n I S T O K 1 C A L I N Q U I li Y 
 
 PRINCIPLES, OPINIONS, and j s.\(, 
 
 NGLISH PRESBYTERIANS. 
 
 iMMci: I I \ i: Sim. LIN 
 
FROM THE LIBRARY OF 
 REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON. D. D. 
 
 BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO 
 
 THE LIBRARY OF 
 
 PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 Sectio. /0/9Y 
 
AN 
 
 HISTORICAL INQUIRY 
 
 CONCERNING THE 
 
 PRINCIPLES, OPINIONS, AND USAGES, 
 
 ENGLISH PRESBYTERIANS; 
 
 FROM THE RESTORATION OF CHARLES THE SECOND 
 TO THE DEATH OF QUEEN ANNE. 
 
 BY JOSHUA WILSON, ESQ. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 H. FISHER, R. FISHER, AND P. JACKSON. 
 
 1835. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The following work, compiled since the autumn of last 
 year, and written amidst the pressure of numerous 
 public engagements, has grown from a pamphlet of a 
 few sheets, which Avas all that the writer originally 
 intended, to its present hulk. The general object of it 
 is to prove, that the Enghsh Presbyterians, from the 
 Revolution to the death of Queen Anne, adhered, from 
 conviction, to the orthodox faith professed by their 
 predecessors during the Long Parliament; but it has 
 chiefly assumed the form of an Answer to statements 
 contained in several publications which induced him to 
 undertake the Inquiry. Of the two pampldets to which 
 most frequent reference is made in the following pages, 
 the chief design of the writers is to shew, that (as one 
 of them asserts) " at the beginning of the last century, 
 the two bodies of Presbyterian and Congregational 
 Dissenters were opposed to each other on the same 
 essential points" on which modern Independents and 
 Unitarians are now opposed. 
 
 Such a question, it is obvious, can only be deter- 
 mined by an appeal to historical evidence. This the 
 writer found to be a task involving an extent of research, 
 and a degree of labour, far beyond his anticipation. The 
 method, however, which at first he prescribed to himself 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 still appears to him the only satisfactory mode of arriving 
 at a just conclusion ; that is, hy a careful examination 
 of books and pamphlets written by eminent English 
 Presbyterian divines during this period, for the purpose 
 of collecting the evidence therein supplied, of the views, 
 opinions, and sentiments of the body to which they 
 l)elonged; especially where they had acted, and pro- 
 fessed to speak, in the name of their brethren — and 
 particularly of such papers as partake in any degree of 
 the nature of public documents or official statements. 
 The persons from whose works the most numerous ex- 
 tracts have been made, are Mr. Baxter and Dr. Daniel 
 Williams, both of whom took a prominent part in the 
 affairs of the Presbyterian body. 
 
 The writer can solemnly declare that he has not 
 mutilated the language, or wilfully perverted the 
 meaning, of any author whom he has quoted ; and, to 
 avoid even the appearance of so doing, he has generally 
 considered it preferable to insert extended and con- 
 tinuous extracts. He has endeavoured to arrange his 
 materials as much as possible in a chronological order, 
 and, in all cases, has been careful to mention exact 
 dates, and to insert particular references to books and 
 pamphlets quoted, which, he liopes, will ])e found 
 accurate. 
 
 JOSHUA WILSON. 
 
 Highbury Place, 
 April 28, 1835. 
 
AN 
 
 HISTORICAL INQUIRY 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 THE ENGLISH PRESBYTERIANS. 
 
 Several pamphlets, published during the last year, contain 
 statements and assertions in reference to the English Pres- 
 byterians of the period to which the following pages chiefly 
 relate,* which the writer, who has been engaged for several 
 years in a course of historical inquiries concerning English 
 Protestant Dissenters, deems to be at variance with truth, and 
 injurious to the memory of those venerable men who were 
 the founders of a numerous and flourishing community of 
 christian professors. To " compare those statements with 
 actual facts," (in the language of one of these publications,) 
 and to produce evidence in support of very different, and, on 
 some important points, totally opposite representations, is the 
 object of the investigation about to be submitted to the candid 
 and impartial judgment of the reader. 
 
 The first assertion which I shall notice is, that during the 
 period in question there was so wide and irreconcileable a dif- 
 ference between the Presbyterians and the Independents, that 
 friendly alliance or harmonious co-operation was rendered im- 
 practicable. " Every stage of the history of the English Presby- 
 terians," says a writer who speaks in the name of an Association 
 recently formed, " marks a distinguishing difference between 
 them and the Independents." f " For a short time," says Mr. 
 Hunter, " there was an attempt at union of the Independents 
 and the Presbyterians. The idea was, that they were united 
 
 * A. D. 1660 — 1714, afterwards generally indicated by ^' the period in question." 
 t " The History, Opinions, and present Legal Position of the English Presby- 
 terians ;" published under the direction of " The English Presbyterian Association" 
 — 1834, p. 30. I have assumed that this was written by an individual. 
 
in the same cause, the doing good by a more energetic and 
 effective ministry than the church provided. The union 
 began in 1691, and was dissolved in 1694. It was impos- 
 sible that two parties, so different in sentiment, should act 
 cordially together for any long time." * 
 
 I shall first direct the reader's attention to the chief points 
 of distinction between these two bodies, previously to the 
 event of 1691. 
 
 The differences which existed between them during the Long 
 Parliament and the Commonwealth, were entirely of an eccle- 
 siastical nature. These were neither so great nor so important 
 as some fierce and angry zealots for a National Establishment 
 founded on the divine right of Presbytery, who viewed all 
 other opinions concerning church government through the 
 distorting medium of prejudice — and those who held them with 
 the malign aspect of intolerance — were anxious to represent. 
 In the eyes of moderate men of both opinions, their differ- 
 ences appeared inconsiderable ; and had not the absurd 
 attempt been urged forward on the part of the high Presby- 
 terians, to enforce a strict uniformity of practice by authority of 
 law, they might have been speedily accommodated. In 1643, 
 the famous Assembly of Divines was convened at Westminster, 
 by order of both Houses of Parliament, to give their opinion 
 and advice concerning church matters. Five of these, who 
 were Independents, and were called " The Dissenting Bre- 
 thren," presented to the two Houses a statement of their 
 principles, entitled " An Apologetical Narration," printed this 
 year, in which they speak of their agreement with the greatest 
 part of their brethren in all points of doctrine as notorious 
 and undisputed ; and represent their differences about " wor- 
 ship and discipline" as comparatively small. Mr. Herle, a 
 moderate Presbyterian, afterwards prolocutor of the Assembly, 
 in the preface to a tract against Independency, (4to. 1643,) thus 
 addresses some friends, for whose satisfaction it had been 
 written : — " However, for the difference between us and our 
 
 * " The Attorney General versus Shore. An Historical Defence of the Trustees 
 of Lady Hewley's Foundations, and of the Claims upon them of the Presbyterian 
 Ministry of England. By the Rev. Joseph Hunter, F. S. A. — 1834." p. 71. 
 
brethren that are for Independency, 'tis nothing so great as you 
 seemed to conceive it. We do but (with Abraham and Lot) 
 take several ways: we are (as Abraham speaks) brethren 
 still, and (as they were) ready to rescue each other, on all 
 occasions, against the common enemy. Our difference is such 
 as doth, at most, but rit^e a little the fringe, not any way 
 rend the garment of Christ : 'tis so far from being a funda- 
 mental, that 'tis scarce a material one — nay, not so much as 
 the form, 'tis but the better or worse way for the exercise of 
 the same form of discipline, that is in question ; the that it 
 he, and ivhat it be, and which it be, is agreed on amongst us ; 
 'tis but the ivhose it be we differ in, and herein too, not so much 
 ivhose neither, as ivhere it be, whether in every congregation 
 apart, or of the same men joined with the like of other con- 
 gregations in a Synod." 
 
 One of the writers now to be examined, while endeavouring 
 to estabUsh, by an appeal to history, what he calls " the great 
 practical distinction between the Presbyterians and the Inde- 
 pendents," declares that " human symbols of belief and confes- 
 sions of faith were constantly objected to by the former, who cen- 
 sured the imposition, and opposed all compilations of creeds."* 
 
 I admit that the Presbyterians did not impose or authorita- 
 tively require subscription to any creed, confession, or articles ; 
 but neither did the Independents, who objected on principle 
 to such impositions, equally with their Presbyterian brethren. 
 But while both opposed the strict enforcement of creeds, 
 considered as tests, and used for that purpose, neither of them 
 objected to the compihng of documents for the purpose of 
 declaring to the world their opinions on theological topics. 
 The Westminster ecclesiastical council, in which the Presby- 
 terians were the largest and prevaihng party, drew up three 
 documents of this description, which, though intended to be 
 applied to different uses, all embody the substance of their 
 doctrinal tenets, or what they regarded as the truth contained 
 in the Holy Scriptures. These were : — a Confession of Faith, 
 and a longer and a shorter Catechism. They had previously 
 
 * " The History, Opinions," &c. pp. 18, 37. This pulilication is quoted in 
 subsequent pages, under the abbreviated form — " Hist." 
 B 2 
 
revised the first fifteen of the Thirty-nine Articles, with " the 
 design of rendering their sense more express and determinate 
 in favour of Calvinism."* 
 
 But, though decided and thorough Calvinists, they were 
 strongly opposed to Antinomian tenets, then recently broached 
 in P^ngland, against which they openly protested. 
 
 As the Assembly were for strengthening the doctrines 
 of the church against Arminianism^ they were equally soli- 
 citous to guard against the opposite extreme of Antino- 
 mianism ; for which purpose they appointed a committee to 
 peruse the writings of Br. Crisp, Eaton, Saltmarsh, and others ; 
 who, having drawn out some of their most dangerous positions, 
 reported them to the Assembly, where they were condemned, 
 as well as confuted in their public sermons and writings. 
 
 A Confession of Faith, with Scripture proofs, drawn up by 
 several committees, and consisting wholly of Doctrinal articles, 
 was adopted in 1648, with some alterations, by both Houses 
 of Parliament. Other chapters relating to Discipline were 
 afterwards laid aside; and, though found connected with 
 the rest in printed copies, had not the sanction of law in 
 England, which the whole soon obtained in Scotland. " This 
 Confession," says Neal, " with all its faults, has been ranked by 
 very good judges among the most perfect systems of divinity 
 that have been published upon the Calvinistic or Anti-Armi- 
 nian principles, in the last age." 
 
 " While the Confession was carrying through the Assembly, 
 committees were appointed to reduce it into the form of Cate- 
 chisms ; one larger, for the service of a public exposition in 
 the pulpit, according to the custom of foreign churches ; the 
 other sinaller, for the instruction of children ; in both which, the 
 articles relating to church discipline are omitted. The larger 
 catechism is a comprehensive system of divinity; and the 
 smaller, a very accurate summary, though it has been thought 
 by some a little too long, and in some things too abstruse, for 
 
 • Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. iii. p. 68, edit. 1736. The revised Articles 
 may be seen in the Appendix, pp. 555-563. The statements contained in this 
 and the two following pages are derived entirely from Neal, and expressed chiefly 
 in his words. 
 
the capacities of children." The shorter catechism was pre- 
 sented to the House of Commons, Noveinber 5, 1647; the 
 larger, with marginal proofs from Scripture, which the Houses 
 desired might be inserted, was allowed to be printed, bi/ autho- 
 ritij, for public use, September 15, 1648.* 
 
 Mr. Baxter speaks of this Assembly in the following terms : 
 ' As far as I am able to judge, by the information of history, 
 and by any other evidences, the christian world, since the days 
 of the apostles, had never a synod of more excellent divines, 
 than this and the Synod of Dort.' They were (adds Neal) in 
 high esteem in the learned world, till they ran into heats, and 
 split upon the fatal rock of the divine right of the Presby- 
 terian government. This engaged them first with the Par- 
 liament, and then with the Independents and Erastians. Their 
 opposing a Toleration raised them a great many enemies, and 
 divided their own body.f 
 
 A little before his death, in September, 1658, the Indepen- 
 dents petitioned Oliver Cromwell for liberty to hold a synod, 
 in order to publish to the world an uniform Confession of their 
 Faith. They were now become a considerable body, their 
 churches being increased, both in city and country, by the 
 addition of great numbers of rich and substantial persons; 
 but they had not agreed upon any standard of faith or disci- 
 pline. The Presbyterians, in the Assembly of Divines, had 
 urged them to this ; and their brethren in New England had 
 done it ten years before. Nor were the English Independents 
 insensible of the defect: ' for hitherto (say they) there have 
 been no association of our churches, no meetings of our mi- 
 nisters, to promote the common interest ; our churches are like 
 so many ships, launched singly, and sailing apart and alone in 
 the vast ocean of these tumultuous times, exposed to every 
 wind of doctrine ; under no other conduct than the word and 
 Spirit, and their particular elders and principal brethren ; with- 
 out associations among themselves, or so much as holding out 
 a common light to others, whereby to know where they were.' 
 To remedy this, some of their divines and principal brethren 
 in London met together, and proposed that there might be a 
 correspondence among their churches, in city and country, 
 
 * History of the Puritans, vol. iii. pp. ;^80-382. t Ibid. p. 49."?. 
 
for counsel and mutual edification : and forasmuch as all sects 
 and parties of Christians had published a Confession of their 
 Faith, they apprehended the world might reasonably expect it 
 from them. For these reasons, they petitioned the Protector 
 for liberty to assemble for this purpose. This was opposed 
 by some of the court, as tending to establish a separation 
 between them and the Presbyterians ; nor was the Protector 
 himself fond of it : however, he gave way to their im- 
 portunity. 
 
 This Assembly, which consisted of ministers and mes- 
 sengers from above one hundred churches, met at the Savoy, 
 Oct. 12, 1658. "After some debate, whether they should 
 adopt the doctrinal Articles of the Westminster Assembly for 
 their own, with some amendments and additions, it was thought 
 more advisable to draw up a new confession, but to keep as 
 near as possible to the method and order of the other." After 
 deliberating eleven or twelve days, they agreed on a Con- 
 fession, which was published under the title of " A Declaration 
 of the Faith and Order owned and practised in the Congre- 
 gational Churches in England," &c. 
 
 This Confession proceeds upon the plan of the Westminster 
 Assembly, which made the work very easy ; and, in most places, 
 retains their very words. The compilers mention, in their 
 preface, that they fully consent to the Westminster Confession 
 for the substance of it, but have taken liberty to add a few 
 things, in order to obviate some erroneous opinions that have 
 been more boldly maintained of late than in former times. 
 They have likewise varied the method in some places, and 
 have here and there expressed themselves more clearly. 
 They have omitted all those chapters in the Assembly's 
 Confession which relate to discipline, and some other points, 
 as " doubtful assertions and speculations," most unsuitable to 
 be " placed under so high a title as a Confession of Faith." 
 " But, upon the whole, (adds Mr. Neal,) the difference be- 
 tween these two Confessions, in point of doctrine, is so very 
 small, that the modern Independents have in a manner laid 
 aside the use of it in their famiUes, and agreed with the 
 Presbyterians in the use of the Assembly's Catechism."* 
 
 • Neal'd Hist. Pnr. Vol. IV. orig. edit, pwn, I7:iR, pp. KJl — 1«1, 
 
" The Savoy Declaration," says Mr. Orme, in his Memoirs 
 of Dr. Owen, " contains the same views of Christian doctrine 
 with the Westminster Confession." He concludes his account 
 of it in these words — " The Savoy Declaration has never been 
 much known, or generally used, even among Independents. 
 As it was not intended to be a test or bond, and could not be 
 enforced, it has never been regarded as an authority. The 
 principles of the body are adverse to all such views, or uses, 
 of any merely human production. Being substantially the 
 same with the Westminster Confession and Catechisms, which 
 are more easily to be met with, it seems gradually to have 
 given place to them," pp. 233, 240. 
 
 Baxter, who looked with no favourable eye on this Assem- 
 bly, took a serious objection to one article in their Declara- 
 tion, which it appears he completely misunderstood. This 
 related to the imputation of the righteousness of Christ for 
 justification, concerning which his views differed from those 
 held by Dr. Owen, who took a leading part in the consult- 
 ations at the Savoy. Baxter had published, in 1655, a book 
 entitled, " Richard Baxter's Confession of his Faith, especially 
 concerning the Interest of Repentance and sincere Obedience 
 to Christ, in our Justification and Salvation ;" 4to. Of 
 this book, the author himself speaks in the following terms — 
 " In my Confession, I opened the whole doctrine of anti- 
 nomianism which I opposed ; and I brought the testimonies of 
 abundance of our divines, who gave as much to other acts 
 besides faith in justification, as I. I opened the weakness of 
 Dr. Owen's reasonings for justification before faith, in his 
 former answer to me : — to which he wrote an answer, an- 
 nexing it to his confutation of Biddle and the Cracovian 
 Catechism, to intimate that I belonged to that party ; that 
 I thought it unfit to make any reply to it."* Some extracts 
 follow: — " I have two sorts of men to address my speech to : 
 1. Those divines that go the way of the Libertines (commonly 
 called Antinomians) in whole or in part ; for these, I perceive, 
 are most deeply offended with me. 2. Some orthodox sober 
 
 * Narrative of his Own Life and Times, folio, 1696. Part I. p. ill. 
 
divines, who are offended with me for some lesser differences 
 wherein I seem to them to affect singularity, and too easily to 
 depart from the common judgment of the reformed churches. 
 
