside the ministers of the Word, or Church-governors, should join with the ministers in the government of the Church." To these propositions were added the texts, Rom. xii. 7, 8, and 1 Cor. xii. 28. "Some liked the propositions," says Lightfoot, " but not the applying of the places of Scripture ; and of that mind was I myself, — for the proposition I un- derstood of magistracy."* The first and second proposi- tions were, however, affirmed without opposition, and the third with only the negative vote of Lightfoot himself ^ the texts also were approved, with the additional opposi- tion of Dr. Temple. The carrying of this question was justly regarded as of the utmost importance, as fixing the character of the Church to be established; and it is matter of surprise that the opposition sunk so nearly to nothing. Even the ac- commodation by means of which these propositions were framed and carried, was somewhat of a perilous experi- ment ; for it narrowly missed introducing the unsound principle of admitting into the arrangements of the Church what had no higher authority than considerations of expe diency and prudence. For all were willing to have admit ted the order of ruling elders on these grounds;! but thiir- was decidedly rejected, especially by the Scottish divines, and by tho^e of the Puritans or English Presbyterians who fully understood the nature of the controversy so long waged by their predecessors against admitting into a di- vine institution anything of merely human invention. There was yet one point to be discussed respecting the ruling elder. It had been decided that this officer Is of divine institution, but it remained to define in what his office consisted; and this gave rise to another, and a very animated debate. In the previous discussion respecting the office itself, considerable weight had been attached to the argument drawn from the constitution of the Jewish * Lighttoot, p. 76. * Baillie, vol. ii. p. Jll. WESTMINSTER JiSSEMDLV. 143 Church, and from llie ciders of the people in ihul insliiu- tion; and when preparing- to define the office of an eUler in the Christian Chnrch, reference was again made to the corresponding functionary among the Jews ; and the ques- tion arose, whether the Hebrew elders were chosen pur- posely for ecclesiastical business; Coleman first brought forward the inquiry, affirming that both the elders and the seventy senators in the sanhedrim were civil officers ; Mr. Calamy and Dr. Burgess both held the reverse; and Mr. Gillespie proved that the seventy were joined with both Moses and Aaron at their institution, — that the elders in other passages of Scripture are joined with the priests, and in others with prophets, and in others are spoken of as distinct from the rulers.* Lightfoot somewhat differed from Coleman, and also Irom Selden, who took part in this debate ; and after a very learned and animated discussion, the opinions of the Assembly being nearly balanced, the subject was laid aside for a time, without any definite conclusion. The office of deacon next engaged their attention. The institution of this office was not denied, but several were of opinion that it was of a temporary nature. This view Vv'as entertained by few except the Erastians ; and when the Assembly decided that the office of deacon was of a permanent nature, Lightfoot alone voted in the negative, though both Coleman and Selden had spoken agamst it. The opposition to the permanency of this office seems to have arisen chiefly from the fact, that there existed in England a civil poor-law, instituted in the reign of Eliza- beth ; which led some to oppose the deaconship as unne- cessary, and others, as interfering with a civil arrangement. It was well suggested by Mr. Vines, " that the provision of civil officers made by the civil State for the poor should rather slip into the office of a deacon, than the reverse, because the latter bears the badge of the Lord." As the report concerning Church-officers had mentioned " widows," this was the last point to be discussed, whether widows are to be c(msidered as deaconesses, and their office one of permanent continuation in the Church. Some of the Independents, and one or two others, were inclined to retain this office ; but after some debate it was decided • Lightfoot, p. 78. 144 EISTOKY OF THE t^hat the existence of such an office in the Church was not proved. With this discussion terminated the year 1643, in which the business of the Assembly had been chiefly of a preliminary character. It had, however, been solemnly decided, that Christ is so completely the Head of the Church, that all its offices are essentially in him, and from him are they all primarily and authoritatively derived ; that of these offices some are extraordinary, and have ceased — those, namely, of apostles, prophets, and evangelists ; that pastors and doctors, or teachers, are essentially the same, and form the highest order of divinely appointed officers in the Church ; that ruling elders are also of divine appoint- ment, and are distinct from pastors ; and that deacons are likewise of divine and permanent institution, though not entitled to preach or to rule, but to take charge of charita- ble and pecuniary concerns. And as considerable progress had thus been made, reasonable hopes might have been cherished that the business of the Assembly would con- tinue to proceed with as much celerity as was consistent with the grave deliberation due to its vast importance. But there were other elements of a less propitious na- ture at work, some of which had already appeared, and others were felt, though scarcely yet fully visible. On the 19th of October, soon after the Assembly had seriously begun its task, the House of Commons intimated through Dr. Burgess, their desire that two points should be decided upon as speedily as possible, namely, an arrangement for their ordination of ministers j and an arrangement for the institution and induction to vacant benefices.* The for- mer of these points could not be determined till the Assem- bly should have discussed the subject of Church-officers in general. But as the latter was a subject of immediate and urgent importance, a committee was appointed to deter- mine in what manner trial should be made of the qualifica- tions of those who might apply for those vacant benefices. Twenty-one rules of examination were at length drawn up, in conformity with which every applicant was to be tried, in order to ascertain his soundness in doctrine and fitness for the situation. Application was frequently made by ministers who had been cruelly plundered by the king's army, and constrained to flee to London, both for safety • Lighlfoot, p. 24. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 1-^5 and to seek some kind of maintenance. The examination of such applicants proved to be a very delicate task, as the kincr's army plundered alike the sound Puritans and the erratic Sectarians — so that persons of each character made application to the Assembly. Sometimes tlie Sectarians, knowino- that no rule of ordination had yet been framed, procured ordination from other Sectarians, and nttempted to deceive the exnminators ; and when this was either not at- tempted, or found impracticable, they then endeavored to form a party among the citizens, and others who had flocked to London, that from them they might derive a means of subsistence. This led directly to a prodigious increase of sectarianism in London, and tended to throw the whole city into a state of confusion and anarchj-. To remedy this state of matters, the city ministers presented a suppli- cation to the Assembly, lamenting their disturbed condi- tion — requesting order to be taken for the ordination of ministers — stating the fearful increase of pernicious sects, and complaining of their restless endeavors to gather sepa- rate congregations — and requesting the Assembly to inter- cede with the Parliament for the redress of these griev- ances, and for the erection of a college at London, where the youth might be educated, as Oxford was in the posses- sion of the king.* The Assembly answered, that it was not yet safe to meddle with the ordination of ministers — that they had applied to the Parliament for redress in the other matters — and desired information to be given respect- ing those who gather churches, that in this also they may seek redress. ]\Ir. Nye objected to the expression against gathering churclies, and was sharply answered.! This apparently slight incident we have mentioned, because it indicates the line of policy which the Independent party were beginning to pursue, in connecting themselves with the mass of Sectarians throughout the kingdom, in which Nye performed so active a part, and of which he seems to have been the chief contriver. [lej-i.] The year lb4^4< began with the introduction into the Assembly of subjects still more certain to produce cli?union than any that had been previously discussed. The general subject of Church-officers had been so far • Lightfoot, p. 57 ; Baillie, vol. ii. p. 111. f Lightfoot, p. 62. 13 146 HISTORY OF THF determined ; but the most important parts of this rnatlel remained to be debated, — namely, the method of appoint- ing Church-officers, and the authority which they ought to possess, or, in other words, ordination and discipline. Well did the Assembly know that great diversity of opinion would arise on these two leading points, and gladly would they have avoided entering upon them till a subsequent period, had it been at all practicable. But the disturbed state of the country, increased and aggravated by the want of religious ordinances and government, rendered it impe- ratively necessary that some steps should be taken for the remedy of so many and such great national maladies. A commission had been appointed in September, 1643, for the purpose of inquiring into the conduct of ministers through- oat the country, and of removing all such as were convict- ed of scandalous conduct, or proved to be des4;itute of suf- ficient qualifications. On the 17th of November, Parlia- ment authorised the publication of a treatise, entitled, " The First Century of Scandalous and Malignant Priests, or, a narration of the causes for which Parliament hath ordered the sequestration of the benefices of several min- isters complained of before them, &c." This was drawn up by Mr. White, M.P., the chairman of the commission ,• and it certainly proves that the ministers so sequestered were utterly unworthy of the sacred office, or rather, that many of them were unv/orthy of the name of men, though we cannot pollute our pages by quotations.* The reason of referring to the subject, is to show the necessity thence arising for ihe ordination of other men to supply the bene- fices become vacant by means of these sequestrations. However desirous, therefore, the Assembly were to post- pone the consideration of a subject, on which they were certain to disagree, till they should have framed a Confes- sion of Faith, and other matters, in which entire unanimity was expected, they were constrained reluctantly to pro- ceed to doubtful disputations. 'I'here is considerable difficulty in giving a direct and ••ontinuous view of the discussions on which we are now lo e«nter, in consequence of the contemporaneous, or rather iiuertwined manner in which they arose and were con- ducted. For instead of continuing steadily to prosecute • Frst Century, ^0. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 11-1 one nubjcct till it was completed, and tlioii passitig on to another, tliere were generally two or three subjects under deliberation at the same period, eacli being peculiarly intrusted to one or other of the committees in which they were prepared for public debate, and were successively laid aside and resumed according to their respective states of preparation. For example, on the '2d of January, 1644*, the two following subjects were both brought forward: "Pas- tors and teachers have power to inquire and judge who are fit to be admitted to the sacraments, or kept from them ; as also who are to be excommunicated or absolved from that censure ;" and, " The apostles had power to ordain officers in all churches, and to appoint evangelists to or- dain." Notwithstanding the general terms employed, it was impossible to discuss tliese propositions without bring- ing forward the very points on which the greatest amonnt of division existed, namely, discipline and ordination. And as they investigated every topic in a minute and scho- lastic manner, by a series of fine-drawn distinctions, and syllogistic propositions previously prepared in the com- mittees, it almost inevitably followed, that the business of the committees came before the Assembly on alternate days. In order to avoid the seeming confusion of such a mode of procedure, it will be expedient to trace each sepa- rate subject till its completion, instead of attempting to carry them forward contemporaneously, as the Assembly did. It \vas in consequence of the m.ethod of treatmg every subject minutely, and as convenience served, that the pro- position respecting the apostolic office was thus brought forward, long after its main elements had been defined, and its character as extraordinary and temporary admitted. When this part of the definition was stated, namely, " That the apostles had power to ordain officers in all churches, and to nppoint evangelists to ordain;" the Independents were afraid, that if this passed unquestioned, it might be held to have been already decided that the apostles alone had that power, and that they had so transmitted it by church-officers, that none others could ordain ; whereas they held that tlie church itself, that is, ordinary church- members assembled, possessed that power. It was also disputed whether the term used, Acts xiv. 23, Xeigoiovla, 14.8 inSTORY OF THE meant ordination or election; and on this point a long de- bate took place, Gillespie, Vines, Simpson, and others, hold- ing- that i lection was the proper meaning.* After some further debate on the power of the apostles to appoint evangelists to ordain, the whole proposition received the sanction of the Assembly. On tbe 9th of January, the whole question of ordination was fairly stated by Dr. Temple, chairman of one of the committees, in the following series of interrogatory propo- sitions : — " 1. What ordination is 1 2. Whether necessa- rily to be continued \ 3. Who to ordain 1 4. What per- sons to be ordained, and how qualified ? 5. The manner how !" To these were appended the following answers for the Assembly's consideration: — '* 1. Ordination is the solemn setting apart of a person to some public office in \\\e Church. 2. It is necessarily to be continued in the Cliurcli. 3. The apostles ordained, evangelists did, preach- ing presbyters did; because apostles and evangelists are officers extraordinary, and not to continue in the Church ; and since, in Scripture, we find ordination in no other itands, we humbly conceive that the preaching presbyters five onlj- to ordain." The first proposition was affirmed without much debate. The second was opposed chiefly because of the word " necessarily," Mr. Nye question- ing whether it were necessitate jinis^ ox necessitate pi ecepti^ • — a necessity for the accomplishment of the purpose, or a necessity arising out of its being commanded. Both sides shrunk from the danger of division on this point; and hav- ing changed the word "necessarily" into "always," the proposition was affirmed. In the next proposition it was easily admitted, that apostles and evangelists ordained ; but when tliat passage 1 Tim. iv. 14, was referred to, as prov- ing that preaching presbyters ordained, a very considerable debate arose, Lightfoot, in particular, asserting that it must mean, not ordination, but admission to be an elder ; and when it was affirmed by the Assembly, he and some others voted in the negative. f This was, however, merely the beginning of the strug- gle. When the latter part of the proposition was brought forward for debate, "preaching presbyters were only to * Lightfoot, pp. JOO-102; Baillie, vol. ii. p. 129. t Lightfoot, p. 113. WF.STMINSTER ASSEMBLY. Ii9 ordain," it way felt by all, that to this the Independenta would not assent without some modification. Calamy, Gillespie, and Seaman, proposed, therefore, that a commit- tee of Independents might be chosen, who sliould, in their own terms, state the question concerning ordination ; in the hope that, by having both views of the subject brought forv/ard at once, it might be possible to fuse and blend them together, so as to prevent division. Their report was given in by Mr. Nye, as follows :—" 1. Ordination, for the substance of it is the solemnization of an officer's outward call, in which the elders of the Church, in the name of Christ, and for the Church, do, by a visible sign, design the person, and ratify his separation to his office, with prayer for, and blessing* upon his gifts in the ministration thereof. 2. Tliat the power that gives the formal being to an offi- cer, should be derived" by Christ's institution from the power that is in the elders as such, on the act of ordina- tion, — as yet, we find not anywhere held forth in the Word." It will readily be supposed that the Assembly must have listened to such vague and unintelligible propo- sitions wnth considerable amazement, not unmingled with displeasure, to find their courtesy requited by such studied ambiguity, certainly not calculated, and it could scarcely be thought intended, to promote agreement. They ques- tioned the use of the word "elders" as obscure and ambi- guous ; also the expression " for the Church," which Nye interpreted, vice ecclesiae, in the stead of the Church. "Other scrupulous and ambiguous passages," says Light- foot, "were found; which, after a very long canvass upon them, were laid by, and our old proposition re-assumed."* The conduct of the Independents, on this occasion, was both discreditable in itself, and led to very pernicious results. It was discreditable either to their candor or their talents, to produce propositions couched in such ambiguous language, much more calculated to j)erplex than to clear the subject ; and as they Avere men of decided abilities, the accusation falls upon their character, and con- strains us to regard them as uncandid and disingenuous. But finding that they had succeeded so ill in their attempts to deceive or confuse in this instance, they never again could be prevailed upon to state to the Assembly their own * Liirhtfoot, p. 115. 13* 150 HISTORY OF THE opinions in writing, though sufficiently pertinacious in retaining them, and supporting them by every kind of argument. The new course of tactics thus adopted proved the means of retarding the Assembly beyond measure, and ended at last in rendering all its prolonged toils compara- tively abortive. When the Assemh)]y was on the point of .resuming the consideration of its own propositions. Lord iManchester entered, bringing an order from thie House of Lords, which required the Assembly to make haste and conclude the subject of ordination. A committee Avas appointed to pre- pare the matter fo-r public discussion ; and next day, 2'2d January, the two following propositions were reported: — " 1. That in extraordinary cases something extraordi- nary may be done, until a settled order may be had ; yet keeping as close as may be to the rule. 2. It is lawful, and according to the Word, that certain ministers of the city be desired to ordain ministers in the city and vicinity, jure fraternitatisy A keen debate ensued, Coleman, Goodwin, and Nye opposing, — Vines, Seaman, Lightfoot, and others supporting the report. Nye, in particular, offered the most determined and pertinacious resistance to the clause, "keeping as close to the rule as may be." " Again," says Lightfoot, " he interposed, again, and again;"* but, in the end, the vote Avas carried in the affirm- ative. Every kind of scruple was started, every kind of objection brought forward by the Independents, aided by Selden, wnth whom they did not hesitate to make common cause in this matter. Nye even went so far as to argue that bishops might still ordain, rather than he would admit the case to be extraordinary, requiring a prompt remedial measure. In order, if possible, to end the tedious debate, it was proposed by Gillespie, that the question of a pres- bytery should be expressly declared as still left open ; and Vines moved that the Independents should propose their own way for the supply of the present necessity. The Earl of Pembroke urged haste, as both Church and king- dom were on fire, and might be destroyed during such te- dious delays ; but Nye would not abate his opp®sition. After a keen and even stormy debate of fourteen days' du- ration, the subject was laid aside, in compliance with the * Lightfoot, p. 117. VE.>TML\STER ASSEMIU.V. 151 request of Lord Saj-, who supported the Independents ; and \vl)o sug^gested that it would really expedite the mat- ter first to decide what onjrht to be the ordinary way and rulo of ordination, to which anything- extraordinary could be then made to conform. The cause of the extreme ob- stinacy of the Independents in this discussion, was their fear that it would overrule two points which they held to be of vital importance, involving the very essence of their system, namely, the power of ordination by a single con- gregation ; and the existence and powers of a presbytery. The Assembly repeatedly assured them that these subjects should not be regarded as in any respect decided ; and Gillespie tendered four distinct arguments to show that it could not determine the question of a presbytery.* The subject of ordination was again resumed on the 18th of March, partly vvith reference to the existing neces- sity, and partly as occurring in the course of discussion respecting the calling and appointment of ministers. One additional element of some importance was now intro- duced, which led to another still more important, — the first was the necessity of designation to some particular place, to avoid disorder and irregularity ; and the second, arising out of this, was, the consent of the congregation to which the pastor is to be ordained. The form of the proposition brought forward on this point was, " That he be recommended to that congregation to whom he is to be a minister, and have their consent, unless they can show just cruise of exception against him." Gillespie pro- posed to add, ' Or will petition for a man that they con- ceive may be more advantageous to them in his preaching, and more powerful upon their experience." Henderson wished this question to be debated : " The presbytery re- commend one, and the people desire another ; how shall it be determined 1" Gillespie desired that this might hold : " In no case, in a settled church, a minister may be obtruded on a congregation." Rutherford said, " The Scriptures constantly give the choice of the pastor to the people. The act of electing is in the people ; and the regulating and correcting of their choice is in the presby- tery." Gillespie again resumed: "But if they cannot show just cause against him, what then is to be done 1 • Lighlfoot, p. 130. 15*2 HISTORV OF THE The people say, Vie see no error in him, in life and doi trine, but honor and reverence him; but we can lettei profit by another : what is to be done in this case 1" He then moved that this proposition miglit be debated : '^He that is to be ordained be not obtruded against the will of the congregation ; for the prelates are for obtrusion, the separation for a popular voting ; therefore let us go in a medium." At length the debate terminated by the passing of the following proposition : — " No man shall be ordained a minister of a particular congregation, if they can show any just cause of exception against him."* In the beginning of April the Assembly completed th.e doctrinal part of ordination, and proceeded to frame a directory how it should be conducted. A committee was chosen to prepare it for debate, consisting of Messrs. Pal- mer, Herle, Marshall, Tuckney, Seaman, Vines, Goodwin, Gataker, and the Scottish ministers. Their report was given in and ratified on the 19tii of April, and next day laid before both houses of Parliament. Although Parlia- ment had repeatedly urged the Assembly to hasten for- ward tbe directory and rules for ordination 5 yet, when this had been done, the matter was allowed to remain in- operative for want of the ratification of the Legislature, from the 20th of April, when it was received, till the 15th of August. Before it was returned, some rumors had been in circulation that consid< rable alterations had been made by the Parliament ; and when it was actually pro- duced before the Assembly, these were found to be more extensive than had even been apprehended. They had omitted the whole doctrinal part of ordination, and all the scriptural grounds for it ; and they had chosen only the extraordinary way of ordination, and even in that part had struck out whatever might displease the Independents, the patrons, and the Erastians.f The Scottish commissioners would by no means consent to these alterations; and, in * Ljo^htfoot, pp. 230-233. The conduct and language of the Scottish divines in this debate prove clearly that they held the principle of elec- tion by the people to be the right one ; and that the utmost modification of it to which they could consent was, that no man be intruded. They were, in short, what would now be termed " decided Non-Intrusionists,^^ at the least ; and their consent to a modified proposition was caused by their dread of the sectarian confusion then prevalent in P'ngland. t Baillie, vol. ii. pp. 198 and 221. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY 153 an address to the Grand Committee of Lords, Commons, and the Assembly, they expressly condemned them. This decided conduct, aided by a timely petition to both Honse-^ from the city ministers, produced the desired effect ;* and, on the IGlh September, the Assembly's directory for ordi- nation was returned, restored to its original condition. On the 18th, a committee was appointed for the ordina'tion of ministers, consisting of ten of the Assembly divines, and thirteen of those belonging to the city of London. This was ratified by both Houses on the 2d of October j and thns that long delayed point was concluded.! As the discussions respecting the directory for public worship were not of such importance as those concerning government and discipline, and were first concluded, though not begun till after the other had continued for a considerable time, it will conduce to simplicity and clear- ness to give an outline of the former of these topics in the present place. On the 21st of May, 1644, Mr. Rutherford moved for the speeding of the directopy for public worship, to which no aitention had hitherto been paid. In consequence of this motion, Mr. Palmer, chairman of the committee appointed for that purpose, gave in a report on the 24th, which brought the subject fairly before the Assembly. Some little difference of opinion arose, whether any other person, except the minister, might read the Scriptures in the time ofpublic vrorship, which terminated in the occasional permis- sion of probationers. But when the subject of the dispensa- tion of the Lord's Supper came under discussion, it gave rise to a sharp and protracted debate, chiefly between the Inde- pendents and the Scottish Commissioners. The Indepen- dents opposed the arrangement of the communicants, as seated at the communion table, it being the custom among them for the people to remain in their pews , while the Scottish members urgently defended tlie proposed method • Riishworth, vol. v. p. 780. t Ibid., vol. V, p. 781. The names of the Assembly divines were, I)is. Burgess and Gouge, Messrs. Walker, Conant, Cawdry, Calamy, Chambers, Ley, Gower, and Roborough. The city ministers were, Messrs. Dovvnham, Dod, Clendon, Bourne, Roberts, Ofl'spring, Crau- ford, Clarke, Billcrs, Cooke, Lee, Horton, and Jackson. A similar committee was alsu appointed for the county of Lancaster. — Neal, vol ii. p. 273. i54 HISTORY OF THE of seating themselves at the same table. Another disputed point was, with regard to the power of the minister to ex. elude io-norant or scandalous persons from communion. The debates on these points occupied the Assembly from the lOih of June to the 10th of July. The directory for the sacrament of baptism was also the subject of conside- rable debate, continued from the 11th July to the 8th of August. The directory for the sanctificalion of the Sab- bath was readily received ; and a committee was appointed to procure a preface for the completed directory for pub- lic worship. This committee consisted of Messrs. Good- win, Nye, Bridge, Burgess, Reynolds, Vines, Marshall, and Dr. Temple, together "with the Scottish ministers. The appointment of so many of the Independents was for the purpose of avoiding any renewal of the protracted con- tentions in which they had so long held the Assembly, as we learn from Baillie.* This part of the Assembly's la- bors received the ratification of Parliament on the 22d of November, 164-1 ; with the exception of the directions for marriage and burial, which v/ere finished on the 27th of the same month, and soon afterwards the wdiole received the full ratification of Parliament. It will be remembered that the Assembly of Divines, when required by Parliament to prepare a new form of government and discipline, attempted at first to begin and proceed Vv'ith their task in a manner strictly systematic and logical, commencing with Christ, the Divine Head of the Church, who possesses all power and all offices by way of eminency in Himself; from that they proceeded to men- tion the various kind of Church-officers wdio are named in the Scriptures, and to define the nature of their official powers and duties, intending to complete this part before undertaking any other. But they were turned aside from the systematic course of procedure, partly by the urgency of the Parliament's desire to obtain a directory for ordina- tion to supply vacant charges ; and partly by their own wish to avoid the discussion of controverted topics till they should have agreed on as many as possible. Even in these preliminary steps, however, they came into contact with several points which led to keen debates between the Intleivendent and the Presbyterian parties, proving but too * Baillie, vol. ii. p. 242. WKSTMIXSTRR ASSEMBLY. 155 plainly, that a full agreement was scarcely to be expected. For a time the Scottish commissioners strove to act the part of peace-makers, and repeatedly moved to avoid dis- putable topics, and to direct their attention chiefly to those on which all micrht be united. As tiie subjects on which they were engaged advanced, this became impracticable, Biid all parties prepared for the struggle. On the 19th of January, ]6i4<, Dr. Burgess reported from the first commit- tee, who were to draw up the propositions concerning Pres- bytery in the following terms: — *' 1. That the Scripture holdelh out a Presbytery in a Church, 1 Tim. iv. 14; Acts XV. 2, 4, 6. 2. That a Presbytery consisteth of ministers of the Word, and such other public officers as have been already voted to have a share in the government in the Church."* Tiie subject having been thus brought forward in the Assembly in the due order of procedure, the Scottish com- missioners prepared a book containing an outline of the P.esbyterial form of Church government, as it already existed in Scotland, and caused a copy of it to be given to each member of Assembly. They also prepared a paper containing a brief statement of the chief heads of Church government, which having been laid before the Grand Committee, was by them transmitted to the Assembly for their consideration. It was to the following effect : — "Assemblies are fourfold, 1. Elderships of particular con- gregations; 2. Classical Presbyteries; 3. Provincial Sy- nods; 4. National Assemblies. Elderships particular are warranted: 1. By Christ's institution. Matt, xviii. 17 ; 2. By the common light of nature ; 3. By unavoidable neces- sity. Classical Presbyteries are warrantable : I. By Christ's institution, Matt, xviii. 17; 2. By the example of the Apos- tolic (-'hurches — instancing in the Church of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Rome, &c."t These proposi- tions were given to the committee which was intrusted with the preparation of all matters connected with Pres- bytery, as the proper channel through which they might again be brought forward in the Assembly ; not, however, without some opposition, both from the Independents and from Selden. This took place on the 25th of January; and on the 27th of the same month, Lord Wharton report- * Liihtloot, p. llo. t Lightfoot, p. 119. 156 HISTORY OF THE cd from the House of Lords, that a person named Ogle, formerly a royalist officer, at that time a prisoner, had been detected holding correspondence with Lord Bristol, expressing his hopes that a large party of the Parliament's adherents might be induced to join the king, " if the mode- rate Protestant and the fiery Independent could be brought to withstand the Presbyterian."* His Lordship produced, at the same time, letters from the Earl of Bristol, encour- aging the scheme of bringing in the Independents to the support of the royal cause. In this plot the Independents in the Assembly do not appear to have been directly impli- cated ; for Nye and Goodwin assisted in its detection, by obtaining permission to hold private intercourse with Ogle, and to seem to consent to his proposals, with the view of ascertaining their full extent and nature. f Although the Assembly Independents were vindicated from participation in this plot, yet a certain amount of suspicion rested on the party in general, which, together with the points of dif- ference already stated, and those on the brink of being brought forward, seem to have induced them to adopt a course which proved exceedingly pernicious, so far as regarded the prospect of arriving at ultimate unanimity. About the end of January, or the beginning of February, 1644, they published a treatise, termed " An Apologetical Narration, humbly submitted to the Honorable Houses of Parliament, by Thomas Goodwin, Philip Nye, Sidrach Simpson, Jeremiah Burroughs, William Bridge." The date on the title-page is 1643; but the Parliamentary year commenced on the 25th of March, according to the English computation ; and Baillie mentions this treatise as newly published, in a letter dated the 18th of February, 1644, he dating the beginning of the year from January, as had been the custom in Scotland from the year 1600. The language of Baillie is very pointed respecting this production. "At last," says he, "foreseeing they behoved ere long to come to the point, they put out, in print, on a sudden, an Apolo- getical Narration of their way, which long had lain ready beside them, wherein they petition the Parliament, in a most sly and cunning way, for a toleration ; and withal lend too bold wipes to all the reformed Churches, as imper- fect yet in their reformation, till their new model be em* • Lightfoot, p. 128. t Baillie, vol. ii. p. 137. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 157 braced."'* BailUc further insinuates, that the appearance of the treatise was " by some n>en intended to contribute to the very wicked plot at that same instant a-working, but shortly after discovered almost miraculously." If this conjecture be correct, the intercourse of Nye and Good- win with Ogle may have been for the purpose of conceal- ncr their Oivn connection with the plof, rather than to aid in^its complete detection. We are not, however, desirous to fix upon them a larger amount of criminality, as con- ducting dark and treacherous intrigues, than can be main- tained by the clearest and most irresistible evidence, and therefore shall not at once adopt the suggestion of Baillie. The publication of this treatise, the " Apologetical Nar- ration," by the Independents, tended greatly to prevent the probability of any amicable arrangement in which all par- ties might asrree. Till that time nothing had been done which foreclosed the possible adjustment of at least all minor differences; and the Scottish divines, in particular, had striven to avoid the premature determination of points disputed by the Independents. But when they had thus carried the controversy away from the Assembly to the Parliament, and had, by publishing this work, laid it before the world, it became almost morally impossible that any accommodated adjustment could take place, each party feelino- bound in honor to make out its own cause, and to adhere pertinaciously to the views thus publicly declared. It may be remarked also, that the Scottish commissioners had always caused their publications to be laid before the Assembly, so as to render them fairly the subjects of dis- cussion ; whereas the Independents addressed their pro- duction to the Parliament, and published it to the commu- nity, without formally giving copies to the Assembly ,* so that, whatever might be thought, the subject could not, without violation of order and propriety, be taken up and debated there. This, of course, led to the publication of a series of answers, in which, as usual, each disputant was more eager to confute his antagonist than to promote peace and harmony. From that time forward the contest between the Independents and the Presbyterians became one of irreconcihble rivalry, to which the utter defeat of the one or the other was the only possible termination. And his- • Baillie, vol. ii. p. 130. U 158 HISTORY OF THK toricnl truth compels us to say, that as this bitter warfare was beg-un by the Independents, they are justly chargeable with all the consequences of the fatal feud. The " Apologetical Narration" is, in many points of view^, a remarkable production. Though it extends to no more than thirty-one pages of small quarto, it contains a very plausible account of the history of the five Independent divines, the peculiar tenets of Church government which they held, and their objections against the Presbyterian system, so expressed as both to convey a highly favorable view of themselves and their opinions to Parliament, and to the public, and to serve as the vehicle of skilfully con- structed adulation to Parliament itself. The treatise begins by complaining of the accusations which were generally urged " (though not expressly directed against us in parti- cular, yet in the interpretation of the most reflecting on us)," by which they had been awakened and enforced to anticipate a little that discovery of themselves which otherwise they had resolved to have left to time and ex- perience, of their Avays and spirits. They present them- selves, therefore, " to the supreme judicatory of this king- dom, which is and hath been in all times the most just and severe tribunal for guiltiness to appear before, much more to dare to appeal unto ; and yet, withal, the most sacred refuge and asylum for mistaken and misjudged innocence." They then mention that most of them had enjoyed stations in the ministry ten years before, which they had been con- strained to abandon in consequence of the corruptions in the public worship and government of the Church. Hav- ing been compelled first to look at the dark -part^ as they term it, or the actually existing evils, v/bich forced them to exile, they next began to inquire into and examine the rts;ht part^ or the positive part of Ch jroii worship and gov- ernment,, as stated in the apostolic diiections, and the examples of the primitive New Testamnit Churches. " In this inquiry," say they, " we looked upon the Word of Christ as impartially and unprejudicedly as men made of flesh and blood are like to do in any juncture of time that may fall out." — "We had no new commonwealths to rear, to iVame Church government unto (a hint for the Erastians), whereof any one piece might stand in the other's light, to cause the least variation bj us from the primitive pattern j .WEST^ITNSTER ASSEMBLY. 159 we had no state ends or political interests to comply with : no kincrdoms in our eye to subdue unto our mould, which yet will be co-existent with the peace of any civil govern- ment on earth ; no preferment of worldly respects to shape our opinions for: We had nothing else to do but simply and singly to consider how to worship God acceptably, and so most according to his word."* These good men do not seem to have perceived, that a precisely similar course of reasoning, in a closely similar condition, led to the erroneous conclusions of the ascetic and monastic orders in the early ages of Christianity, nothing being more common than for men to spring from one extreme into that which is most directly and remotely opposite. And it will be observed that there is an allusion to the usual charge brought against the Scottish Covenanters, which it would have been more in accordance with the spirit of charity and peace not to have made. They next proceed to point out the advantages which they enjoyed from the writings of the non-conformists, — • the errors of the Separatists or Brownists, — the example of other reformed Churches, and particularly the example of their expatriated countrymen in New England. As if to prove that t'hey were not men of unaccommodating tempers, and rigid sectarian spirit, they admit that even in the worst times of the Church of England, "multitudes of the assemblies and parochial congregations thereof were the true churches and body of Christy and the ministry thereof a true minv^try'''^ (the i/alic9 are in the work itself) ; " and that they both had held, and would hold, communion with them as the churches of Christ." Mention is also made of the friendly terms in which they had lived with the National Presbyterian Church of Holland, as a further proof of their truly Christian liberality of spirit. Having given this general view of their own feelings, they proceed to state briefly the way and practices of their churches, which, accordingly, we quote in their own words: " Our public worship was made of no other parts than the worship of all other Keformed Churches doth con- sist of: As public and solemn prayers for kings and all in authority, &,c., — the reading the Scriptures of the Old aud New Testament, exposition of them as occasion wa3 ,* Lord's day. For officers and public rulers in the Church, we set up no other but the very same which the Reformed Churches judge necessary and sufficient, and as instituted by Christ and his apostles for the perpetual government of his Church, that is, pastors, teachers, ruhng elders (with us not lay, but ecclesiastical persons separated to that ser- vice) and deacons. And for the matter of government and censures of the Church, we had not executed any other but what all acknowledge, namely, admonition and exconi' municafion upon obstinacy and impenitency (which wo bless God we never exercised). Ihis latter we judged should be put in execution for no other kind of sins than may evidently be presumed to be perpetrated against the party's known light. We had these three principles more especially in our eye to guide and steer our practice by, — first, the supreme xw\e without us was the primitive pattern and example of the churches erected by the apostles. A second principle we carried along with us in all our resolutions was, Not to make our present judgment and practice a binding law unto ourselves for the future, which we in like manner made continual profession of upon all occasions ; which principle we wish were (next to that most supreme, namely, to be in all things guided by the perfect will of God) enacted as the most sacred law of all other, in the midst of all other laws and canons ecclesias- tical in Christian States and Churches throughout the world. Thirdly, we are able to hold forth this true and just apology unto the world, that in the matters of greatest moment and controversy, all still chose to practise safely, and so as we had reason to judge that all sorts, or the most of all the churches did acknowledge warrantable, although they make additaments thereunto." In order to explain what they mean by these additaments^ they proceed to say, — " For instance : Avhereas one great controversy of these times is about the qualification of the members of churches and the promiscuous receiving and mixture of good and bad ; therein we chose the better part, and to be sure, received in none but such as all the churches in the world, by the balance of the sanctuary, ac« WESTMINSTEi; ASSRMI5LV. 161 knowledge; faithful." With regard to Church government^ after referring to the Preshyterian system at that time pre- valent in all the Reformed Churches, except that of Eng- land, they say, — " We could not but judge it a safe and an allowed way to retain the government of our several con- gregations for matters of discipline within themselves, to be exercised by their own elders, whereof we had (for the m jst part of the time we were abroad) three at least in each congregation whom we were subject to ; yet not claiming to ourselves an independent power in every congre- gation, to give account, or be subject to none others, but Oiily a full and entire power, complete within ourselves, until we should be challenged to err grossly." To meet the objection, that such a system afforded no remedy for mis- conduct in any erring congregation, they state, that when one church gives oflence to others, they ought to submit to trial and examination by those offended, and if the offending church should persist in their error, then the others are " to pronounce that heavy sentence against them, of withdrawing and renouncing all Christian communion with them until they do repent." This sentence of non- communion^ as they term it, is what they meant by excom- municntion ; and as its efficiency was questioned, they saj"", in answer to such an objection : " And if the magistrate's power (to w^hich we give as much, and, as we think, more than the principles of the Presbyterial government will suffer them to yield; do but assist and back the sentence of other churches denouncing this non-communion against churches miscarrying, according to the nature of the crime, as they judge meet, and as they would the sentence ot' cliurches excommunicating other churches in such cases, upon their own particular judgment of the cause ; ther), without all controversy, this, our way of church pro- ceeding, will be everyway as effectual as their other can be s ipposed to be." A short narrative is then given of the way in which they had succeeded in terminating a dispute which had occur- red among them while in Holland ; but strict truth con- strains us to say, that their narrative is by no means of an impartial character; and as the whole facts of the case were well known to many of the Assembly Divines, from their intercourse with the Netherlands, they could not fail 16'2 IIISTO;iV OF THE to be displeased wiih this apologetic account of the aiTair The relation goes on to suggest, in a tone of considerable self-complacency, that though the Reformed Churches had made considerable progress, yet it seemed likely that a much more perfect reformation might be obtained, mani- festly implying that this would best be accomplished by following their model. Again complaining of the re- proaches and calumnies which they had endured, they mention, as among them, " That proud and insolent title of Independency was affixed unto us, as our claim, the very sound of which conveys to all men's apprehensions the challenge of an exemption of all churches from all subjec- tion and dependence, or rather a trumpet of defiance against whatever power, spiritual or civil, which we do ab- hor and detest: Or else, the odious name of Brownism^ together with all their opinions as they have stated and maintained them, must needs be owned by us ; although upon the very first declarin-of our judgments in the chief and fundamental point of all Church discipline, and like- wise since, it hath been acknowledged that we differ much from them. And we did then, and do here publicly profess, vve believe the truth to lie and consist in a middle way be- twixt that which is falsely charged on us, Brownism ; and that which is the contention of these times, the authorila- tive Preshyte.ridl govermnent in all the subordinations and proceedings of it.' * After a few more general declarations respecting their own " peaceable practices," and " constant forbearance" in the midst of many provocations, and their resolution to bear all " with a quiet and strong patience," they intimate their intention to decline further controversy, reservinof the declaration and defence of their opinions to the Assem- bly. They declare also their full agreement with the As- sembly in all points of doctrine that had yet been discussed ; and their wish to yield in matters of discipline, in which alone they had yet differed, to the utmost latitude of their ligi'it and consciences. And finally, they conclude their Apologetical Narration, by beseeching the Parliament to regard them as men, who, if they cannot be promoters, have no wish to be hinderers of further reformation ; who differ less from the Reformed Churches and their brethrer; • Apol. Nar., pp. 23 24. WKS'TMI.NSTI-R ASSEMBLY. 163 than they do from what themselves were three years past., who have long been exiles and are now sufferers of reproach ; and who pursue no other design but a subsist- ence, be it the poorest and meanest in their own land, with the enjoyment of the ordinances of Christ, and with the allowance of a latitude to some le^^ser differences with jeaceableness, as not knowing where else with safety, health, and livelihood, to set their feet on earth. The publication of this Apologetical Narrative operated instantaneously like a declaration of war. A number of answers almost immediately appeared, various in talent, learning, and power, but at least sufficiently keen and pointed. Even the calm, plausible, and stately tone of the Narrative tended to provoke their antagonists to the use of undue asperity ; for they regarded it as an attempt to recommend their own system, and disparage others, by means of careful concealments, plausible evasions, and alluring insinuations of its accommodating nature, skilfully contrasted with hints and suggestions of an unfavorable kind respecting the character and tendency of the Presby- terian form of Church government and discipline. For this reason many seemed to think that the Narration was not merely to be answered, but assailed with vehemence and indignation. In this, although the temptation was great, they certainly erred, and erred grievously ; both because such a method is not likely to disarm hostility, or remove prejudice, and because it seemed to prove that the charge of intolerance, so frequently urged against them, Avas but too well founded. Let it, however, be observed, that none of the Scottish divines entered warmly into this controversy, although the Independents had alluded to them in a manner sufficiently ungracious. Baillie, indeed, speaks of them with considerable severity in some parts of his letters ; and the view which he gives of their system in his "Dissuasive," is certainly not such as would gratify its adherents ; and Rutherford did not hesitate to encounter them in fair argument, in several of his works, but without any asperity of temper, or harshness of language. They were answered by Mr, Herle, in his treatise em tied "The Independency upon Scripture of the Independency of Churches; ' and he also retained a dignified and Christian- like calmness of spirit and manner. But other antagonists 164» HISTORY OF THE kept no such terms. Dr. Bastwick, Mr. Vicars, and Mr, Kdwards, assailed the Narration with not less keenness of expression than strength of argument. Of these answers the most elaborate was that entitled " Antapologia ; or, a Full Answer to the Apologetical Narration ; by Thomas Edwards," extending to 259 pages of small quarto, and embracing every disputed or suggested topic. It will scarcely be denied, by those who have carefully perused the Antapologia, that it furnishes a very ample and strong, but most ungracious refutation of the main positions taken up by the authors of the Apologetical Narration. No for- mal reply was returned by the Independents to the Anta- pologia ; but Mr. Burroughs some time afterwards published a vindication of himself from some of the charges that had been urged against him. To that vindication we may have occasion to refer subsequently, for another purpose. Instead, therefore, of tracing the Antapologia, and ex- tracting its statements, it may be enough to advert to some of the main points in which it answered the Nar- ration. It is proved clearly by facts, that the Independent bretbren had not been such silent and retiring men as they represented themselves to have been ; but that, on the contrary, they had been very active in endeavoring to re- commend and spread their own views as widely as possi- ble ; that in reality all their principles, of which they spoke as in a great measure discovered by themselves, in their own study of the Scriptures, bad been previously promulgated and acted upon by others ; that, in effect, their boasted theory of non-comm.union had not been found adequate to the maintenance of peace among them, and had but very imperfectly answered the end in the case to which they referred as a practical instance of its sufficien- cy ; th:it they had not experienced any peculiar hardships either before or during their exile ; and that, since their return, they had enjoyed comfort, influence, and honor, at least eqiia^ • that which any of the Presbyterians had ob- tained. The insinuations against the Presbyterian system were shown to be invidious aud unfounded, and were very sharply retorted against themselves and their course of procedure ; and their practice in " gathering churches out of churches," was shown to be contrary to their own de- clarations as members of the Westminster Assembly. It WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 165 was proved, al^o, that they maintairieti a more intimate in- tercourse with the Brownists and other Sectarians than they were willing to admit; and were engag-ed in a series of intrigues, which they were anxious to conceal. All these points appear to be proved in the Antapologia by a strength and minuteness of evidence which could not be set aside, and which they did not attempt to meet. But there was so much of a fiercely hostile spirit displayed by Edwards, that his attack recoiled somewhat upon himself, and diminished considerably the value of his production, wliile it furnished a kind of excuse for his antagonists in abstaining from giving a direct answer. Such was the first direct outbreak of the controversy between the Independents and the Presbyterians, — a con- troversy greatly to be deplored, as having proved ulti- mately the main cause wdiy the Westminster Assembly failed to accomplish all the good wliich had been expected from its important deliberations. Viewed as a theological controversy alone, it contained but few, and these not vi- tally important elements. There was no disagreement be- tween the two parties in matters of doctrine ; they both admitted the same orders of office-bearers in the Church, though the Independents would have recognized more than the Presbyterians thought either necessary or com- manded in the Scriptures; and they differed little in their opinions respecting the powers properly inherent in con- gregations. But tlie Independents refused to recognize the Presbyterian system of successive Church courts, — as presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, — possessing authori- tative jurisdiction over those immediately beneath them, though they were willing to admit the advantage of synods, in cases of difficulty, to the opinions of which great respect would be due, but not subjection and neces- sary obedience. The point, however, on which the greatest disagreement existed, was that relating to the ideas which they attached to the term, Church. In their view, each company of believers, though not more than seven in number, form? ri church, complete in itself, and in no respect subordinate to, or requiring the aid ef, any other church. Such a church might, at its first formation, be entirely without pastors, elders, or church-officers of any kind ; but hav- 166 IIISTORV OF THE ing met together, and made a solemn declaration of faith, and entered into a mutual church-covenant, they imme- diately became possessed of such inherent powers as to entitle them, to choose and ordain all necessary church- officers, without the presence or the intervention of any pastor previously ordained. Other pastors mi.ght indeed be present, but their presence was not necessary to the validity of the ordination conferred. In the same manner, the congregation of ordinary members might censure or depose their office-bearers, and choose and ordain new ones whenever they thought proper ; and if the office- bearers did not readiljr submit and become private mem- bers aoain, the congfreo^ation were entitled to withdraw from communion with them altogether, and to reconstruct their system as at first. Against such proceedings no appeal could be taken to any other authority, each congregation pos- sessing all power in itself, and being free to have recourse to the principle of non-communion in any case, though against the whole Christian Church. Even when thus stated, the dijTerence between the Independent and the Presbyterian systems may be brought Avithin a very narrow compass. The Presbyterians never denied that a company of trtie believers might be a true church, though destitute of pas- tors ; nor that they might select the most grave and pious of their number, and set him solemnly apart to the office of the ministry, without the presence of any ordained pastor, if in circumstances where that could not be obtained. They admitted that the church must possess in itself the power of all that is necessary to the continuation of its own existence. But they held, also, that Christ himself at first chose and appointed office-bearers, and gave to them authority to ordain others ; that this was matter of pre- cept, and to be regularly obeyed in every instance v.hen that was possible, because it had been so commanded ; while they regarded the Congregational mode as a matter oi necessity, justifiable only in cases where without it the {:?njoyment of Christian ordinances could not be obtained. 1 ne error of the Independents consisted in adopting as the ordinary rule the case of necessity^ instead of the method of precept ; and in adhering so pertinaciously to this view as 10 condemn and refuse to admit into their communion all who could not ao-ree with them. WESTMIiNSTKR ASSf:.-MBLV. IST It was a necessary consequence of this essential princi- ple, that the Independents held the theory of admiltitig none to be members of their churches except those whom they believed to have been thoroughly and in the hisrhest sense regenerated, or, in the language of the time, " true saints," and consequently, perfectly qualified to exercise rightly all the high and sacred functions which they assert- ed to belong to the congregation, as in itself a complete church. For the same reason, they necessarily opposed the idea of a national Church, in any other sense than as a series of congregational churches, gathering together true believers as the wheat, and leaving the chaff to its fearful fate. And following up this theory, they regarded it as perfectly right to gather churches of their own kind out of the congregations of other ministers — a process which necessarily gave great offence to those whose congrega- tions they thus divided and led away. Nor was it at all strange that considerable numbers should bcAviliing to join a system which gave such irresponsible power to ordinary Church members ; and which, at the same time, certainly tended to encourage the feeling of spiritual pride in those who, in being admitted, were recognized as truly regene- rated persons. In one point of view they were, to a cer- tain extent, right. It must always be desirable that Church members should be real believers, and that Christian com- munion should be enjoyed by none but true believers ; but it must always be impossible for man, who cannot read the heart, to avoid being deceived by the plausible language and manners of skilful hypocrisy — and therefore it was im- possible for the Congregational theory to be fully realized. And at the same time, while assuming so much purity and reality in its members, its want of the power either to in- flict Church censures or to appeal to higher authority, ren- dered it peculiarly unable to preserve that very purity in u'hich it assumed its superiority over other Churches to consist. Still further, by placing the very essence of its system in congregational power, it necessarily stood close- ly allied, in theory at least, with all the multitudinous sects with which that period was so prodigiously rife — all of which were perfectly ready to maintain the sole and un- controllable power of separate congregations ; and thus the Independents were in a manner compelled to become 158 HISTORY OF THE the head sectarian body, and to defend not only their own religious liberties, but also the liberty claimed by the most wild and monstrous sects to hold and to teach errors the most immoral and blasphemous — of which they by no means approved, or rather, which they strongly condemned, but could not consistently oppose. They were thus led to advocate a toleration in theory which they never granted where their own power was predominant, as in New Eng- land, — and which, it may be added, they never would con- sent to grant to the Presbyterians, whom they would not admit to communion with them unless they were willing to abandon Presbyterianism, and become Congregational- ists. But as the subject of toleration was scarcely sug- gested in the Apologetical Narration, we shall postpone the consideration of it till we reach the period when it became a leading element of controversy. All the topics which have been stated above were known to the two parties of Presbyterians and Independents in the Assembly, before the publication of the Apologetical Nar- ration, and several of them had casually become the sub- ject of debate; but there had been considerable forbear- ance on both sides, arising from a natural and laudable reluctance to anticipate a perhaps unavoidable contest. The Scottish divines, in particular, had repeatedly inter- posed to prevent any premature discussion of debatable subjects, and had recommended as much accommodation to the views of the Independents as was consistent with the maintenance of principle. And although the allusions to them in the Apologetical Narration were sufficiently ungracious and irritating, they were in no haste to show resentment; being far more desirous to see the religious welfare of the community promoted and secured, than to vindicate their own character from groundless aspersions. But, nevertheless, the publication of that most ill-omened production caused an estrangement which was never fully removed, and led to a degree of keenness and obstinacy in all the subsequent deliberations of the Assembly, whenever disputed points arose, which tended greatly both to retard their proceedings and to obscure the prospect of ultimate and harmonious success in their great work. And having thus opened the subject of the Independent controversy, we shall now proceed to trace it, according to the course which circumi^tanccs led it to pursue. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 169 After some preliminary arrangements, in which it was agreed that the Independents should bring forward their objections to the proposition of the committee, the subject was formally stated, on the 6th February, in the following terms :— ' The Scripture holdeih forth, that many particu- lar congregations may be under one presbyterial govern- ment.'" 'liie Independent argument against this proposi- tion was stated by Mr. Goodwin, to this effect, as given by Lightfoot: — " If many elders put together make one pres- bytery classical, then every one of those elders is to be re- puled as an elder to every one of those churches ; but the Word of God does not warrant any such thing." In proof of the minor proposition he argued thus: — '' The deacons are not to be officers to divers churches, therefore not the pastor; the pastor is not to preach in divers churches, therefore not to rule ; the several congregations are not to give honor or maintenance to the pastor of another church ; one pastor was not chosen, ordained, and main- tained by diverse churches, therefore not to have power ia them ; several offices are not to meet in one and the same person."* It will be observed, that this argument opposed Presbyterial government not on scriptural grounds, but on the supposed incongruities and inconveniences of the sys- tem ; and this was promptly and very easily met. Mr. Vines, in answer to the major proposition, replied, that "What belongs to the whole, as such, does not belong to every p;irt ;" but the presbytery is an aggregate whole, and so are the churches combined under this presbytery ; therefore the relations borne by the presbytery to the church of its bounds, have respect to the aggregate W'hole, and do not interfere with the peculiar relations which the respective pastors and congregations bear to each other. He illustrated his argument by reference to the original government of the Hebrew commonwealth, where the heads of the tribes governed the whole community ; but this did not alter the relation between the head of each tribe and that particular tribe ; and he showed that the Independent argument might be retorted against their own system. Mr. Marshall began by proving the proposition of the com- oj^ttee : — That the whole Church is but one body, and its members ought to act not as distinct persons, but asjoint- ♦ Li2hlfool, p. 132. 15 170 HISTORY OF THE members ; that the office-bearers were instituted by Christ, for the general good and edification, and also ought to act in unity ; that members are baptized not into one particu- lar congregation, but into the general body ; and that this general body is cast into societies, which are called by di- vines instituted churches. He further reasoned, that it ap- pears from Scripture, that when so many were converted in any city as to make a congregation, the apostles ap- pointed them elders; that though they increased, so as to form many congregations in that city, they continued to be but one Church, as at Jerusalem ; that though not speci- fically declared, yet it seemed probable that the several pastors had their several charges ; and that this pattern ought to be followed. Mr. Gillespie pursued a similar line of argument ; gave an illustration from the representative government of the States-General in the Netherlands ; and added, that the power of government in a presbytery is not a power of order, but of jurisdiction, and that they govern not as presbyters, but as a presbytery. Mr. Seaman met the objections of Mr. Goodwin, by proving that the incon- veniences alleged against the presbyterial government of churches would, were they just, apply equally to civil gov- ernment of the rppres.entative kind ; but no such incon- veniences or incongruities were experienced ; therefore the objections urged hy Mr. Goodwin could not be v%'ell founded. He proved, also, that a minister may stand in relation to more congregations than one, and that several offices may, without incongruity, meet in one person: that a minister may do his duty in one congregation and also in the presbytery, as a representative may to his own con- stituents and also to the general administration ; and that the people may enjoy their full rights under a Presbyterial government, in the choice of their pastor, as in civil mat- ters they have their full rights in the choice of their par- liamentary representatives.*' Such is a fair outline of the arguments used on both Hides at the commencement of the main stem of the Inde- pendent controversy. When Mr. Goodwin replied, he admitted the truth and applicability of the logical maxim, " What belongs to the whole, as such, does not equally belong to each part ;" for the whole is a Presbytery, but * Liiihlfool, pp. 132-131. WKSTMLNSTER ASSEMBLY. -7i every member of it is not a presbytery. Various attempts were made by him, and also by others of tlie Independents, lO escape from the force of the argument, and to support their own proposition, but without success. A sliglit :hange was ffiven to the course of debate by the reference which Mr. Burroughs made to 1 Cor. v. 4-, in which church censure is spoken of as inflicted in the presence of tl'-e church ; and this, lie endeavored to prove, could not have taken place had it been the deed of a presbytery. A lengthened discussion arose on this point, in which mucii minuteness of criticism and subtlety of argument were displayed on both sides, till the topic was abandoned, as not conclusive. During this debate, Mr. Nye admitted that there was a very close approximation between the two systems, saying, that the Independents " held classical and synodical meetings very useful and profitable, yea, possibly agreeable to the institution of Christ j but the question is this, whether these meetings have the same power that ecclesia primn^ or one single congregation, has V* If he and his friends could have admitted one additional elementary principle, there mioht speedily have taken place a complete agreement, namely, that the power of presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, is cumulative, not privative ; that is, that it consists in the collected power of all the congregations of which it is composed, and in reality adds to the power of each, rather than takes away its proper power from any. Becoming weary of this protracted discussion, several of the divines proposed that they should leave off these metaphysical disquisitions, and proceed to the considera- tion of those passages of Scripture which might be brought forward as direct proofs ; but by the vote of the Assembly the Independents were allowed to continue brinsfing for- ward all thpir objections. f This we mention in order to show that the Assembly treated the Dissenting Brethren with extreme indulgence and toleration, and never attempt- ed to run them down by the force of numbers and the authority of a vote, as they could have so easily done, and no doubt would have done, had they been the into- lerant and overbearing bigots which they have been so srenerallj'" and so unjustly called. • Li-htfoct, p. 1 ! }. 