 " Were England well rid but of Libertinism, Socinianism, 
 and Popery, it were a happy land."* 
 
 He tells the reader, " I will make a true confession of my 
 faith, by which you may judge of Mr. Eyre's and Mr. Crandoris 
 charge of Popery, Socinianism, Arminianism, &c."t 
 
 He then declares his faith in these general terms : — " I do 
 believe the holy canonical scriptures, and all things therein 
 contained, to be infallibly true, as being the word of God : 
 And I do beheve it to be a sufficient and perfect rule or law, 
 needing no additions of tradition or human testimony, to 
 supply its defects, though it suppose some tradition and human 
 testimony as necessary to its promulgation and explication. 
 
 " Seeing the main point wherein we differ from the Papists, 
 is in maintaining the sufficiency of the scripture, I suppose I 
 need not add any creed or other confession as necessary to be 
 subscribed, as if this word alone were an insufficient test to try 
 by who is orthodox, and of the right religion : so that I think 
 I have in this made a sufficient confession, did not men's 
 misapprehensions require more." 
 
 He then states this objection — " The Socinians and Armi- 
 nians believe the sufficiency of scripture;" which he thus 
 answers, — " So long there is the more hope of their reduction. 
 But they believe not some plain particular doctrines of scrip- 
 ture. The Socinians beheve not the Godhead of Christ, or 
 the Holy Ghost, though the first be oft in terms, and the latter 
 at least in sense, expressed in the scripture. Nor do they 
 believe Christ's satisfaction : therefore they do not beheve the 
 doctrine of the scriptures, though they beheve in general that 
 the scripture is true.:}: 
 
 " But because it is expected that there be a more particular 
 
 profession of the several doctrines contained in this m ord ; and 
 
 because I confess such a profession very fit and necessary in 
 
 other respects, (it being not every word in scripture that is of 
 
 * p. 3. t P-8- t Pp- 10, II. 
 
9 
 
 flat necessity to salvation, it is very fit that those which be so, 
 should distinctly and explicitly be believed,) I shall descend 
 to such particulars." 
 
 He next recites the short Worcestershire Profession of Faith, 
 then lately pubhshed, as expressing in brief the sum of his 
 belief, for assent and consent. The introductory portion of 
 every paragraph will serve as a specimen of the whole. 
 
 " I beheve that there is one only God, the Father, infinite 
 in being, wisdom, goodness, and power, &c. 
 
 " I believe that mankind, being fallen by sin from God and 
 happiness, under the wrath of God, the curse of his law, and 
 the power of the devil, God so loved the world, that he gave 
 his only Son to be their Redeemer, who, being God, and one 
 with the Father, did take to him our nature, and became man, 
 being conceived of the Holy Ghost in the virgin Mary, and 
 born of her, and named Jesus Christ ; and, having lived on 
 earth without sin, and wrought many miracles for a witness of 
 his truth, he gave up himself a sacrifice for our sins, and a 
 ransom for us, in suffering death on the cross, &c. 
 
 " I believe that God the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of the 
 Father and the Son, was sent from the Father by the Son,* 
 to inspire and guide the prophets and apostles, that they 
 might fully reveal the doctrine of Christ," &c. 
 
 The above he entitles in the margin, " Profession of 
 Assent ;" what follows he calls, " Profession of Consent." 
 
 " I do heartily take this one God, for my only God and my 
 chief good ; and this Jesus Christ for my only Lord, Redeemer, 
 and Saviour ; and this Holy Ghost for my Sanctifier, &c. 
 
 " I do also take the ten commandments for a general 
 standing rule of obedience; and the Lord's Prayer for a 
 perfect rule for prayer, most admirable for comprehension of 
 matter, and exactness of method," &c. 
 
 " This," he adds, " is my religion : this I profess, subscribe, 
 and stand to. He that professeth this, and lives accordingly, 
 shall by me be taken for a good Christian, by what name or 
 title soever men call him. I say as Hilary, quod non per 
 difficiles qu<sstio7ies, ad vitam beatam nos ducat Deus.f 
 
 * "Or, [and the Son,] which you will." Marg. f Pp. H — 13. 
 
10 
 
 " Thus much might well serve as a discovery of my belief, 
 were it not that prejudice and jealousy require more : I add, 
 therefore, — I do heartily approve of the shorter Catechism of 
 the Assembly, and of all therein contained: and I take it for the 
 best catechism that ever I yet saw, and the answers continued, 
 for a most excellent sum of the Christian faith and doctrine, 
 and a fit test to try the orthodoxness even of teachers them- 
 selves." He then refers to some who would think, that " in 
 embracing this catechism" he was "yet too short to be accounted 
 orthodox," and " did but embrace a childish faith." The fol- 
 lowing extract may suffice, from " those things which (he says) 
 I am bold to tell them by way of answer :" — " 2. I would have 
 these men that have such a swelled belief, to compare the 
 Assembly's shorter catechism, not only with the Epistles 
 which the Apostles wrote to particular churches, but with all 
 the Confessions of faith that were made for four hundred 
 years after Christ, in the church ; and see if any of them used 
 a more extensive form ? Nay, all the Creeds and Confessions 
 of the church set together for many hundred years (except 
 the scriptures) were not comparable to this, for fulness and 
 exactness of order and expression. Only in the point of the 
 mystery of the Trinity, you may find many more copious and 
 wordy, as urged to it by the several heresies of those times. 
 But whether they are therefore ever the more excellent, I will 
 not presume to censure. Nay, what talk I of creeds and con- 
 fessions, when you may read many and many volumes of the 
 Fathers that contain not so much of the body of theology as 
 this Catechism," pp. 14, 15. 
 
 He afterwards proceeds, — " to give fuller satisfaction, I fur- 
 ther add, I have perused the larger Catechism of the Assembly, 
 and judge it a most excellent sum of divinity: and so much the 
 more excellent, in that it is sparing in the difficult and more 
 abstruse part, and most full in the practical part. And I 
 find no word that I dissent from, so I may have leave but to 
 interpret four words as followeth." p. 18. 
 
 These relate chiefly to the exact place and office to be 
 assigned to faith, in justification, — the point on which he 
 differed fi-om the Savov confession. 
 
11 
 
 In vindicating himself from the charge of taking an occasion 
 to quarrel with the Assembly, he says — " I so highly reve- 
 rence that Assembly, that I think this nation, since the apos- 
 tles' days, had never any that excelled it for piety and ability." 
 He then proceeds to express assent to the Confession, with 
 some explications, in these words : — 
 
 "I have perused oft the Confession of the Assembly, and 
 verily judge it the most excellent for fulness and exactness 
 that I have ever read from any church. And though the 
 truths therein, being of several degrees of evidence and neces- 
 sity, I do not hold them with equal clearness, confidence, or 
 certainty; and though some few points in it are beyond my 
 reach ; yet I have observed nothing in it contrary to my judg- 
 ment; if I may be allowed these expositions following." 
 
 The first of these relates to passages which speak against 
 universal redemption. " These (he says) I understand not of 
 all redemption, and particularly not of the mere bearing the 
 punishment of man's sins, and satisfying God's justice; but 
 of that special redemption proper to the Elect, which was 
 accompanied with an intention of actual application of the 
 saving benefits in time," p. 21. 
 
 On the article — " the CathoUke cJuirch, luhich is invisible^ 
 consists of the ichole number of the elect that have been, are, or 
 shall be" &c. he says — " I understand it not of the church, as 
 now existent, but as it shall be in its perfection at the end of 
 the world, when all the elect shall be called. I understand 
 those words, which is invisible, as distinguishing the church 
 as invisible from the church as visible. For I conceive that 
 Christ hath one universal visible church, called one by the 
 unity of their profession." " And now (he continues) I leave to 
 Mr. Crandon and others to consider, whether a Jesuite, a 
 Papist, a Socinian, an Arminian, will consent to this copious 
 Confession of the Assembly, with these expositions or hmita- 
 tions, as I have here done? Or whether they will make all 
 the Assembly to be Papists, Socinians, or Arminians? I truly 
 profess, I take the labours of the Assembly, especially these 
 three pieces now mentioned, for the best book, next my Bible, 
 in my study ; however, the Libertines, and other giddy secta- 
 
ries of these times, have despised them, as if they were 
 childish toyes." p. 22. 
 
 He next states that he " unfeignedly honours the articles 
 or decrees of the Synod of Dort, as containing sound and 
 moderate doctrine," and heartily laments that some late 
 divines have, to the great detriment of the church and truth, 
 forsaken the moderate way of that synod, and laid the weight 
 of the Anti-Arminian cause so much upon higher points not 
 owned by them. p. 23. 
 
 He mentions a few " limiting expositions" with which, he 
 says, " I do profess my consent to the canons or decrees of the 
 Synod of Dort. And how far any of these are from favouring 
 Arminianism, they that will see need not be ignorant. Yea, 
 in the very article of perseverance, which some were pleased 
 to quarrel with me about, I subscribe to the Synod. Yea, in 
 the article of the extent of redemption, wherein I am most 
 suspected and accused, (and was fain to use a limiting exposi- 
 tion in my consent to our Assembly's Confession of faith,) I do 
 subscribe to the Synod of Dort, without any exception, limitation, 
 or exposition, of any word as doubtful, and obscure.* p. 25. 
 
 " And because it is this Synod, purposely called against 
 Arminianism, that is the best discovery what is to be accounted 
 Arminian or Anti-Arminian doctrine, as I think, by con- 
 senting to it, I do clear myself from that calumny with all men 
 of conscience and reason that know it ; so I shall think that 
 those who go as much on the other hand, and differ from the 
 Synod one way, as much as the Arminians did the other way, 
 remain censurable as well as they; till some body shall con- 
 vince me that there is but one extream in this case, and that a 
 man may hold what he will without danger, so he be but sure 
 it go far enough from Arminianism. A man that holds to the 
 moderation of the Synod of Dort, need not say that Christ did 
 not dye or satisfie for all men, nor need he trouble himself 
 with presumptuous determinations about many mysteries in 
 the decrees of God, which many volumes are guilty of. 
 
 * " As every man ought to be allowed to be the expositor of his own sentiments, 
 let no man, after this, question or deny the Calvinism of Richard Baxter." — Life 
 and Times, hij Rev. \V. Onne, vol. ii. p. 53. 
 
13 
 
 " Many other moderate passages I could shew in our 
 Assembly's Confession, to some that have need to imitate 
 them; and the Antinomians may see their doctrine subverted, in 
 their excellent definition of saving faith, in both Catechisms 
 and in the Confession ; in their determination of the natural 
 effects of sin in whomsover, ch. 6. sect. 6 ; in their determina- 
 tion of the necessity of repentance (as sine qua non) to remis- 
 sion, ch. 15. 3.; with more the like. 
 
 " And now, if they have any standing rule to know a Papist 
 or Arminian, I think I have acquitted myself from their 
 accusation. But if there be no rule of the Orthodox doctrine 
 and for rejection of Error, but the giddy, distracted brains of 
 Libertines, that know not where to fix themselves, then I am 
 content to bear the name of Jesuit, Papist, or what these 
 men shall please to call me. 
 
 " Yet let me add this, lest my seeking to satisfy the 
 offfended may draw me into guilt. Though I have voluntarily 
 myself professed my consent to these several Canons and Con- 
 fessions of faith, yet for the Synod of Dort, the Confession of 
 our Assembly, yea, or the larger Catechism, without some 
 correction, I do hereby protest my dissent against the so im- 
 posing them, to a word, upon all ministers, that no man that 
 cannot subscribe to them shall be permitted in the Church. 
 Whether our Confession were intended for such a necessary 
 Test, I know not well : bvit that the Synod of Dort was, is 
 expressed in the end. I abhor unlimited liberty of conscience, 
 so called ; that is, of divulging intolerable doctrines ; and I 
 lament also, that, instead of moderation, the Churches, for 
 1300 years, have been so guilty of proud and cruel tyranny. 
 There is singular use for a full body of Theologie, or a Pro- 
 fession concluded on by such reverend assemblies, that the 
 younger ministers may be taught by it, and the reverence of 
 it may restrain them from rashly contradicting it. And there is 
 a necessity of exercising power in ministerial assemblies, for 
 the actual restraint of such as shall teach things intolerably 
 unsound ; and all ministers should be there accountable for 
 their doctrine. But before any Forms be tendered us to sub- 
 scribe, we must have them reduced into a narrower room, and 
 
14 
 
 into phrase s(j clearly rational or scriptural, as no sober, stu- 
 dious, competent, godly divine, shall scruple. Call it Socinian, 
 or what name soever imperious faction shall put upon it, yet 
 tender consciences will expect this, and the Churches shall 
 never have peace in any other way, unless I be a false 
 prophet; and the contrary course doth but tend to do the 
 same in doctrine, as the Common Prayer Book did in wor- 
 ship ; even to ensnare the most conscientious, and work them 
 out of the ministry by degrees, and to create us, insensibly, a 
 lazy, formal ministry, that will take all upon trust, and run to 
 the authority of their Confession instead of their Bible. I 
 have long feared that the toleration threatened in these times, 
 for all, is a judgment of God, for our running into the tyran- 
 nical extreme so long ; and I withal hope that he will turn 
 this judgment to a mercy."* 
 
 The latter part of this extract will furnish the reader with 
 a clue to the real sentiments of Baxter. They were moderate, 
 catholic, but not latitudinarian ; favourable to what he regarded 
 as reasonable liberty, and opposed to rigorous imposition, but 
 equally opposed to unlimited license. I shall subjoin a few 
 extracts from the doctrinal propositions which follow. 
 
 " Though faith in Christ be a fi-uit of God's eternal elec- 
 tion, and of Christ's meritorious redemption, and of the Holy 
 Ghost's effectual special saving operation ; yet it is man's act 
 and habit, and by the precept made his duty," &c.f Speaking 
 of the objects of faith, he mentions as the principal : '• 1. Christ 
 himself; and that considered in his nature as God and as 
 man, and in his office as mediator, and so as king, priest, 
 prophet ; and in the exercise of these, as one that hath been 
 born, lived perfectly, died innocently, satisfied, risen again, 
 and is now ascended, and in glory, reigning and interceding. 
 2. The end of his redemption, viz. our final blessedness in the 
 unseen glory, and our pardon and sanctification as the way 
 and beginning."! 
 
 " This faith, by which we are justified and saved, is the 
 receiving of Jesus Christ as Jesus Christ, and as a Saviour 
 entirely ; and as a physician of our souls, to cure us of, and 
 
 • Pp. 2j— 27. t P. 3.3. t P. 31. 
 
15 
 
 save us from both guilt and power of sin, and the misery due 
 for it. And so it is the receiving of Christ, as a prophet to 
 teach us, and a king to rule us, and a priest after the order of 
 Melchisedeck^ now to intercede for us, and not only as a sacri- 
 fice for our sins, or a satisfier of justice for us. It is the 
 receiving of whole Christ,"* (he afterwards explains this ex- 
 pression, by " receiving him in all those respects which are 
 essential to him, as he is Redeemer and Saviour." )f 
 
 " Christ himself, as mediator and redeemer, in satisfying 
 and procuring pardon, is a remedy, a means to our recovery, 
 a way to the Father, &c. It is one end of his bloodshed and 
 redemption, to procure us the Spirit, and restore us to a state 
 of hohness, and to ' purify unto himself a peculiar people, 
 zealous of good works,' Tit. ii. 14; and to wash us and 
 cleanse us, that he may present us pure and acceptable to his 
 Father, without spot or wrinkle, Eph. v. 26, 27.| 
 
 " Our remission of sin is only for the merit of Christ, and 
 in his blood : and I give not faith, or any act of man, the least 
 copartnership with Christ's righteousness, nor any share in this 
 honour. Now seeing our divines do commonly mean the remis- 
 sion of sin, and the acceptijig us as pardoned, when they speak 
 of justification ; and all this I ascribe to Christ's meritorious 
 satisfactory righteousness alone, and not at all to faith or 
 works as any causes, I conceive I grant them the thing that 
 they contend for."§ 
 
 The reader should be informed, that the author's design 
 was to vindicate himself from the charge of " teaching an 
 almost pure Socinian Justification" \\ which he had himself, 
 a few years before, called, " most accursed doctrine." ^ 
 
 Here, at least, is no indication of the " latitudinarian spirit" 
 which Mr. Hunter ascribes to the Presbyterian body at a later 
 period, or of that characteristic of it which he mentions as 
 "the setting works before faith."** Baxter, on the contrary, 
 regarded faith as, in its own nature, a comprehensive grace, as 
 
 •P. 35. tP. 90. +P. 43. § P. 52. |1 P. 57. 
 
 IT " Aphorismes of Justification, witli their Explication annexed," 12nio. 
 1649, p. 307. ** Hist. Def. p. 12. 
 
16 
 
 well as the great principle of Christian virtue. He strongly 
 objected to confining it to any one act, and describes it as 
 " the full, sincere reception of Christ as our Saviour, in all 
 the essential parts of his office; — by all those acts of the 
 soul, which are of absolute necessity to the true reception of 
 such an object: that is, by assent, consent, love to him, 
 affiance." * 
 
 Noticing the opinion held by some writers, who represent 
 " apprehension of Christ" as justifying faith, he says — " Passing 
 by the ambiguity and comprehensiveness of the term appre- 
 hension, no man can tell us whether to apprehend Christ as 
 God and as man, and as God and man in one person, and as 
 the second person in [the] Trinity, and as one that hath died, 
 and by death satisfied, and as one that is risen, ascended, 
 intercedeth, hath power to forgive sins, and as one that, by 
 pardoning, must save us from hell, and give us heaven, &c. ; 
 I say no man can tell just how many physical acts go to this : 
 much less can any prove that all this may be done by one 
 physical act, or can any cull out any one, and say, that is the 
 justifying object and act, and reject all the rest as not essen- 
 tially requisite as well as that."f He subsequently declares — 
 
 " I do firmly believe, that he that receives not Jesus 
 Christ, as Jesus Christ — that is, as God and man, as one that 
 hath perfectly obeyed, died for us, ransomed us, rose again, 
 is now in glory. Lord of all, as our Saviour from the guilt 
 and power of sin, and so as Priest, Prophet, and King, as one 
 that will bring us to glory, if we believe ; and so as a bene- 
 factor, and as good, (and therefore to be received with grati- 
 tude and love,) — I say, he that doth not thus receive Christ 
 is not a true Christian, nor hath any true justifying faith, but 
 shall be damned ; and that justifying faith containeth all this 
 in it. And therefore I believe, that they who teach men 
 that some one only of these acts is justifying faith, and all the '^ 
 
 rest are works, which, if we look for salvation or justification 
 by, we fall from Christ, do lead men the direct way to despe- 
 ration and damnation.":}: 
 
 After the strong language just quoted, I may introduce to 
 
 • Pp- 35, 90. t P. 91. t P- 93. 
 
the notice of the reader what is represented as the great dis- 
 tinguishing principle of those called Presbyterians, of whom 
 Baxter may be almost regarded as the head and father. 
 They might, it is said, be themselves, as he was, moderately 
 orthodox ; but they were no zealots for their private opinions. 
 On the contrary, so firmly did they resist " the principle of 
 subscription," so strenuously did they oppose the imposition 
 of a creed, so jealous were they of all articles of faith 
 expressed in mere human words and phrases, which might by 
 possibility be converted into a test or criterion of orthodoxy, 
 that they would tolerate any doctrine, however erroneous, 
 and even heretical, in their judgment it might be, rather 
 than afford the least countenance to what might operate in 
 the slightest degree as a limitation or restraint on the exercise 
 of the right of private judgment by " imposing any fetters 
 on the freedom of inquir)^" Mr. Hunter, referring to the 
 early part of the eighteenth century, thus describes the prin- 
 ciple to which I have just adverted : — 
 
 " I do not mean to say, that the opinion of the Presbyterian 
 body at large, did not agree very much with the moderate 
 orthodoxy of Baxter, or that there was any concealment of 
 opinion to any considerable extent. But I do mean to say, 
 that there existed in the Presbyterian body, at that time, a 
 latitudinarian spirit which is inconsistent with the possession 
 of zeal for any particular modification of Christian belief."* 
 Again : " Neither is there any reason to believe, that the zeal 
 for what are called orthodox opinions, which is founded on the 
 principle that a peculiar faith is essential to salvation, 
 actuated the minds of the Presbyterian founders :"f but the 
 reader has been informed what was that ' peculiar faith' 
 which Baxter considered ' essentially requisite' to justifica- 
 tion, and consequently to salvation and eternal life. 
 
 It may be said the exti-acts I have given are from a work pub- 
 lished before the Restoration. In reply to such an objection, 
 I might say, he never revoked the opinions there expressed, 
 and no evidence can be produced to shew that he did not con- 
 tinue to hold them. But without referring to numerous 
 
 • Historical Defence, pp. 41, 42. t lb. p. 38. 
 
 C 
 
18 
 
 similar passages in liis later writings, it may be mentioned, 
 that in a book, published in 1681,* he refers to this " Con- 
 fession," as containing a view of his " Religion." 
 
 The English Presbyterian Association make a just dis- 
 tinction between " wiposiiig and declaring opinions ;"f but 
 they positively affirm that the Presbyterians of this period 
 " always disclaimed any fixed standard of orthodoxy, sought 
 the abolition of distinctive creeds ; and did not attempt per- 
 manently to define the doctrines they professed."^ It is 
 not easy to see how they could profess certain doctrines, 
 unless those doctrines were not only expressed in words, but 
 also committed to writing, and stamped with perpetuity by 
 means of the press ; and what else is it permanently to define 
 them ? That, indeed, had been already done by the West- 
 minster Assembly; but let this writer shew that their suc- 
 cessors, during the period in question, rescinded or revoked 
 that act of the original English Presbyterians. But they else- 
 where seem to concede the point in debate ; for they not only 
 speak of " the doctrines their predecessors professed," § but, 
 in a subsequent page, describe the Presbyterians as " a body 
 of men, who, since their secession from the Church, have 
 relinquished their oivii original standard of faith, as well as 
 the institutions from which they derive their name."|| True, 
 the modem successors of this body have relinquished their 
 original standard — the standard adopted by the founders of 
 the Presbyterian churches — but, during the period in ques- 
 tion, and for many years after, f they adhered to the same 
 standard, and generally believed the doctrines which it 
 contained. 
 
 * " An Apology for the Nonconformists' Ministry," 4to. " I have told you 
 my religion oft enough, especially in my ' Reasons for the Christian Religion,' 
 and in my ' Confession.'" p. 118. The other work relates chiefly to the evidence 
 by which Christianity is supported. 
 
 t Hist. p. 3. t lb. pp. 33, 49, 63. § lb. p. 28. || lb. p. 99. 
 
 ^ Even so late as 1747, the Dissenters professed adherence to these original 
 standards, as the following quotation from a book published by Dr. Watts in that 
 year, will shew : — 
 
 " Such articles or summaries of the Christian religion are useful to hold forth to 
 the world, what arc in general the sentiments of such a particular Church or 
 
19 
 
 I'lie following are a few of the strong assertions made by 
 the EngHsh Presbyterian Association concerning the alleged 
 difference on this point between the two bodies: — 
 
 " The Independents have ever been opposed to the Pres- 
 byterians as to the principle of imposing any fetters on the 
 freedom of inquiry. The modern Presbyterians have acted 
 on the liberal principle handed down to them ; the Indepen- 
 dents fence their faith by creeds and subscriptions." * " The 
 governing principle of the Presbyterians was to leave that 
 liberty to others, which they claimed for themselves ; to look 
 to Scripture as the sole rule of faith; to admit to its full extent 
 the right of private judgment ; and virtually to admit the inno- 
 cence of involuntary error. Their principle was not to interfere 
 with doctrines ; to allow all to act upon their own responsibility 
 in receiving or rejecting any religious opinions; and not to cen- 
 sure any for acting in the honest exercise of their judgment."! 
 
 " They did not compose a creed, and require subscription 
 to it, but rejected the imposition of all statements, positive in 
 their terms, respecting disputed doctrines." J " We do happen 
 to know that their opinions were latitudinarian, and there is 
 abundant evidence in existence to shew their indifference to reli- 
 gious doctrine."§ In support of this assertion no testimony is here 
 produced from any Presbyterian writer, but merely an extract 
 from a treatise by Dr. Hare, a bishop of the Church of England. 
 
 I have admitted, that, even prior to the Restoration, the 
 Presbyterians had no creed which they used as a test to which 
 
 Churches: and as this is proper on many accounts, so it is of use in order to make 
 the way to their communion evident and easy, and that other Christians may 
 know whether they agree with them in what is essential to Christianity, and may 
 judge, whether they should seek or desire constant or occasional communion with 
 them; and that other Churches may judge, whether they should admit their mem- 
 bers to communion. This also may tend to encourage more zealous and hearty 
 consultations, and mutual assistances toward the support of their common 
 Christianity, provided that these articles are drawn up with judgment, and these 
 things are managed with prudence and charity. Such are, or should be, the 
 Articles of the Church of England, which proclaim her doctrine and discipline to the 
 world. Such are, or should be, the Westminster Assembly's Confession of Faith, or 
 that of the Savoy, and the two Catechisms which shew the faith and worship of tlie 
 English Dissenters." — Rational Foundation of a Christian Church, pp. 198, 199. 
 • Hist. p. 3. t lb. pp. 50, 51. t lb. pp. 53, 55. § lb. 57, 58. 
 
 c2 
 
20 
 
 they required subscription, or which they imposed upon 
 others as a term of communion; though it appears that 
 Baxter, at least, considered what is called the Apostles' creed, 
 as a form of words to which a profession of assent and consent 
 might be required. But it does net follow that they abjured, 
 for all piirjwses, the use of articles and confessions, because 
 they did not impose them as tests. They might distinguish 
 between the use and the abuse of such documents. Without 
 requiring " implicit assent" to them, they might choose to 
 employ them for legitimate purposes. Accordingly, we find 
 that such was the fact. They were never reluctant to state, 
 for the information of others, what were their real opinions on 
 doctrinal points ; nor did they shrink, through any fear of con- 
 sequences, from making a public declaration of " those things 
 which were most surely believed among them."* There is an 
 obvious difference between professing to hold certain doctrines, 
 and requiring subscription to the document, whether called a 
 creed or a confession, in which those doctrines are expressed 
 and embodied; still more between professing, and imposing 
 or enforcing upon others by penalties, the profession of belief 
 in them. The question, " shall there be a creed imposed or 
 not?- was well known; (say the English Presbyterian Asso- 
 ciation;) it had been argued, and its determination formed a 
 badge of distinction."! This question, " shall there be a creed 
 imposed or not ?" was one to which Independents, as well as 
 Presbyterians, have always returned a negative reply. Neither 
 of them ever required " assent to the imposition of a creed. "| 
 If the former imposed a creed, surely a fact which must have 
 been notorious will admit of being proved. The document (if 
 any) must be still in existence. Let it be produced, or a re- 
 ference made to the historical record in which it may be found. 
 The Savoy Confession, to which we may perhaps be referred, 
 was neither originally intended, nor was it at any time actually 
 used, as a test of orthodoxy, or a standard of appeal in the 
 
 • For some just and forcible remarks on this point, I beg leave to refer the 
 reader to a learned and eloquent " Letter to the Rev. James Yates, M.A.," &c. by 
 the Rev. Robert Halley, Classical Tutor of Highbury College, p. 67. 
 t Hist. p. 50. t lb. p. 4C. 
 
21 
 
 room of the scriptures, which both parties regarded as the 
 sole rule of faith. Indeed the Independents, as already inti- 
 mated, made little use of that Confession for any purpose, but 
 for many years adopted the Assembly's shorter catechism as 
 their symbol. 
 
 « The Independents (says Mr. Hunter) adhere ostensibly to 
 similar views as to discipline, and the propriety of subscrip- 
 tions and confessions now as during the period in question." 
 With respect to " the propriety of subscriptions," if by that is 
 meant the imposing of subscription to human articles, the 
 statement is incorrect, both in reference to the Independents 
 of earlier and of modern times. They did not formerly, any 
 more than the Presbyterians, nor do they now, require " im- 
 plicit assent to creeds, liturgies, or articles." On the contrary, 
 they disapprove, and, on principle, disavow any such require- 
 ment. The fact is, that both parties were equally, and on the 
 same grounds, opposed to the imposition of creeds, or the 
 demand of subscription to articles of faith expressed in merely 
 human terms.* 
 
 The Presbyterians, especially those of London and Lan- 
 cashire, were chiefly instrumental in accomplishing the resto- 
 ration of monarchy in the person of Charles the Second. 
 Most cruel and ungrateful was the treatment they received at 
 the hands of that perfidious and dissolute prince. They were 
 willing to enter into terms with the Episcopalians for a mutual 
 accommodation of ecclesiastical diiFerences, and a meeting was 
 held at the Savoy, professedly for that purpose. They offered 
 to concur in a modified system of Episcopacy, and to adopt a 
 revised liturgy. This proves that their altered circumstances 
 had rendered them more liberal in reference to particular 
 modes of church government. They generally approved of 
 a national estabhshed church, and therein certainly at that 
 time differed from the Independents. But the entertaining of 
 
 * For particular information on the sentiments of the Independents concerning 
 public confessions of faith by bodies of professed Christians, the reader is referred 
 to Orme's Memoirs of Dr. Owen, pp. 227—229 ; the History of Dissenters, by 
 Messrs. Bogue and Bennet, orig. edit. vol. i. p. 298 ; and to the Preliminary 
 Notes prefixed to the Declaration of Faith, Church Order, and Discipline, adopted 
 by the Congregational Union of England and Wales, in 1833— p. 4. 
 
2-2 
 
 that opinion had not the effect upon tlieir minds, ascribed to it 
 by the Enghsh Presbyterian Association, of making them 
 indifferent to doctrinal truth. The writer asserts, that at this 
 era a remarkable change took place in the views of the two 
 bodies ; that " doctrinal severity" now began to characterize 
 the Independents, while " moderation and liberality of senti- 
 ment" gradually spread and prevailed among the Presbyterian 
 body of Nonconformists, in the interval between the Restora- 
 tion and the Toleration Act.* 
 
 If any change of this kind took place among the Inde- 
 pendents, let the evidence be produced. It will be easy to 
 shew, that, neither in respect to discipline nor doctrine, did 
 any relaxation, to the extent here insinuated, occur in the 
 views and sentiments of the Presbyterians. 
 
 Shortly after the Restoration, several eminent Presbyterian 
 ministers, having been made chaplains to the king, recom- 
 mended to his serious consideration the union of his subjects 
 in religion, by an accommodation of differences, begging that 
 only things necessary might be the terms of union ; that the 
 true exercise of church discipline might be allowed ; and that 
 the faithful ministers that would exercise it might not be cast 
 out, nor unworthy men obtruded on the people. A paper of 
 proposals was afterwards drawn up, addressed to his majesty, 
 in which the ministers, who then met daily at Sion College, 
 chiefly Presbyterians, humbly present four preliminary requests : 
 That serious godli?iess might be coimtenanced ; that a learned 
 a7id pious minister in each parish might be encouraged ; that 
 a personal jmblic owning of the baptismal covenant might 
 precede an admission to the Lord's table; and that the 
 Lord's-day might be strictly sanctified.^ 
 
 In October, 1660, a declaration from his majesty, concerning 
 ecclesiastical affairs, was prepared, and a meeting of Episcopal 
 dignitaries and divines, with the leading Presbyterian mi- 
 nisters, called to hear it read, and offer their objections to 
 what either side disliked. After it had been perused and 
 discussed, the lord chancellor intimated that the king had 
 also been petitioned by the Independents and Anabaptists 
 for liberty ; and read an additional clause, to the effect that, 
 
 • Hiit. p. 13. t Calamy's Abridgment of Baxter's Life, pp. 139—141 
 
23 
 
 others also be permitted to meet for religious ivorship, so be 
 it they do it not to the disturbcmce of the peace ; and that no 
 justice of peace or officer disturb them. This being designed 
 to secure liberty to the Papists, there was a general silence 
 upon the reading of it. The bishops thought it a nice point, 
 and therefore said nothing : the Presbi/terians were afraid to 
 speak against it, lest all the sects and parties should look 
 upon them as the causers of their sufferings, and they should 
 be represented as grossly partial, in desiring liberty them- 
 selves, while they would have no others obtain it with them. 
 At length, Mr. Baxter, fearing their silence might be misin- 
 terpreted, spake to this purpose, That Dr. Gunning; a little 
 before speaking against sects, had named the Papists and 
 Socinians ; that, for their parts, they did not desire favour to 
 themselves alone, aiul rigorous severity against none ; but, 
 as they humbly thanked his majesty for his declared Irulul- 
 gence to theinselves, so they distinguished the tolerable party 
 from the intolerable. For the former, they humbly craved 
 just lenity and favour ; but for the latter, such as the two 
 sorts mentioned, for their parts, they could not make their 
 Toleration their request.* 
 
 I do not deny that there was a considerable increase of 
 liberality among the Presbyterian divines after the Restora- 
 tion, and that they adopted more enlarged views of religious 
 liberty. But that there was not any considerable or serious 
 degree of " doctrinal relaxation," is evident from the fact, that 
 they still adhered to the Confession of Faith and Catechisms 
 of their Assembly, and professed the doctrines contained in 
 them. The Shorter Catechism was in general use among 
 them; and several expositions of it were, in the course of a 
 few years, published by eminent ministers belonging to their 
 body. 
 