172 I! 1 -TORY OF TliF. On the 14th of Fcbrup.ry the first committee rep' rted, in confirmation of the proposition that many congvegaiions maybe under one presbytery, the following instances from Scripture : — 1. The Church of Jerusalem 5 2. The Church of Corinth; 3. Of Ephesus ; 4. Of Antioch. Assuming that the existence of many congregations and but one presbytery at Jerusalem had been proved in a former debate, the other instances were proved by the following arcruments : Corinth — from the time of Paul's abode there \ from the different places of meeting, as Cenchrea, the house of Justus, and of Chloe, and the use of the word churches, in the plural ; and from the multitude of pastors, — 1 Cor. i. 12, iv. 15; and that these congregations were under one presbytery, — 1 Cor. v,2 Cor. ii. Ephesus— from Paul's continuance there ; the special effect, and the reason of his stay given ; from the multitude of pastors, termed elders ancl overseers, or bishops ; and under one presbytery, which exercised jurisdiction,— Rev. ii. 1, 2. Antioch — from a multitude of believers, — Acts xi. 21-26 ; and from numbers of pastors and teachers, — Acts xiii- 1, xv. 35. The report concluded with this argument : — " Where there were more believers than could meet in one place, and more pastors than could be for one congregation, then there Vv-ere more congregations than one ; but it was so in these Churches: and it was lawful for these to be under onepres- byterial government; therefore it is so now."* These pro- positions were, as usual, laid aside till the objections al- ready stated by the Independents should have been fully debated. The discussion respecting Church censure and excom- munication was again resumed, wnth reference to 1 Cor. V. ; and Mr. Goodwin argued that " discipline did not con- stitute a church, nor is any note of a church." Selden doubted whether the passage referred to had anything to do with excommunication. This was answered very strongly by Mr. Vines and others; and the Independents were requested to state clearly their opinion on the sub- ject. To this Goodwin answered, " That the people can- not excommunicate ; and that the people, if need be, yet must have their vote." The inference was immediately drawn, that if the elders were outvoted the excommunica- • Lisfhlfool, p. 151. WF.STMrx.STF.:^ ASSKMI'.LY. 173 tion would be prevented, and thus tlie theory of llie Inde- pendents, of simple admonition or non-communion, would alone be practicable. At last the Assembly decided, that the argument of the Independents was not proved, and did not conclude against the proposition. The attention of the Assembly was next directed to Matt, xviii. 15-17, by Mr. Bridge, who endeavored, in a very elaborate argument, to prove that the church there montio-ned was not a civil court, not a Jewish sanhedrim, not a presbytery or synod, not a national Church, but a particular congregation only, and yet that it had the power of the highest censure, without appeal; therefore every particular congregation, consisting of elders and brethren, should have entire and full power and jurisdiction within itself. Mr. Marshall met the argument, point by point, in an answer, equally full and elaborate ; assuming, as the basis of his reply, that the term Church neither meant universal, national, nor provincial only, nor a single con- gregation only ; but either, or all in turn, as the occasion might require. Mr. Vines, Mr. Gataker, Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Calamj^, and others, took part in the debate, which was conducted v/ith great skill and ability. When the subject was resumed, another direction was given to the discussion by Selden, who produced a long and learned arofument to prove that the passage of Scripture in question contained no authority for ecclesiastical jurisdic- tion. His object was, to guard against any conclusion of the Assembly which might contradict the JSrastian theory, and therefore he labored to represent the whole as relating to the ordinary practice of the Jews in their common courts ; by whom, as he asserted, one sentence was excom- munication, pronounced by the civil court. Herle and Marshall both attempted answers, but, says Lightfoot, " so as I confess gave me no satisfaction." Gillespie then came to the rescue, and, in a speech of astonishing power and acuteness, completely confuted Selden, even on his own chosen ground, and where his strength was greatest. He proved that the passage could not mean a civil court, be- cause, — 1. The nature of the oftence and cause treated of is spiritual ; 2. The end is spiritual, for it is not restitution or satisfaction, but to gain the soul ; .3. The persons are Bpiritual, for Christ speaks to his apostles; 4. The manner 15* l'74f nrsTORV of the of proceeding is spiritual — all is done in the name of Christ; 5. The censure is spiritual, for it is binding the soul; 6. Christ Avould not have sent his disciples for pri- vate spiritual injuries to civil courts ; 7. The Church of the Jews had spiritual censures, and the expression, " Let him be as a heathen," imported prohibition from sacred things, for the heathen might not come into the temple; and the ceremonial unclean might not enter, much more the morally unclean.* This appears to have been the speech referred to by Wodrow, and of which there still exist many tradi- tionary anecdotes, illustrative of the very extraordinary effect produced upon all that heard it- Selden himself is reported to have said, at its conclusion, " That young man, by this single speech, has swept away the labors of ten years of my life ;"f and it is remarkable that Selden made no attempt to reply to Gillespie, though he answered some of the arguments used bj^ others who spoke after him. About the same time Mr. Nye craftily endeavored to ex- cite the jealousy of the Parliament against Presbyterial Church government, but overreached himself. He had attempted to frame an argument against the power of pres- byteries, on the assumption " that there is no power over another power, where there is no distinction in nature nor difference in operation;" but he was called to order, as not speaking to the question. On the following day, finding the Assembly full of the nobility and members of Parlia- ment, he resumed the argument, persisting in his speech against the evident feeling of the House ; and after he had attempted to show that the admission of a power over a power, in Church courts, would lead to an ecclesiastical government commensurate with that of the civil, he drew the inference, that it would be pernicious for a great com- monwealth were so great a body to be permitted to grow up within it; in short, he attempted to alarm the Parlia- ment by the dread of that phantom of which so much has been heard, an imperium in imperio, or one government within another, as a formidable and monstrous anomaly, dangerous to the peace of states and kingdoms. This insidious attempt caused a great sensation; some proposed that he should be at once expelled, others declared that his ♦ Lightfoot, pp. 165-168. t Wodrow's Analccta; M'Crie's Sketches, p. 300, — Appendix, WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 175 language was seditious, and it was voted that he had spo- ken against order — which was the higliest censure that the Assembly inflicted. Mr. Marshall appealed to all the parliamentary members present, whether the Presbyterial government be more terrible to them than ten thousand or twenty thousand congregations, none in reference or de- pendence to another. Warriston showed that the ecclesi- astical and civil governments strengthened each other j and that one power over another in the Church no more tended to produce confusion or injury than in civil matters, where one court is subordinate to another, and yet but one state. And Mr. Whitelocke, M.P., followed a similar course of illustration, and ended his remark by saying. " What a con- fusion it will prove to have congregations independent 1" This debate, ending so very much the reverse of what Nye had expected, caused the Independents to abate their oppo- sition considerably; and it was voted that their arguments had not concluded against the proposition bex"ore the Assembly.* The next subject was respecting the instance of the Church at Jerusalem, as proving that one presbytery was over many congregations. AUhough considerable time was spent in discussing this topic, it did not draw forth any great exhibition of learning or power, such as had been previously displayed. Almost the only idea of im- portance brought out in this discussion was that suggested by Gillespie, namely, that there could be no other princi- ple whereby several congregations could be one church, but only government. Their dwelling in one town made them a civil body, but not an ecclesiastical ; their ecclesi- astical union could not be but in a presbytery, for they could not meet together in one place ; therefore it was only as forming a presbytery, and in respect to govern- ment, which is the function of a presbytery, that they could be one ecclesiastical body. Once more the Independents were staggered, and could not answer. Both Goodwin and Nye admitted that at least the keys of doctrine are in the hands of a synod or assembly ; and that as many men united have more moral power than one man, so many churches joining together must have more ecclesiastical power than one church ; and in order to avail themselves * Lijhtfoot, pp. IC,8-110; Baillie, vol. ii. pp. \46, 147. 176 HISTORY OF THE of this renewed approximation, the Assembly, on the mo« lion of Mr. Henderson, proposed a committee for the pur- pose of attempting to obtain an accommodation with the Independents; and Messrs. Seaman, Vines, Palmer, Mar- shall, Goodwin, Nye, Burroughs, and Bridge, together with the four Scottish divines, were named for the com- mittee. On the 14^-, and Lev. iv. 13, 'If the whole congregation have sinned,' — the Jews constantly understood this of the great sanhedrim. And so might the presbytery here, though ix-Ar,oia^ awaxOeiaiig had been the phrase. About Jerusalem it was still called the Church, not only under Judaism, but also under Chris- tianity. 3. Ancient times, indeed, have called excommu- nication ' giving up to Satan,' and our own khigdom hath called the excommunicated person ' the devil's person ;' but for the first three hundred years most (none 1) of the Fathers take this place for excommunication ; and he also showed that P. Molinos proves that it meaneth no such thing. He queried whether this were the incestuous, he that is mentioned to be excommunicated hereafter, who is called 'the evil person to be taken away,' in the last verse, where many copies have t«, and not lov TionjoovJ^ This argument produced little effect upon the Assem bly, and after Mr. Vines had answered it, the discussion with the Independents was resumed. Having failed on this point, Selden prepared to put forth all the st'iength of his rabbinical lore in the discussion con- cerning the" meaning of Matt, xviii. 15-18, which was brought forward to prove ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and also the subordination of Church courts, and successive appeals ending in excommunication. The Independents had admitted that the passage did prove jurisdiction and Church censure, but labored to limit the whole procedure within one congregation, so as to deny appeals to presby- teries. Selden again came forward, and again we shall give his argument as reported by Lightfoot : — « Mr. Selden confessed that he could not find any kind of jniisdiction in this chapter : and he told a story of a Jesuit, Xavier, that turns the place in Persic, ' Dicprvncipi ecclesiae.' Also, that all the Fathers in the first times do ever apply this text to jurisdiction, hefore Rome Church grew high, namely, not in the first four centuries, unless it be in the forsed book of Cyprian, de abiisionibits saeculi. Then he offered these things : 1. To consider the time, place, and way of writing of this. Matthew's Gospel was first ^v^itten, viz., about eight years after Christ's ascension, so it is in an old copy of Greek used by Beza, and an Arabic 2. It is conceived it was written in Hebrew, for the Hebrews, and ei • Lightfoot, pp. 153, 154. 18 206 HISTORY OF THE the Sj'rian T1 1;<'^ Now, in the Hebrew text it is TM},^ in these two editions we have, and belike in Matthew's ; now in chapter xvi. it is hr\p. Now, the Acts of the Apostles, which is the first place we find ecclesia in, was not written of fourteen years after this of Matthew. Now the course of admonition amonsfthe Jews was : They distinguished betwixt offences betwixt man and man, and betwixt man and God ; now he that had been oflended by man was to go single and desire satisfac- tion ; and if he would not hearken, then take more company, and if yO)\y irx then Un lID'dS. Now every one of the courts was called mj-'. Excommunication amon? the Jews might be inflicted by any of twelve years old, and so, by consequence, every court might do it; but the synagogue did not use it ; and a7nj-7j)j/.iy(oyoc, was not utterly outlawed from the synagogue, but some part of ordinary free conversation denied him. Now, TM)^ /Hp, ecclesia, &c., must be interpreted according to the occasion, for a certain number, secundum suhjectam materiam, as Deut. xxiii., ' An Ammonite may not enter 7np2, that is, of women ; for the Jews understood it of marrying an Israelitish woman. He con- cluded that this place might very well mean a sanhedrim. Christ was ia Capernaum now, when he spake this, where there was a sanhedrim. Now his speech is so Jewish, that it results to this, If an Israelite otfend thee, tell the sanhedrim. To the objection, But what means ' Let him be unto thee an heathen V he answered. This indeed may be excommu- nication by the court ; or, by himself: 'If thy brother offend,' &,c., after such and such admonition, sue him at the court, or else inform of him there ; if he will not obey the court, do thou excommunicate him.'^* Such was the boasted argument of the man emphatically styled " the learned Selden." Its object was, to explain away the force of the term ecclesia^ or church, and to reduce the passao^e to a strictly Jewish application ; then, by allu- sions to some indefinite Hebrew customs, to resolve the matter into a mere application to a civil court, in cases where a private and friendly arrangement could not be effected, reducing, at the same time, the meaning of the term excommunication, into the act of one person merely declining to hold intercourse with another person from whom he had received offence. Yet the ostentatious dis- play of minute rabbinical lore which he brought forward, seems to ha\e somewhat staggered the Assembly, as ap- pears from the inconclusive remarks of Herle and Marshall, as reported by Lightfoot. But Gillespie saw through the fallacious character of Selden's argument ; and in a speech of singular ability and power completely refuted his learued • Lightfoot, pp. 165, 166. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 207 antagonist, proving that the passage could not be inter preted or explained away to mean a mere reference to a civil court. By seven distinct arguments he proved that the whole subject was of a spiritual nature, not within the cognizance of civil courts; and he proved also, that the Church of the Jews had and exercised the power of spi- ritual censures. The efiect of Gillespie's speech was so great as to astonish and confound Selden himself, who made no attempt to reply ; and the result was, that the Assembly soon afterwards decided that the negative argu ments of Selden and the Independents were not conclusive, and the proposition was affirmed.* Closely connected with this subject was the proposition which asserted "that authoritative suspension from the Lord's table of a person not yet cast out of the Church, is agreeable to the Scripture ;" and this point held the As- sembly in debate from the 20th to the 24th of May, 1644, when it was affirmed, the opposition being made chiefly by the Independents, while the Erastians reserved their strength for the Parliament, well knowing that their views would coincide with the notions of men of the world, and would not be subjected to such a narrow scrutinj^ there as in the Assembly. The subject will come before us again, when we come to treat of the Parliament's proceed- ings. It was mentioned in the preceding chapter, that when the Assembly had completed the Directory for ordination, the result was laid before the Parliament to receive its ratification, that it might have the authority of law ; and that the Parliament allowed it to lie past for some time, and then made considerable alterations upon it before re- turning it to the Assembly, which they did on the I5th ol August, 1644<. These alterations were so many, and of such importance, striking out the doctrinal part of the Di- rectory, that the Assembly refused to consent to them, and proceeded to debate afresh the topics so altered or struck out. Mr. Whitelocke, a leading member of the Commons, entered into the debate ; and passing from the direct point in hand, made a long, and certainly not a pe- culiarly able speech on the question, whether Presbyterial Church government be jure divino, of divine institution * See before, pp. 173, 174 ; also Appendix. 208 HISTOKV OF THE He admitted that Church government, in the abstract, i« of divine institution, but held it doubtful whether any pe- culiar form. Episcopacy, Presbytery, or Independency, can claim that high authority ; nor did he think it of any importance to determine the point, because no decision could alter its nature ; if of divine institution, it would re- main so, whether men affirmed it or not, and if not so, the authority of man could not elevate it to that height. He advised the Assembly, therefore, to be content with stat- ing to the Parliament, " that the government of the Church by Presbyteries is most agreeable to the Word of God, and most fit to be settled in this kingdom."* It is easy to see the tact of the politician in Whitelocke's suggestion, which, according to his own understanding of it, left it in the powder of the civil government to establish any form of Church government of which they might approve, and to change it as they might think it expedient ; while, if the strictest sense of the words were held, Presbj^terians might very properly conclude that the Church government which is " most agreeable to the Word of God," must therefore be of divine institution. But the Assembly was neither to be overawed nor de- ceived in this matter. Information of these alterations was communicated to the Scottish commissioners, before it was made known to the Assembly ; the effect of which was, first a private remonstrance to certain of the Parlia- ment, and then a preparation for a strenuous struggle in the Assembly itself.f The Scottish commissioners further addressed the Grand Committee on the evils resulting from such a prolonged delay, in the conclusion of which they expressly condemned the Parliament's alterations, stating the reasons of their disapprobation. This bold course was seconded by a petition from the city ministers, on the 18th of September ; and on the 2d October the Parliament issued an ordinance, sanctioning the Assembly's Directory of Or- dination, and appointing a committee of Divines to ordain ministers in London. The difference between the conduct of the Assembly in this point, and the manner in which they acted towards the Independents, must strike every attentive and candid reader. Although highly disapprov- ing of the pertinacious obstinacy with which the Dissent- • Whitelocke, p. 95. f BaiUie, vol. ii. p. 198. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 209 ing Brethren clung to their own views, and threw every possible obstacle in the way of an early and satisfactory settlement of Church government, yet the Assembly con- tinued to treat them as brethren, bore with their length- ened speeches and subtle distinctions, admitted many mo- difications of their own opinions, and did their utmost to procure an amicable adjustment of all dilTerences, so far as the conscientious views of both parties could be reconciled. But when the Parliament attempted to exercise an Eras- tian supremacy, and to strike oirt what they believed to have the authoritative sanction of the Word of God, they refused to yield; and in this instance their firmness and energy were crowned with success. It v/as, no doubt, in the power of the Parliament to refuse to sanction the Di- rectory of Ordination ; but it was also in the power of the Assembly and the city ministers to refuse to ordain on Erastian principles : and the Parliament, aware that they could not, even plausibly, attempt to compel ministers to ordain, yielded the point, and reserved their Erastianism for the still undecided subject of Church censures. The leading propositions respecting Church government having been nearly completed, several members of both Houses of Parliament attended the Assembly, 7th Novem- ber, 1614, and required them to hasten a report of what had been done " concerning the government of the Church ; and the rather, because they" (Parliament) " had been soli- cited by the Committee of the State of Scotland for it."* Dr. Burgess and a select committee were directed to pre- pare all that had been voted by the Assembly, that it might belaid before Parliament in proper form wath all convenient speed. This was done, read over in the Assembly, com- pared with the papers in the hands of the scribes, and a com- mittee named to lay the whole before the House of Com- mons on the 15th of November. The account of what took place in the House of Commons, upon the presenting of this paper, is both curious and instructive, as an exhiL'ition of political management. "The Assembly of Divines, as soon as the House of Commons were sate, and before they were full, came to the House and presented them with the Assembly's advice and opinion, /or the Presbyterian govern- ment to be settled ; and an expression was in their advice, • Lightfoot, p. 323. 18* 210 HISTO'.Y OF THE that the Presbyte .ian gov^ernment was jure divino Glyn and Whitelocke were tiien m the House, and few others but those who concurred in judgment with the Assembly, and had notice to be there early, thinking to pass this bu- siness before the House should be full. Glyn stood up and spoke an hour to the point o{ jus divinum and tlie Presby- terian government ; in which time the House filled apace ; and then Whitelocke spoke to the same points, enlarging his discourse to a much longer time than ordinary, and pur- posely that the House might be full — as it was before he had made an end. And then upon the question it was car- ried, to lay aside the point of jus divinum ; and herein Glyn and Whitelocke had thanks from divers, for prevent- ing the surprisal of the House upon this great question."* Such is the account given by Whitelocke, in a tone of evi- dent self-complacency, looking upon himself as having ma- terially aided in the achievement of a meritorious exploit. How far we are to believe his suggestion respecting the crafty design of the Assembly to procure a ratification of their opinion concerning the divine right of Presbyterian Church governm.ent in a thinly attended House, composed chiefly of their friends, may well be doubted, since the order for the Assembly's committee to lay their proposition be- fore Parliament " to-morrow morning" was publicly given, as Lightfoot states — and of course in the hearing of Light- foot himself, who could easily have notified the matter to his Erastian friends, so as to prepare them for the strata- gem, had such a thing been intended. In truth, the publi- city of the direction renders the idea of an intended stra- tao-em on the part of the Assembly incredible ; while Whitelock's account proves him to have been sufficiently on his guard, v/hatever may have been the case with others. And it will be observed, that the House did not at that time positively reject, but merely " lay aside," or post pone, the consideration of the claim of divine right.f [1645.] From about the close of the year IGM till about April, 1645, the Assembly was chiefly engaged in the In- dependent controversy, receiving the wa'itten reasons of * Whitelocke, p. 106. t The account of this matter given by Neal is worse than inaccurate. He says, " When the question was put it was carried in the negative ;" whei eas it was only " laid aside," not negatived. Neal thought it a vi« lory ovei the Presbyterians — hence hif misrepresentation. AVKSTMINSTEH ASSEMl'.LY. 211 dissent, and returning written answers to these reasons. During- tliat period the debates of the Assembly were of little importance, and the Erastian controversy also re- mained in compannive abeyance. Indeed the debates of the Assembly may be said to have almost terminated with the close of 1644-; for their public deliberations after that time were chiefly occupied with the framing of the Cate- chisms and the Confession of Faith ; and although the very solemn and important nature of these subjects required mature study and great precision of language, which form- ed necessarily a work of considerable time, yet there existed so much harmony of doctrinal principles among them, that their discussions very seldom assumed the distinctive character of debate. The chief cause, probably, why the Erastian controversy was allowed to slumber dur- ing that period, was that the parliamentary politicians were engaged in the treaty of Uxbridge with the king, and were exceedingly anxious to conclude a peace with his majesty, if possible, being apprehensive that the self-deny- ing ordinance would be carried by the intrigues of Crom- well, and the sword be thereby wTested from their grasp. That ordinance, after a strugnje of nearly three months, was at last ratified by both Houses, on the 3d of April, 164-5, and from that time the army was virtually indepen- dent of the Parliament, and ere long became its master, or rather the tyrant of both Parliament and kingdom. Mention has been already made of the disinclination of the Parliament to agree to the Assembly's proposition respecting the power of ministers to keep back from the Lord's table persons not yet cut off from the Church. This power the Erastians were reluctant to sanction ; and the Assembly was equally urgent that it should be fully sanc- tioned, both because they believed it to be necessary, to prevent that sacred ordinance from being profaned, and because one point strongly urged by the Independents, in defence of their separation, was the want of sufficient reformation in congregations. The subject was laid before the Parliament on the 6th of March, 1645, by the Assem- bly, and on the 10th of the same month by the city minis- ters.* On the 21st the Parliament took the subject into consideration, and on the 25th some votes were passed • Whitelocke, pp. 130, 131. 5il2 HISTORY OF THE respecting it, in some particular points. Again, on tne 27th, the Assembly gave to the House their advice con- cerning not admitting scandalous and ignorant persons to the sacraments. Thus urged to what they had no mind to grant, the Parliament, on the 1st of April, emitted an order, "That the Assembly set down in particular what measure of understanding persons ought to have of the Trinity, and other points debated, before they be admitted to the sacrament."*" The object of this order Vv^as evid ntly to engage the Assembly in a discussion which might occupy their attention for a considerable time, and perhaps involve so much confusion and disagreement of opinion as should render a definite answer impracticable. But the desire of the Assembly was not to be so evaded ; and they expe- rienced less difficulty in answering the question of the Parliament than the Erastian lawyers had expected. Some additional votes respecting Church government were about the same time passed by the Parliament, the purport of which is thus stated by Baillie : — " They have passed a vote in the House of Commons, for appeals from Sessions to Pres- byteries, from these to Synods, from these to national As- semblies, and from these to the Parliament. We mind to be silent for some time on this, lest we mar the erection of the ecclesiastical courts ; but when we find it seasona- ble, we mind to make much ado before it go so. We are hopeful to make them declare that they mean no other thing, by their appeals from the national Assembly to a Parliament, than a complaint of an injurious proceeding ; Avhich we did never deny." f Repeated debates took place in Parliament respecting the demands of the Assembly, during the months of May, June, and July, though without arriving at any conclusion. On the 30th of July Coleman preached a sermon before the House of Commons, of the most perfect Erastian cha- racter, to which we shall have occasion hereafter more particularly to refer. On the second day after, viz., on the 1st of August, the Assembly sent a deputation to tlie House, desiring "that a speedy course might betaken about those who should be thought not fit to be admitted to the sacrament, namely, the ignorant, scandalous, and profane : it being a thing that, if effected exactly to the • Whitelocke, p. 134. f Baillie, vol. ii. p. 267. WKSTMI NSTER A.^SEMF.LY. 213 rule, would much tend to the glory of God and the gfood of this whole kingdom." The Speaker answered, " That the House was in debate of the same business long before their coming, and that they would expedite it with as much conveniency as could be."* Not dismayed by this short answer, the Assembly, on the 8th, presented a petition, in which they " declared plainly their claim, j?//e divmo, o{ power to suspend from the sacrament all such as they should judge to be scandalous or ignorant ;" t and on the llth a petition of a similar nature was presented to the House of Lords. Parliament was thus constrained to take the subject into full consideration, for the purpose of giv- ing a clear and decided deliverance concerning it ; and an elaborate discussion took place on the 3d of September, in which the Erastians declared their opinions fully. "The house fell into debate," says Whitelockc, "of the great business of the Church,— the points of excommuni- cation and suspension from the sacraments. Selden de- clared his opinion, 'That for four thousand years there was no sign of any law to suspend persons from religious exer- cises. That under the Law every sinner was, eo nomine^ to come to ofler, as he was a sinner ; and no priest, or other authority had to do with him, unless it might be made appear to them, whether another did repent or not, — which was hard to be done. Strangers were kept away from the passover, but these were Pagans, and such as were not of the Jewish religion. The question is not now for keeping away Pagans in tim.es of Christianity, but Protes- tants from Protestant worship. No divine can sho-w that there is any such command as this to suspend from the sacrament. If, after Christ suffered, the Jev>s had become Christians, the same ground upon which they went as to their sacrifices, would have been as to the sacrament ; and certainly no way nor command" to keep any one from par- taking of it. No man is kept from the sacrament, eo 'no- mine, because he is guilty of any sin, by the constitution of the Reformed Churches, or because he hath not made satisfaction Every man is a sinner, the difference is only, the one is in private, and the other a sinner in public. The one is as much against God as the other. Die Ecclesm (' Tell it to the Church'), in St. Matthew, was, to the courts • Whitclocke, p. 158. f White locke, p. 160. ZXX r.iSTOllV OF THE of law, which then sat in Jerusalem. No man can ^ho\^ any excommunication till the Popes, Victor and Zephori' nus, two hundred years after Christ, first began to use it upon private quarrels; thereby (it appears) excommunica- tion is but human invention ; it was taken from the heathens.' "* Such was the argument of "the learned Selden ;" and very probably the members of the House thought it very learned, and fraught with sound theology. If it had been delivered in the Assembly it would have been estimated by a different standard, and subjected tc a more searching scrutiny, — as had been the case with arguments and asser- tions of a similar character in an instance already related. The substance of Mr. Whitelocke's speech was as fol- lows : — " The Assembly of Divines have petitioned and advised the House of Commons, that in every Presbytery, or Presbyterian congregation, tht! pastors and ruling elders may have the power of excommunication, and the power of suspending such as they shall judge ignorant or scandalous persons from the sacrament. By | astors I suppose tlsey mean themselves, and others who are, or may be preachers in the several congregations, and would be i-mr^ nrr^i, bishops, or overseers of these congregations. By ruling elders, I take their meaning to be, a select number of such as in every one of these congregations shall be chosen for the execution of the church government and discipline in them respectively. They may properly enough be called pastors, from our Saviour's charge to his dis- ciples, ' Feed my sheep ;' so that a pastor is to feed those committed to his charge with spiritual food, as the shepherd feeds his flock with tem- poral, if so, how improper, then, will it be for those who are to feed the flock, to desire the power to excommunicate any, — to keep them from food, — to suspend any from the sacrament, — to drive them from feeding on the bread of life, — to forbid any to eat of that whereof Christ, the great Shepherd of our souls, hath said, ' Take, eat,' — to forbid those to drink whom they shall judge unworthy, when our Saviour himself said, ' Drink ye all of this.' In the Old Testament, ' Ho ! every one that thirsteth,' &c., said the prophet ; yet now his successors would be authorized to say to some persons, * You do not thirst,' though they them selves say they do, and to deny them milk and water, bread and wine, when they desire it. Surely it is not proper for pastors, for feeders of flocks, to deny food to any of their flock who shall desire it. But some have said, that it is the part of a good shepherd, if he see one of his sheep going astray into a ground where the grass will bring the rot, to chase him out of that pasture. And they apply it to spiritual pastors, suspending those from the sacrament whom they feared, by the unworthy receiving of it, may eat and drink their own damnation. This may be a charitable simile, but will hardly be found a full answer ; for • Whitelocke, p. J63 ; Rushworth, vol. vi. p. 203. WESTMLXSTER ASSEMBLY. "15 it is not the receiving: of the sacrament, but the unwortliinf-ss of the receiver that brings destruction. And whether he be unworthy or not, it is not in the judgment of pastor, or of any other, but of the party only ■lyho is the sinuer ; for none can know his heart but himself, and a com- mission will scarce be produced for any other to be judge there( f. Tlie person refused may say to the pastor in this case, ' Who made thee judge ?' Besides, the authority desired is not only oC suspension, but of excommunication, — which is a total driving or thundering away of the party from all spiritual food whatsoever. And if a shepherd shall chase away his sheep from all pastures, that indeed will bring the hunger-rot upoii them. The more sinful persons are, the more they have need of instruction ; and where can they have it better than from the lips of the learned and pious pastors, who ought to preserve knowledge. "But it hath been said that the ruling elders are to join with them ; let us inquire who they are. In some congregations in country villages, perhaps they may not be very learned themselves ; yet the autiiority to be given them is sulficiently great. The word Elders, among the Hebrews," si2:nified the men of greatest power and dignity ; the members of their great sanhedrim were styled Elders, so were the princes of their tribes."