 After informing us that the Presbyterians, among the ejected 
 ministers, were at first favourable to a national establishment 
 of Christianity, if that establishment could have been settled 
 in a form which appeared to them scriptural, and certain 
 impositions removed, — Mr. Hunter proceeds to remark, " But 
 
 * Calamy's Abridgment, pp. 149, 150. 
 
'24 
 
 being out of the Church, and persecuted by the state which 
 supported the Church, in the interval between the passing of 
 the Acts of Uniformity and Toleration, some change in this 
 respect may well be supposed to have taken place ; and they 
 who in the unsettled times would have erected guards, such 
 as it seems there must be if a national church is to be main- 
 tained at all, were now become the advocates of a most unli- 
 mited toleration, as they necessarily must have become, since 
 in no other way could their own opposition to the church and 
 to the law have been justified. Here they took a lesson from 
 the Independents, and this same principle has remained with 
 them."* 
 
 Baxter justly remarks — " All are for toleration (usually) 
 that need it." The Presbyterians became, after the passing 
 of the Act of Uniformity, vigorous opponents of unnecessary 
 impositions, and advocates for liberty of conscience, but only 
 within certain prescribed bounds. 
 
 Baxter, who for many years acted as their leading divine 
 in all public matters, and who was certainly one of the most 
 liberal of them, many years after the Act of Uniformity, 
 expressed his opinion in these strong terms — " But I still say, 
 that toleration must have its due bounds, and not extend 
 to intolerable doctrines, practices, or persons." 
 
 During the treaty for union, held in 1675, with a few leading 
 Presbyterian divines, a paper was drawn up, probably by 
 Baxter, entitled " An Act for the Healing and Concord of his 
 INIajesty's Subjects in matters of Religion," which contains the 
 following clause : — 
 
 " VI. And whereas there are many peaceable subjects, who 
 hold all the essentials of the Christian Faith, but conform not 
 to so much as is required to the Established Ministry and 
 Church-Communion, Be it enacted, that all and only they who 
 shall publicly take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy 
 before some court of justice, &c.; and that then and there 
 subscribe as followeth, [ I A. B. do imfeignedly stand to my 
 baptismal covenant^ and do believe all the articles of the 
 Creeds called the Apostles, Nicene, a7id Constantinopolitane ; 
 
 " Hist Def. V 16- 
 
25 
 
 and the truth of the Holy Canonical Scriptures, and do 
 renounce all that is contrary thereto^ shall be so far tolerated 
 in the exercise of their religion, as his Majesty, with the 
 advice of his parliament or council, shall from time to 
 time find consistent with the peace and safety of his king- 
 doms."* 
 
 Dr. Stillingfleet, in his celebrated sermon before the Lord 
 Mayor against Nonconformists, May 2, 1680, had asserted — 
 " Those that now plead for Toleration did once think it the 
 mother of confusion, the nurse of atheism," &c. To which 
 Baxter, in his answer to that sermon, thus replies — 
 
 " Ans. 1. Sure, though you often cite Dr. Owen, you mean 
 not the Independents. 
 
 2. If they spake either for or against Toleration, as you do 
 without distinction, and were for all or against all, and dis- 
 tinguished not the tolerable from the intolerable, it's no great 
 heed to be taken what they say. If there were but one false 
 word imposed on you, which you could not assent to, and on 
 2000 such as you, should you be no more tolerated than a 
 3Iahometan?"\ 
 
 In a preceding page, in reply to what Dr. Stillingfleet had 
 said concerning the Assembly of Divines urging conformity on 
 their Dissenting brethren, he says — 
 
 " But is it possible that you can expect that men should 
 believe that their case and ours are the same, or that either 
 all must be tolerated or none, that conform not ; and that the 
 bare talking for or against toleration, without distinguishing 
 the tolerable from the intolerable, doth tend to men's edifi- 
 cation. He that will tolerate all, is bad; and he that will 
 tolerate none that differ, is mad. As it's an ill argument, 
 Vespce habent favos, et apes habent favos ; Ergo vesjjce sunt 
 apes : so it is not a good one to say, JVasp^ nests should be 
 destroyed; ergo. Bee-hives should be destroyed. 
 
 " The Assembly urged the Independents to declare but 
 what limits they would allow to their church-gathering hberty; 
 that it might not extend to Hereticks and the intolerable, and 
 could not prevail. Judge now, whether these cases are of any 
 
 • Narrative of Life, part iii. p. 159. f P. 98. 
 
26 
 
 kin? Save in the genus of not allowing unlimited toleration, 
 which we hold to as well as they."* 
 
 " Wliat a pitiful case is mankind in, if such an harangue of 
 confounding w^ords can make them believe that tolerating or 
 not tolerating, in causes vastly different, are the same ! Is it 
 all one to deny men liberty to seduce others from the essentials 
 of the faith, and to forbid many hundreds to preach Christ's 
 Gospel, unless they will openly profess that they assent and 
 consent to three books, and covenant never to endeavour the 
 reforming of the government of the church ?"f &c. 
 
 In the same year, Baxter published, " The True and Only 
 Way of Concord of all the Christian Churches : the desirableness 
 of it, and the detection of false dividing Terms," 12mo. He de- 
 clares himself in favour of the magistrate's right to repress the 
 propagation of false doctrine by authority of law. " The errors 
 which men should be restrained from preaching or propa- 
 gating," he says, "are innumerable;" and proceeds to mention 
 a great variety of false and dangerous doctrines, of which the 
 following may serve as a specimen : — 
 
 " Of the Blessed Divine Trinity. 
 
 " 2. That the Trinity are but three names of God ; or three relations 
 of him to the creature. 
 
 " 5. That one Person in the Trinity is, in time or dignity, before or 
 after other, or greater or less than other. 
 
 " 7. That the doctrine of the Trinity is contradictory, or impossible 
 to be true. 
 
 " 8. That it is unnecessary to be believed or preached. 
 
 " 10. That the works of Creation, Redemption, or Sanctification, 
 are no more eminently or otherwise ascribed in Scripture to any one 
 Person in the Trinity than to the other. That Creation is no other- 
 wise ascribed to the Father than to the Son and Holy Ghost ; nor 
 Redemption to the Son than to the Father and the Holy Ghost ; nor 
 Sanctification, Consolation, and Sealing, to the Holy Ghost, than to 
 the Father and the Son ; and so that they are not hence relatively 
 distinguishable to us, and by us, at all. 
 
 " Of the Person of Christ. 
 
 " 1. That Christ is but a creature, >r not eternal ; or not of the 
 same Divine Essence as is the Father. 
 
 " 9. That he had not two distinguishable natures, viz. the Divine 
 and Human. 
 
 " 16. That Christ is not now God and man in Heaven. 
 • Pp. 00, 91. t P- 104. 
 
27 
 
 " Of the Holy Ghost and the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 " 1. That the Holy Ghost is but a creature, or not God, of the same 
 essence witli the Father and tlie Son. 
 
 " Of Sin, Original and subsequent. 
 
 " 7, That Infants have no Original Sin ; no guilt of Adam's sin, 
 and no sinful pravity of nature. 
 
 " 9. That therefore Infants have no need of a Saviour to suffer for 
 their sin, nor of a pardon. 
 
 " 10. That Infants need not the Holy Ghost to sanctifie them, by 
 killing any sinful pravity or inclination in them. 
 
 " 12 That sin deserveth not hell, or an everlasting punishment. 
 "Of Redemption by Christ Incarnate, &c. 
 
 "6. That Christ was not a satisfying sacrifice for Sin. 
 
 "11. That Christ's Rightousness and sacrifice are not the true merito- 
 rious cause of our righteousness, pardon, justification, and salvation. 
 
 " 20. That Christ sendeth not forth his Spirit to be his agent and 
 witness to the end of the world, in sanctifying his elect. 
 
 "Of Faith, Repentance, and Sanctification. 
 
 " 5. That Faith and Repentance are of nature, or by mere natural 
 power and free will, and not the gift of grace through Christ. 
 
 •'6. That God giveth grace equally to all, till good improvers make 
 a diflterence. 
 
 " 7. That men may be holy in the restored image of God without 
 the grace of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 " Of the Church. 
 
 "21. That the universal Church hath erred, or may err, in points 
 essential to Christianity, or absolutely necessary to salvation ; (and 
 so become no Church, and Christ no King or Head of it.) 
 
 "25. That a member of the visible Church cannot be certainly 
 known, because it cannot be known what is essential to a Christian, 
 seeing it depends on the sufficiency of the proposal of truths, which 
 cannot be known by many or most.* 
 
 The reader must now perceive how widely remote from truth 
 is the statement, that " the object of Baxter and the succeeding 
 Presbyterians was to maintain concord, by laying the founda- 
 tion of an institution wide enough to include all classes of 
 opinions." f 
 
 There was another point of difference between Presby- 
 terians and Independents, on which great stress has been laid 
 by these writers, and which will therefore require particular 
 examination. It relates to the qualifications required from 
 candidates for admission to the Lord's supper, the exercise of 
 discipline, and the terms of church communion generally. 
 
 • Pp. 293-317. t Hist. p. 141. 
 
28 
 
 In describing what they consider as " the great practical 
 distinction between the Presbyterians and the Independents," 
 the Enghsh Presbyterian Association mention, not only " the 
 rejection, by the former, of creeds and subscriptions," but also 
 " the practice of admitting communicants to the Lord's table 
 without any of those inquiries, examinations, and confessions, 
 on which others insisted. The Presbyterians (they add) 
 opposed all interference with the liberty of conscience, every 
 inquisitorial process, and all compilations of creeds."* 
 
 Speaking afterwards of the Independents, they say, " By 
 practice, the members of their congregations are called upon 
 to make confessions of faith, and to express a determination 
 to adhere to them. The difference, in the whole course and 
 practice of the two parties, indicates a distinguishing principle. 
 There was nothing to prevent the limitations required by the 
 one from being required by the other, or the confessions of 
 doctrines demanded by the one from being demanded by the 
 other."! 
 
 The Presbyterians, according to Mr. Hunter, extended their 
 communion to all, whereas the Independents " fenced round 
 the Lord's table with the requirement of previous confessions 
 and histories of experiences and professions of belief." In this 
 respect he represents them as "unlike the Presbyterians, 
 whose principle of a national church necessarily led to open 
 communion.''^ 
 
 That the Presbyterians approved of such a national church 
 as in their opinion would necessarily lead to open com- 
 munion, cannot be correct, because one of their chief objec- 
 tions to the English diocesan frame of Episcopacy established 
 by the Act of Uniformity, was, that " it deposed church 
 tliscipline, and rendered it impossible." I admit that it was 
 the general custom of Independent churches, at this time, 
 to require from candidates for admission, besides a confession 
 of faith, a statement of their religious experience, either 
 orally delivered or committed to writing ; which was not com- 
 mon among Presbyterians. These did, however, require pre- 
 vious professions of belief; and, though not by means of " any 
 
 • Hist. p. IS. f lb. p. 50. t Hibt. Def. pp. IC 
 
29 
 
 inquisitorial process," (which no English nonconformists have 
 ever used,) they certainly did make "examinations," if they 
 did not also institute particular inquiries respecting those 
 who proposed themselves for communion. 
 
 Baxter thus expresses his opinions concerning this point — 
 
 " All Christians are agreed that it belongeth to God only to 
 make the conditions of church communion ; and therefore it be- 
 longeth not to us to invent them, nor to our wit to censure 
 what God hath done, but to search the Scripture till we find it out, 
 and then obey it. This is the great controversie which hath 
 troubled the church. When men know not who should be members 
 of the church, and who not, and when they have no certain rule or 
 character to know whom they must receive, it is no wonder if con- 
 fusion and contention be the complexion and practice of such churches. 
 And here the pastors have torn the church by running into contrary 
 extreams. Some have thought that the visible church must be consti- 
 tuted only of such persons as satisfie the pastors and the people of the 
 truth of their sanctification by some special account of their conver- 
 sion, or the work of grace upon their hearts, in a distincter manner 
 than the ancient church required of the baptized. 
 
 " On the other side, there is one or two of late among us, who think 
 that the church is but Christ's school, where he teacheth the way to true 
 regeneration, and not a society of professed and regenerate ones or saints : 
 and that all who own Christ as the Teacher of the church, and submit 
 to the government of the pastors, and are willing to learn how to be 
 regenerate, should be baptized, though they profess not any special 
 saving faith of repentance. 
 
 "What church soever is constituted according to either of these 
 two opinions, will not be constituted according to the mind of Christ ; but 
 yet with this difference. The first opinion introduceth church tyranny 
 and injustice, and is founded in the want of Christian charity and 
 knowledge, and tendeth to endless separation and confusion. But the 
 second opinion inferreth all these greater mischiefs. First. It con- 
 foundeth the Catechumens with the Christians, and maketh all Christians 
 who are but willing to learn to be Christians. Secondly, it maketh 
 the Christian church to consist of such as are no Christians ; as that 
 person certainly is not, who consenteth not that Christ be his Teacher, 
 Priest, and King : for to such an one, he is no Christ ; seeing these are 
 the essential parts of his mediatory office. And the new device of 
 distinguishing Christ's apostolike and mediatory offices, and so tlie church 
 congregate and the church regenerate accordingly, will not serve to 
 defend this conceit. For, as Christ, is not divided, so his office for 
 which he is called Christ, is but one, which entirely is called the office 
 of a Saviour, or Redeemer, or Mediator, which are all one : and the 
 
30 
 
 essential parts of it are, first, his jjriestly ; second, teaching and 
 ruling offices or works. And this which is called his teaching or prophe- 
 tical office, is a part of his mediatory or saving office. And he is no 
 Christian, nor is that any congregated Christian church, which professeth 
 not to take Christ for his Mediator, his Priest, and King, as well as for 
 an Apostle, a Prophet, or Teacher. Thirdly, they therefore who hold 
 the aforesaid doctrine, do introduce a new sort of Christianitj\ 
 Fourthly, and a new sort of baptism, which the church of Christ 
 never knew to this day. Fifthly, And by this new doctrine, they 
 destroy all that special love which church members, or visible Chris- 
 tians, as such, should bear to one another. For ii no faith or consent 
 must necessarily be professed at baptism but that which is common to 
 the ungodli) and children of the devil, then all church members, as onli/ such, 
 must be taken to be but ungodly ; and no man must love a church 
 member as such, with a special love, as a visible saint ; but only as 
 one of the hopefuller sort of the ungodly. Sixthly, And hence it will 
 follow, that either none must make ani/ profession of saving faith and 
 repentance, (and so all appearance of holiness must be driven out of 
 the world,) or else the church must be constituted of two sorts of 
 professions and professors, tota specie distinct from one another ; yea, 
 more distinct than infidels are from their new sort of Christians. 
 And consequently it must needs be indeed two churches, and not one; 
 viz. one church of those who take Christ for their teacher only, and 
 another of those that take him entirely as Christ. Seventhly, And by 
 tliis rule, the Socinians and Mahometans, who confess Christ to be a 
 great Teacher, but deny him to be the Priest and Sacrifice for sin, may 
 be baptized, and taken for Christians."'^ 
 
 He thus explains the nature of the baptismal covenant : — 
 
 " The true conditions of admittance into the church and state of 
 Christianity are these : 
 
 " First — A true belief in God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and a 
 devoting ourselves sincerely to him, as our reconciled Father, our Saviour, and 
 our Sanctifier, in a resolved covenant or consent, renouncing the devil, the 
 world, and the flesh, (expressly or impliedly,) is the whole and the only 
 condition of our communion with the Church mystical, or the living 
 body of Christ. This (he adds) is to be a Christian. 
 
 " Secondly — That which maketh a man a member of the Universal Church, 
 as visible, is his baptism ; which is his profession of the same true faith afore- 
 said, and consent to the covenant ; or his visible dedication to God the Father, 
 Son, and Holi/ Ghost, as his reconciled Father, his Saviour, and Sanctifier, by 
 a vow and covenant in baptism, pp. 50, 51. 
 
 " And here" (he adds) " I must lament it, that I have met with 
 many censorious professors, who would not communicate with the 
 parish churches, because the people are ignorant, who, when I have 
 
 • Cure of Cliiinh Divisions, 3d edit. 12mo. 1G70, pp. 45—48. 
 
31 
 
 examined themselves, have proved ignorant of the very subatance of Chris- 
 tianili/, so that 1 have been much in doubt whether I ought to admit 
 them to the Lord's table or not. Tliey knew not whether Christ was 
 Eternal, or whether he was God when he was on earth, or whether he be 
 man now he is heaven : nor what faith is, or what justif cation or sunctifi- 
 cation is ; nor what the covenant of grace is ; nor what baptism or the 
 Lord's Supper are ; nor could prove the Scripture to be the word of 
 God ; or prove man's soul to be immortal ; but gave false or imperti- 
 nent answers about all these. " p. 55. 
 
 Thus it appears, that, Hberal as were Baxter's views con- 
 cerning the terms of church communion, he required not a 
 Uttle theological knowledge from those who offered themselves 
 for admission, besides a profession of what he regarded as the 
 essential articles of the Christian faith, and entered into par- 
 ticular examinations, in order to ascertain whether they pos- 
 sessed the requisite degree of information. In short, though 
 an earnest advocate for catholic and comprehensive church 
 communion, founded on the basis of a solemn profession of 
 Christianity, Baxter, it is evident, held a belief of the Trinity 
 necessary to constitute a true Christian. 
 
 He proceeds to state, that an intelligent, voluntary, delibe- 
 rate profession of faith in, and consent to the whole baptismal 
 covenant, is the profession of Christianity which entitleth those 
 baptized during infancy, on attaining years of discretion, to 
 church communion ; "unless they forfeit the credit of their pro- 
 fession, by proved heresies, or crimes in which they live impe- 
 nitently : and the more solemnly this is done, the better it is. 
 Whosoever doth profess the Baptismal Covenant, professeth to 
 be a saint. Conversion, regeneration, faith, and repentance, 
 are all contained in taking God, the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ghost, for our Father, Saviour, and Sanctifier." In reply to 
 the objection, that a parrot may be taught to speak those words, 
 he says : " It's true ; and perhaps to speak any words which 
 you use yourselves ; but if you will thence conclude that words 
 must not be taken as a profession, you grossly err, or abu- 
 sively wrangle." * He carefully distinguishes between " arti- 
 cles of faith," or truths essential to Christianity, the belief 
 of which was therefore necessary to salvation, and lesser 
 
 • Cure of Ch. Div. pp.52— 55. 
 
32 
 
 truths. Heretics, in the strict sense of the word, he describes 
 as persons denying any one essential part of the Christian 
 doctrine. The essentials of the Christian faith, expressed in 
 the " three articles" of the baptismal covenant, he considered 
 to have been afterwards embodied in what is called "the 
 Apostles' Creed;" which, it is evident, he regarded as a pro- 
 fession of faith in the Trinity, or in God, as the Father, the 
 Son, and the Holy Spirit. Sincere consent he represents as 
 full saving conversion ; but, he adds, " it is not that covenant 
 when any essential part is omitted. To believe in the Father^ 
 and not the Son, or not in the Holy Ghost, is not that cove- 
 nant." * In his " True and Only Way of Concord," he says, 
 « The Council of Nice truly decided, ' All that had not true 
 Christian baptism, consisting of all the true essentials, were 
 to be re-baptized, and not others, whatever particular church 
 they were of.' If the person baptized profess to be baptized 
 in general, but deny any Essential in particular, it is not the 
 true Christian baptism, but must be better done. When any 
 came in so great errour, as that the Church scarce knew 
 whether it was an Essential part of faith and baptism that 
 was denyed, it made the controversie hard about their re- 
 baptizing. Many thought that the Photinians and Avians, 
 denying Christ's Godhead as of the same substance with the 
 Father, denyed an essential article, and were to be re-baptized 
 if they so entered at first. Our Socinians are much worse, 
 that deny Christ's Godhead in a fuller sense. And how doth 
 he believe in Christ, that believeth him not to be God, which 
 is most eminently essential to him ? pp. 116, 117. 
 
 " And to take into the church of Christ such as want the 
 Essentials, and Christ would not have received, is to corrupt his 
 church, and bring in confusion, and such as will dishonour 
 him, and will be more hurtful in the church than they would 
 be without; like rebels in a kingdom, or mutineers in an 
 army, or enemies in a family — the nearer the worse. 
 
 " How far infidels, catechumens, or heretical or schismatical 
 assemblies, may be tolerated in the world about us by magis- 
 trates, is not here to be enquired. But that the churches 
 
 • Defence of Nonconfonnists' Plea for Peace, r2ino. IGSO, p. 14S. 
 
as 
 
 themselves should not corrupt their own communion, by taking 
 and keeping in uncapable persons, the nature of the church 
 and discipline, and its ends, and the reproof of the churches 
 (Rev, ii. & iii.) and the judgment of the universal church, do 
 tell us." p. 118. 
 
 I will only add one brief but decisive testimony, alone suf- 
 ficient to shew that Baxter was not an advocate for open, in 
 the sense of indiscriminate, communion. 
 
 " We [Nonconformists] judge all our present Infidels, Sad- 
 ducees, and Socinians, unfit, [to receive the Lord's Supper,] if 
 not the Papists."* 
 
 Baxter considered it an important part of the minister's 
 office to execute the discipline prescribed and appointed in 
 the New Testament, in order to keep the church pure, and 
 separate from the world. The discipline which he approved 
 might be, and probably was, less strict than that exercised by 
 the Independents, though he has recorded, to their honour, 
 that " he saw a commendable care of serious holiness and 
 discipline in most of their churches, "f On the other hand, he 
 mentions as what he disUked in the Erastians, " That they 
 made the articles of [the Holy Catholic Church, and the Com- 
 munion of Saints'] too insignificant, by making church com- 
 munion more common to the impenitent than Christ would 
 have it; and so dishonoured Christ by dishonouring his church, 
 and making it too like to the heathen world, and breaking 
 down the hedge of spiritual discipline, and laying it almost 
 in common with the wilderness.":}: 
 
 He mentions, as one of the facts deduced by historical tradi- 
 tion from the primitive age,' " the constant use of Discipline 
 in the Christian churches: it having been their constant law 
 and practice to inquire into the faith and lives of the members, 
 and to censure or cast out those that impenitently violated 
 their religion." |1 And elsewhere, " The church hath from the 
 beginning had a constant discipline, by which it hath kept 
 
 • Narrative of his owu Life, Part iii. p. 123. 
 
 t Narrative of Life, part ii. p. 140. t lb. p. 141. 
 
 II Practical Works, fol, 1707. Life of Faith, vol. iii. p. 549. 
 D 
 
34 
 
 itself separate fi-oni heretics, who have denied any essential 
 article of this faith: which is a sure tradition of the same 
 hehef."* 
 
 In the third part of his True and only Way of Concord, ('of 
 Schism,') he says — " To separate fi-om any church by denyal 
 of some one essential j^art of Christianity, though all the rest 
 be confessed, is Heresie in the strict se?ise, and Ajmstasie in a 
 larger sense: and to deny all Christianity is Apostasie in the 
 strict sense. But the ancient Christians called it Heresie, 
 when men separated into distinct opposing bodies as parties, 
 from the generality of Christians, for the cherishing of any 
 dangerous error." p. 7. 
 
 Mr. Hunter states, that " the term Presbyterian originally 
 comprehended all the discontented party in the Church, except 
 perhaps the few Socinians,"t — intimating that those reputed 
 heretics originally formed part of the Nonconformist body. 
 Very different was the language employed by Richard Baxter 
 in 1680. Speaking of the "present state and practice of the 
 Nonconformists" he premises, that he speaks only of mere 
 Nonconformists as such, and not men of other principles and 
 parties that conform not, as Jeivs, Turks, Socinia?is, Papists, 
 Feminists, Quakers, &c. p. 87. 
 
 The Socinians he expressly calls heretics, in a passage which 
 I shall quote at length, as it shews that he could appreciate 
 good qualities even in those whose doctrines he reprobated 
 and condemned ; and is thus alike honourable to his candour, 
 and to his fidelity, as a witness and advocate for Christian truth. 
 
 " There is one sort of men that have written many things 
 excellently for Peace, even the Socitiians, who being Heretics, 
 have thereby done much harm. Divers of them have laid 
 down in general those rules and terms which might much have 
 furthered the church's peace, if the same things had been 
 written by men of name and reputation. What Acontius\ was, 
 or what Rupertus 3Ieldenius was, I am not sure; some say 
 they were Socinians, and some deny it. But I am sure, if 
 
 *Ib. p. 921. Dying Thoughts (Appendix.) f Hist. Def. p. 15. 
 
 X Concerning Acontius and his writings, a translation of part of which was pub- 
 lished in London, 1C47, some curious information will be found in a book entitled, 
 
35 
 
 they were heretical, their excellent precepts for love and 
 peace may rise up in judgment against orthodox persecutors, 
 schismatics, and revilers. Many that are known to be Socin- 
 ians have written much for peace ; and Satan hath made great 
 advantage of it, to bring all earnest motions for peace into 
 suspicion : so that a man can now scarce write for the retreat 
 of church-warriors, and for the quenching of our consuming 
 flames, but he is presently suspected to be guilty of some 
 Heresy, and to have specially need of charity or toleration 
 himself; like the fox, that, having lost his tail, would have all 
 foxes' tails cut off." p. 21. 
 
 In 1668, some conference and correspondence took place 
 between Dr. Owen and Mr. Baxter on " a concord between 
 the Independents and Presbyterians," in which some discussion 
 arose as to the means of keeping out the Socmians, " who (says 
 Dr. Owen) are numerous, and ready to include themselves 
 upon our communion." He adds, " the Creed, as expounded 
 in the first four councils, will do it." Mr. Baxter, in reply, 
 states his reasons for not making a larger profession necessary 
 than the Creed and Scriptures. One of them is, that " judg- 
 ing heretics by the law of God is a fitter remedy against heresy, 
 than making a uetv rule for that purpose. Either (he adds) 
 they are heretics only in heart, or in tongue also, and expres- 
 sion : if in heart only, we have nothing to do to judge them. 
 Heart irifidels are and will be in the churches. If they be 
 proved to be heretics in tongue, then it is either before they 
 are taken into the communion of the church, or after. If 
 before, you are to use them as in case of proved wickedness ; 
 that is, call them to public repentance before they are ad- 
 mitted : if it be afte?', they must be admonished, and rejected 
 after the first and second contemned admonition. And is not 
 this enough? And is not this the certain regular way? Is it 
 
 "The Divine Trinunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; or the blessed 
 Doctrine of the Three Co-essentiall Subsistents in the Eternal Godhead, 
 without any confusion or division of the distinct Subsistences, or multiplication of 
 the most single and entire Godhead, acknowledged, believed, adored by Christians, 
 in opposition to Pagans, Jews, Mahumetans, Blasphemers, and Antichristian 
 Hereticks, who say they are Christians, but are not; &c. By Francis Cheynell." 
 12rao. 1650. The author was a famous Presbyterian divine. 
 1) t> 
 
not confusion to put law for judgment, and say there wants a 
 neiv laiv or rule, when there wants but a due judgment by 
 the rule in being. 
 
 « If there be nothing against Socinianism in the Scripture, 
 it is no heresy : if there be, (as sure there is enough, and plain 
 enough,) judge them by that rule, and make not new ones."* 
 
 Baxter, while he considered a profession of behef in what 
 he calls " the substance of the doctrine of salvation," an indis- 
 pensable prerequisite to church communion; and held that 
 some errors were " damnable, as plainly subverting the foun- 
 dation of faith," objected to any words and phrases not found 
 in Scripture, being made necessary for that purpose. " For 
 instance," he says, " I think the word [Satisfaction] as used by 
 the orthodox, is of a very sound sense in our controversies 
 against the Socinians ; and yet I will never account it neces- 
 sary, as long as it is not in the Scriptures, and as long as the 
 words sacrifice, ransom, price, propitiation, atonemeiit, &c., 
 which the Scripture useth, are full as good." f 
 
 He also objected to enlarging the Creed, properly so called, 
 by multiplying the number of articles of faith considered ne- 
 cessary to salvation. But he did not object to confessions and 
 catechisms being used for the purpose of explaining the doc- 
 trines held by Nonconformists, and vindicating them from the 
 imputation of maintaining erroneous tenets. This, it appears, 
 was a common practice among them, when misrepresented and 
 traduced by their enemies. I shall give a few instances : and 
 the first shall be from Baxter himself. 
 
 " Our Doctrine is published to the world so fully, that 
 no sober man can question us, as a party, for it ; but if any 
 individual err, he must be named, and proved faulty. For our 
 very religion is nothing but the law of Nature, and the holy 
 Scriptures, which we profess to the Papists, that would have 
 more, and to all the world : and we subscribe the doctrine 
 of the Church of Eiigland, in the Articles, as our explication 
 of the sense of Scripture in those points. Though God's word 
 only be our religion in the rule, and we profess to disclaim all 
 
 * Narrative of his Life, part iii. pp. 63, 65. 
 t Practical Works, vol. iii. p. 550. 
 
37 
 
 additions or diminutions^ yet not all explications of our under- 
 standing the meaning of it ; and, therefore, are still ready to 
 give such explicatory Professions to any that suspect, or accuse 
 us of error. And so the TFestminster Assembly did in their 
 Confession, as all the Reformed Churches have done. But 
 our religion, in the divine rule, we take for infallible ; but 
 our explications we take for the corrigible words of falHble 
 men ; and as we will take no other men's for infallible, so we 
 are ready to retract and correct whatever shall be proved 
 faulty in our own. 
 
 " Much less can we boast, that wo minister among us doth 
 ever speak or write incongruously, or hath any imperfection 
 or misapprehension of any point or method in theology : we 
 rather wish than hojje for such perfection here. But, besides 
 the foresaid Confessions, our professed doctrine is known by 
 many printed catechisms and treatises, such as Mr. Ball's 
 Catechism, and Mr. Gouge's, &c."* 
 
 There are many similar testimonies which might be produced. 
 I will insert a strong declaration by the anonymous author of a 
 small tract, printed in 1680, entitled " EngHsh Presbytery ; 
 or an Account of the Main Opinions of those Ministers and 
 People in England, who go under the name of Presby- 
 terians,"! published for the vindication of those who were 
 aspersed and calumniated under that title, gives the following 
 decisive testimony : — " In all matters of faith, the Presby- 
 terians believe whatsoever is in the /Apostles' Creed, the 
 Nicene Creed, and the Confessions of Faith of the Churches 
 of God in Switzerland, Holland, France, Geneva, the 
 Articles of Ireland, our own 39 Articles, (with exception only 
 to i\ve articles concerning the ceremonies and discijiUne,) and 
 deiy the doctrines of Papists, Socinians, Pelagians, Semi- 
 Pelagians, and all others erring from the faith." 
 
 The Dissenters were charged, in 1686, with " being 
 popishly aifected, and joyning with the Papists to mine the 
 
 • The Second Part of the Nonconformists' Plea for Peace, 4to. 1680, p. 192. 
 
 t I am aware that the word Presbyterian was frequently used about this time, 
 and for many years after, as a generical term, comprehending Dissenters generally ; 
 but when so used, it of course included those to whom it was also specifically applied. 
 
38 
 
 Protestant interest." To this, Mr. James Owen, a very 
 learned Presbyterian minister, at Oswestry, afterwards tutor 
 of an academy in Shrewsbury, answered, that, '* of all the 
 imputations cast upon them, none could be more unhappily 
 invented than this;" and assigned ten arguments to disprove 
 the calumnious assertion. The following are some of them : 
 
 " 1. The Pi'otestant Dissenters cannot be charged with any 
 Popish principles. Their Confession of Faith and Cate- 
 chisms are extant. 
 
 " 2. Their practices are not Popish. They worship no 
 graven images, nor do they pray to saints and angels. They 
 teach no doctrine but ^that of the 39 Articles of the Church 
 of England. 
 
 " 8. We differ in nothing from them of the Church, but in 
 those things wherein they agree with the Papists. It's true 
 they have rejected their idolatry and grosser errors, and 
 therein we agree with them ; but they retain a great many of 
 their ceremonies and superstitions, and therein we differ from 
 them. 
 
 " The Papists have no controversy with the Church about 
 those points wherein we differ from them ; nor have we any 
 controversy with the Church about things wherein they differ 
 from the Papists. 
 
 " 9. In those things wherein we differ from the Church of 
 England, we agree with other Reformed Churches. 
 