^ [Then, as if in rivalry "of Selden, he enlarged upon the use of a similar title among the Grecians, the Phoenicians, the Tyrians, the. Romans, the Spaniards, the Italians, the Saxons,— giving the etymology of Earl, Alderman, and Sir.] " And so they may allow the title of Elders to the chief and select men of every Presbytery. Yet if this power (excommunication and suspension) be allowed them, they may well challenge the title of Elders in the highest signification. The power of the keys is a great power ; the Romish Church will acknowledge it, and the foundation of their supremacy to be built upon it. Whatsoever they bind or loose upon earth to be bound or loosed in heaven, is a power which may claim the hiiihest title imaginable. Although I can never presume that the reverend and pious learned gentlemen who aim at this power, can have the least supposition of any such effect by it, yet if any petitioners should sue you to be made judges or justices, I believe you would judge their petition the less modest, and them the less fit for such offices; but to this I make no application, and I hope none shall make any use of it. Power is Ihou-ht fit to be given to suspend from the sacrament two sorts of persons, — the ignorant and the scandalous. I am sure that I am a very ignorant person; we are all more ignorant than we ought to be of the truth of Christ ; CA'en amongst the pastors and elders in some places, the most learned may in other places be adjudged ignorant. The more ignorant people are, the more some will blame their pastors, who ought to instruct them, and, by private conference, inform them, and rectify their understandings ; and that is a good part of spiritual food. And to keep an ignorant person from the ordinances is no way to improve his knowledge. Scandalous persons are likewise to be suspended ; and that is to be referred to the judgment of the pastor and ruling elders ; where a commission for them to execute tliis judicature is extant, will be hard to show. Both pastors, and elders, and people are scandalous, in the general sense. We are all of us gross sinners, and our best performances are but scandalous, as to the true and sincere profession of^ the Gospel of Christ. Those who are scandalous sinners ought to be admonished to forsake their evil ways, 216 HISTORY OF THE and to amend their lives ; and where can they receive this admonitioUi and hope for more conviction of their consciences, than by hearing good sermons, and being admitted to be partakers of the holy ordinances ; but to excommunicaie them, deprives them wholly of the best means for their cure. The best excommunication is, for pastors, elders and people, to excommunicate sin out of their own hearts and conversations, — to suspend themselves from all works of iniquity. This is a power which, put in execution, through the assistance of the Spirit of God, will prevent all disputes about excommunication and suspension from the sacrament. A man may be a good physician, though he never cut off a member from any of his patients ; a body may be very sound, though no member of it was ever cut off; and surely a ch\irch m.ay be a good church, though no member of it hath ever been cut off. I have heard here many com- plaints of the jurisdiction formerly exercised by the prelates, who were but a few; there will be, by the passing of this now desired, a great mul- tiplication of spiritual men in government. Where the temporal sword (the magistracy) is sufficient for punishment of offences, there will be little need for this new discipline ; nor will it be so easily granted," — " After a long debate," adds Whitelocke, in the narrative part of his work, " tlie House referred this matter to a further consideration by the Grand Committee, to whom it was formerly referred."* From the circumstance of the preceding speech being given at full length by both Whitelocke and Kushworth, it is evident that it must have been regarded by the Erastians of the Parliament as exhibiting the ablest statement and advocacy of their opinions. One thing, indeed, it proves very clearly, namely, that when civilians attempt to reason upon theological questions, they are in great peril of for- feiting their reputation either for candor and intelligence, or for clearness of thought and power of reasoning. It will be observed that Whitelocke deals very much in vague generalities about the character and duties of pastors and elders, and the effect of suspending from the sacrament and excommunicating ; and that he insinuates the danger of allowing such powers to be exercised by the Church courts, but carefully avoids making any specific applica- tions. This method of stating his opinions left him at full liberty to use all the artifices of sophistry which he could command ; and, accordingly, his whole speech is a tissue of sophistical plausibilities. As, for example, " The duty of a pastor is to feed his flock ; therefore he can have no ri2;ht to refuse food to any." But he should have proved that the only duty of a pastor is to feed; otherwise his argument cannot prove that it may not be also a duty to refuse for proper reasons. Again, " The unworthiness of •Whitelocke, pp. 163, 164; Rushworth, vol. vi. pp. 203-205. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 217 the receiver alone brings destruction ; but none can judge of this but the sinner himself ; therefore the pastor ought not to have power to refuse." True, the unworthiness of the receiver brings destruction ; but it is not true that none can be a judge of this but the sinner ; for his con- duct may be so glaringly sinful, and he may be so reck- lessly impenitent, that every one may be able to judge him by his fruits, and may be constrained to shun him as in- corrigibly wicked and impious. Once more, " All are io-no- rant and scandalous in the widest sense of these terms ; but the best way to remedy this is, to give them an oppor- tunity of hearing good sermons, and to admit them to the holy ordinances." Certainly it may be a good way for instructing the ignorant, to bring such persons where they will hear good and sound instruction, and the Westminster divines never dreamt of preventing any from hearing ser- mons; but admission to ordinances, that is, to the Lord's table, is a totally different matter, and instead of tending to instruct, might more probably tend to harden an im- penitent sinner, and might lead him to regard himself as needing no further amendment. But it cannot be necessary to detect all the fallacies of this much boasted speech ; that every sound and right- minded reader will do for himself. It has been inserted, liowever, for the purpose of giving a favorable specimen of the kind of arguments employed by the Parliamentary Erastians of that period ; which are essentially the same as those used by many Erastians in the present day, with, perhaps, this exception, that few modern Erastians can reason even so well, or have skill enough to enter so deeply into the subject. The language of Baillie, in a letter written at this junc- ture, shows the strong anxiety entertained by the Assem- bly regarding this important subject, and gives also ano- ther proof of the temperate spirit and calm prudence of the Scottish commissioners. After mentioning the diffi- culty which the Assembly felt in enumerating all kinds of scandalous offences, on which account they required to have power to exclude all scandalous as well as some, he adds, " The general they would not grant, as including an arbitrary and unlimited power. Our advice (that of the Scottish commissioners) was, that they (the Assembly) 19 218 HISTORY OF THE would go on to set up their Presbyteries and Synods with so much power as they could get j and after they were once settled, then they might strive to obtain their full due power. But the Assembly was of another mind ; and after divers fair papers, at last they framed a most zealous, clear, and peremptor one, wherein they held out plainly the Church's divine right to keep from the sacrament all who are scandalous ; and if they cannot obtain the free exercise of that power which Christ hath given them, they will lay down their charges, and rather choose all afflic- tions than to sin by profaning the holy table."* It was the presenting of this paper which gave occasion to the preceding speeches of Selden and Whitelocke. And, although the Parliament was determined not to grant the full claim of the Assembly, yet they were not prepared at once to declare that determination, but still continued to keep the subject in a state of suspense, hoping, probably, that the divines would at last consent to accept some lower measure. While Parliament treated the Assembly with a considerable degree of guarded respect, they showed their temper more plainly to the city divines, a petition from whom, " for establishing Presbytery, as the discipline of Jesus Christ, they voted to be scandalous."! it might have puzzled these sage senators to have defined their own language, and showed in what respect such a petition was scandalous ; but it was easy for them to apply harsh and ungracious epithets to a request which they were de- termined to refuse. it has been already mentioned that the Parliament had required the Assembly to state " what measure of under- standing persons ought to have of the Trinity, and other points debated, before they be admitted to the sacrament ;" and also, that they required an enumeration of such scan- dalous offences as deserved the censure of suspension from ordinances. To the former point the Assembly readily prepared an answer ; but they found the latter more diffi- cult, both because the attempt to enumerate such offences suggested additional ones, and because the inevitable ten- dency of such an attempt was to present their wliole sys tern in its most repulsive aspect, and even to prevent them- selves from having a discretionary power to mitigate its • Baillie, vol. iii. p. 307. f Whitelocke, f. 159. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 219 apparent severity. At length, liowcver, on tlie 14th of Oc- tober, the Assembly presented their advice on these points to the Parliament, at the same time clearly declaring their earnest desire that the general principle should be atlirmed, and the details left to be regulated according to the pecu- liarities of each specific case.* But the Parliament resolved to turn this paper of advice into an ordinance of both Houses ; and on the 15th voted, as a preliminary step, " That the presbytery should not suspend from the sacra- ment, for any other offences than those particularly men- tioned in the ordinance," which, adds Whitelocke, dis- pleased some who were earnest to give an arbitrary power to the Presbytery. t Strange that this legislator could not perceive, that Parliament was retaining a much more arbi- trary power in its own possession, — a power which is abso- lute despotism, claiming to rule alike over person, property, and conscience. On the 20th of October, 1645, this important document passed both Houses, under the designation of '' An Ordi- nance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, about Suspension from the Lord's Supper." J The state- ment of the amount of religious knowledge, which ought to be possessed by every person before being admitted to the Lord's table, is ver}'^ clear and explicit ; and the enu- meration of scandalous offences is also very full. But in one clause towards the close of the ordinance, the Erastian principle is very strongly stated : " If any person suspended from the Lord's Supper shall find himself grieved with the proceedings before the eldership of any congregation, he shall have liberty to appeal to the classical eldership (or Presbytery), and from them to the Provincial Assembly (or Synod), from thence to the National, and from thence to the Parliament. And it is further ordained. That the mem hers of both Houses, that now are members of th§. Assem- bly of Divines, or any seven of them, be a standing coin- mittee of both Houses of Parliament to consider of causes of suspension from the Lord's Supper not contained in this ordinance ; unto which committee any eldership shall present such causes, to the end that the Parliament, if need require, may hear and determine the same." The undis- • Baillie, vol. ii. p. 325. f Whitelocke, p. 162. X Rushwortli, vol. vi. pp. 210-212. Itiee Appendix. 220 HISTORY OF THE guised Erastianism of this ordinance was exceedingly dis pleasing to the Assembly, and rendered them unwiRing to pnt it into operation at all, even so far as it went, lest they siiould seem to consent to a principle which they so decid- edly condemned. " This," says Baillie, " has been the only impediment why the Presbyteries and Synods have not been erected ; for the ministers refuse to accept of Presbyteries without this power." Both parties, indeed, were equally resolute, — the Parliament not to grant, and the Assembly not to be satisfied without the recognition of what they regarded as of divine right, — a full liberty to keep from the holy table all scandalous persons. And although the divines were perfectly able to refute the sophistry of the Erastian lawyers in argument, they could not change their hearts, nor make them willing to submit to the purifying, though humbling precepts of the Gospel ; consequently these unhappy men continued tenaciously to ietain a power which they could not hold and exercise, but t'> the injury of religion, and to the ruin of themselves and of the kingdom. Not only was the Assembly dissatisfied with the conduct of Parliament in thus attempting to retain an Erastian power in ecclesiastical affairs, but all the Presbyterians, both ministers and people throughout the kingdom, and particularly those of the city of London itself, were both grieved and displeased with conduct so graspinaf and un- wise. A petition was addressed to Parliament from the Common Council of London praying that Church govern- ment might be speedily settled and observed, and that greater power might be given to the ministers and elders than was established by the Parliament, according to the warrant of the Word of God. The House answered, " That they had already taken much pains in debating of Church government ; and they conceived the city" and Common Council were informed falsely of the proceedmgs of the House else they would not have precipitated the judgment of the Parliament ; however, they take it as a good intention of the petitioners promoting this business." A similar petition from the city ministers received a still 11 ore uncourteous answer, — two of the members were sent to tell them, that, " they need not attend any longer for an answer to their petition, but to go home, and look to the WRSTMI.NSTl.il .ASSKMf.l.V. 221 These ungra- cious answers gave rise to a feeling of alienation between the city and the Parliament, the completed effect of which was, that counterpoise, or rather paralysis of each other's energies, which laid both prostrate beneath the power of the army, by whom the Parliament was at last trampled out of existence, — so swift and sure was the blow of retribu- tive justice. Had Parliament abandoned its Erastian prin- ciples, and granted the petitions of the Assembly, the min- isters, and the people, it w^ould have been so deeply rooted in the grateful ailbction of the kingdom, and its power would have been so thoroughly consolidated, that not even Cromwell's deep schemes, and iron strength, could have greatly sliaken, much less utterly overthrown it. But it sinned obstin-jtely aoainst the "Prince of the kings of the earth ;" ^ind therefore He dashed it to pieces. One very probable reason vrhy the Parliament were at this time assuming a more haughty tone than formerly was, the depression of the king's power, who had never been able to make head against the army to any considerable extent since the battle of Naseby, on the 14^th of June. Yet even in this point of view the conduct of the Parliament was mark- ed by something little short of infatuation ; for the powder of the army had passed completely into the hands of Crom- well, though Fairfax stiJ held, nominally, the chief com- mand ; and a very moderate degree of penetration micfht have enabled them to perceive that they had no means of counterbalancing the power of the army except by the wealth and influence of the city of London, which was thoroughly Presbyterian. The Independents in both Par- liament and the Assembly were delighted with the delay caused by the Ernstian obstinacy ; and to these two par- ties. Independents and Erastians, there was added, as Bail- lie says, "a third party of worldly profane men, who were extremely affrighted to come under the yoke of ecclesias- 1 ic discipline." The very fact of such a combination against the Presbyterian system would go far to prove its truth and scriptural character ; for that can scarcely be other than a good cause, which provokes the opposition of such conflicting elements, and some of them elements essentially evil. * Whitelocke, p. 187. J9* 222 HISTORY OF THE [164-6.] Though hitherto disappointed, the Assembly nnd the city continued to exert themselves by plying the Parliament with petition upon petition ; and to one of these, signed by the whole magistracy of London, address- ed to both Houses, 15th January, le^iG, the Parliament felt it necessary to return a courteous and complimentary an- swer, thanking them for their care and zeal for God's worship, and assuring them of their readiness to promote so good a work.* Adverting to this petition, Baillie says, '' No doubt, if they be constant they will obtain all their desires; for all know that the Parliament here cannot sub- sist without London, so that whatsoever they desire in earnest and constantly, it must be granted." On the 20th of February it was " Resolved by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled, That there be forthwith a choice made of elders throughout the kingdom of England, ac- cording to such directions as have already passed both Houses, bearing date the 19th of August, 1645." But on the 14th of March, a more complete ordinance passed both Houses, containing full regulations respecting the choice of elders and of everything necessary for the organization '■)( the Presbyterian form of Church government. Even in this ordinance the same Erastian element appeared. By one clause it was enacted, " That in every province persons shall be chosen by the Hoases of Parliament, that shall be commissioners to judge of scandalous offences, not enumerated in any ordinance of Parliament, to them presented ;" and upon the decision of these commission- ers it was to depend whether the eldership might suspend persons accused of such offences from the sacrament. f Before this ordinance had passed the Lords, and as soon as its tenor was known from the deliberations of the Com- mons, both the Assembly and the city ministers prepared to give the most decided opposition to this Erastian clause. " I wish," says Baillie, writing to one of the citj ministers, " by all means that unhappy court of commis- sioners in every shire may be exploded. If it must be so, let the new cases of scandal come to the Parliament bj'- the letters of the eldership, or any other way, but not by a standing court of commissioners. This is a trick of the • Whitelocke, p. 194. t Kushworth, vol. vi. pp. 224-228. See Appendix. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 223 Independents' invention, of purpose to enervate and dis- grace all our government, in wh'ich they have been assist- ed by the lawyers and the Erastian party. This troubles us all exceedingly; the whole Assembly and ministry over the kintrdom ; the body of the city is much grieved with it; but how to mend it we cannot well tell. In the mean time it mars us to set up anything ; the anarchy continues, and the vilest sects daily increase." Such, indeed, was the inevitable consequence of allowing the kingdom to continue without any regular form of Church government and discipline, the presence of which acts by a moral con- straint on even those who do not admit its authority, as the experience of all ages and countries can amply testify. Fully aware of the extreme importance of obtaining a right adjustment of this essential point, the Presbyterians both of Scotland and England made every possible exer- tion to secure it. And there seemed to be one favorable opportunity, by availing themselves of which it might yet be accomplished. The unhappy king, beaten from the field by successive and ruinous defeats, had retired to Oxford, where he found himself almost driven to distraction by the wretched cabals of his selfish and unprincipled adherents. In these circumstances he proposed a new negotiation for peace, and many letters were interchanged between him and the Parliament on this subject. But the Parliament were now not only secure of triumph, but also under the infl'.ience of Cromwell and his friends, who had no wish for pe3ce ; and for these reasons they rose in their demands to such a degree, that all prospects of peace were greatly obscured. The Scottish parliamentary commissioners, on the other hand, were desirous of peace on such terms as should not annihilate the regal dignity, and therefore they endeavored so far to modify the demands of the English Parliament, that they might be such as the king could ho norably grant. But the iEnglish Parliament felt that they had no longer any urgent need of assistance from a Scot tish army, and therefore were not inclined to listen to the more reasonable proposals of the Scottish commissioners. Still, they could not at once dishonorably violate their Solemn League and Covenant with Scotland, and therefore they continued to receive, with due respect, the communi- cations of the Scottish Parliament through its commission- 224 HISTORY OF THE ers. And as these commissioners were all Presbyterians, they felt deeply interested in the question of the right establishment of Presbyterian Church government in Eng- land, according to the principles of the Solemn League of both nations. For this reason they presented to the English Parliament several papers respecting the pending treaty of peace, and the various matters involved in it ; one of which necessarily was, the form of religion to be established, to which the king was to be requested to give his concur- rence. On the subject of religion these papers took up the points that had so much engaged the attention of the Assembly, and gave their opinion in the following man- ner : — " Having perused the several ordinances, directions, and votes of the honorable Houses concerning Church government delivered unto us, which we conceive will be the matter of the propositions of religion, and in this sense only we speak to them, we do agree to the direction for the present election of elders, to the subordination of congregational, class- ical, provincial, and national assemblies, and to the direction concerning the members of which they are constitute, and the times of their meet- ing. Only we desire, that no godly minister be excluded from being a member of the classical presbytery ; nor any godly minister having law- ful commission from being a member of the provincial and national As- semblies, there being the greater need of their presence and assistance in such Assemblies, that there are no ruling elders to join with and assist them. And we desire that a fixed time be appointed for the ordi- nary meeting of the national Assembly, with power to the Parliament to summon them when they please ; and with liberty to the Church to meet oftener, if there shall be necessary cause; the ordinary meeting thereof being most necessary for preserving truth and unity in the whole Church, against the errors that may arise and multiply in the Church, and against the divisions and differences that may distract the inferior assemblies of the Church, and for receiving and determining ai)peals from provincial assemblies, which otherwise will be infinite, and lie over long without determination, and the exigence of religion sometimes being such that it will require an extraordinary meeting. " We agree to the rules and directions concerning suspension from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in cases of ignorance and scandal. Only we desire that the congregational eldership may have power to judge in cases of scandal not enumerated, with liberty to the person grieved to appeal, as in other Reformed Churches. This we conceive to be a power no more arbitrary in this Church, than in them who are limited by the rules expressed in Scripture, and do exercise this their power with such moderation as is a comfort, help, and strengthening of civil author- ity. The appointing of provincial commissioners, such as are appointed in the ordinance, will minister occasion to such debates and disputes, in this and other Churches, as will be very unpleasant to Parliaments and civil powers, will make a great disconformity betwixt this and othet WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 225 Churches, and a present rent ami division in this Church ; is such a mixture ia Church government as hath not been heard of in any Church hcfore this time, and may prove a foundation of a new Episcopacy, or of a High Commission. And the work may be better done by the As- semblies of ministers and elders who have this in their ecclesiastical charge, and will be no less tender of the honor of Parliament, by whose laws they live and are protected ; and as able and willing to give satis- faction to the people, whose consciences and conversation are best known unto them, as any other persons whatsoever. Concerning the suspension of the ministers themselves, although scandal in them de- serveth double censure, yet we conceive it to be most agreeable that they have their censure from the classical, or other superior Assemblies of the Church, where there be ministers to judge them. We do also agree to the ordinance of ordination of ministers; only we desire it may be pro- vided, that it stand in force for all time to come. «' 'IMiere be other matters contained in the ordinances; as. The man ner of subordination of the Assemblies of the Church to the Parliament, so much liable to mistake. The seeming exemption of some soits of persons from the just censures of the Church : the ministering the sacra- ment to some persons against the consciences of the ministry and elder- ship : concerning public repentance to be only before the elderships, and such like ; which may be taken into consideration, and with small labor and alteration be determined to the great satisfaction of many. As for the remnant concerning the perpetual officers of the Church, and their offices ; the order and power of Church Assembliei^, the order of public repentance, and of proceeding to excommunication and absolu- tion ; we desire they may be agreed u|)on according to the cov. nant, and the advice of the divines of both kin,'doms, long since ottered to both Houses; which bf ing done, they may be presently drawn in a method, and formed up in a model of Church government in three days, to the quieting the minds of all the godly, concerning the particular meaning of both kingdoms in the matter of religion, to the great content of the Reformed Churches, and which will both make us distinctly to know what we demand, and the king what he doth grant."* Within a few days after these papers had been laid be- fore the English Parliament, and before the two Houses had returned any answer, they were printed and published with a preface, as from a private person into whose hands they had fallen by accident, purporting to state the case between the Parliament and the Scottish commissioners.! Both Houses Avere exceedingly indignant that such liberty should be taken with their proceedings, and on the 14-th of April concurred in a vote : " That the matter contained in these printed papers was false, and scandalous against the Parliament and kingdom of England ; that they should be • Rushworth, vol. vi. pp. 254, 255. t Baillie informs us that David Buchanan was the person by whom Ihey were published. Vol ii. p. 367. 226 HISTORY OF THE burned by the common hangman ; that a declaration should be drawn up refuting their untruths, and showing the innocence and integrity of the Parliament ; and that the author or publisher was an incendiary between the two kingdoms." And on the 21st of April the preface was burnt as had been ordered, but not the papers of the Scot- tish commissioners. The Declaration published by the Parliament for their own vindication was characterized by equal intemperate heat and bitterness, and contained a very strong assertion of the Erustian theory ; colored, however, by the pretext of their dread of the consequences which might ensue from "granting an arbitrary and unlimited power and jurisdic- tion to near ten thousand judicatories to be erected within this kingdom ;" and asserting that they " had the more reason by no means to part with this power out of the hands of the civil magistrate, since the experience of all ages will manifest that the reformation and purity of reli- gion, and the preservation and protection of the people of God in this kingdom, hath under God been bjr the Parlia- ments, and their exercise of this power." How easy it is to make bold and general assertions ; but had the English Parliament been required to produce proofs and instances in maintenance of their self-complacent assertion, they would have found that they had undertaken no easy task. And it might have occurred to them, that such vehemence of conduct and language might be very fairly interpreted into a proof that they vvere aware that they had acted wrong, and that their anger arose from the painful and mortifying consciousness of being detected in the commis- sion of what was manifestly culpable. But even yet an English Parliament can reason and act in a similar manner, untaught by the bitter experience of their ancestors, and unable to read the signs of the times, however close the resemblance which these bear to a former period. Not even this manifestation of the Parliament's stormy temper could appal the Assembly of Divines, although the city ministers had somewhat quailed. Mr. Marshall, by no means one of the most rash or impetuous of the brethren, arose in his place, and after referring to the recent ordi- nance, and stating that there were several things in it which pressed heavily upon his conscience, and upon the con* Wt.STMINSTEH ASSEMliLV. 