 " 10. We profess the orthodox doctrine, in opposition to the 
 Arminians. The old doctors of the Church looked upon 
 Arminianism as an introduction to Popery, and yet how 
 many embrace it in the Church ! Who, then, promote 
 Popery, they who embrace the Arminian errors, or those ivho 
 detest them?"* 
 
 It \ is generally believed that the greater part of the 
 ministers ejected by the Act of Uniformity, were real Presby- 
 terians, or persons who approved of the mode of church 
 government by presbyteries, synods, and assemblies. Several 
 undoubtedly were such ; but many of them, it appears, would 
 
 * Arcount of the Life of Kev. James Owen, 12ino. 1709., pp. 38— IK 
 
39 
 
 have preferred, as their leaders oflfered to accept, a scheme 
 of church government framed on the model of the primitive 
 episcopacy. Baxter, himself one of this number, allows, that "in 
 the beginning churches were societies of Christians united for 
 personal com)7iimion, and that if we go beyond those bounds, 
 we may make a church of a nation, or of ten nations, or what 
 we please, which shall have none of the nature and ends of 
 the primitive particular churches."* To apply the term Pres- 
 byterian in its original and proper sense, to persons holding 
 these opinions, would be grossly inaccurate, for such, they 
 were not, in the conviction of their judgment. But even sup- 
 posing that, what they subsequently became, they were rather 
 from necessity than from choice, they certainly adopted in 
 practice, when they gathered separate congregations, what 
 may be called the Congregational principle — that every parti- 
 cular assembly of Christian professors was, in the scripture 
 sense of the word, a church, competent to conduct its own 
 affairs, and administer its own disciphne, without being sub- 
 ject to the authoritative interference or control of any other 
 body of Christian professors. Their disciphne, therefore, what- 
 ever it was, could only be Congregational ; nor was there, I 
 believe, an attempt made to set up a more general scheme of 
 church government in any part of the kingdom. 
 
 Mr. Hunter has correctly stated, that, " the Independents 
 were from the first for particular churches, each church or 
 body of Christians unconnected with other churches, except 
 as their ministers or people might, for convenience or mutual 
 edification, form voluntary alliances."f And the Enghsh 
 Presbyterian Association, though they represent that, " the 
 ejected members of the Church were still inclined to Pres- 
 byterian discipline," admit that among them, " each congre- 
 gation necessarily conducted its affairs on an independent 
 principle ;" and that, " though calling themselves, from the 
 Act of Uniformity, Presbyterians, they had scarcely one of 
 the old primitive Presbyterian forms among them."| 
 
 I have already admitted that most of the ejected ministers, 
 who belonged to this denomination, were desirous of being 
 
 * Narrative, &c, part i. p. MO. f Hist. Def. p. 16. t Hist. pp. 10, 11, 33. 
 
40 
 
 comprehended within the pale of the established Episcopal 
 church, could they only have obtained a relaxation of its 
 rigorous impositions, and the removal of its offensive cere- 
 monies. They were, however, compelled to become noncon- 
 formists, when the slightest concession was finally refused; 
 and for several years they endured severe privations and 
 sufferings, inflicted by most iniquitous acts of parliament. 
 
 A declaration was issued by Charles II., March 15, 1672, 
 dispensing with the penal laws against nonconformists, on 
 which Baxter makes the following remarks — 
 
 " This question, whether Toleration of us in our different 
 assemblies, or such an abatement of impositions as would 
 restore some ministers to the public assemblies by a law, were 
 more desirable, was a great controversy then among the non- 
 conformists ; and greater it had been, but that the hopes of 
 abatements, (called then a Comprehension, ) were so low as made 
 them the less concerned in the agitation of it. But whenever 
 there was a new session of parliament, which put them in 
 some little hopes of abatements, the controversy began to 
 revive, according to the measure of those hopes. The Inde- 
 pendents, and all the sectaries, and some few Presbyterians, 
 especially in London, who had large congregations, and 
 liberty and encouragement, were rather for a Toleration. The 
 rest of the Presbyterians, and the Episcopal nonconformists, 
 were for abatement and comprehension."* 
 
 " The several parties," says Mr. Orme, after inserting the 
 extract just quoted, " were influenced by their respective prin- 
 ciples of church government and civil establishments." 
 
 From this time, it appears the Presbyterians began gene- 
 rally to form separate congregations for divine service. 
 
 Mr. Neal gives the following account of the origin and 
 design of the Lecture which was established in this year by 
 the London nonconformists : — 
 
 " During this interval of Parliament, the Declaration of 
 Indulgence continued in force, and the Dissenters had rest ; 
 when the Presbyterians and Independents, to sliew their 
 agreement among themselves, as well as to support the doc- 
 
 * Narrative of Life, part iii. p. 100. 
 
41 
 
 trines of the Reformation against the prevaiUng errors of 
 Popery, Socinianism, and Infidelity, set up a weekly lecture 
 at Pinner's Hall, in Broad-street, on Tuesday mornings, by 
 the contributions of the principal merchants and tradesmen of 
 their persuasions in the city. Four Presbyterians were joined 
 with two Independents, to preach by turns ; and to give it the 
 greater reputation, the principal ministers, for learning and 
 popularity, were chosen into it ; as. Dr. Bates, Dr. Manton, 
 Dr. Owen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Collins, Jenkins, Mead, and after- 
 wards Mr. Alsop, Howe, Cole, and others ; and though there 
 were some little misunderstandings at their first setting out, 
 about some high points of Calvinism, occasioned by one of Mr. 
 Baxter's first sermons, yet the lecture continued in this form 
 till the year 1695, when it split upon the same rock, occa- 
 sioned by reprinting Dr. Crisp's works."* 
 
 The toleration, granted after the Revolution in 1688, put 
 an end to all farther reasonable prospect of such a comprehen- 
 sion as most of the Presbyterians were desirous of obtaining 
 from the legislature. Liberty of separate worship having 
 been conceded by that important measure, little hope re- 
 mained of this favourite object being attained ; and the failure 
 of an attempt made the following year, by Archbishop Tillot- 
 son, must have convinced them how vain would be any 
 expectation that the terms of ministerial conformity, or even 
 of lay communion, would hereafter be materially altered, with 
 a view to meet the scruples or to secure the adhesion of any 
 class of nonconformists. Dr. Calamy, 'after mentioning that 
 this act received the royal assent May 24, adds : — " From that 
 time they were easy and thankful, though many of them would 
 have been glad to have been taken into the National Establish- 
 ment, some hopes of which were still left them, because there 
 was a bill for that purpose yet depending in Parliament." f 
 
 The Act of Toleration, 1 W. & M. s. 1, c. 18, exempts 
 nonconformists, upon taking certain oaths, &c. from liability 
 to penalties imposed by an act of Charles II., and expressly 
 extends that exemption to ministers and preachers, who, be- 
 sides taking the same oaths, &c., " declare their approbation 
 
 * History of the Puritans, vol. iv. p. 3G9. 
 t Calamy's Historical Additions, p. 445. 
 
4'2 
 
 of, and subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles, except the 34th, 
 35th, and 36th, and a clause in the 20th — and, if Antipsedo- 
 baptists, part of the 27th — at the General or Quarter Ses- 
 sions ; the declaration and subscription to be entered of 
 record." " This restriction," say the English Presbyterian 
 Association, " was offensive to the greater number of Dis- 
 senters, especially to those of the Presbyterian party. Baxter, 
 who may be considered their leader, consented to subscribe, 
 and did so conditionally ; but he gave his own interpretation 
 of the Articles, and, in so doing, attached a sense to them 
 which was, no doubt, at variance with their strict meaning ; 
 adding to his subscription, ' If I have hit upon the true 
 meaning, I subscribe my assent, and I thank my God that this 
 National Church hath doctrine so sound.' "* The paper which 
 he printed on this occasion, entitled, " Richard Baxter's Sense 
 of the Subscribed Articles," 1689, 4to. is inserted in Dr. 
 Calamy's Historical Additions. to the Abridgment of his Life, 
 pp. 469 — 476. This writer asserts " that the great body of 
 Nonconformists (by which, I presume, he means Nonconformist 
 ministers,) " did not subscribe." I will quote Dr. Calamy's 
 own words : " The Dissenting ministers of the several denomi- 
 nations subscribed the doctrinal Articles of the Church of 
 England^ as the Act of Parliament required: but some few 
 expressions in them being dubious, Mr. Baxter drew up a brief 
 explication, which he gave in for his sense at the time of his sub- 
 scription, in which many of his brethren concurred with him." f 
 The explication itself is too long to be inserted, but I may 
 venture to assert that his remarks do not affect the substance 
 of any cardinal or vitally important doctrine. How can it be 
 said, with truth, that he attached a sense to the articles (gene- 
 rally) " which was no doubt at variance with their strict 
 meaning," when he professed merely to state " how he under- 
 stood the words which he subscribed," and passed by more 
 than half of the articles to which subscription is required, 
 as "those that need no exposition ?"% Among these are, 
 the first, « Of Faith in the Holy Trinity ;" nearly all the 2nd 
 relating to the Incarnation of the Eternal Word; the 5th, 
 
 • Hist. p. IJ. t Abridg. Life of Baxter, p. 169. X lb. p. 476. 
 
43 
 
 " Of the Holy Ghost;"* and also the 17th, " Of Predestination 
 and Election." He thus notices the 8th : " The three creeds, 
 viz. Nice Creed, Athanasius Creed, and that commonly called the 
 Aposths^ Creed, ought throughly to be received and believed, 
 [omnino.'] Expos. Rightly understood, viz.: 1. That by [God 
 of God, very God of very God,] be not meant two Gods. 2. Nor 
 the damnatory clauses taken for part of Athanasius 's Creed, 
 though they be part of the Liturgy assented and consented to."t 
 We have sufficient means of knowing the opinion, not only 
 of Baxter, but of the ejected ministers generally, concerning 
 the creed ascribed to Athanasius. His own distinct acknow- 
 ledgment, and the testimony supplied by Dr. Calamy, in his 
 " Lives of the Ejected Ministers," furnish ample evidence 
 on this point. Baxter declared, in 1667, " I unfeignedly ac- 
 
 * The following are the Articles above referred to: — 
 
 I. There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or pas- 
 sions ; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness ; the maker and preserver of all 
 things, both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead, there be three 
 Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 If. Of the Word, or Son of God, which was made very Man. 
 
 The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the 
 Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's 
 nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance : so that two whole and 
 perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and manhood, were joined together in 
 one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God and very man, 
 who truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, 
 and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men. 
 
 [Baxter's explanatory remark relates merely to the last few words of this article, 
 which he appears to have read thus : " for all the sin of man, original and actual,"] 
 
 V. The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, 
 majesty, and glory with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God. 
 
 f " We hold it not unlawful to take oaths and make covenants, subscriptions, or 
 declarations of things lawful, when Authority commandeth us. 
 
 " We readily subscribe the doctrine of faith and sacraments contained in the 
 39 Articles, and differ not therein from the Church of England, that we know of. 
 And though there be some expressions in the Articles which we think not accurate, 
 but liable to an ill interpretation, yet when our consciences tell us that it was truth 
 which was intended, we are willing to overlook infirmity and unfitness of expres- 
 sion, when we see that we are not to own untruths." — " What Mere Nonconformity 
 Is Not. The Profession of several whom these Times have made and called Noncon- 
 formists," 4to, 1676, pp. 98, 99, annexed to Baxter's Second Part of the Nonconform- 
 ists' Plea for Peace. 
 
44 
 
 count the doctrine of the Trinity the very sum and kernel of 
 the Christian Religion, (as exprest in our Baptism,) and Atha- 
 nasius his Creed the best explication of it that ever I read."* 
 
 " Our Fathers," says Dr. Calamy, " approved of the Creed 
 in general, as heartily as their brethren, and esteemed it an 
 excellent explication of the doctrine of the Trinity."^f 
 
 They strongly objected, however, to what are usually called 
 " the damnatory clauses" appended to this creed, which, not 
 forming any part of it, might (as Dr. Calamy argues, in de- 
 fending them and himself,) be held in abhorrence by those 
 who " thoroughly received the substance of the creed itself."| 
 
 It will now be proper to notice what were the opinions of 
 the Presbyterians concerning the securities to be required from 
 persons allowed to officiate as ministers of religion and pastors 
 of churches, for orthodoxy in doctrine. They considered 
 " soundness in the faith" an indispensable prerequisite ; and 
 while they declined enforcing subscription to articles containing 
 particular statements of doctrine composed by falhble men, 
 and expressed in mere human terms, they considered it no un- 
 warrantable infi'ingement on the liberty of inquiry, or the right 
 of private judgment, to demand from candidates for the minis- 
 terial office such a statement of their doctrinal views as might 
 be sufficient to give reasonable satisfaction on this important 
 point. Nor did they, it appears, object to all subscription 
 even to " creeds," for this purpose. Baxter, in his Overture for 
 " a Brotherly Agreement" with the Episcopalians, proposed, 
 as one of the terms, " That no subscription be required of the 
 pastors, to any thing about Religion, but to the Holy Scriptures, 
 and the ancient creeds, and to the necessary articles of faith 
 and practice expressed in Scripture terms, and to the renun- 
 ciation of all heresies contrary thereto. §" 
 
 We have seen that, in 1655, he considered the Assembly's 
 shorter Catechism as " a fit test to try the orthodoxness even 
 of teachers themselves." || 
 
 In his " True and only Way of Concord," in which he states 
 
 • Reasons of the Christian Religion, 4to, p. 377. t Abridg. Life of Baxter, p. 235. 
 i Defence of Moderate Nonconformity, part ii. pp. 263-265. 
 § Narrative of Life, Part II. p. 209. || Ante. p. 10. 
 
45 
 
 the bounds which he would set to the toleration of ministers, he 
 distinguishes them into three classes ; the approved and main- 
 tained — the tolerated — the intolerable. By the last descrip- 
 tion he intended the preachers of intolerable heresies, whom 
 he elsewhere denominates " heretical seducers." These, he 
 says, " must be suppressed or restrained, according to the 
 quality of their offence." He proposes that three several 
 catalogues, or laws, should be drawn up : the first containing 
 " the necessary parts of Christianity and Communion, (the 
 Baptismal Covenant, Creed, Lord's Prayer, and the essentials 
 of Ministry and Communion, ) which all tolerated ministers 
 shall subscribe to or profess ; having also testimonials of their 
 competent abilities, piety, and peaceableness. 
 
 " II. Some of the great sort of integrals added, that are 
 needful, plain, and certain ; and, therefore, it is best in the 
 very words of Scripture, which all agree to ; and this to be 
 consented to by the approved and preferred ministers, who 
 shall have the . temples, and public countenance and main- 
 tenance. 
 
 " III. A catalogue of doctrines, of so great use, as that 
 none be suffered to preach or privately dispute against them. 
 
 " Those that break either of these laws, and subscribe not 
 to the Essentials first mentioned, to be judged intolerable (till 
 reformed) in the ministry." All such, in his judgment, were 
 to be silenced and restrained by the civil power. 
 
 " The approved, tolerable, and intolerable, thus distin- 
 guished, and thus used by the magistrate, will best answer 
 the ends and interest of Christianity, and the laws of Christ, 
 and will do as much to preserve love, unity, and peace, as is 
 on earth to be expected, which all other contrary ways will 
 unavoidably violate."* 
 
 He afterwards gives " a draught or specimen of such forms, 
 for the approved and the tolerated ministers ; which," he says, 
 " I thought to omit, lest it seem presumptuous : but the obser- 
 vation how ordinarily men miscarry in this work, hath per- 
 suaded me to run the hazard of men's censures."f 
 
 • Pp. 262—267. t P. 279. 
 
46 
 
 The Form to be subscribed by the Approved Ministry. 
 
 The form common " I, A. B., do seriously, as in the sight of God, 
 
 to all Christians. — profess, that as I have been in baptism devoted 
 Matt. xxvm. 19. ^^^ ^j^^ sacred covenant to God the Father, Son, 
 and Holy Ghost, renouncing the devil, the 
 world, and the flesh, so far as they are his enemies ; so I do unfeign- 
 edly believe in God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and consent 
 still to that covenant, in hope of the grace and glory promised, obliging 
 myself to continue, by the help of that grace, in Faith, Love, and sincere 
 obedience, to the end. 
 
 " More particularly, 
 . "I. — Idounfeignedlybelieve,!. that there is One only God, an 
 
 infinite Spirit of life, understanding, and will ; most perfectly 
 powerful, wise, and good ; incomprehensibly Three in One, and One 
 (essence) in Three (called persons, or subsistences, by the church), the 
 Father, the Word, and the Spirit, of whom, and through whom, and to 
 whom, are all things ; he being the Creator, Preserver, Governor, 
 and the ultimate End of all : our absolute Owner, our most just Ruler, 
 and our most gracious and amiable Father and Benefactor. 
 
 " 2. I believe that this God created all the world, things invisible 
 and visible ; and made man in his own image, forming a fit body, and 
 breathing into it a spirit of life, understanding and will ; fitted and 
 obliged to know, love, and serve his Creator ; giving him the inferior 
 creatures for this use, making him their owner, their governor, and 
 their end, under God ; but specially forbidding him to eat of the tree 
 of knowledge, on pain of death. 
 
 "3. The woman being tempted by Satan, and the man by the 
 woman, both fell by wilful sin from their holiness, innocency and 
 happiness, into a state of pravity, guilt and misery, under the slavery 
 of the devil, world and flesh, under God's vindictive justice, and the 
 condemnation of his law ; whence sinful, corrupted, 'guilty, and mise- 
 rable natures are propagated to all mankind. Eph. ii. 3. And no mere 
 creature is able to deliver us. 
 
 " II. — I believe that God so loved the world that he gave his only 
 Son to be their Saviour; who, being God, and one with the Father, 
 took our nature, and became man ; being conceived by the Holy 
 Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, named Jesus, the Christ ; who was 
 perfectly holy, without sin, fulfilling 'all righteousness ; and, being 
 tempted, overcame the devil and the world ; and, after a life of humi- 
 liation, gave himself a sacrifice for our sins, by suffering a cursed 
 death on tlie cross, to ransom us and reconcile us unto God, and was 
 buried, and descended to Hades ; and, conquering death, the third day 
 he rose again. And having sealed the New Covenant with his blood, 
 he commanded his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all the world, and 
 promised the Holy Ghost ; and after forty days ascended into heaven, 
 
47 
 
 where he is God and man, the glorified Head over all things to his 
 church, all power being given him in heaven and earth ; our prevail- 
 ing Intercessor with God the Father, to present us and our service 
 acceptable to God, and communicate God's grace and mercies unto 
 us; to teach us, govern, protect and judge us, and to save, and bless, 
 and glorify us. 
 
 "2. By the New Testament, Covenant, or Law of grace, God, 
 through the aforesaid mediation of Jesus Christ, doth freely give to 
 fallen mankind. Himself to be their reconciled God and Father, his 
 Son to be their Saviour, aud his Holy Spirit to be their Sanctifier and 
 Comforter, if they will accordingly believe and accept the gift, and by 
 faithful covenant give up themselves to him in these relations ; repent- 
 ing of their sins, and consenting to forsake the devil, the world and 
 the flesh, so far as they are enemies to God and their salvation, and 
 sincerely to obey Christ, his laws, and his Spirit to the end, bearing 
 the cross, and following him though sufferings, that they may reign 
 with him in glory. All which God will faithfully perform. 
 
 " III. — I believe that God the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the 
 Father and from (or by) the Son, was given to the Prophets, Apostles, 
 and Evangelists, to be their infallible guide in preaching and record- 
 ing the doctrine of salvation, and to be the great witness of Christ and 
 his truth, by his manifold divine operations. And that he is given to 
 quicken, illuminate, and sanctify all true believers, and to save them 
 from the devil, the world, and the flesh's temptations, from sin, and 
 from spiritual misery. 
 
 " 2. I believe that all who by true consent are devoted to God in the 
 foresaid baptismal covenant, and so continue, are one sanctified 
 Church, or body of Christ ; and have communion in the same spirit 
 of faith and love, and have forgiveness of their sins ; and having one 
 God, one Christ, one Spirit, one faith, one baptism, and one hope of 
 heavenly glory, are bound to keeji this unity of the Spirit in the bond 
 of peace, in the doctrine, worship, order and conversation, and mutual 
 helps, which Christ hath by himself or his Apostles commanded, 
 avoiding uncharitable contentions, divisions, injuries, and off'enees. 
 And that the baptised covenanters, and external professors of the 
 foresaid covenant-consent, are the visible church universal, and such 
 as we must have outward communion with, though only the sincere 
 believers and consenters shall be saved. 
 
 " 3. I believe that at death the spirits of the justified go to happi- 
 ness with Christ, and the souls of the wicked to misery. And that 
 at the end of this world Christ will come in glory, and will raise the 
 bodies of all .men from death, and will judge all according to their 
 works ; and that the righteous shall go into everlasting life, where, 
 being perfected themselves, they shall see God, and perfectly love and 
 praise him in joy, witli Christ and all the glorified Church ; and that 
 
48 
 
 the rest shall go into everlasting punishment, where their worm never 
 dieth, and tlieir fire is never quenched. 
 
 ^ n ■ " ^^" — '^^^ ^ believe thus in God the Father, 
 
 Son, and Holy Ghost, according to the Sacred 
 Scriptures, and the Creeds and constant Profession of the universal. 
 Christian Church, so I do unfeignedly continue to give up myself 
 presently, absolutely, and resolvedly, to this God, my Creator, Re- 
 deemer and Sanctifier, according to the covenant of grace ; that I may 
 be resigned to the will of God, my Owner, and obey the will of God, my 
 Ruler, and please and rest in the will and love of God, my Father, the 
 chiefest End and infinite Good. And renouncing all idols and enemies 
 of God and this his Covenant, I consent, though with the cross, to 
 follow Christ, the Captain of my salvation, to the death, desiring still 
 more of the love of the Father, the grace of the Son, and the commu- 
 nion of the Holy Spirit, and hoping for the promised glory. All which 
 1 pray for, according to that prayer which Christ hath left to be 
 the summary directory of our desires : ' Our Father, which art in 
 heaven,' &c. 
 
 „ . " III. — According: to the foresaid belief and consent. 
 
 Practice , . 
 
 as God hath obliged me, I do by covenant oblige myself, 
 
 by the help of his grace, sincerely to obey this God, my Creator, 
 Redeemer, and Sanctifier, according to the law of nature, summed up 
 in the two great commands of loving God with all our hearts, and our 
 neighbours as ourselves ; and in the Ten Commandments, as the law 
 of Christ explained by him, with his superadded precepts and insti- 
 tutions. By all which I am bound to take God only for my God, by 
 believing, fearing, trusting, loving, and obeying him ; to avoid all 
 idolatry of mind and body, to worship God according to his law, by 
 learning and meditating on his word, by believing, holy fervent 
 prayer, thanksgiving and praise, and the holy use of the sacrament of 
 his body and blood. I must reverently and holily use his name, and 
 not by perjury, or otherwise, profane it. I must keep holy the Lord's 
 day, especially in holy communion with the Christian assemblies, in 
 the public worship of God, and thankful commemoration of Christ's 
 resurrection and our redemption." — [Some other specific practical 
 duties are then mentioned.] 
 
 " 2. And as the special duty of my office, as in the sacred ministry, 
 I do consent and promise sincerely to perform that office for the flock 
 over which I shall be placed, or wherever I am called to exercise 
 it ; teaching them the doctrine of the Sacred Scriptures, especially the 
 greatest and most necessary parts, which I have here professed, and 
 nothing contrary thereto, so far as by diligent study I can discern it, 
 exhorting them to live by faith in love to God and man, and in the 
 joyful hope of heavenly glory ; in humility, self-denial, temperance, 
 patience, justice, diligence, and fruitfulness in all good works. 
 
49 
 
 Other duties are tlieii enumerated, particularly those to civil rulers, 
 after which follows " the Renunciation," which commences thus :— 
 
 " And as I have thus unfeignedly pi'ofessed my belief, my consent, 
 and promised practice, so I heartily renounce all doctrines, desires and 
 practices contrary to any part of this Profession. And if by error I 
 hold, or shall hold, any thing contrary thereto, as soon as I discern 
 such contrariety, I will renounce it."* 
 
 This form of profession clearly shews the importance which 
 Baxter attached to a correct and scriptural belief, especially 
 in the doctrine of the Trinity, by all approved pubhc teachers 
 of religion. Eminently practical as was the character both of 
 his preaching and of his writings, he was very remote from 
 that latitudinarian indifference to religious truth, which has 
 with so much confidence of assertion been ascribed to the 
 Presbyterians. On the contrary, it was their invariable custom 
 to institute very particular and minute inquiries into the faith 
 of those who proposed themselves for admission to the sacred 
 ofiice, on the principle that persons who teach erroneous 
 doctrine spread mischief among the churches, and expose to 
 jeopardy the souls of their hearers. So far from " viewing 
 with equal charity all conscientious differences of doctrine," 
 they denied that those who propagated heretical opinions 
 could be justly called Christian ministers, and declared that 
 such should be restrained by the arm of the civil power. 
 We cannot therefore wonder that in the Act of Toleration, an 
 act framed, there is reason to believe, with a view to meet 
 the feelings and opinions of the leading Dissenters at that 
 time, a clause was inserted to exclude from the benefit of it 
 " those who denied the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity as 
 declared in the Articles of Religion." 
 
 " Some," say the Enghsh Presbyterian Association, " take 
 high ground indeed in the argument, who refuse to those 
 who dissent fi-om the doctrine of the Trinity the title of 
 Christian."f Without offering any opinion of my own upon 
 this point, I will again appeal to the most eminent of " the 
 old Presbyterians," who has " sanctioned the charge" lately 
 made against them. That individual, they themselves 
 denominate, and justly, " one of the ablest and most cele- 
 
 * Pp. 279—288. t Hist. pp. 63, C4. 
 
 E 
 
50 
 
 brated of the Presbyterian ministers." In a book published 
 in 1681, after having declared concerning himself: " I am 
 against all sects and dividing parties — if the name of Christian 
 be not enough, call me a Catholic Christian ;" he speaks in 
 these terms of " the dangerous heresy of Arius, " [that 
 " Christ was a superangelical perfect Spirit, by which God 
 made all the rest of the creatures."] — " He that denieth the 
 Deity of Christ, denieth his Essence; and he that denieth 
 his Essence, denieth Christ, and is no Christian."* We are 
 told, indeed, that " there is a sense in which many persons 
 who hold Unitarian tenets, allow Jesus Christ to be 
 God,"f but I presume there are none of them who do not 
 deny what Baxter here strongly affirms — his Essential Deity, 
 and such, in that great man's estimation, are no Christians. — 
 " The modern Presbyterian refuses," it is said, " to employ 
 unscriptural phrases respecting the Trinity, or to adopt those 
 terms which the Articles of the Church of England, or 
 the Assembly's Catechism, have connected with it ;" where- 
 as it is admitted, that " the early Presbyterians assented 
 to those terms."! But a very eminent Unitarian minister 
 and tutor, now living, refuses to assent even to terms that are 
 found in Scripture. Mr. Wellbeloved, " preferring scriptural 
 to dogmatical phraseology,"§ has, on a recent occasion, made 
 a declaration of his faith, on oath, " in the text and words 
 of Scripture." From this it appears, that he is not one of 
 those Unitarians who admit Jesus Christ to be God in any 
 sense ; for, quoting the first verse of the Gospel of John, he 
 mutilates the language of the sacred writer, omitting a portion 
 of the sentence in which it is expressly declared that " the 
 Word was God." He says, " I acknowledge Jesus to be the 
 Word that in the beginning was with God," || and there he stops, 
 leaving in the mind of every reader the inevitable conclusion, 
 
 * Church-History of Bishops and their Councils, 4to. : Addendum to Preface, 
 prope finem, p. 48. He gives this account of the state of things at Kidderminster, 
 wLilehe was minister of the place. " In my own charge, (a great parish, of many 
 thousand souls,) where I was above fourteen years, we had no one separate assembly, 
 nor one sectary, that I remember, save two or three apostate Infidels, (or Socinians,) 
 and two or three Papists." The True and only Way of Concord, p. 276. 
 t Hist. p. 77. : lb. p. 46. § lb. p. 114. || lb. p. 66, 
 
51 
 
 that he does not acknowledge what immediately follows, and 
 is separated only by a comma — " and the Word was God." 
 Mr. Wellbeloved, therefore, according to Bcixter, is no Chris- 
 tian; and all who assert that Jesus Christ is a mere man, or 
 less than " essentially God," are not true believers. Now, 
 let the reader judge of the truth of the following assertion : — 
 " If the Presbyterians were at any time generally Trinitarian, 
 it was not from abhorrence of other doctrines. Their pre- 
 ference was accompanied by no such feeling Interference 
 
 with religious belief was regarded as more mischievous than 
 
 all the errors ignorance or weakness might produce Any 
 
 other course would have produced a habit of pursuing error, 
 or, by favouring indifference, have perpetuated mischievous 
 opinions."* So thought not Baxter. Very dilFerent was the 
 principle which this " leader of the Presbyterian party" advo- 
 cated ; — a principle which, in my opinion, was carried to an 
 extreme, when the civil magistrate was called in to suppress 
 heresy. The preachers of " error and mischievous opinions," 
 he held that the supreme power in the state should not suffer 
 to be admitted into the ministry; and this principle succeeding 
 Presbyterians continued to hold for several years after his 
 death, as will be shewn in subsequent pages. 
 
 An Agreement for Union between the Presbyterian and 
 the Independent ministers in and near London was concluded 
 in 1691. The two bodies had been gradually approximating 
 for several years. The Congregational had generally laid aside 
 some of their peculiarities of ecclesiastical usage, and the Pres- 
 byterian had been compelled to renounce all hope of a compre- 
 hension with the Established Church. Thus prepared to 
 unite, measures were adopted, soon after the Revolution, for 
 accomplishing the object, which, after several meetings, was, 
 at length, happily effected. The important document drawn 
 up on this occasion, having been committed to the press, 
 enables us to give a correct and authentic account of the nature 
 of the Agreement, the particulars it embraced, and the prin- 
 ciples on which it was formed. It is entitled " Heads of Agree- 
 ment assented to by the United Ministers in and about London, 
 
 * Hist. pp. 53, 54. 
 
 e2 
 
formerly called Presbyterian and Congregational, 4to, 1691." 
 To the document itself is prefixed a notice that " it had been 
 resolved upon not as a measure for any national constitution, 
 but for the preservation of order in their congregations, that 
 cannot come up to the common rule by law established." 
 The preface to the reader I will insert entire. 
 
 " Endeavours for an Agreement among Christians will be'grievoiis 
 to none who desire the flourishing state of Christianity itself. The 
 success of these attempts among us must be ascribed to a presence of 
 God, so signal as not to be concealed, and seems a hopeful pledge of 
 further blessings. 
 
 " The favour of our rulers, in the present established liberty, we 
 most thankfully acknowledge ; and to them we are studious to approve 
 ourselves in the whole of this affair. Therefore, we declare against 
 intermeddling with the National Church Form. Imposing these terms 
 of Agreement, on others is disclaimed. All pretence to coercive power 
 is as unsuitable to our principles as to our circumstances : Excom- 
 munication itself, in our respective churches, being no other than a 
 declaring such scandalous members as are irreclaimable, to be inca- 
 l)able of communion with us in things peculiar to visible believers. 
 And in all, we expressly determine our purpose, to the maintaining of 
 harmony and love among ourselves, and preventing the inconveniences 
 which human weakness may expose to, in our use of this liberty. 
 
 " The general concurrence of ministers and people in this city, and 
 the great disposition thereto in other places, persuade us this happy 
 work is undertaken, in a season designed for such divine influence 
 as will overcome all impediments to peace, and convince of that 
 Agreement which has been always among us in a good degree, though 
 neither to ourselves nor others so evident as hereby it is now ac- 
 knowledged. 
 
 " Need there any arguments to recommend this Union ? Is not this 
 what we all have prayed for ; and Providence, by the directest indi- 
 cations, hath been long calling and disposing us to ? Can either zeal 
 for God or prudent regards to ourselves remissly suggest it, seeing 
 tlie blessings thereof are so important, and when it's become, in so 
 many respects, even absolutely necessary ; especially as it may con- 
 duce to the preservation of the Protestant religion, and the kingdom's 
 weal ; a subserviency whereto shall always govern our united abilities, 
 with the same disi)osition to a concurrence with all others who are 
 duly concerned for those national blessings. 
 
 " As these considerations render this Agreement desirable, so they 
 equally urge a watchful care against all attempts of Satan to dis- 
 >>olvc it, or frustrate the good effects thereof, so manifestly destructive 
 
53 
 
 to his kingdom. Therefore, it's incumbent on us to forbear con- 
 demning and disputing those different jiractices we liave expressly 
 allowed forj to reduce all distinguishing names to that of United 
 Brethren ; to admit no uncharitable jealousies, or censorious 
 speeches ; much less any debates whether party seems most favoured 
 by this Agreement. Such carnal regards are of small moment witli 
 us, who herein have used words less accurate, that neither side might 
 in their various conceptions about lesser matters be contradicted, 
 when in all substantial we are fully of one mind ; and from this time 
 hope more perfectly to rejoice in the honour, gifts, and success of each 
 other, as our common good. 
 
 " That we, as United, may contribute our utmost to the great con- 
 cernments of our Redeemer, it's mutually resolved we will assist each 
 other with our labours, and meet and consult, without the least 
 shadow of separate or distinct parties : whence we joyfully exj^ect 
 great improvements in light and love, through the more abundant 
 supplies of the Spirit ; being well assured we herein serve that 
 Prince of peace, of the increase of ivliose government and peace there shall 
 be no end." 
 
 I shall insert such portions of the Heads themselves, as 
 appear to bear directly on the present inquiry. 
 