22T sciences of many otliers, he moved, that a committee might be appointed to examine what points in the ordinance were contrary to their consciences, and to prepare a petition on the subject, to be presented to the two Houses. This was accordingly done, and presented by the whole Assembly, with Mr. Marshall at their head, on the 24'th of March. The main topics of the petition were, an assertion of the divine right of Presbyterian Church government, and a complaint against that clause in the recent ordinance which appointed an appeal from the censures of the Churcli to a committee of the Parliament. The House appears to have been somewhat staggered by this decided course adopted by the Assembly, and appointed a committee to cons^ider what answer should be given, and what notice should be taken of the manner in which the petition had been brought forward. The report of the committee was characterized by deep policy. First, they gave it as their Oj)inion, that the Assembly of Divines had, in their recent petition, violated the privileges of Parliament, and incurred the penalties of a premunire ; and next, they proposed, that since the Assembly insisted on the jus divinu/n of the Pres- byterian government, certain queries which they had pre- pared respecting that point might be sent to the Assembly, and the divines required to return answers to the satisfac- tion of the Parliament. The House approved of the com- mittee's report, and on the 30th of April sent Sir John Evelyn, Mr. Fiennes, and Mr. Brown, to state to the As- sembly the sentiments of the House, and to require an- swers to the prepared list of interrogations. These questions display so clearly the captious cha- racter and petulant temper of the Erastians, even Avhile pretending to be merely desiring satisfaction to their scruples of conscience, that we think it expedient to insert them here : — *' Questions propounded to the Assembly of Divines by the House of Commons, touching the point of Jus Divinum in the matter of Church government. " Whereas it is resolved by both Houses, that all persons guilty of no- torious and scandalous offences shall be suspended from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper; the House of Commons desires to be satisfied by the Assembly of Divines in the questions following: — " 1. Whether the parochial and congregational elderships appointed by ordir ance of Parliament, or any other congregational or presbyterial 228 HISTORY OF THE elderships, are jure divino^ and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? And whether any particular Church government be jure divi- no ? And what that government is ? "2. Whether all the members of the said eldership, as members there- of, or which of them, are jure divino, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? " 3. Whether the superior assemblies or elderships, viz., the classical, provincial, and national, whether all or any of them, and which of them, are jure divino, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? " 4. Whether appeals from the congregational elderships to the clas- sical, provincial, or national assemblies, or any of them, and to which (if them, nve jure divino? And are their powers upon such appeals jwre dicino, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? " 5. Whether oecumenical fissemblies are jure divino ? And whether there be api)eals from any of the former assemblies to the said oecumeni- cal, J7*re rfivmo, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ? " 6. Whether by the Word of God the power of judging and declaring what are such notorious and scandalous offences, lor which persons guilty thereof are to be kept from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, — and of eonvenina; before them, trying, and actiially suspending from the sacrament such offenders accordins:ly, — is either in the congregational eldership or presbytery, or in any other eldership, congregation, or per- sons ? And whether such powers are in them only, or in any of them, and in which of them, jftre divino, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? " 7. Whether there be any certain and particular rules expressed in ihe Word of God, to direct the elderships or presbyteries, congregations or persons, or any of them, in the exercise and execution of the powers aforesaid ? And what are those rules ? "8. Is theie anything contained in the Word of God, that the su- preme magistracy m a Christian State may not judge and determine what are the aforesaid notorious and scandalous offences, and the man- ner of suspension for the same ? And in what particulars, concerning the premises, is the said supreme magistracy by the Word of God exjiuded ? " 9. Whether the provision of commissioners to judge of scandals not enumerated (as they are authorized by the ordinance of Parliament) be contrary to that way of government which Christ hath appointed in his Church ? And wherein are they so contrary ? '* In answer to these particulars the House of Commons desires of the Assembly of Divines their proofs from Scripture, and to set down the several texts of Scripture in the express words of the same. And it ia ordered, that every particular minister of the Assembly of Divines, that is or shall be present at the debate of any of these questions, do, upon every resolution which shall be piesented to this House concerning the same, subscribe his respective name, either with the affirmative or nega- tive, as he gives his vote.* And those that do dissent from the major part shall set down their positive opinion«, with the express texts of Scripture upon which their opinions are grounded.f • This was evidently for the purpose of intimidation. t Rush worth, vol. vi. pp. 260, 261. V ESTMINSTKR ASSF.MIil.V 229 It is not difficult to perceive the bitter hostility against every kind and degree ot spiritual jurisdiction which per- vades these questions ; nor yet is it difficult to detect the sophistical fallacy which forms the basis of the whole. In llicse Erastian questions there is a constant endeavor to keep a variety of details prominently before the mind, so as to obscure the main principle as far as possible ; and even when the proper question of principle is slated, it is done in the same manner, — " Whether any particular Church government he jure divino V^ The very essence of the inquiry is, " Whether there be in the Word of God Churcli government 1" and if that be affirmed, then the question arises, " What that government is ?" With regard to all matters of detail, on which the parliamentary Erastians loved to dilate, these would naturally arise either from Scripture precept or Scripture practice, applied as enlight- ened reason might dictate and emergencies require. But the Assembly was composed of men well able to detect the sophistry of their opponents, and therefore they declined entering, in the first place, into a series of detailed Jind circumstantial answers. But as they had been previously led to investigate very fully the same subject, in the course of their o^vn deliberations while framing the Confession of Faith, they proceeded to state their main proposition on the subject of Church censures, on which, as will be per- ceived, the whole Erastian controversy turned, with the intention of giving a clear and explicit expression of their judgment respecting the master-principle and essence of the question. This they did in the following simple yet comprehensive proposition : — "The Lord Jesus, as King AND Head of his Church, hath therein appointed a gov- ernment, IN the hand of Church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate." The affirmation of this prop sition was regarded, both by the Assembly and by the Erastian party, as containing a complete rejection of the Erastian principle ; for, in their clear style of reasoning, they perceived, that if Church government were admitted to be " distinct from the civil magistrate," then the civil magistrate could exercise no jurisdiction in Church matters, as that would be to break down the distinction. Against this proposition, according- ly, the two Erastians in the Assembly, especially Coleman, 20 230 HISTORY OF THE directed their whole force of argument. Baillie says, " To oppose the Erastian heresy, we find it necessary to say, that Christ in the New Testament had instituted a Church government distinct from the civil, to be exercised by the officers of the Church, without commission from the magis- trate. None in the Assembly has any doubt of this truth, but one Mr. Coleman, a professed Erastian ; a man reason- ably learned, but stupid and inconsiderate, half a pleasant, and of small estimation. But the lawyers in the Parliament did blow^ up the poor man with much vanity ; so he is become their champion, to bring out, the best way he can, Erastus' arguments against the proposi*:ion We give him a fair and free hearing 5 albeit we fear, when we have an- swered all he can bring, and have confirmed with undenia- ble proofs our proposition, the Houses, when it comes to them, shall scrape it out of the Confession ; for this point is their idol. The most of them are incredibly zealous for it. The pope and the king were never more earnest for the headship of the Church than the plurality of this Parliament."* After the Assembly had debated this proposition for some time, and w^ere about to put it to the vote, Coleman w^as taken ill, and sent a request to the Assembly, that they would delay it for a few days, as he had still some argu- ments to bring forward. The Assembly complied ; but after an illness of four or five days he expired, and the pro- position was passed, with the single dissentient vote of Li.';htfoot. In the account of this event contained in '• Neal's History of the Puritans," the names of those who subscribed this proposition, according to the injunction of the Parliament, are given, amounting Xo fifty-two^ and com- prising all the men of chief eminence in the Assembly, ex- clusive of the Scottish divines, who spoke, but did not vote on any subject. Neal contradicts himself in his account, stating, that the Independents took -'the opportunity to withdraw, refusing absolutely to be concerned in the affair 5" f yet in the list w^hich he gives, there are the names of Goodwin, Nye, Greenhill, and Carter, all of them Independents, — the names of Burroughs, Bridge, and Simp- son only being wanting to complete the w^hole of that party who signed the Reasons of Dissent, of which mention has • Baillie, vol. ii. p. 360. f Neal, vol. ii. p. 395. WF.STMINSTI-R ASSE^IP.LY. 231 been already made Indeed, the whole of Neal's statement respectin^r the conduct of the Presbyterians is so warped and biased by prejudice, that it presents a very unfair view not only of their characters, but even of the facts that oc- curred in which they bore a leading part. But the Assembly were not contented with thus cutting the heart out of the Erastian theory ; they appointed a committee to prepare answers to the Parliaments ques- tions, following out the principle of their own fundamental proposition. "The work of the Assembly," says Baillie, " these bygone weeks has been to answer some very cap- tious questions of the Parliament, about the clear scriptural warrant for all the punctilios of the government. It was thought it would be impossible for us to answer, and that in our answers there v\Ould be no unanimity ; yet, by God's grace, we shall deceive them who were waiting for our halting. The committee has prepared very solid and satis- factory answers already to almost all the questions, wherein there is like to be an unanimity absolute in all things mate- rial, even with the Independents. But because of the Assem- bly's way, and the Independents' miserable, unnmendable design to keep all things from any conclusion, it's like we shall not be able to perfect our answers for some time ; therefore I have put some of my good friends, leading- men in the House of Commons, to move the Assembly to lay aside our questions for a time, and labor that which is most necessary, and all are crying for, — the perfecting of the Confession of Faith and Catechism." * The House of Commons followed the suggestion here alluded to, which was made about the middle of July ; and as the course of events rolled on, and matters of great importance occu- pied the attention of the Parliament, little more inquiry was made by the House respecting the Assembly's answers to their questions. Although the answers of the Assembly to these Eras- tian questions were not finally called for and printed by the Parliament, there is some reason to believe that their labor was not wholly lost to the public. For after the change of affairs which induced the Parliament to change * Baillie, vol. ii. p. 378. — This is a sufficient refutation of Neal's dsseition. that the Assembly durst not present their answers to Parlia« inent for fear of a premunire. 232 HISTORY OF THE its course, several months were allowed to pass away, lest the Commons might repeat their demand ; but at length, on the 1st of December, 1646, a book was published, en- titled, "Jw.9 Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici ; or The Divine Kig-ht of Church Government Asserted and Evidenced by the Holy Scriptures. By sundry Ministers of Christ within the City of London." This work is an express and direct answer to the Parliament's questions respec;ing divine right, following these questions in their order, and giving to them a distinct reply point by point, confirming every argument by Scripture proofs, and by quotations from the writings of learned and able ecclesiastical authors. Judg- ino- from internal evidence, in matter, manner, and styJe, it appears almost certain that this work at least embodies the substance of the answer prepared by the Assembly, some- what enlarged and modified by the city ministers, in wiiose name it was published. This idea is not set aside by the manner in which it is noticed by Baillie, who says, " The ministers of London have put out this day a very fine book, proving from Scripture the divine right of every part of the Presbyterial government."* We do not mean to assert, that the work published by the city ministers was the identical production of the Assembly ; but that so miich of the one was transfused into the other as to render them to all practical intents one work, and to relieve us from any cause to regret that the Assembly's answer was not published. On the seventh day after the appearance of this book, the House of Commons requested the Assembly to give in their answers to the jus divinum queries, as i( to intimate their suspicion with regard to the authorship of the recent publication ; but this demand was not again repeated, and no direct notice was taken of the book itself But whether the work in question w^as to any considerable extent the production of the Assembly Divines or not, this at least is certain, that it is the most complete and able defence of Presbyterian Church government that has yet appeared, and places its divine right on a foundation which will not easily be shaken. f Allusion has been made to events of great public impor- * BailHe, vol. ii. p. 411. t A reprint of this work would be a verjf valuable contribution to the Presbyterian cause in the present day. WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLV. '23 J tance, which contributed not a little to change the tone of the Parliament. These maybe briefly meniioiied. The military affiiirs of the year liilb terminated most disas- trously for the king. All his armies were beaten out of the field, and he was constrained to retreat to Oxford with the wreck of his troops, and there to try what coidd be gained by intrigues and negotiations, since he could no lotiger maintain an open war. During the course of these negotiations there arose a degree of alienation between the English Parliament and the Scottish commissioners and Parliament, which threatened an open rupture. The English Parliament, influenced by Cromwell and his friends, were not desirous of peace ; while the Scottisli commissioners made every eff'ort to procure such terms as the king might accept without absolute submission. It was while their temper was in this high and heated state, that the English Parliament treated the petitions of the city ministers, and of the Assembly itself, with that scant courtesy, if not rather overbearing haughtiness, which has been already related. Elated with success, they could not brook the firm and fearless attitude assumed by the Pres- byterian divines, and re^jented the remonstrances of the Scottish commissioners and Parliament, as an improper in- terference with their imperial dignity. At this very junc- ture the king, despairing of obtaining from the English Parliament any terms to which he could accede, left Ox- ford in disguise, on the 27th of April, and after wandering about for a few days, arrived at the quarters of the Scot- tish army, which was besieging Newark, on the .^th of May, 164r6. This was totally unexpected by either the army or the commissioners of Scotland; for though his majesty had attempted to induce the Scottish general and Committee of Estates to espouse his cause against the Par- liament, he had received such an answer from them, as rendered it, in their opinion, impossible that he would put himself into their power. No sooner was this event known in London than the tone and temper of the Parliament was very sensibly changed. They perceived that it was no longer safe to treat the remonstrances of Scotland with disrespect ; and as they were well aware how much the establishment of Presbyterian Church government in both kingdoms was longed for by the Scottish Church and peo« 20* 234 HISTORY OF THE pie, they deemed it expedient to remove some of the obstacles by which this had been hitherto prevented. Up till this time the ordinance of March 14-, for the choice of ruling elders and the erection of presbyteries, had not received the full ratification of the House of Lords ; and even if it had, it would have been inoperative, because the ministers v/ere resolute not to become mem- bers of Presbyteries, so long as they were subject to such Erastian interference, and so bereft of their due powers, as would have been the case under that ordinance. But on the 5th of June both Houses not only ratified the ordi- nance, and on the 9th issued an order that it should be im- mediately put into execution,* but also at the same jm.e laid aside the clause respecting provincial commissioners to judge of new cases of scandal, — thus removing the main obstacle to its reception by the ministers. This con- cession having been made, the Assembly Divines and thj city ministers met at Sion College, on the 19th of June, and after some conference, agreed upon a declaration, ex- pressing approbation of what had been done, specifying what was still defective, and declaring that they now con- ceive it to be their duty to put in practice the present set- tlement, as far as they conceive it correspondent with the Word of God.f The actual erection of Presbyteries did not immediately follow this ordinance of Parliament, and consent of the Assembly and the city ministers; for the attention of the whole community was strongly attracted to the negotia- tions between the king and the Parliaments of the two kingdoms, as also between the two Parliaments them- selves. It scarcely falls within our province to relate even an outline of the political intrigues which distracted the kingdom for many months after his majesty's retreat to tlie Scottish army; j^et so much must be stated as is ne- cessary to explain the bearing of these events upon the proceedings of the Assembly. There is every reason to believe that the determination of the king to seeka retreat in the Scottish army, was the result of a complication of circumstances and of intrigues, — circumstances which he ♦ Whitelocke, p. 213. t Baillie, vol. ii, p. 377 ; Neal, vol. ii. p. 396. In this instance also the account of Neal is unfair and inaccurate, to use no harsher terms. WKs'iMiNS'iTK /\ssr.r:;.i.Y. 235 could not control, and intriirnes in wliich he and his adhe- rents were mutually deceivers and deceived. The fortune of war had been decisively against him, so that he could no longer expect to recover his power by conquest ; and the demands of the Parliament rose with their success, so that he was constrained to contemplate the necessity o-f submission, if he could not contrive to divide his victori- ous antagonist. For that purpose he carried on a series of intrigues with all parties that would listen to him, par- ticularly with the Independents in both army and Parlia- ment. The decided ground taken by the Scottish Parlia- ment, Church, and nation, in behalf of their religious liber- ties, as stated in their Covenant, which he regarded with intense hostility, rendered him unwilling to hold intercourse \\ith them, and at the same time made it more than doubt- ful whether any measure of success could be expected to follow such an attempt. But the disagreement which took place between the English Parliament and the Scottish commissioners seemed to give some reason to hope that, by skilful management, it might at last be possible to dis- unite the kingdoms, and through their disunion to recover his own ascendency over both. A French agent was ser:t to the Scottish army to sound the Committee of Estates, who were with it ; and upon receiving a half-favorable re- port from this agent, the king resolved to go in person lo the Scottish army, — hoping, by such an apparent act of confidence in their honor and loyaltj^ to render it impossi- ble for them to do otherwise than espouse his cause. But his private agent deceived him, — he deceived himself, — • and the Scottish generals and statesmen were not deceived. At the very first interview wliich the king had with his Scottish subjects, they gave him distinctly to know, that they neither could nor would do anything contrary to their engagement with England in the Solemn League and Covenant, or to the spirit of that sacred document. And in a letter to the Committee of both kingdoms, written immediately after his majesty's arrival, they declared, " That they were astonished at the providence of the king's coming to their army ; and desired that it might be im- proved to the best advantage for promoting the work of uniformity, for settling of religion and righteousness, and attaining of peace, according to the Covenant and Treaty, 236 HISTORY OF THE by advice of the Parliaments of both kingdoms, or their corn- missioners : And they further declare, that there hath been no treaty betwixt his majesty and them ; and in so deep a business they desire the advice of the Committee of both kingdoms. '* The king soon perceived that he had both overrated his own personal influence and undervalued the power of religions principle, — that he had deceived him- self, and had now to do wnth men who w^ere too sagacious to be deluded, and too high-principled to be turned from the path of integrity and truth. Finding that he \vas not likely to gain the object which he had in view^, the king wrote to the English Parliament, requesting permission " to come to London wdth safety, freedom, and honor ;" declaring that he was resolved " to comply w^ith the Houses in wdiat should be most for the good of his subjects. The Parliament itself had previously resolved to demand the king's person, declaring, '' Tliat in England the disposal of him belonged to the Parliament of England, and that the Scots army were in pay of the Parliament of England ; that the king ought to be near his Parliament ; and that this was consonant to the Covenant."! And in order to get quit of the Scottish army as quickly as possible they voted, a few days afterwards, " That this kingdom had no further need of the army of their brethren the Scots in this king- dom.'' So early was it apparent that the English Parlia- ment was determined to obtain possession of their sove- reign's person, and that the Scottish nation could not o.lierwise protect him than by friendly negotiation, so as to secure a peace including his safety; or by declaring war against England in his behalf, contrary to their obli- gations in the Solemn League and Covenant, and contrary to their ow^n determination to defend religious liberty, — of which the king w^as the known and determined enemy. This they saw clearly ; and being at the same time aware of the republican inclinations of Cromwell and his strong party, they perceived that the only way in which they could interfere to preserve his majesty, without incurring the guilt of perjury, was to persuade him, if possible, to sign the Covenant, and consent to the establishment of Presbyterian Church government. But to this no force of argument, no urgency of persuasion, no tearful earnest * Whitelocke, p. 210. f Ibid. WESTiAllNsTRR ASSKMBLV. 237 ness of entreaty, could induce him to consent ; and after spending- several monllis in ti uitlcss ne:R ASSEMBLY. 241 provided that this extend not to any toleration of the Popish religion, nor to any penalties imposed upon Popish recu- sants, nor to tolerate the practice of anything; contrary to the principles of Christian religion, contained in the Apos- tles' creed, as it is expounded in the Articles of the Church of England. Nor to anything contrary to the point of faith for the ignorance whereof men are to be kept from the Lord's Supper ; nor to excuse any from the penalties for not coming to hear the Word of God on the Lord's day, in any church or chapel, unless he can show a rea- sonable cause, or was hearing the Word of God preached or expounded elsewhere." These were the votes of the Lords ; and to these the Commons added, " That the Pres- byterian government be established till the end of the next session of Parliament, which was to be a year after that date. That the tenths and maintenance belonging to any church shall be only to such as can submit to the Presby- terian government, and to none other. That liberty of conscience granted shall extend to none that shall preach, print, or publish anything contrary to the first fifteen of the Thirty-nine Articles, except the eighth. That it ex- tend not to Popish recusants, or taking away any penal law against them. That the indulgence to tender con- sciences shall not extend to tolerate the Common Prayer."* These votes were passed on the 13th day of October, 1647, and may be regarded as the final settlement of the Presby- terian Church government, so far as tliat was done by the Long Parliament, in accordance with the advice of the Westminster Assembly of Divines. For before the expira- tion of the period named by the Parliament, the Parlia- ment itself had sunk beneath the powder of Cromwell, whose policy was to establish no form of Church government, but '/O keep everything dependent upon himself, though his chief favors were bestowed upon the Independents. There is but one point more connected with the Erastian controversy which requires to be stated, namely, its effect upon the formation and ratification of the Confession of Faith. For a considerable time after the Assembly com- menced its deliberations, the chief subjects which occupied its attention were, the Directories for public worship, and ordination, and the form of Church government, including • Whitelocke, pp. 275, 276. 21 24£ HISTORY OP THE the power of Church censure. Till some satisfactory con- clusions had heen reached on these points, the Assemhly abstained from entering upon the less agitating, but not less important work of framing a Confession of Faith. But having completed iheir task, so far as depended upon themselves, they appointed a committee to prepare and arrange the main propositions which were to be discussed and digested into a system by the Assembly. The mem- bers of this committee were. Dr. Hoyle, Dr. Gouge, Messrs. Herle, Gataker, Tuckney, Reynolds, and Vines, with the Scottish commissioners. These learned and able divines ]»egan their labors by arranging in the most systematic (.>rder the various great and sacred truths which God has revealed to man ; and reduced these to thirty-two distinct heads or chapters, each having a title expressive of its sub- ject. These were again subdivided into sections; and the committee formed themselves into several sub-com- mittees, each of whom took a specific topic for the sake of exact and concentrated deliberation. When these sub- committees had completed their respective tasks, the whole was laid before the entire committee, and any altera- tions suggested and debated till all were of one mind. And when any title or chapter had been thus fully prepared by the committee, it was reported to the Assembly, and again subjected to the most minute and careful investigation, in every paragraph, sentence, and word. It is exceedingly gratifying to be able to state, that throughout the delibera- tions of the Assembly, when composing the Confession of Faith, there prevailed almost an entire and perfect har- i.nony. There appear, indeed, to have been only two sub- jects on which any difference of opinion existed among them. The one of these was the doctrine of election, con- cerning which, as Baillie says, they had long and tough de- bates : " Yet," he adds, " thanks to God, all is gone right according to our mind."* The other was that of which mention has been already made, namely, that " the Lord Jesus, as King and Head of his Church, has therein ap- pointed a government in the hand of Church-officers dis- tinct from the civil magistrate," which appears as the fun- damental proposition of the chapter entitled " Of Church censures." This proposition the Assembly manifestly • Baillie, vol. ii. p. 325. WESTMlNSTEIi ASSEM15LY. 243 intended and understood to contain a principle directly and neces-iarily opposed to the very essence of Erastianism ; and it was regarded in the same light by the Erastians themselves, consequently it became the subject of long and earnest discussion, and was strenuously opposed by Light- foot and Coleman, especially the latter. But Coleman falling ill and dying before the debate was concluded, it was carried, the sole dissentient voice being that of Lightfoot. It does not appear thai the Erastian lay-assessors at- tempted to debate the point in the Assembly, but wisely, or at least cunningly, reserved their opposition for the House of Commons, being aware that their strength lay in power, not argument. The whole influence of the Eras- tians did not succeed in modifying, no, not by one word, the statement of the Assembly's faith on this vital point ; although some have had the hardihood to assert that they condescended to compromise the question. The conduct of the Assembly in the Erastian controversy contrasts strongly with their conduct in the Independent contro- versy- With the Independents there w-ere many instances of compromise and accommodation, or at least of attempts in that direction ; with the Erastians none, no, not so much as one. They could not compel the Parliament to give its sanction to all that they proposed ; but they could and did state freely and fearlessly what they believ^ed to be the truth, earnestly and urgently petitioning that it might be ratified, then leaving the legislative powers to accept or reject on their own responsibility. To the Independents, on ihe other hand, they showed the utmost leniency ; and while they could not abandon their own conscientious con- victions^, they were extremely reluctant to deal harshly with the conscientious scruples of men whom they regarded as brethren. Some discussion took place on the thirty-first chapter in the Confession, respecting Synods and Councils 5 but that subject also was carried in the express language of the As- seni])ly, and without any Erastian modification. The first half of the Confession was laid before the Parliament early in October, IGiG, and on the 2Gth of November the remain- der was produced to the Assembly in its completed form, when the prolocutor returned thanks to the committees, in 2414" HISTORY OF THE the name of the Assembly, for their great pains in perfect* ing the work committed to them. It was then carefully transcribed ; and on the 3d of December, 1646, it was pre- sented to Parliament, by the whole Assembly in a body, under the title of " The humble advice of the Assembly of Divines and others, now by the authority of Parliament sitting at Westminster, concerning a Confession of Faith." On the 7th, Parliament ordered " five hundred copies of it to be printed for the members of both Houses ; and that the Assembly do bring in their marginal notes, to prove every part of it by Scripture."* There is strong reason to believe that the House of Commons demanded the insertion of the Scripture texts, for the purpose of obtaining an ad- ditional period of delay, as indeed Baillie pretty plainly intimates. The Assembly, accordingly, resumed their task, and after encountering a number of interposing obstacles, again produced the Confession of Faith, with full scriptural proofs annexed to all its propositions, and laid it before the Par- liament on the 29th day of April, 1647. The thanks of the House were given to tlie Assembly for their labors in this important matter; and " six hundred copies were ordered to be printed for the use of the Houses and the Assembly, and no more, and that none presume to reprint the same, till further orders."! The appointed number of copies having been printed they were delivered to the members of both Houses by Mr. Byfield, on the 19th of May, when it was resolved to consider the whole production, article by article, previous to its being published with the sanction of Parliament, as the Confession of Faith held by that Church on which they meant to confer the benefits of a national establishment. But the deliberations of the Parliament were interrupted by the insurrection of the army, and the numerous, pro- tracted, and unsatisfactory negotiations in which they were engaged with the king ; so that they had not completed their examination of the Confession till March, 1648. On the 22d day of that month a conference was held between the two Houses, to compare their opinions respecting the Confession of Faith, the result of which is thus stated by Rushworth : " The Commons this day (March 22d), at a * Whitelocke, p. 233. f Rushworth, vol. vi. p. 473. WESTMI.NSTKR .AS.>F.M|[.V. 24C: f onference, presented the Lords with the Confession of Faith passed by thenn, with some alterations, viz., That they do agree with their Lordsliips, and so with the As- sembly, in the doctrinal part, and desire the same may be made public, that this kingdom, and all the Reformed Ctmrches of Christendom, may see the Parliament of Eng- land difler not in doctrine. In some particulars there were some phrases ahered, as in that o^ tiibvte being due to the magistrate, they put dues ; to the degree of marriage they refer to the law established ; particulars in discipline »are recommitted 5 and for the title, they make it not ^ Jl Co?i- fcsswn of Failh^'' because not so running ' I confess ^^ at the beginning of every section ; but, ' Articles of Faith agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament^ as most suitable to the former title of the Thirty-nine Articles."* Such was the last positive enactment made by the Eng- lish Parliament respecting the Confession of Faith ; for the subsequent mention made of it, and of other particulars in Presbyterian Church government, during the course of iheir negotiations with the king, were not enactments, but attempts at accommodation with his majesty, with the view of endeavoring to secure a satisfactory basis for a perma- nent peace to Church and State. And it will be observed, that the only material defect mentioned in this reported conference betv/een the Houses is, that ^'■particulars in dis- cipline are recommitted.''' These " particulars" are said to have been the thirtieth chapter, " Of Church censures;" the thirty-first chapter, " Of Synods and Councils ;" and the fourth section of the twentieth chapter, " Of Christian liberty, and liberty of conscience." The enumeration of these particulars rests on the authority of Neal,f which is by no means unimpeachable, but it is in itself probable, being quite consistent with the views of the Erastians, whose chief hostility was directed against the power of Church discipline, of which the chapters specified contain an explicit statement according to the judgment of the Assembly. It is of some importance to remark, that these "particulars in discipline" were not rejected by the English Parliament, as is generally asserted, but merely recommit- ted, or referred to a committee to be more maturely con- sidered. But as the Parliament itself not long afterwards fell * Rushworth, vol. vii. p. 1035. f Neal, vol. ii. p. 429. 21* 246 HISTORY OF THE under the power of the army, and was at length forcibly dissolved by Cromwell, the Committee never returned a report, and consequently these particulars were never either formally rejected or ratified by the Parliament of England. The fact of their having been recommitted is of itself enough to prove that they were not, in the estimation of snch men as Selden and Whitelocke, susceptible of an Erastian interpretation, although such an opinion has been hazarded by men certainly not a little their inferiors in learning, legal acumen, and intellectual power. A full account of the literature of the Erastian contro- versy would be an extremely interesting and highly im- portant production ; but to attempt anything more than a very brief outline of it here would lead to a digression far beyond our limits. We shall therefore mention almost solely those works which were either written by some of the Westminster Divines, or were closely connected with the proceedings of that venerable assembly. A few pre- liminary sentences, however, may be of use to introduce the subject. During the earliest ages of Christianity the only rela- tionship in which the civil magistrate and the Church stood towards each other, was that which exists between persecutors and the persecuted. When at length Constan- tino avowed himself a Christian, persecution ceased, and the more friendly relation of granting and receiving pro- tection became that between the State and the Church. But Christianity had already become deeply tainted with the antichristian leaven ; Prelacy had raised its haughty head, equally inclined to domineer over what it regarded as the inferior orders of the clergy, and over the people, and to arrogate to itself exemption from the control of the civil magistrate, even in civil matters. A protracted struggle ensued between the imperial and royal powers and the Bishop of Rome, the issue of which was, not merely an exemption of ecclesiastical matters, and even persons, from civil authority, but the establishment of a supremacy over civil rulers and civil matters wielded by the Romish hierarchy, and forming a complete spiritual and civil despotism. This fearful and degrading despotism was overthrown by the Reformation ; and although the great and wise Christian divines and patriots by whose WESTMINSTER ASSEMBI-Y. 247 instrumentality the Reformation was effected, were unable entirely to perfect their work, yet they all, more or less clearly, indicated their judgment that the two jurisdictions, civil and ecclesiastical, ought to be, and to remain co-or- dinate and distinct, mutually supporting- and supported, but each abstaining from interference with the other's intrinsic and inherent rights, privileges, and powers. In some countries this high and true theory was clearly developed, in others more obscurely, and in some not at all. In no part of Reformed Christendom was it so distinctly stated, and so fully realized, as in Scotland ; and nowhere was it so thoroughly rejected as in England. In England, indeed, the exact counterpart of the Romish system was establish- ed, the king's ecclesiastical supremacy rendering him equally judge of ecclesiastical as of civil matters. It was soon found that in this, as in all other things, extremes meet ; the king, by a slight transfer of terms, became a civil pope, and the country was oppressed by a complete civil and spiritual despotism. In the mean time, the great principle of truth and free- dom, the principle of distinct and co-ordinate civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions, was assailed on the Continent by Erastus, and became a subject of speculative thought and controversial literature. Unfortunately for the cause of truth and freedom, the great men of the Reformation had nearly all departed from the scene of their labors and triumphs before the Erastian theory was fully brought for- ward, so that it was not at once met and overthrown as it would otherwise have been. And besides, it was too ac- cordant with the views and feelings of men of secular minds not to obtain a ready credence and a hearty welcome from politicians, who can form no higher idea of a Church than an engine of State, from lawyers who can conceive no higher rule than statutory enactments, and from irreligious and immoral men, who equally detest and fear the strict and pure severity of divinely authorized Christian disci- pline. In England, also, the despotism of the Prelatic hierarchy tended to produce, in the minds of all zealous assertors of freedom, an instinctive dread of ecclesiastical power, and rendered many men Erastians from terror and in self-defence, not because they had studied the theory, and been convinced of its truth. Such men were ready to 248 HISTORY OF THE Oppose the establishment of Presbyterian Church govern- ment on the ground of divine right, not because they were convinced that no system of Church government can justly lay claim to an authority so high and sacred ; but because they were apprehensive that it would produce a species of spiritual despotism as oppressive as that which they had just been striving to abolish. In vain did the Scottish statesmen and divines answer and refute their ob- jections ; their fears were not removed, and fear is a men- tal emotion that cannot be set aside by argument. But Selden, Whitelocke, Lightfoot, and Coleman took up the subject on other grounds, which, though difficult, were not equally unassailable by reason. Their chief argu- ment was one of analogy, although, as they used it, the appearance which it bore was that of identity. They held that the Christian system ought to resemble, or rather to be identical with, the system of the Mosaic Dispensation ; and they attempted to prove, that there were not two dis- tinct and co-ordinate courts, one civil and the other eccle- siastical, among the Hebrews, but that there was a mixed jurisdiction, of which the king was the supreme and ultimate head and ruler, and that, consequently, the civil courts de- termined all matters, both civil and ecclesiastical, and inflicted all punishments, both such as affected person and property, and such as affected a man's religious privileges, properly termed Church censures. From this they con- cluded, that the civil magistrate, in countries avowedly Christian, ought to possess an equal, or identical authority, and ought consequently to be the supreme and ultimate judge in all matters, both civil and ecclesiastical, inflicting or removing the penalties of Church censure equally with those affecting person and property. The arguments on which they most relied were drawn from rabbinical lore, rather than from the Bible itself, although they were very- willing to obtain the appearance of its support, by ingenious versions, or perversions of peculiar passages of Scripture. Selden's argument has been already stated, and need not be repeated. The value of Lightfoot's authority may be estimated somewhat lower than is usually done, if we take into consideration, not merely the amount of his learning, but the soundness, or the reverse, of his judgment. As, for instance, he strenuously maintained that the Jews arc WESTMINSTET? ASSr.?IBL\'. 249 Utterly and finally rejected, that those of them who em- braced Christianity in the time of Christ and the apostles were the "remnant to be saved," and that there neither then was, nor ever shall be, any universal callinj^ of them.* He held also, that the expressions, "the keys of the king- dom of heaven," and " binding- and loosing," had no refer- ence to discipline, but merely to doctrine, in which opinion he differed from almost every person, both before and since his time. His opinion of the Septuagint was equally at variance with the views of the most eminently learned and judicious men. In short, whatever may be said of his ex- tensive and minute rabbinical lore, it is impossible to regard his judgment as entitled to much deference, consequently his advocacy of Erastian principles will not avail much for their support. Mention has already been made of Coleman's sermon, preached before the House of Commons, on the 30th of July, 164'5. That sermon must be noticed as part of the Erastian literature, not so much on account of its own merits, as on account of other w^orks to the composing of which it gave occasion. Towards the end of the sermon, various advices and directions are given, as calculated to promote the peace and welfare of the kingdom ; and of these, one point; on which Coleman dwelt strongly was, the unity of the Church, and the best way to procure that unity. For this he gives several directions, of whicii the following are the chief: — '' 1. Establish as few things jure divino as can well be. Hold out the practice, but not the ground. 2. Let all precepts held out as divine institutions have clear Scriptures; an occasional practice, a phrase upon the by, a thing named, are too weak grounds to uphold such a building. I could never yet see how tw^o co-ordinate gov ernments, exempt from superiority and inferiority, can be in one State; and in Scripture, no such thing is found, that I know of. 3. Lay no more burden of government upon the shoulders of ministers than Christ hath plainly laid upon them ; let them have no more hand therein than the Holy Ghost clearly gives them. The ministers will have other work to do, and such as will take up the whole man. 1 ingenuously profess I have a heart that knows belter how to be governed than to govern; I fear an ambitious en* * Lightroot, vol. i. p. 165. 250 HISTORY OF THE snarement, and I have cause. I see what raised Prelacy and Papacy to such a height, and what their practices Avere. being so raised. Give us doctrine ; take you the govern- ment. Give me leave to make this request, in the name of the ministry; give us two things, and we shall do well : — give us learning, and give us a competency. 4. A Chris- tian magistrate, as a Christian magistrate, is a governor in the Church. All magistrates, it is true, are not Christians ; but that is their fault : all should be ; and when they are, they are to manage their office under and for Christ. Christ hath placed governments in his Church. Of other governments besides magistracy I find no institution ; of them I do. I find all government given to Christ, and to Christ as Mediator ; and Christ, as head of these, given to the Church. To rob the kingdom of Christ of the magis- trate and his governing power, I cannot excuse, no, not from a kind of sacrilege, if the magistrate be His."* Sentiments such as these could not but be agreeable to the Erastian members of parliament; yet they seem to have thought that Coleman had spoken with more plain- ness than prudence, for while they ordered the sermon to be printed, as was customary, they did not give him the thanks of the House -an omission which was extremely unusual. But the principles stated in Coleman's sermon were not allowed to remain longr unassailed. On the 27th of August George Gillespie preached a sermon before the House of Lords ; and when it was published, he appended to it a small pamphlet of nine leaves, entitled "A Brotherly Examination of some Passages of Mr. Coleman's late print- ed Sermon." In this short treatise, Gillespie not only an- 3wered and refuted Coleman, but also completely turned his arguments against himself; proving, ^zri/, that the pro- per rule for human conduct in all things, but especially in religious matters, was to obtain as much of divine guidance, or to establish as much by divine right as possible. He then proceeds to examine in succession Coleman's direc- tions or rules in a very masterly manner, annihilating or reversing each with great strength and clearness of argu- ment. It is proved, that Coleman's principle, that in every divine institution Scripture must speak expressly, would involve a dangerous tampering with Scripture, and would • Coleman's Sermon, pp. 24-28. V;! STMLXSTRR A.SSi M !;LY. 251 sweep away several important Christian institutions which were never doubted ; and also, that whatever, by necessary consequence, is drawn from Sciipture, is a divine truth, aa well as what is expressly written therein. The argument of co-ordinate jurisdictions is next taken up, and thoroughly established both by argument and by illustration. And in answer to Coleman's assertion, that he can find no institu- tion of any government except magistracy, Gillespie proves from Scripture, that obedience is directly commanded to spiritual governors, who are " over us in the Lord," and who must have been distinct from the civil magistrate at a time when there was no Christian magistracy. In a short, but very clearly stated argument, Gillespie refutes Cole- man's dangerous assertion, '' that all government is given to Christ as Mediator, and Christ, as head of these, given to the Church ;" and states the distinction between Christ's government as God and as Mediator, by the right under- standing of which important idea the whole Erastian con- troversy must be decided. Coleman soon afterwards published a pamphlet, eruitled, " A Brotherly Examination Re-examined,' which is dis tinguished chiefly by boldness of assertion and feebleness of argument To this Gillespie replied in another, bearing the title, " Nihil Respondes," in which he somew^iat sharply exposed the weakness of his antagonist's reasoning. Irritated by the castigation he had received, Coleman pub- lished a bitter reply, to which he gave the not very intelli- gible title of '' Male Dicis Maledicis," — meaning, doubtless, to insinuate, that Gillespie's answer was rather of a railing character, or, to use a phrase of modern times, displayed a bad spirit. This Gillespie answered in an exceedingly viu^orous pamphlet, entitled, "Male Audis," in w^hich he swept rapidly over the whole Erastian controversy, so far as Coleman and some of his friends had brought it for\yard, convicted him and them of numerous self-contradictions, of unsoundness in theology, of violating the covenant which they had sv.'orn, and of inculcating opinions fatal to both civil and religious liberty. To this Coleman did not attempt to reply, feeling, probably, that he was over- matched. Several of these controversial pamphlets appeared in the course of the year 1646 ; and towards the close of the 252 HISTOKY OF THE same year, Gillespie published his celebrated work, "Aaron's Rod Blossoming ; or, the Divine ordinance of Church Government Vindicated." In this remarkably able and elaborate production, Gillespie took up the Erastian con- troversy as stated and defended by its ablest advocates, fairly encountering their strongest arguments, and assailing their most formidable positions, in the frank and fearless manner of a man thoroughly sincere, and thoroughly con- vinced of the truth and goodness of his cause. The work is divided into three books; the first treating "Of the Jewish Church Government;" the seco?id, " Of the Chris- tian Church Government; and the l/urd^ "Of Excommu- nication from the Church, and of Suspension from the Lord's Table." In the first book, the five following pro- positions are demonstrated : — " 1. That the Jewish Church was formally distinct from the Jewish State. 2. That there was an ecclesiastical sanhedrim and government distinct from the civil. 3. That there was an ecclesiastical excommunication distinct from civil punishments. 4. That in the Jewish Church there was also a public exomologesis, or declaration of repentance, and thereupon a reception or admission again of the offender to fellowship with the Church in the holy things. 5. That there was a suspen- sion of the profane from the temple and passover." In this part of his work Gillespie boldly met and completely overthrew the united strength of Selden, Lightfoot, and Coleman, on their own chosen field of Hebrew learning. In the second book or part of his work, " Of the Chris- tian Church Government," the main element of the contro- versy which he had to encounter is of a nature so abstract, that it requires peculiar clearness of thought and accuracy of reasoning to keep the subject intelligible, and to draw the requisite distinctions. Coleman had in his sermon said^ that "a Christian magistrate, as a Christian magis- trate, is a governor in the Church," and that " all govern- ment is given to Christ as Mediator, and Christ, as head of these, is given to the Church ;" from this he drew, though not very distinctly, the inference, that the Chris- tian magistrate is directly the vicegerent of Christ, and therefore rules in the Church ; yet when pushed on this point he recoiled, and modified his inference so as to state It in the following terms, " that magistracy is given to WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 253 Christ to be serviceable in his kingdom." But this tnodi tied statement would not have answered the purposes of the Erastians ; and therefore their principle was more boldly and plainly expressed by Mr. Hussey, minister at Chesllhurst, in Kent. This thorough Erastian boldly maintained, both "that all government is given to Christ as Mediator, and that Christ, as Mediator, has placed the Christian magistrate under him, and as his vicegerent, and has given him commission to govern the Church." It will be at once perceived, that the very terms of this proposi- tion involved an inquiry into the nature and extent of Christ's mediatorial sovereignty. To this point, accord- ingly, Gillespie directed his attention, in his answer to Hussey's argument. He draws the distinction between the power and sovereignty of Christ, as the Eternal Son of God, and as God-man and Mediator. Considered as the Eternal Son of God, as the Word by whom the universe was called into being, he necessarily rules over all, and magistrates derive their power from him : considered as God-man and Mediator, his direct sovereignty is in and over the Church, which is his body ; and all power ha.s been given to him both in heaven and in earth, to be wield- ed by him for the safety and the extension of his spiritual kingdom. A further distinction is drawn by Gillespie be- twixt power over and power in any kingdom, which are not necessarily identical, although the one may be employed for the purpose of promoting and securing the other. In this argument, some have thought that Gillespie has drawn his distinctions too fine, more so than was necessary for his argument, or than many would be able to follow or willing to admit. Beyond all question, he has overthrown the Erastian theory, " that the civil magistrate is Christ's vicegerent, and appointed to govern the Church ;" but some have been afraid that one aspect of his argument might seem to countenance the Voluntary theory, and to exempt civil government from the duty and responsibility of giving countenance and support to the Church. Cer- tainly no such idea was ever in Gillespie's mind, nor is it my opinion that his reasoning, rightly understood, gives it the least shadow of support. Besides, if there be any danger arising from the extreme fineness with which his distinctions are drawn in that branch of his argument, it is 90 254' HISTORY OF THK completely removed by the succeeding chapter, in which he treats " of the power and privilege of the magistrate in things and causes ecclesiastical, what it is, and what it is not." It w^ould be well if magistrates would study care- fully the passage alluded to, that they might acquire some information respecting the proper nature and boundaries of their duties and responsibilities, cicra sacrn^ about reli- gious matters, as distinguished from what they have al- ways been so eager to usurp, power in sncris, in religious matters, which forms no part of their peculiar duty, and is not within their province. The third book, " Of Excommunication from the Church, and of Suspension from the Lord's Table,'' has the appear- ance of being an answer to Prynne, who had written largely against the exercise of such power by Church-officers. But it is evident that Gillespie had more in view than merely to answer Prynne. He makes no express reference to the Parliament's J//S dhnnum queries, but he meets them nevertheless, and gives to them very conclusive answers, while appearing to be merely replying to a less formidable antagonist. The very tenor of Prynne's writings gave him this opportunity, for Prynne kept as closely to the line of the Parliamentary queries as he with propriety could, so that Gillespie was both enabled and fairly entitled to answer both at once, so far as they were identical or similar. The work, in short, is a very complete refutation of the whole Erastian theory, taking up its leading points systematical- ly, clearing away all obscurities of language, reducing every argument to its elementary principles, stating these in the form of simple propositions, and in terms strictly defined, so as to preclude sophistry or mere verbal subtle- ties, and proceeding to refute error and demonstrate truth, in a manner singularly clear and forcible, displaying, each in a very high degree, extensive learning, sound judgment, intellectual acuteness and strength, and the pure and lofty spirit of genuine Christianity. Another very able and elaborate work on the Erastian controversy was written and published also in the year 1646, by Samuel Rutherford, entitled, "The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication." Although Rutherford manifests a thorough understanding of the sub- ject, and treats very fully of all its main elements, exhibit- W KSTM I NSTE li ASS KM \U.Y. 255 inff great learning and extreme minuteness in thonght, ar- gument, and illustration, his work is not, upon the whole, so successful as that of Gillespie. It is defective in point of arrano-ement, and especially for want of a statement of the systematic order which the author meant to follow, though it is perfectly plain that in his own mind there was a system by which he regulated his course of argument. But the very minuteness of his learning and his reasonings is felt to obscure, or rather to overlay the subject; and while tracing out every point of detail, the general impres- sion is either weakened, or fails to be forcibly conveyed. This, however, is criticism according to modern taste ; for the style of the times when Rutherford wrote, was to ex- haust every subject under discussion, and to leave nothing unsaid upon it that could be said. In this respect, there- fore, Rutherford merely followed the spirit of the age in which he lived ; and whosoever will carefully peruse his very elaborate work, will obtain ample materials for the refutation of Erastianism. There appeared another work at that time, not indeed written by one of the Assembly of Divines, but so inti- mately connected with the controversies which were ao-itated among th-em, that it deserves to be mentioned here. This was a treatise written by the celebrated Apol- lonius of Middleburg, entitled " Consideratio Quarundam Controversiarum ad Regimen Ecclesise Dei Spectantium, qua) in Anglise Regno hodie Agitantur." When this trea- tise was published, a copy of it was sent to each member of the Westminster Assembly. " It was," says Baillie, " not only very well taken, but also, which is singular, and so far as I remember, alisque exemplo^ it was ordered, nt^mint contraJicente^ to write a letter of thanks to Apollo- nius."* The spirit of this work is thoroughly Presbyte- rian, encountering alike the theories of the Independents and the iii astians. It consists of seven chapters, each treating of a separate topic briefly, but with great clear- ness and force of reasoning. They are as follows: — " 1. Concerning the qualification of Church members. 2 Con- cernino- a Church covenant. 3. Concerning the Church visible and instituted. 4-. Concerning power ecclesiastical. 5, Concerning ecclesiastical ministry and its exercise. 6. Concerning Classes (Presbyteries) and Synods, and their • Baillie, vol. ii. p. 246. 256 HISTORY or TI!£ authority. 7. Concerning forms or directories of faith and worship." It will at once be seen, that in the discussion of these topics the learned author must come into direct collision Avith both the Independents and the Erastians ; yet his work has very little of a merely controversial charac- ter, being a calm and dispassionate, but very clear and able disquisition concerning these important theological ques- tions. There is another very valuable work by the same author, written a short time before the meeting of the Westminster Assembly, but treating very fully of the Eras- tian theory. Its title is, " Jus Majestatis Circa Sacra ; sive Tractatus Theologicus de jure Magistratus circa reseccle- siasticas." A translation of this work, for the purpose of general circulation, would be a very valuable contribution to tiie cause of religious liberty, which is at present beset by so many and such formidable enemies. But we must quit this digression, however alluring the subject, and return to what remains to be stated respecting the concluding labors of the Westminster Assembly. Enough, if the attention of the reader has been directed lo some of the most important v/orks relating to the great Erastian controversy, which he may peruse for himself. And we do not hesitate to say, tlmt it is scarcely possible for any man, especially for any Christian, to engage in a study of deeper and more universal importance. For it di- rectly involves the glory of the Mediator, as sole head of his body the Church, and sole Kmg in Zion, his spiritual king- dom, — the purity, peace, and freedom of the Church, in its administration, and in the rights and privileges of its mem- bers,— the moral and religious welfare of the community, as involved in, and flowing from, the efficiency and the extension of true and living Christianity, the divinely ap- pointed remedy for the miseries of fallen mankind, — and even the progress of civilisation, the maintenam^e of peace, and the stability of kingdoms, as all depending upon the blessing and the favor and the protection of Him who is " Prince of the kings of the earth." And it is so eminently the great controversy of the present day, that upon its right or wrong determination depends the continuance of peace throughout ^ hristendom, or the speedy commence- ment of commotions and conflicts of the most portentous nature, shaking the foundations of society, and ending in wide-spread anarchy and desolation. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION OF THE WESTMINSTER iiSSEMBLY. The Larger and Shorter Catechisms — Inquiry concernino: their Author ship — Departure of the Scottish Commissioners — Final Dissolution of the Westminster Assembly — The Ratification of the Directory of Worship and of Church Government by the Church of Scotland — Also of the Confession of Faith, with an Explanation Guarding against any Erastian Construction — Brief View of Public Events con- nected with tlie Assembly's Proceedings — Struggle between the Par- liament and the Army — Cromwell's Usurpation — Death of Charles I. — Dissolution of the Long Parliament and the Westminster Assembly — Synod of London — The Independents in Power — Committee of Triers — The Savoy Confession — Restoration of Charles II. — Prelacy Restored — Act of Uniformity and Ejection of Two Thousand Presby- terian Ministers on St. Bartholomew's Day — Retrospective Review and Summary of the Westminster Assem.bly's Proceedings — Religious Uniformity in the Three Kingdoms by Mutual Consultation, intended to Form the Basis of a Secure and Permanent Peace — Erastian Ele- ment and its Consequences — Mutual Misunderstandincrs — Mutual Agreement — Effect on the Universities — On Theolosrical Literature — On Education — State of the Kingdom and Army — Sectarinns — Tolera- tion — Its True Nature Intimated — How Misunderstood by both Par- ties —Liberty of Conscience — Unlimited Toleration not Granted by the Independents when in Power— Great Idea of a General Protest- ant Union entertained by the Westminster Assembly — How yet At- tainable — Conclusion. Although the chief duties for which the Assembly of Divines were summoned to meet at Westminster, may be regarded as having been discharged when they had pre- pared and laid before the Parliament Directories for Public Worship and Ordination, a Form of Government, Eules of Discipline, and a Confession of Faith, yet there remained several matters, subordinate indeed, but still important, on account of which they continued to sit and deliberate for some time longer, an outline of which we now proceed to give, before offering some concluding remarks on the whole subject. 22* 258 HISTORY OF THE A catechism for the instruction of children and of the comparatively ignorant in religious truth will always be regarded as a most important matter by every true Chris- tian Church ; and as the Catechism of the Church of Eng- land was undeniably both meagre and unsound, it formed a part of the Assembly's duty to prepare a more accurate and complete catechism, as a portion of the national sys- tem to be established. The attention of the Assembly was occupied almost entirely by the discussions respecting the Directories of Ordination and Worship, till towards the end of 1644-. They then began to prepare for compos- ing a Confession of Faith and a Catechism ; and according to their usual course of procedure, committees were ap- pointed to draw up an outline, in regular systematic order, for the consideration of the Assembly. But the progress of the Assembly in these points was retarded by the va- rious events which have been already related, so that little was done till towards the end of May, 164.'i. The commit- tees from that time forward carried on their labors in pre- paring the Confession and the Catechism simultaneously, but, as Baillie says, " languidly, the minds of the divines being enfeebled by the delay of the House to grant the petition respecting power to exclude scandalous persons from com- munion." After some progress had been made with both, the Assembly resolved to finish the Confession first, and then to construct the Catechism upon its model, so far at least as to have no proposition in the one which was not in the other ; by which arrangement there would be left scarcely any ground for subsequent debate and delay.* But political movements, answers to the Independents and to the Erastians, and other disturbing influences, so impeded the Assembly's progress, that the Catechisms were not so speedily completed as had been expected. The Shorter Catechism was presented to the House of Commons on the .5th of November, 1647, and the Larger on the 14th of April, 1648. After they had been carefully perused by the Parliament, an order was issued on the 15th of September, 1648, commanding them to be printed for public use. The king, during his residence in the Isle of Wight, after many solicitations, consented to license the Shorter Catechism, * BaiUie, vol. ii. p. 379. WF.STMIN.sTER ASSEMBLV. 259 with a suitable preface ; but as the negotiations did not end in a treaty, that consent was never realized. There had been many inquiries in order to ascertain, it possible, by whom the original draught or outline of the Catechism was prepared, but hitherto without success. In our opinion, there is no reason to think it w^as done by any one person. Committees were appointed to prepare every- tliinor that was to be brought before the Ass^embly. AVe find no separate committee named expressly for the pur- pose of drawing up the Catechism ; and we find repeated proofs of a very close connection between the Catechism and the Confession. It may reasonably be inferred that both subjects were conducted by the same committee, M'hich w^is composed of Drs. Gouge and Hoyle, and Messrs. Herle, Gatak'i, Tuckney, Reynolds, Vines, and the Scot- tish Ministers. Some add Arrowsmith, and Palmer ; both men of great piety, learning and abilities, and the latter termed by Baillie " the best catechist in England." Pal- mer, it appears, was appointed to draw up a section in the Directory of Public Worship, on catechising ; but it did not give satisfaction, and that topic was not inserted in the Directory.* Scarcely could it be called an unfair infer- ence, were we to conclude from this fact that Palmer had no peculiar share in framing the Catechism. It may be mentioned, that Dr. Arrowsmith was appointed Master of St. John's College, Cambridge, in the year 1644, befo.re the Catechism was begun, and that his attendance upon the Assembly after that period was only occasional, in conse- quence of the new sphere of duties on which he was called to enter. Mr. Palmer was also constituted Master of Queen's College, Cambridge, in the same year ; but he continued to attend the Assembly very constantly till the time of his death, in the year 164-7 — at w^hich time the Catechism was still unfinished. It has been also conjec- tured, that the first outline of the Catechism may have been drawn by Dr. Wallis, one of the scribes of the Assembly at that period, and afterwards so justly celebrated as Savi- lian Professor of Geometry at Oxford, and one of the first mathematicians of the age. This conjecture may have arisen from the fact that he wrote a short treatise, entitled, " A Brief and Easy explanation of the Shorter Catechism ;" * Baillie, vol. ii. p. 148. 260 HISTORY OF THE which was so much approved of by the Assembly that they caused it to be presented to both Houses of Parliament.* But in truth, as lias been already suggested, the framing of the Catechism appears to have been the work of the com- mittee, and not of any one individual 5 and it was brought to its present admirable degree of nearness to perfection by the united deliberations of the whole Assembly. The chief matters on account of which the Assembly had been called together being now completed, so far as depended on that venerable body itself, the Scottish com- missioners prepared to take their departure. This, indeed, had to a certain extent already taken place, though not formally. The celebrated Alexander Henderson had been sent to Newcastle to converse with the king, during his majesty's residence along with the Scottish armj^, for the purpose of endeavoring to persuade him to consent to such terms as might form the basis of a satisfactory and perma- nent peace. Exhausted already with the long continuance and severity of his arduous public toils, and finding it im- possible to make any impression on the mind of the infa- tuated monarch, Henderson left Newcastle and returned to Edinburgh, where he soon afterwards died, leaving behind him a reputation unsurpassed by any man since the days of the first reformers. And towards the close of the year 164.6, Baillie obtained permission to leave the Assembly and return to Scotland, that he might communicate to the Com- mission of the Scottish General Assembly what had been done by the Westminster Divines, preparatory for the meeting of the Assembly at Edinburgh in August, 1647, when it was expected that the proceedings of the Westmin- ster Assembly would be formally considered and approved of by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, as the ground of the desired uniformity in religion between the two kingdoms. Gillespie and Rutherford still remained, as the Westminster Assembly had been required by the Parliament to add Scripture proofs to the Confession of Faith ; but Gillespie left London in time to be present in the General Assembly, R\itherford remaining a little longer. It may be stated, that the Assembly had intentionally ab- stained from inserting texts of Scripture in the copy of the Confession first presented to Parliament, not because they • Reid's Lives of the Westminster Divines, vol. ii. p. 214. WESTMINSTER ASSEiMBLY. 261 had themselves any difficulty in doing so, but to avoid giv- ing oii'ence to the Parliament, whose custom had previously been, to enact nothing concerning religion on divine right, or on scriptural grounds.* This change in the procedure of the Parlianient was doubtless intended to cause delay ; but its e fleet was, the rendering of the Confession a much more perfect work than it would otiiervvise have been. On the 24-th of October, 1()47, Samuel Rutherford moved, that it might be recorded in the books of tlie scribes, that the Assembly had enjoyed the assistance of the honorable, reverend, and learned commissioners of the Church of Scotland, during all the time they had been debating and perfecting these four things mentioned in the Covenant, namely, a Director^' for Public Worship, a uni- form Confession of Faith, a Form of Church Government and Discipline, and a public Catechism. The Assembly assented unanimously to this motion ; and Mr. Herle, the prolocutor, rose up, and, in the name of the Assembly, returned thanky to the honorable and reverend commission- ers for their instance. He went on to explain the causes which prevented the Directory from being so well observed as it ought to be, and lamented that the Assembly had not power to call offenders to account. He further adverted to the chaos of confusion in which public aflairs in Eng- gland were continuing, the king having been seized by the army, and the Parliament being overawed by the same usurping power ; acknowledging that their extraordinary successes hitherto had been granted in answer to the pray- ers of their brethren of Scotland, and other Protestants abroad, as well as to their owii.t The business of the Assembly was now virtually at an end. The subjects brought before them by Parliament had been all fully discussed, and the result of their long and well-matured deliberations presented to both Houses to be approved or rejected by the supreme civil power on its own responsibility. But the Parliament neither fully ap- proved nor rejected the Assembly's productions, nor yet issued an ordinance for a formal dissolution of that vener- able body. Negotiations were still going on with the kino- ; and in one of the papers which passed between his majesty and the Parliament, he signified his willingness to • Baillie, vol. iii. p. 2. t Neal, vol. ii. p. 431. 262 HISTORY OF THE sanction the continuation of Presbyteiian Church g-overn- ment for three years; and also, that the Assembly should continue to sit and deliberate, his majesty being allowed to nominate twenty Episcopalian divines to be added to it for the purpose of having the whole subject of religion again formally debated. To this proposal the Parliament refused to consent ; but it probably tended to prevent them from formally dissolving the Assembly, so long as there remain- ed any shadow of hope that a pacific arrangement might be effected wdth his majesty. In the meantime many members of the Assembly, espe- cially those from the country, returned to their own homes and ordinary duties; and those who remained in London were chiefly engaged in the examination of such ministers as presented themselves for ordination, or induction into vacant charges. They continued to maintain their formal existence till the 22d of February, 1649, about three weeks after the king's decapitation, having sat five years, six months, and twenty-two days, in w^hich time they had held one thousand one hundred and sixty-three sessions. They were then changed into a committee for conducting the trial and examination of ministers, and continued to hold meetinofs for this purpose every Thursday morning till the 25th of March, 1652, when Oliver Cromwell having forci- bly dissolved the Long Parliament, by whose authority the Assembly had been at first called together, that committee also broke up, and separated wdthout any formal dissolu- tion, and as a matter of necessity. As the main object of the Westminster Assembly v/as, to frame such a system of Church government and public worship as might unite the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, in religious uniformity ; and as the Assembly had completed its task, the nexi point was to lay the result of its labors before the Church of Scotland, that its con- sent might be obtained. This was in perfect harmony wdlh the whole procedure of Scotland in this great and sacred enterprise. The Church of Scotland had neither the power nor the wish to force its system upon England ; as little would it have submitted to English dictation in a matter so important : and although the English Parliament had not fully ratified all the propositions of the Westmin- ster Assembly, yet, since these wsre completed, the delay WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 26 3 of Eng-land was no sufficient reason why the Church and kingdom of Scotland should also delay, if satisfied with the system which the Assembly of Divines had prepared. Even before the completion of the Westminster Assembly's labors, the Church of Scotland had shown its satisfaction and its readiness to promote the desired uniformity ; for, in he General Assembly held at Edinburgh early in the year 161-5, an act of Assembly was passed on the 3d of Febru- ary, ratifying the Directory of Public Worship ; and on the iDlh of February another act was passed, ratifying the Form of Church Government and Ordination, though these had not yet received the full ratification of the English Parliament. Again, in the General Assembly whi(;h met in August, 164'7, the Confession of Faith was taken into consideration, copies having been previously distributed throughout the Church, and was solemnly ratified by an act of Assembly passed on the 27th of August, 164-7. The Larger and Shorter Catechisms not being ready at that time, owing to the delays which had impeded the progress of the Westminster Divines, were not ratified till the fol- lowing year, when both of them obtained the full sanction of the General Assembly in July, 164-8. It may be necessary to mention, that so jealous was the Church of Scotland lest her sanction should be given to anything which bore an Erastian taint, or might, by per- verse ingenuity, be so construed, that in the act of Assembly which ratified the Confession of Faith, an explanation was inserted, giving the Assembly's understanding of some parts of the second article of the thirty-first chapter, which seemed, or might be interpreted to seem, to grant more power to the civil magistrate in the calling of synods than the Church of Scotland was prepared to admit. And still more completely to guard against the very suspicion of any tincture of Erastianism, the Assembly caused to be printed a series of propositions, or " Theses against Eras- tianism," as Baillie terms them, amounting to one hundred and eleven, drawn up by George Gillespie, embodying eight of them in the act which authorized their publication. It is impossible to peruse these hundred and eleven proposi- tions without being thoroughly convinced, that the General Assembly never would have ratified the Confession of Faith if they had understood it to contain any such Eras* 264 HISTORY OF THE tian taint as some in modern times have affected to dis- cover in It. Let the third section of the twenty-third chap- ter be carefully perused by any intelligent and candid per- son, in connection with the whole proceedings of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, and of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and with the hundred and eleven propositions, and he must conclude that it can- not possibly have an Erastian meaning, even though he should be unable to state what it really does mean; unless, indeed, he were to suppose that the Westminster Assembly and the Church of Scotland did not understand the true meaning of their own propositions. But the truth appears to be, that the learned and able men of that period had so thoroughly studied and mastered the essential elements of the Erastian controversy, that they could state the propo- sitions respecting the duty and power of the civil magis- trate circa sacra, about religious matters, without admitting his possession of any duty and power in sacris, in religious matters, in terms which, to their practised minds, marked the boundaries in sharp and narrow but clear and definite distinctions ; while men who have not so deeply studied these subjects, and whose mental acumen has not been so much exercised, cannot trace, and are perpetually crossing, these boundary-lines, more, it may be, from want of per- spicacity or knowledge, than in wilful perverseness. A full and clear history of the Erastian controversy, stating dis- tinctly the great principles which it involves, and their bearing upon liberty, civil and religious, would be a work of incalculable value at the present time, — that very con- troversy having ajrain begun to disturb men's minds, and threatening to shake to pieces the most valuable institutions, if not to overturn the entire structure of society. Although the course of events has led to the statement of the Westminster Assembly's dissolution, with which this narrative might close, yet, as its influence did not at once terminate with its actual duration, it seems expedient to give a brief outline of some of the leading events which still retained its impress, till they became almost indistin- guishably blended with the onward movements of the na- tional mind and history. It will be remembered that a new element was introduced into the acting powers of the body politic, when, by means of the " self-denying ordinance,' WKSTMINSTEK ASSFiMBLY. 265 members of Parliament were prohibited from holding any post in the army, and new general officers were appointed, while Cromwell contrived to procure a special permission for retaining his military command. From that time for Avard there was a distinction of aims and interests between the Parliament and the army, although they continued their mutual co-operation till the king's power was laid pros- trate. In the Parliament, the Presbyterian party retained the ascendency ; in the army, the Independents appeared to do so, although they formed but one of the many sects of which it was almost entirely composed. For some time after the kiug had taken up his residence at Holmby, the disagreement between the Parliament and the army ap- peared only in the shape of negotiations in the terms of which the two parties could not agree, — the Parliament wishing to disband a large proportion of the troops, and to send a considerable body to Ireland, to suppress the Popish insurrection in that country, — and the army petitioning for au act of indemnity for any illegal actions they might have committed during* the war. This petition was stigmatized by the Commons as of a mutinous tendency, subjecting its promoters to be proceeded against as disturbers of the public peace. The army immediately formed a council of the principal officers, to deliberate for their own protection; and to this was added two soldiers out of each company, to assist the officers in their council. To these soldiers was given the designation, adjutators^ or asslsiants ; but this somewhat pedantic title very speedily degenerated into the more intelligible word, agitators-, — by which name, accordingly, they are best known. The disagreement continuing, the army seized possession of the king's per- son, and marched towards London, declaring their inten- tion to new-model the government, as the only method of securing a settled peace to the nation. Eleven of the lead- ing Presbyterian members of the House of Commons were accused as guilty of high treason, and enemies of the army, and, with equally unwise and unmanly terror, left the House. The city ©f London prepared to meet the danger, — en- rolled the militia, threw up defences, and made ready to repel force by force. But the Parliament was divided. The Speakers of both Houses favored the Independents, 21 266 HISTORY OF THE and the absence of the eleven impeached members discou- raged their party. The two Speakers and about sixty-two of the members retired to the army. This gave to that for- midable power what it wanted — the semblance of being engaged in d fence of the Legislature itself — and with in- creased alacrity it advanced against the city. Strife and confusion had, in the meantime, done their work. \\ ithout men of ability and deteimination to direct and lead them on, the citizens were unable to encounter a veteran army, and London threw open its gates, and submitted to a power, formidable indeed, but utterly unable to have taken forcible possession of tlie city, had it been boldly and vigorously defended. The army having thus manifested its power, recoiled a little and allowed the Parliament to continue to sit and deliberate, as if still the supreme authority in the nation, although the king was carefully retained under the super- intendence of the military leaders. At length Charles con- trived to escape from Hampton Court, with the intention of withdrawing from the kingdom, and seeking the aid of foreign powers to reinstate him on his throne ; but not being able to procure a passage, he entrusted himself to Hammond, governor of the Isle of Wight, by whom he was kept in Carisbrooke castle, in real imprisonment, though treated with respect. A series of negotiations for a treaty was resumed between the king and the Parlia- ment, which, like every preceding attempt, proved abor- tive, in consequence of that strange peculiarity in his ma- jesty's character, the union of inflexible obstinacy in one point, with boundless and incurable dissimulation in every other. At the very time that the king was treating with the English Parliament for peace, he was framing a pri- vate engagement with the Scottish Royalists, by means of which he hoped to recover his power by force of arms. This led to the march into England of another Scottish army, under the command of the Duke of Hamilton, who had obtained a temporary ascendency in the Scottish Par- liament, but against the opposition, and under the protest of the true and faithful Covenanters. Cromwell marched against this army, defeated it, and returned to London de- termined to put an end to the struggle, by putting to death a monarch whose principles were of the most despotic WESTMIiNSTER ASSEMBLY. 267 character, and upon whose most solemn treaties no re.iance could be placed. Again was the Parlinment subjected to military force ; upwards of forty of the Presbyterian mem- bers were cast into confinement ; above one hundred and sixty were excluded from the House ; and none were suf- fered to sit and deliberate but the most determined Secta- rians, in all not exceeding sixiy. This violent invasion of parliamentary rights is commonly termed "Pride's purge," from the name of Colonel Pride, the person who com- manded the military detachment by which it was perpe- trated ; and the parliamentary section which was allowed to remain, is known by the designation of the Kump Par- liament. The republican revolution now swept onward with great rapidity and irresistible force. It was resolved that the king should be brought to trial, as guilty of treason against the people of England, before what was termed a Court of Justice. The House of Lords refused to give their con- sent ; and the Commons voted the concurrence of the Lords to be unnecessary, the people beiug the source of all just power. The unfortunate king was brought before the Court of Justice, and accused of treason. He de- clined their jurisdiction, and defended himself with great dignity and courage. But all his defences were overruled, the dread sentence was pronounced ; and on the 30th of January, 164-9, he perished on the scaffold, the victim of an inflexible attachment to superstitious observances and despotic principles, aud of an incurable perseverance in the arts of dissimulation, yet in his last moments display- ing a degree of personal intrepidity, firmness of character, and Christian-like calmness and elevation of mind v/orthy of a better cause. No sooner had the tidings of the ill-fated monarch's tragic end reached Sci>tland than it called forth a burst of intense sorrow and indignation from the heart of every true Presbyterian Covenanter in the kingdom. Arrange- ments were instantly made for placing the young prince on the Scottish throne, and supporting him there by force of arms, if necessary, provided he would subscribe the Covenant. To this Charles was unwilling to consent, if he could otherwise obtain his purpose ; and with this design held the Scottish commissioners in terms, while conduct* 268 HISTORY OF THE in2^ a private trea}}^ with Montrose, in the hope of securing the kingdom by his means without any stipulation. But while in this he showed proofs of hereditary dissimulation, when Montrose failed, he consented to swear the Cove- nant which he never intended to keep, in this respect com- mitting a crime darker far than any with which his father's memory is chargeable ; for though Charles I. seems to have regarded dissimulation as allowable in diplomacy, which perhaps statesmen in general may be thought also to do, he reverenced an oath, and w^ould not on any account have sworn what he did not intend to perform. But Cromwell was not disposed to permit the establishment of the royal power in Scotland, by which his own su|)remacy might be endangered. He therefore marched northwards at the head of his veteran army, invaded Scotland, and after a series of military movenients, in which he w^as fairly matched by David Leslie, he gained a decisive victory near Dunbar. The Scottish army rallied and took up a strong position near Stirling ; but their flank being turned, and their resources cut off, the young prince adopted the dar- ing enterprise of marching into England, hoping to be joined by the Royalists in that country. His hopes were disappointed, that party being thoroughly broken and dispi- rited ; and being overtaken by Cromwell, a final struggle took place at Worcester, v/hich ended in the total route and dispersion of the royal army. After encountering many perilous adventures and narrow escapes, Charles fled to the Continent, and Cromw^ell returned to London to con- solidate that power in w^iich he had now no rival but the degraded Rump of the Long Parliament. As he no longer needed the services of that faction, he fostered, or at least encouraged a quarrel between the army and Parliament, and taking part w^ith the former, he hastened to the House of Commons, assailed the astonished members with a tor- rent of violent invectives, ordered the mace, " that bauble," to be taken away, called in the military to eject the dis- mayed but struggling members, and having locked the door put the key in his pocket, and returned to Whitehall. So fell the English Parliament beneath the power of milita- ry usurpation ; and at the same moment terminated the Westminster Assembly. It will be remembered, that London and its immediate WESTMIN'STKR ASSEMBLY. 209 vicinity had been formed into twelve Presbyteries, consti- mtiiifT the Provincial Synod of London. This Synod con- tinued to hold regular half-yearly meetings till the year Ui55, without encountering any direct obstruction from Cromwell, but receiving no encouragement. They then ceased to hold regular meetings as a Synod, but continued to meet as Presbyteries, and to maintain, as far as possi- ble, every other point of Fresbyteiian Church government and discipline. It is probable, or rather certain, that their ceasing to act as a Synod was caused by the conduct of Cromwell in regard to religious matters. When, upon the death of the king, the government of England was changed to a commonwealth, an ordinance was passed appointing an engagement to be taken, first by all civil and military officers, and afterwards by all who held official situations in the universities ; and at last it was further ordered that no minister be capable of enjoying any preferment in the Church, unless he should, within six months, take the en- gagement publicly before the congregation. The conse- quence of this was, that while the engagement was readily taken by all the Sectarians, and by many Episcopalians of lax principles, it was refused by great numbers of the Presbyterians, several of whom were in a short time eject- ed from the situations to which they had been appointed by the Parliament. Cromwell and his Council, carrying into full execution this course of procedure, certainly not that of loleration^ immediately placed Independents in the situations thus rendered vacant by the ejection of the Presbyterians, prohibited the publication of pamphlets cen- suring the conduct of the new government, and abolished the monthly fasts, which had continued to be regularly kept for about seven years, and whose sacred influence had often been deeply and beneficially felt by both Parlia- ment and Assembly. The Rev. Christopher Love was be- headed for being engaged in, or cognisant of, a correspon- dence with Scotland for the purpose of supporting the in- terests of Charles IL Not long afterwards, in the year 11)54-, an ordinance of council was issued, appointing a new committee of thirty-eight persons, nine of whom were laymen, to examine and approve all who should be pre« sented, nominated, chosen, or appointed to any benefice with cure of souls, or to any public settled lecture in Eng« 23* 270 HISTORY OF THE land or "Wales. Of this new committee, commonly called Triers, some were Presbj^terians, a large proportion Inde- pendents, and a few were Baptists. Any five were suffi- cient to approve ; but no number under nine had power to reject a person as unqualified. In this manner, although the Presbyterian Church government was not formally abolished by Cromwell, its power was transferred to the hands of the committee of Triers, and consequently the Synods ceased to hold meetings which could no longer exercise ary authority. This committee continued to ex- ercise its functions till the Protector's death in 1659, when it was discontinued. Another ordinance appointed commissioners, chiefly laymen, for every county, with power to eject scandalous ignorant, and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters This also superseded the previous arrangements which had been made by the Long Parliament for a similar pur pose, and tended to bring every ecclesiastical matter under the direct control of the civil power, and in a great mea- sure under the superintendence of the Protector himself and his council. By this ordinance, as well as by that of the Parliament, it was appointed that ample time should be allowed to the ejected person for his removal, and the fifths of the benefice were reserved for the support of his family. When the Prelatic party silenced and deposed the Puritans and Nonconformists of other days, no such generosity was shown to them or their families, but nei- ther the Presbyterians nor the Independents were so for- getful of the principles of Christianity as to requite evil with evil, but showed kindness to their former calumniators and oppressors. The Independents were now raised to the enjoyment of a large measure of power and favor, though the Protector .managed to reserve to himself the reality without the name of ecclesiastical supremacy. They felt accordingly that they might now safely adopt a course on which noth- ing had hitherto been able to induce them to enter, — the preparation, namely, of some public document of the na- ture of a Confession of Faith. To this they had been often urged by the Westminster Assembly, but in vain. They were aware that a full and explicit statement of their principles would deprive them of the support of a large WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. Sl^l proportion of the numerous sects who viewed them as the leading Sectarian party, and might thereby so reduce their influence as to render their hopes of promoting their own system exceedingly feeble. But the Presbyterians were now depressed and overborne ; some of the most danger- ous of tile sects had been forcibly suppressed, such as the Levellers, Fifth Monarchy men, &c. ; and they might new promulgate their own views without incurring the danger of losing valuable adherents. Some of the leading men among them accordingly met in London, and having agreed upon the propriety of framing a Confession of Faith, as had been done by other Churches, they requested permission from the Protector to hold an Assembly for that purpose. This was granted with some reluctance, and tbeir Assembly was appointed to meet at the Savoy, on the 12th of October, 1658. They opened their meeting with a day of fasting and prayer 5 and after some deliberation, resolved to keep as near as possible to the method and order of the Westmin- ster Assembly's Confession of Faith, in framing a similar document for themselves. A committee was chosen to prepare the outline, consisting of Brs. Goodwin and Owen, Messrs. Nye, Bridge, Caryl, and Greenhill. In the short period of about eleven or twelve days they finished their work, which was soon afterwards published under the title of " A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and prac- tised in the Congregational Churches in England, agreed upon and consented unto by their elders and messengers in their meeting at the Savoy." The speed with which they completed their task contrasts very strongly with the manner in which they contrived to retard the progress of the Westminster Assembly, but may be readily explained. They followed the Assembly's Confession very closely, to which indeed their leading men had already assented ; they omitted all the chapters which relate to discipline, thus avoiding the discussion of disputed topics; and they had now no object to serve by delay, but many a motive to induce them to make haste. At the end of their work there is a chapter of discipline, consisting of five sections, and giving a brief statement and assertion of the main points in which their system differed from that of the Presbyterians, respecting the power of single congrega* 272 HISTORY OF THE tions, the method of ordination, the admini-strution of the sacraments, the use of Synods and Assemblies to consult and advise but without authority, and occasional commu- nion with other Churches.* This Savoy Confession, as it is commonly called, never acquired any importance in the community, and did not supersede the Assembly's Confes- sion of Faith even in the estimation of a large proportion of the Independents themselves ; and as Cromwell, the great supporter of the Independent party, died very soon after its production, on the 3d of September, 1658, it never received his public sanction. Upon the death of Cromwell, he was succeeded by his son Richard, a man of an amiable character, but utterly unfit to conduct the government of the country in such a time of storm and peril. A plot w^as formed against him by a part of the army, headed by Fleetwood and Desbo- rough, to whom the leading Independent divines, especially Dr. Owen and Mr. Nye, lent their ready assistance. Rich- ard was persuaded to dissolve the Parliament ; Fleetwood and Desborough, and their party, immediately summoned the Rump of the Long Parliament to re-assemble, and Rich- ard, seeing it impossible to maintain his power without another civil war, and being destitute of military talents, resolved to abdicate his authority, and retire to private life. A new series of dark intrigues followed, in which General Monk acted a prominent part, the issue of which was, the restoration of Charles II. on the 29th of May, 1660. In consequence of the mutual jealousies of the various par- ties, the king was restored without conditions of any kind, and thus the liberties, both civil and religious, of the king- dom, in defence of which so much blood had been shed, and so many miseries endured, were laid at his feet. The Prelatic hierarchy w.ere immediately restored to the pos- session of all their rank, wealth, and power, and speedily proved that the persecuting spirit of Prelacy had sustained no abatement. For a short time the king affected to treat the Presbyte- rian ministers with respect and kindness ; and they were encouraged to hope, that although Prelacy was restored to its former supremacy, yet some modification of it might be made to which it might be possible to conform. Aftei * Neal, vol. i. pp. 690-692. WESTMINSTER ASSFMBT.Y. 273 Fome consultation amon^ themselves, they presented to his majesty a petition expressing their desires for such alterations as might lead to an accommodation and agree- ment in an amended and modified Episcopacy. This peti- tion was communicated to the Prelates, who returned such an answer as greatly to obscure all prospect of any accom- modation. But as matters were not yet ripe for what was intended, the king issued a declaration concerning eccle- siastical attairs, containing so mat»y plausible statements, that the hopes of the Presbyterians were somewhat revived. At length it was arranged that a conference should be held at the Savoy between twelve bishops and nine assistants on the part of the Episcopalian Church, and an equal number of ministers on the part of the Presbyterians. The first meeting of this conference took place on the 15th of April, 1661, and it was continued, with intermissions, till the 2r)th of July, when it expired without producing the slightest approximation towards an agreement, the bishops refusing to make any alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, to which their discussions were limited, or to make any con- cession to the conscientious scruples, or more grave and solid arguments of the Presbyterian ministers.* A convocation was held soon after the termination of the conference, in which a few alterations were made in the Prayer-Book, not all for the better ; and the proceedings of the convocation were ratified by both Houses of Parliament. It now remained to enforce the Prelatic system by the strong hand of legislative power. This was done by the Act of Uniformity, which, after passing both Houses, by small majorities, received the royal assent on the 19th of May, 1662, and was to take effect from the 24th of August following. The terms of conformity specified by this act were: 1. Re-ordination, if they had not been episcopally ordained. 2. A declaration of unfeigned assent and con- sent to all and everything prescribed and contained in the Book of Common Prayer, and administration of sacraments and other rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, together with the psalter, and the form and manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons. 3. To take the oath of canonical obedience. • For a full account of this Conference, see History of iVon-Confor. mit^, Life of Baxter, &c. 274 HISTORY OF THE 4. To abjure the Solemn League and CcTenant. 5. To abjure the lawfulness of taking arms against the kino-, or any commissioned by him, on any pretence whatsoever. Such were the terms of the infamous and tyrannical Act of Uniformity, which was to come into force on what is termed the feast of St. Bartholomew ; and the penalty for any one who should refuse, was deprivation of all his spi- ritual promotions. The result was, that when the fatal St. Bartholomew^'s day arrived, about two thousand Presbyte- rians relinquished all their ecclesiastical preferments, abandoned all their worldly means of subsistence, left their homes, and, m.ore painful than all, their churches and their weeping and heart-stricken flocks, and became literally strangers and pilgrims in their native country, like their Divine Master, not having where to lay their heads. In their day of power, when ejecting Episcopalian ministers convicted of scandalous offences or of ignorance, they had allowed to these men a fifth part of their former livings ; but no similar mercy or charity was shown to them. They were at once driven and abandoned to utter poverty and homelessness ; and to grievous wrong was added not less grievous insult in the cruel and contumelious treatment which they received from their proud and pitiless oppres- sors. Yet in one respect the day of St. Bartholomew^ was a glorious day. It testified to a wondering world the strength and the integrity of Presbyterian principles, in their triumph over every earthly influence ; or rather, let us say, it proved that the essential spirit of the Presbyterian Church is the spirit of Christianity itself, and therefore it received Divine strength in the day of sore trial, that it might finish its testimony in behalf of the sole sovereignty of Christ over his own spiritual kingdom, to the laws and institutions of w^hich man has no right to add, and which he cannot without sin diminish Yes, for the Presbyterian Church, and even for the Westminster Assembly by which that Church had been introduced into England, it was a rrlori- ous day ; but what was it for Prelacy 1 A day of everlast- ing infamy, stamping upon its character indelibly the fact- proved charge of being essentially a PERSECUT1^:G systf.m. But it is equally unnecessary and ungracious to dwell on the detailed results of this tyrannical and persecuting act ; and therefore, with a few incidental remarks of some ffene- V.'ESTHINSTKU ASSE.'MBLV. 275 ral im})ortance, we shall pass from tiie painful subject, [t must have been observed, that the religious body once known by the name of Puritans, l»ecame Presbyterians both in principles and practice, partly before, and thoroug-hly during the time of the Westminster Assembly. Against them, accordingly, as Presbyterians, was the force of perse- cution directed, although the demands and the penalties of the Act of Uniformity were equally applicable to the Inde- pendents and all other sects of Dissenters ; and of the whole two thousand who were ejected by that act, above nine-tenths were Presbyterians. The Independents did not, at that time, number more than an hundred churches in their communion ; the Baptists were still fewer ; and of the other sects, the greater part had only those lay preach- ers who had sprung up during the enthusiastic times of the civil war. Of the divines who had constituted the West- minster Assembly, not more than six, or, in strict propriety, only four, conformed. About thirty of them were dead before the act came into operation, some of them very close upon the time, and one or two almost immediately after preaching what would have.proved by persecution, as they did by death, their farewell sermons. The names of the six who are stated to have conformed were, l)rs. Conant, Wallis, Reynolds, and Lightfoot, and Messrs. Heyri«h and Hodges. But of these Dr. Conant at first refused to conform, was ejected, and continued so for a period of eight years, when tlie persuasion of relatives prevailed on him to comply, and he was appointed to a ministerial charge in Northampton, nnd subsequently obtained other preferments; and Dr. Wallis, who had been one of the scribes to the Westmin- ster Assembly, was made Savilian Professor of Geometry at Oxford, in the year 1649 — an office which in a great measure excluded him from ecclesiastical affairs, and ren- dered the act of conformity to him little different from a university qualification. It thus appears, that almost the entire surviving members of the Westminster Assemblv gave to the principles which they had then declared and advocated the strong and clear testimony of suffering in their defence. Having now stated all the leading events connected with, and resulting from, the Westminster Assembly, we might here conclude ; but in order to obtain as clear and 276 HISTORY OF THE comprehensive a conception of the whole subject as possv ble, it seems expedient to retrace, for the purpose of com- bining in one view its leading principles, characteristics, endeavors, and intentions, offering some remarks explana- tory of their nature, showing how far they were success- ful, or by what and to what extent obstructed, what actual impress they gave to the form of society, or what vital elements they infused into its heart, and how far the great objects which they sought to attain may yet be susceptible of resuscitation and accomplishment. It has been already shown, by a series of historical deductions, that the principle of the sovereign's supremacy in ecclesia^stical matters, conjoined with the encroaching and domineering spirit of Prelacy, had so nearly subverted all liberty, civil and religious, that it became t'he impera- tive duty of every Christian and every patriot to unite in resisting the cruel and degrading thraldom with which the kingdom was threatened. To that subject it is not neces- sary again to direct our attention. Nor need we do more than simply refer to the important fact, that the main pur- pose for which the Westminster Assembly was called toge- ther, and the Solemn League and Covenant was framed, was to produce, so far as might be practicable, unity of religious belief and uniformity in Church government throughout England, Scotland, and Ireland. Even for the sake of pro- curing and maintaining peace among the nations compos- ing the one British empire, such an uniformity was re- garded as almost indispensable. For, as the Scottish com- missioners reasoned, there is "nothing so powerful to divide the hearts of people as division in religion ; nothing so strong to unite them as unity in religion." The same idea was entertained by both James VI. and his son Charles I., and both of them sought to realize it by imposing the English system on the Church and people of Scotland, the one by fraud and the other by force. As might have been expected, neither of them was successful ; but the attempt to realize the idea by such methods, both showed its im- portance, and placed it in a clearer hght, as related to the two kingdoms of England and Scotland. The people of Scotland loved their Church devotedly, not only on account of its purity of doctrine and scriptural simplicity of form, but also because by its means alone had they acquired a WESTIMINSTER A^SKMBLV. 277 partial release from that feudal thraldom in which they had previously been held by their haughty and oppressive nobles. And they were compelled to see that their belov- ed Church would never be safe from the aggressions of Prelacy so long as the prelalic form of Churcirgovernnicnt prevailed in England. On the other hand, the oppressive, persecuting, and despotic conduct of Prelacy, in its treat- ment of the Puritans, and in the aid which it so willingly lent the sovereign in his invasions of civil liberty, had at length aroused the strong and free spirit of England, which deter- mined to shake off the prelatic yoke, and to make such alterations as should render its future re-imposi*tion im- possible. Such a concurrence of sentiment and feeling between the two nations held out the prospect that at least an approach to uniformity of religion might now be ob- tained, such as would form the only sure basis of a tho- rough and permanent national peace, — and that, too, not by one of the two dictating to the olher, but in the only way by which real uniformity can ever be effected, by mu- tual consultation and consent. Such were the enlarged, free, and generous views which led to the calling of the Westminster Assembly, and the framing of the Solemn League and Covenant — such, in an especial manner, were the views entertained by the Scot- tish Covenanters, both statesmen and divines, as is proved by that remarkably able paper presented by them to the English Parliament in the year 1641. It is, however, a painful truth, that these elevated ideas were not received and held with equal fulness, sincerity, and perseverance, by a large proportion of the English statesmen ; and this de- fectiveness on their part allowed the remaining existence and the subsequent growth and development of those dis- turbing influences, which at length prevented the grand object from being fully realized. In England the struggle was chiefly in defence of civil rights and privileges, involv- ing also, though somewhat less directly, the still more im- portant element of religious liberty. Hence the ordinary secular opinions and feelings that mould the course of hu- man action, were allowed to have almost full scope, and produced their common narrowing and self-seeking influ- ence. Had not this been the case, Erastianism would not have characterized so stronffly the conduct of the English 24> 2,78 HISTORY OF THE Parliament, exercising a power so baneful in impeding Ine final settlement of the desired religious uniformity, involv- ing the nation in protracted anarchy, and exposing the cause of freedom to the crushing grasp of military usurpa- tion. There might be traced, did our limits allow it, a very close connection between the development of Erastian principles in the Parliament, and the successive disasters which befel them through the insubordination of the army in its growing republicanism — so close, that the latter would almost seem like the direct infliction of retributive justice upon the former, ending in the completed guilt and the final overthrow of the Parliament being almost simul- taneous. The advantage which would arise to Christendom from the existence of something approaching to a general reli- gious uniformity must be apparent to every reflecting mind, both as a general homage to the certainties of revealed truth, and as itself the master element of general harmony and peace. But it is contrary alike to the nature of reli- gion, and to the constitution of the human mind, to suppose that this desirable object can be obtained by compulsion. Open, candid, brotherlike consultation may do much, when Christian men fairly and honestly wish to arrive at as ".lose a degree of uniformity in doctrine, worship, and govern- ment, as can be attained, with due respect to liberty and integrity of conscience. It was for this very purpose that the Westminster Assembly was called, and that Scottish divines were requested to be present at and aid in its deli- berations. This was right, and bore fair prospect and pro- mise of o-ood ; but mutual jealousies and rivalries arose; men misjudged and misinterpreted each other's intentions; and the intrigues of mere worldly politicians intermin- gled with, biassed and baffled far higher and holier objects than those with which such men are usually conversant. Probably the two parties of a religious character (we speak not now of mere Erastians), of whom the Assembly was composed, the Presbyterians and the Independents, were both in error ; probably they both entertained narrower conceptions of the nature of religious uniformity, and also of religious toleration and liberty, than the terms, rightly undersitood, imply. Uniformity is not necessarily absolute identity. Neither of these two parties held that absolute WESTMINSTRR ASSEIMBLY. 279 identity was necessary, as appears from their respective writings; but each of them dreaded that nothing- less than absolute identity would satisfy the other, and to that nei- ther of them could agree. And this misapprehension was enough, not only to prevent the accomplishment of the purpose for which they met, but even to act as a wedge, rending them daily more widely and hopelessly asunder. Yet in spite of this unpropitious misapprehension, a very considerable amount of religious uniformity was produced. The Independents expressed no dissent from the Confes- sion of Faith and the Directory of Worship prepared by the Assembly. All the Puritan nonconformists received these documents with cordial approbation. Parliament gave to their most important principles and arrangements its legislative sanction, and England was on the very point of being favored with the establishment of a Presbyterian Church. So far did this proceed, that at first the Univer- sity of Cambridge, and afterwards that of Oxford, were new-modelled, and the professorships given to Presbyterian divines. Prelatic writers have been in the habit of repre- senting this change as barbarising these universities. To refute such calumny, nothing more is necessary than to name the men on whom these academic appointments were conferred — men than whom none more eminent for learn- ing, abilities, and true piety, ever graced the universities of any age or country. But something still more striking may be said in answer to prelatic calumny. Not only did the new professors ably sustain the reputation of the Eng- lish universities, they also infused into them a spirit of free- dom, originality, and energy of thought, which burst forth in the manhood of the men trained under their care, with a degree of power and splendor that has scarcely been ever equalled, much less surpassed. In proof of this, it is enough to mention the names of Locke, Boyle, Newton, Tillotson, Stillingfleet, Cave, Whitby, South, and many others. In short, the Presbyterian dynasty of the univer- sities infused into them new life, the vigorous tone and movements of vvhich were not exhausted till the lapse of two o-enerations. Closely associated with the subject of imiversity learn- ing is that of eminence in theological acquirements, and pulpit oratory. On this point also a very prevalent fallacy 280 HISTORY OF THE exists, and is repeated and believed without inquiry. It is very common to meet with extravagant praises bestowed upon the eminent learning and the valuable theologica. works produced by the Church of England ; but it seems to be generally forgotten, that by far the largest and most precious portion of English theological literature was com- posed either by the Puritan divines, or by the Presbyte- rians of the Westminster Assembly, or by the generation which was trained up under them in the universities, [f all the worksproduced by these men were carefully marked and set aside, and the works of none but the genuine Pre- latists were ascribed to the Church of England, her renown for theological literature w^ould be shorn of its beams in- deed. It is not denied that the Church of England has contributed many valuable additions to the literature of Christianity ; and considering the ample means at her com- mand for bestowing on her office-bearers extensive educa- tion and literary leisure, it would have been strange if she had not. But it is not the less true, that a very large share of her reputation is derived from the writings of the Puritan and Presbyterian divines, and their immediate pu- pils, — from the very men whom she calumniated and perse- cuted, and strove to ex'erminate when living, and when dead, has pillaged of their hard-won honors, which she arrogates for her own, or suffers to be ascribed to her by unwise or unblushing flatterers. Not only was an impulse given to the universities during the short prevalence of the Presbyterian Church in Eng- land, but also throughout considerable districts of the kingdom. Strenuous exertions were made to provide an adequate remedy for the deplorable state of ignorance in which the great body of the population had been suffered to remain. The removal of scandalous and ignorant min- isters was the first step taken towards this desirable ob- ject. Another was the sequestration of the surplus wealth of the Prelatic dignitaries ; a portion of which it was in- tended to employ in providing academies, schools, and all that was necessary for instituting a national system of education. This noble and generous scheme also was em- barrassed and impeded by Erastian interference ; because it would have naturally fallen under the superintendence of Presbyteries, to the erection of which throughout the AVESTMI?isTi:R ASSF.iMBLY. 281 kingdc-nn, with full and due powers, they could not be per- suaded to consent. Even when almost paralyzed by this unhappy Krastian interference, the Presbyterian ministers set themselves to promote education to the utmost ol their power. There may still be found, in several country dis- tricts in England, where Presbyterians once abounded, schools having a right to a small salary to the schoolmas- ter, on condition that he should teach the children the As- sembly's Shorter Catechism.* The people of England do not yet know, and cannot easily conceive, how grievous wasthe loss which they sus'tained by the unfortunate failure of the attempt to rende.r the Presbyterian Church the ecclesiastical establishmen.t of the kingdom. To them it would have been a s-ource of almost unmingled and in.cal- culabic good, giving to them the advantage of an evangeli- cal, pious, laborious, and regularly resident minister in every parish, together with cheap and universally accessi- ble educati'on, the constant inspection of elders to watch over their moral conduct, and deacon-s to attend to the wants of the poor i-n the spirit of Christian kindness and benevolence; all regulated by the superintendence of Pres- byteries and Synods, to prevent the hazard of injury from local neglect or prejudice. And surely a truly ^vise and paternalGovernment ought to have rejoiced at the oppor- tunity of attaining so easily advantages so inestimable to the nation at large, and consequently to its rulers, and to all that wished its welfare. All this was once attainable, — was very nearly attained; has it become for ever impos- sible 1 We will not think so ; a time may come. Reference has been repeatedly made to the state of the army, and of the almost innumerable varieties of sects which appeared in it, and throughout the kingdom ; and it has been shown that this strange and formidable chaos of relioious opinions can best be accounted for by attending to the fact, that almost the entire population had been al- lowed, or rather constrained, to remain in a state of deplo- rable ignorance, by the wretched policy of the Prelatists and of the despotic monarchs, who deemed it inexpedient to teach the people to think, lest they should turn their • One of these the author was fortunate enough to assist in rescuing from thor nands of Socinians, a few years ago, on the strength of that !iJv to a Sermon preached before the House of Commons, April 29, 16 16 ; \. 66 WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 287 of the conscience, and condemning persecution. And in Scotland, where the Presbyterian Church was early esta- blished, and repeatedly enjoyed much power, often as that Ch.urch suffered persecution in every form and degree, it never, in its day of power, persecuted its enemies in return. This some will think a strange assertion, accustomed ns they have been to hear so much about Presbyterian into- lerance ; yet it is not more strange than true. And did our space permit, we could furnish ample proof that the true principles of religious toleration were both held and prac- tised in Scotland by the Presbyterian Church, both before Independency had come into existence, and during the very time of the strugcrle between the two parties in England. And even in the Westminster Assembly, at the time when the subject of toleration was under discussion, the true principles of religious liberty were avowedly held and pub- licly taught by the Presbyterian divines, the very men who are so vehemently accused of intolerance, at least as dis- tinctly and earnestly as they were by the Independents. Such sentiments as the following were frequently expressed by them in their public sermons : — '' Fierce and furious prosecution, even of a good cause, is rather prejudice than promotion. We must tenaciously adhere to all divine truths ourselves, and, with our wisest moderation, plant and propagate them in others. Opposites, indeed, must be opposed, gainsaid, reclaimed ; but all must be done in a way, and by the means, appointed from heaven. It is one thing to show moderation to pious, peaceable, and tender consciences; it is another thing to proclaim beforehand toleration to impious, fiery, and unpeaceable opinions." In the last sentence of this quotation a distinction is drawn which touches the essential point of the controversy between the Presbyterians and the Independents. The Presbyterians wished Church government to be established in the first instance, and then a toleration to be granted to tender consciences : the independents, on the other hand, strove to obtain a legislative toleration first, and then it would have been a matter of little moment which, or whe- ther any form of Church government should be established The Presbyterians not only apprehended that this would amount to the establishment of the Independent system, instead of their own, and, consequently, to the frustration •288 HISTORY OF THE of the very object for which the Assembly had met, ztnd for which they had sworn the Covenant, namely, the pro- motion of uniformity in religious matters throughout Pro- testant Christendom, Independency being prevalent in no European country ; but also, they regarded it with strong alarm, as sanctioning all the pernicious heresies with which England abounded, and establishing the principle of universal licentiousne-s. On the other hand, the Indepen- dents knew well, that unless the spirit of a Presbyterian Church should be different in England from what it was in every other country, its establishment would not prevent toleration to the utmost extent that God's Word warrants, and an enlightened conscience can require. Such, indeed, was the conviction of Dr. Owen, who, though not a mem- ber of the Westminsteif Assembly, was thoroughly ac- quainted with many of the leading Presbyterians, knew their sentiments, and understood their system. " Had the Presbyterian government," says he, "been settled at the king's restoration, by the encouragement and protection of the practice of it, without a rigorous imposition of every- thing supposed by any to belong thereunto, or a mixture of human institutions, if there had been any appearance of a schism or separation between the parties, 1 do judge they would have been both to blame ; for they allowed distinct communion upon distinct apprehensions of thins^s belong- ina: to Church order or worship, — all ' keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.' If it shall be asked, Then why did they not formerly agree in the Assembly ( I answer, 1. I was none of them, and cannot tell. 2. They did agree, in my judgment, well enough, if they could have thought so ; and further, I am not concerned in the difference." * The real cause, most probably, why they did not agree, was what has been already suggested, — that the intriguing spirit of Nye involved the Assembly Independents in the political schemes of Cromwell. But though that ambitious man made use of them to promote his designs, by retard- ing the settlement of anything till his power was matured ; and though he continued to bestow upon them the chief share of his favor after he had seized upon the sceptre of * Inqiiiry into the Original, &c., of Evangelical Churches. Works working?, especially now, when they are made operative, and shall be set on work at the first advantage, by their vindictive disposition to be avenged upon ns for the present quar- rel, which can never be chanL'ed by any limitations. As, on the con- trarv, the cause being taken away, the effects will cease, and the peace shall be firm. It would seem that limitations, cautions, and trienninl Parliaments, may do much ; but we know that fear of perjury, infamy, excommunication, and the power of a National Assembly, which w;is in Scotland as terrible to a bishop as a Parliament, could not keep our men from risinc to be prelates; and after they had risen to their greatness, their apolocry was, — 'These other catttions or conditions were rather accepted of for the time, to prevent all occasion of jangling xoith the con- tentious, than out of any purpose to obsrve them forever.' Much is spoken and written for the limitations of bishops; but what good can their limitation do to the Church, if ordination and ecclesiastical juris- diction shall depend upon them, and shall not be absolutely into the hands of the assemblies of the Church; and f it shall not depend upon 26* 306 .'iPI'EMDIX. them, what shall their oflice be above other pastors ? or how shall their labors be worthy so large wages '/ What service can they do to King;, Church, or State ? Roine and Spain may be glad at the retaining of the name of Bishops, more than the Reformed Churches, which expect from us at this time some matter of rejoicing. 3. The Reformel Churches do hold without doubting, their Church- officers, Pastors, Doctors, Elders, and Deacons, and their Church gov- ernment by Assemblies, to be jure divino, and perpetual, as is manifesf in all their writings. And on the other hand. Episcopacy, as it difiereth from the office of Pastor, is almost universally acknowledged, even by th? bishops themselves, and their adherents, to be but a human ordi- nance, established by law and custom for conveniency, without war- rant of Scripture: Avhich, therefore, by human authority may be altered and abolished, upon so great a conveniency as is the hearty conjunction with all the Reformed Churches, and a durable peace of the two king- doms, which have been formerly divided by this partition-wall. We therefore desire, that jus divinum and humanum, conscience and con- veniency, yea, the greater conveniency with the lesser, and, we may add, a conveniency and an inconveniehcy, may be compared, and equally weighed in the balance, without adding any weight of prejudice. 4. The Church of Scotland, warranted by authority, hath abjured Episcopal government, as having no warrant in Scripture, and by solemn oath and covenant divers times before, and now again of late, hath es- tablished the government of the Church by Assemblies; but England, neither having abjured the one nor sworn the other, hath I ibert}^ from all bands of this kind to make choice of that which is most warrantable by the Word of God. And, lest it be thought that we have wilfully bound ourselves of late by oath that we be not pressed with a change, we desire it to be considered, that our late oath was nothing but the renovation of our former oath and Covenant, which did bind our Chui'ch before, but was transgressed of many by means of the prelates. 5. If it shall please the Lord to move the king's heart to choose this course, he shall, in a better way than was projected, accomplish tlie great and glorious design which King James had before his eyes all his tiine, of the unity of religion and Church government in all his dominions, — his crowns and kingdoms shall be free of all assaults and policies oi Churchmen. Which, whether in the way of ecclesiastical jurisdictiv/n and Church censure, or by complyins: with the Pope, the greatest enewiy of monarchy; or by bringing civil governments into a confusion, or by taking the fat of the sacrifice to themselves, when the people are pleased with the government, and when they are displeased, by transferring the hatred upon authority, — which was never woo* to be done by any good statesmen : all which, all these ways, have proceeded from bishops seek- ing their own greatness, never from Assemblies, which, unless overruled by bishops, have been a strong guard to monarchy and magistracy, — both the one and the other being the ordinances of God. The Church shall be peaceably governed, by common consent of Churchmen, in As- semblies, — in which the king's majesty hath always that eminency which is due unto the supreme magistrate, and by which all heresies, errors and schisms, abounding under Episcopal government, shall be suppress- ed ; and the State, and all civil matters, in Parliament, Council, and other inferior judicatures, governed by civil men, and not by Churchmen. APPEKDIX. 307 —who, being out of the.'r own clement, must nee']?; stir nnd make trou- ble to themselves and the whole Slate, as woful experience hath lauj^ht. The work shall be better done, and the means which did uphold their unprofitable pomp and greatness may supply the wants of many preach-- jng ministers to be provided to places; and, wilhout the smallest lo?s or aamagc to the subjects, may be a great increase of his majesty's reve- Jines. His royal authority shall be more deeply rooted in the united hearts, and more strongly guarded by the joint forces, of his subjects, as if they were a. 1 of one kingdom; and his greatness shall be enlarged abroad by becoming the head of all the Protestants in Europe, to the ^'reater horror of his enemies, and to the sowing of greatness to his pos- terity and royal succession. All which we entreat may be represented unto his majesty and the Houses of Parliament, as the expression of our desires and fears, and as a testimony of our faithfulness in acquitting ourselves in the trust committed unto us; but no ways forgetting our distance, or intending to pass our bounds, in prescribirig or setting'down rules to their wisdom and authority, which we do highly reverence and honor, and from which only, as the proper ibuntain, the laws and order of reformation in this Church and Policy must proceed, for the nearer union and greater happiness of his majesty's dominions," Let the thoughtful reader ponder well the deep meaning of this remark- able document ; and while he will perceive in it a complete vindication of the Church of Scotland, he will also be constrained, when he contem- plates the present sufferings of that Church, to admire the almost pro- phetic foresight of that great man by whom i1 was written, who saw clearly that the Prelatic spirit would never cease to strive for the over- throw of the Presbyterian Church. II. (Seepages 174,207.) So much reference has been made by a certain class of writers to the name and reputation of the learned Selden, and the influence which he is said to have exercised in the Westminster Assembly, that I have tliou2:ht it expedient to state his arguments more fully in the body of the Work than their own merit seems to me to deserve. ' I have given them also as reported by Lightfoot, who being likewise an Erasf ian"^ cannot be suspected of doin^r them in injustice. But as the same discussion is reported in Gillespie's own notes of the Assembly's proceeding's, I am persuaded that the general reader will peruse the following extra«:t with considerable curiosity and interest : — " DEBATE RESPECTIJCG MATTHEW XVIII. « Mr. Selden said. There is nothing in Matthew xviii. cf excommunN cation or jurisdiction, which could not be exercised by the ancient 308 APPENDIX. Church, till the Church of Rome got their power from the emperor- That some late men — as Dominicus Solo, and Sayrus, and Henriquez— say that there is some power given to the Church, which the Church afterwards did specificate to be a power of excommunication. He said, Matthew's Gospel was the first that was written, about eight years aftei Christ's ascension, the first year of Claudius ; that it was written in Hebrew, and translated into Greek by John ; that though the Hebrew that Matthew wrote be not extant, yet two editions of the Gospel (are) in Hebrew, one by Munster, another by Tilius ; that we find in Tilius' edition Kahal, Matt, xviii., and Guedah, Matt, xviii., though in Mun- ster's Kahal be in both places. Now, there being no place of the New Testament written when this was written, we must expound it by the custom of the Jews, which, according to the law (Lev. xix. 17), was, that when one oflended his brother, the offended brother required satis- faction ; and if he get it not, speak to him before two or three witnesses ; and if he hear them not, to tell it to a greater number (for which he of- fered to show many Hebrew authors and Talmudists). That they had in Jerusalem, beside the great sanhedrim, two courts of 23, and in every city one court of 23. That the casting out of the synagogue was only the putting of a man in that condition that he might not come within four cubits of another; that any man being twelve years of age might excommunicate another ; not that he was altogether cast off from having anythinsT to do with the synagogue. He said the convocation was called C'lerus Anglicanus, and the parliament Populus Anglicanus. So here Guedah and e^-vA^tio signifies only a select number ; that the word is used in one place for woman ; Deut. xxiii., shall not enter into the con- gregation. That Christ, when he said 'Die Ecclesioe,' was in Caper- naum, where there was a court of 23 ; that the meaning is, tell the san- hedrim, which can redress the wrong. That if the Jewish State had been Christian, their civil government might have continued, though the ceremonies were gone ; so that ecclesia here would have been a civil court." Gillespie's answer, as given by himself, is as follows : — " It is a spiritual, not a civil, court which is meant by ' the Church,' Matt, xviii.; for, 1. Subjecia materia is spiritual. If thy brother tres- pass against thee, is not meant of personal or civil injuries, but of any scandal given to our brother, whereby we trespass against him, inas- much as we trespass against the law of charity, Augustine and Testatns expound it of any scandal, and the coherence confirmeth it; for scandals were spoken of before in that chapter. 2. The end is spiritual — the gaining of the offender's soul, which is not the end of a civil court. 3. The persons are spiritual, for Christ speaks to his apostles. 4. The manner of proceeding is spiritual (verses 19, 20) — prayer, and doing all in the name of Christ; which places, not only our Divines, but Testatus and Hugo Cardinalis, expound of meetings for Church censures, not of meetings for worship. 5. The censure is spiritual — binding; of the soul, or retaining of sins. (Verse 18, compared with Matt. xvi. 19 ; John XX. 23.) 6. Christ would not have sent his disciples for pi-ivate inju- ries to a civil court, especially those Avho were living among heathens, (1 Cor. vi. 1). 7. If we look even to the Jewish customs, they had spi- ritual eensures. To be held as a heathen man and a publican, imports APPENDII. 309 a restraint fl sacr/s ; for heathens were not admitted into the temple. (Ezek. xliv. 7, 9; Acts xxi. 28). So the profane were debarred from the temple. Josephus 'Aniiq., lib. xix. chap. \7) tells us that one Simon, a doctor of the law of Moses, in JenisahMn, did accuse Kiii^ As;rippi as a wiciied man, that should not l)e admitted into the temple. Pliilo Lib. De Sacrificaniibus) writelh, it was the custom in his own time that a raanslayer was not admitted into the temple. The Scripture also giveth li'^ht in this ; for if they that were ceremonially unclean might not entei into the temple, how shall we think that they which were morally un- clean might enter ?" The close coincidence of the debate, as here given, with the account of it in Lightfoot's journal, will at once be perceived, confirming the authenticity of both ; the chief difference between them being, that Gil- lespie's is the more clear and succinct of the two, as might have been expected from his intellectual pre-eminence. V^^'hile giving some fragmentary records of the opinions of the leading men among the Westminster Divines on peculiar points, it may not be inexpedient to show what were the sentiments of Gillespie on the sub- ject of the election of ministers, and how far these were entertained by the Church of Scotland at that period, and are identical with those held by the Evanijelical majority of the present time. The arguments of Henderson, Gillespie, and Rutherford have been already stated, as used by them in the debate on the subject, an account of which will be found in pa2:e 151 of this work. On a subsequent occasion, when Gillespie, in ins Male Audis, was answering the Erastian arguments of Coleman and Hussey, the subject came asain under discussion, and drew forth from Gillespie a re-statement of his opinion. Hussey had boldly af- firmed, that the Parliament may require such as they receive for preach- ers of truth, " to send out able men to supply the places, and that ivithoiU any rei^ard to the allowance or disallowance of the people." This truly tyrannical theory Gillespie strongly condemns; reminds his opponent that one, and not the least, of the controversies between the Papists and the Protestants is, what right the Church hath in the vocation of minis- ters ; refers to the Helvetic Confession, which says, that the riglit choosing of ministers is by the consent of the Church, and to the Belgic Confession, which says, " We believe that the ministers, seniors, and deacons, ou;a''|es 1 1012 01236 0857