 I. 0/" Churches fl?jfZ Church Members. 
 " 1. We acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ to have one catholic 
 church, or kingdom, comprehending all that are united to him, 
 whether in heaven or earth ; and do conceive the whole multitude of 
 visible believers, and their infant seed, (commonly called the Catholic 
 visible Church,) to belong to Christ's spiritual kingdom in this world.* 
 
 * The English Presbyterian Association state, that " the two great bodies of 
 Dissenters, for a short period, endeavoured to form, with the Baptists, one gene- 
 ral Nonconformist body."* This, it will be seen, is not correct. The pastors, 
 elders, and ministering brethren, of upwards of one hundred " baptized congre- 
 gations, in divers parts of England and Wales, owning the doctrine of personal 
 election and final perseverance, or, (as they otherwise express their sentiments,) 
 " denying Arminianism," held a General Assembly, in London, in September, 
 1689, at which they owned a Confession of their Faith, agreed on a general 
 epistle to all their churches, determined to raise a common fund or stock, for 
 assisting in the education and support of their ministers, and discussed various 
 questions relating to the interest of their body. At the General Assembly, in 
 June, 1690, Associations of Churches were formed in different parts of the country. 
 Narratives of the proceedings were printed, from which this account is taken. The 
 Arminian portion of this denomination, commonly called General Baptists, had, I 
 believe, associated from a much earlier period. 
 *Ilist. p. 118. 
 
54 
 
 " 2. We agree, that particular societies of visible saints, who, 
 under Christ their head, are statedly joined together for ordinary 
 communion with one another, in all the ordinances of Christ, are 
 particular churches, and are to be owned by each other as instituted 
 churches of Christ, though differing in aj^prehensions and practice in 
 some lesser things. 
 
 " 3, That none shall be admitted as members in order to com- 
 munion in all the special ordinances of the Gospel, but such persons 
 as are knowing and sound in the fundamental doctrines of the Christian 
 religion, without scandal in their lives ; and to a judgment regulated 
 by the word of God, are persons of visible godliness and honesty ; 
 credibly professing cordial subjection to Jesus Christ. 
 
 " 4. A competent number of such visible saints (as before described) 
 do become the capable subjects of stated communion in all the special 
 ordinances of Christ, upon this mutual declared consent and agree- 
 ment to walk together therein according to the Gospel rule. In 
 which declaration, different degrees of explicitness shall no way 
 hinder such churches from owning each other as instituted churches. 
 
 " 6. That each particular church hath right to choose their own 
 officers ; and, being furnished with such as are duly qualified and 
 ordained according to the Gospel rule, hath authority from Christ for 
 exercising government, and of enjoying all the ordinances of worship 
 within itself. 
 
 " 7. In the administration of church poioer, it belongs to the pastors 
 and the elders of every particular church (if such there be) to rule and 
 govern; and to the brotherhood to consent, according to the rule of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 " 8. That all professors (as before described) are bound in duty, as 
 they have opportunity, to join themselves as fixed members oi some par- 
 ticular church. 
 
 II. Of the Ministry. 
 
 "1. We agree that the ministerial office is instituted by Jesus 
 Christ, for the gathering, edifying, and governing of his church ; and 
 to continue to the end of the world. 
 
 *' 2. They who are called to this office ought to be endued with 
 competent learning and ministerial gifts, as also with the grace of 
 God, sound in judgment, not novices in the faith and knowledge of 
 the Gospel ; without scandal, of holy conversation, and such as de- 
 vote themselves to the work and service thereof. 
 
 " 3. Tliat ordinarily none shall be ordained to the work of the 
 ministry, but such as are called and chosen thereunto by a particular 
 church. 
 
 "4, That in so groat and weighty a matter as the calling and 
 rlioosing a pastor, we judge it ordinarily requisite that every such 
 
55 
 
 church consult and advise with the pastors of neighbouring congre- 
 gations. 
 
 ^' 5. That after such advice, the person consulted about being chosen 
 by the brotherhood of that particular church over which he is to be 
 set, and he accepting, be duly ordained and set apart to his office over 
 them ; wherein 'tis ordinarily requisite that the pastors of neighbour- 
 ing congregations concur with the preaching elder or elders, if such 
 there be. 
 
 "6. That whereas such ordination is only intended for such as 
 never before had been ordained to the ministerial office ; if any judge 
 that in case of a removal of one formerly ordained, to a new station or 
 pastoral charge, there ought to be a like solemn recommending him 
 and his labours to the grace and blessing of God, no different senti- 
 ments or practice herein*shall be any occasion of contention or breach 
 of communion among us. 
 
 " 7. It is expedient that they who enter on the work of preaching 
 the Gospel, be not only qualified for communion of saints,* but also 
 that, except in cases extraordinary, they give proof of their gifts and 
 fitness for the said work unto the pastors of churches of known abili- 
 ties, to discern and judge of their qualifications,t that they may be 
 sent forth with solemn approbation and prayer; which we judge 
 needful, that no doubt may remain concerning their being called to 
 the work, and for preventing (as much as in us lieth) ignorant and 
 rash intruders. 
 
 III. — Of Censures. 
 "1. As it cannot be avoided but that, in the purest churches on 
 earth, there will sometimes offences and scandals arise, by reason of 
 hypocrisy and prevailing corruption ; so Christ hath made it the duty 
 of every church to reform itself by spiritual remedies, appointed by him 
 to be applied in all such cases ; viz. admonition and excommunication. — 
 [Particulars here follow, of the mode in which these spiritual remedies 
 are to be applied.] 
 
 <' IV. — Of Communion of Churches. 
 " 1. We agree, that particular churches ought not to walk so distinct 
 and separate from each other, as not to have care and tenderness 
 towards one another : but their pastors ought to have frequent meet- 
 ings together, that, by mutual advice, support, encouragement, and 
 brotherly intercourse, they may strengthen the hearts and hands of 
 each other in the ways of the Lord. 
 
 " 2. That none of our particular churches shall be subordinate to one 
 
 * The reader should bear in recollection what is said on this point in the third 
 article, under the first division. 
 
 \ This, which was afterwards commonly called •' passing trial," will be more 
 particularly noticed afterwards. 
 
56 
 
 another; each being endowed with equaUti/ of power from Jesus Christ. 
 And that none of the said particular churches, their officer or officers, 
 shall exercise any power, or have any superioritj^, over any other 
 church, or their officers. 
 
 " G. That we are most willing and ready to give an account of our 
 church proceedings to each other, Avhen desired, for preventing or 
 removing any offences that may ai'ise among us. Likewise, we shall be 
 ready to give the right-hand of fellowship, and walk together according 
 to the gospel rules of communion of churches. 
 
 " V. — Of Deacons and Ruling Elders. 
 
 " We agree [tliat] the office of a Deacon is of divine appointment ; 
 and that it belongs to their office to receive, lay out, and distribute 
 the church's stock to its proper uses, by the direction of the pastor, 
 and the brethren if need be. And whereas divers are of opinion that 
 there is also the office of Ruling Elders, who labour not in word and 
 doctrine, and others think otherwise, we agree that this difference 
 make no breach among us. 
 
 " VI. — Of Occasional Meetings of Ministers, &c. 
 
 " 1. We agree, that in order to concord, and in any other weighty 
 and difficult cases, it is needful, and according to the mind of Christ, 
 that the ministers of several churches be consulted and advised with 
 about such matters. 
 
 " 2. That such Meetings may consist of smaller or greater numbers, 
 as the matter shall require. 
 
 " 3. That particular churches, their respective elders and members, 
 ought to have a reverential regard to their judgment so given ; and not 
 dissent therefrom without apparent grounds from the word of God. 
 " VII.— Of our Demeanour towards the Civil Magistrate. 
 
 " 1. We do reckon ourselves obliged continually to pray for God's 
 protection, guidance, and blessing upon the rulers set over us. 
 
 [Two other articles relate to the duty of yielding subjection and 
 support, and readiness to furnish any account of their affairs, and the 
 state of their congregations.] 
 
 " VIII.— Of a Confession of Faith. 
 
 " As to what appertains to soundness of judgment in matters of 
 Faith, we esteem it sufficient that a church acknowledge the Scriptures 
 to be the Word of God, the perfect and only rule of faith and prac- 
 tice ; and own either the doctrinal part of those commonly called the 
 Articles of the Church of England, or the Confession, or Catechisms, 
 Shorter or Larger, compiled by the Assembly at Westminster, or 
 the Confession agreed on at the Savoy, to be agreeable to the said 
 rule. 
 
57 
 
 *' IX. — Of our Bull/ and Deportment towards them that are not in commmuon 
 with us. 
 
 " 1. We judge it our duty to bear a Christian respect to all Chris- 
 tians, according to their several ranks and stations, that are not of 
 our persuasion or communion. 
 
 " 2. As for such as may be ignorant of the principles of the Christian 
 religion, or of vicious conversation, we shall, in our respective places, 
 as they give us opportunity, endeavour to explain to them the Doctrine 
 of Life and Salvation ; and, to our uttermost, persuade them to be recon- 
 ciled to God. 
 
 " 3. That such who appear to have the essential requisites to church 
 communion, we shall willingly receive them in the Lord, not troublino- 
 them with disputes about lesser matters:' 
 
 This official document clearly shews that the Agreement 
 was founded on the principle of mutual concession, and 
 formed with a view to the accommodation of slight differences 
 chiefly of an ecclesiastical nature. It bears on the face of it 
 the design of bringing two parties, very nearly agreed in 
 opinion, and only differing in a few comparatively unimportant 
 points, to combine and associate, by bringing the ministers, 
 who acted as their leaders, into a state of friendly alliance 
 and co-operation. These determine henceforth to lay aside 
 petty jealousies, to recognise each other as brethren in the 
 ministry, and the particular churches over which they presided, 
 as associated churches'; to meet, consult, and act harmoniously 
 together, bearing with each other in respect to the few and 
 minute points in which they might differ. It furnishes not 
 the slightest ground to suppose that, with reference to what 
 they call the fundamental doctrines of the Christian religion,'va. 
 which they required not only their ministers, but the members 
 of their churches to be " knowing and sound," they were 
 in any respect, or in the least degree, "otherwise minded." 
 In reference to these, it might be said, " Whereunto we have 
 already attained," we are already agreed to " walk by the 
 same rule, to mind the same thing." In matters of church 
 order, and the administration of discipline, each party might 
 have something to concede, or at least to tolerate, in the 
 other ; but, in respect to " the doctrine of life and salvation" 
 — that truth which is eminently called " the Gospel" in " the 
 
58 
 
 faith and kno\vled<?e" of which they require that those called 
 to the ministerial office, which they describe as " the work of 
 preaching the Gospel," should not be "novices," — there is 
 not the slightest appearance of any diiference then existing ; 
 while the recognition of those Confessions and Catechisms, 
 to which the reader's attention has already been directed, as 
 embodying the substance of their belief, and proclaiming to 
 the world their " soundness of judgment in matters of faith," 
 puts the real fact beyond the reach of reasonable question. I 
 admit, however, that there had been, and that probably there 
 were, some slight shades of diiference in the manner of ex- 
 plaining certain subordinate or even important points of 
 doctrine. Mr. Orme gives a similar account of the nature and 
 design of this Union — " The object of the Agreement was 
 rather to discountenance useless contentions about matters of 
 ecclesiastical discipline, among the Dissenters, than to form a 
 corporate body, or to convey the idea of entire agreement on 
 doctrinal points."* Referring to some earlier differences, or 
 supposed differences, among the lecturers at Pinner's Hall, in 
 a preceding page, he says — " I believe the whole matter was, 
 the Independent ministers were more thorough systematic 
 Calvinists than the Presbyterians, though there was no dif- 
 ference of importance between them."f I may safely assert, 
 therefore, that in the year 1691, there was a substantial 
 agreement on all the great leading doctrines. The principal 
 subject on which some slight difference had previously 
 existed, and might still exist, was, the exact method, the 
 precise terms, or mode of Justification. Concerning the sole 
 medium through which that blessing is bestowed on indi- 
 viduals of the human race — the meritorious obedience, suf- 
 ferings, and death of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Eternal 
 Word incarnate — there was no diversity of sentiment. The 
 chief leaders of the two denominations, Baxter and Owen, 
 had disputed in print on some of the nice and abstruse 
 questions connected with this doctrine; but, to prove that 
 there was no serious or substantial difference between 
 
 * Life and Times of Baxter, vol. i. p. 492. + lb. p. 408. 
 
59 
 
 them, I will here advert to a remarkable fact mentioned by 
 Dr. Calamy — 
 
 Mr. Samuel Clark, an ejected minister, published Annota- 
 tions on the Bible, which he describes as " a work of great 
 exactness and judgment," and concerning which he says — 
 " He was so happy in this performance, as to obtain the 
 concurring testimony of two great and excellent men, who 
 were thought to have different sentiments of some points of 
 religion; viz. Dr. Oivcn^ and Mr. Baxter; in their respective 
 epistles before the 4to. edition of the New Testament. The 
 words of the former are remarkable: — But this I must say, 
 that, to the best of my under standbig, he has made his choice 
 of the especial sense which he gives of the word, in all places, 
 with great diligence and judgment. And 'tis evident, that in 
 the whole, he has so carefully and constantly attended to the 
 Analogy of Faith, that the reader may safely trust to him, 
 without fear of being led into the snare of aiiy error, or 
 unsound opinio)!. The words of the latter are these : And I 
 especially commend it as Orthodox, in explaining those texts 
 which meddle with justification, remission of sin, tvith faith 
 and ivorks, and such great and practical points of doctrine ; 
 so that the reader need not fear the corrupting his under- 
 standing by any secret insinuation of errors, or dangerous 
 mixture of jrrivate cmd unsound opinions. Since both of 
 them herein freely expressed their proper sentiments, 'tis 
 scarce conceivable how there could be any very important 
 difference remaining between them." * 
 
 The English Presbyterian Association represent, that " the 
 joint lecture at Pinner's Hall was established whilst the Union 
 lasted," and that the Heads of Agreement were " apparently 
 assented to, as the means pf peace between the contending 
 parties," in consequence of an attempt to effect a permanent 
 removal of some doctrinal differences, which, however, still re- 
 mained.f Here are several mistakes in a few lines. The joint 
 lecture had been established nearly twenty years previously, 
 and the document itself drawn up on this important occasion, 
 
 • Account of the Ejected Ministers, Svo. 1713, pp. 106, 107. t Hist. p. 19. 
 
60 
 
 was not apparenfli/, but actually and avowedly assented to, at 
 a time when there was no momentous or considerable diversity 
 of opinion on doctrinal points among the ministers of the two 
 respective bodies.* 
 
 At the time when the Heads of Agreement were printed, 
 they had been " already assented to by above fourscore minis- 
 ters, and the Preface approved of." This was probably in 
 March or April, 1691. They were evidently then disposed 
 to carry the design into practical effect. This appears by the 
 form of expressing their approbation — " As we assent to the 
 foremen tioned Heads of Agreement, so we unanimously resolve, 
 as the Lord shall enable us, to practise according to them." 
 
 Mr. Baxter, who " was, by the confinement of decrepit age 
 and pain, hindered from having any part in the form or contract 
 of this Agreement," published a tract, with a view to " second" 
 it, entitled — " Church Concord : containing, 1. A Dissuasive 
 fi-om unnecessary Division and Separation, and the real Con- 
 cord of the moderate Independents with the Presbyterians 
 instanced in ten seeming differences ; 2. The Terms necessary 
 for Concord among all true Churches and Christians, 4to. 
 1691." At the end of the preface is a brief Address to the 
 United Protestant Nonconformists in London, dated April 23, 
 which concludes in these words — " Thus praying God to save 
 you from violating the Concord you consent to, and from 
 being perverted by the ignorant dividing sort of teachers or 
 people, and that you will study Mr. Mead's Reasons against 
 Division, well and seasonably urged, I bid you farewell. Your 
 quondam fellow-labourer. Rich. Baxter."f The first part had 
 been written in 1655, the second in 1667. Both exhibit the 
 sentiments already explained as to Catholic Christianity, 
 comprehensive communion, an.d magisterial restraint of 
 
 • The volumes of Lectures preached by ministers of both denominations, and 
 published under the title of " Morning Exercises," afford ample evidence of their 
 being alike orthodox. 
 
 t Mr. Orme does not mention this tract, and probably had not seen a copy. He 
 correctly states, however, that the venerable author, though he felt a deep interest, 
 took no active part in this affair : and adds, " the style of these articles shews, I think, 
 that Baxter's judgment and feelings had been consulted." — Life and Times of 
 Baxter, vol. i. p. -192. He died December 8, this year. 
 
61 
 
 heretical preachers. The following extracts may suffice to 
 prove this : 
 
 " If we would prevent our people's separations, we must not make 
 the door of tlie church so narrow as to shut out the faithful, though 
 infirm. Men must be called to no Profession but of points plainly con- 
 tained in the Holy Scriptures, and the ancient simplicity must recover 
 us to the ancient charity and unity. And though more knowledge be 
 necessary to the pastors than to all the flock, yet must the Scripture 
 sufficiency be maintained, and necessary things distinguished from 
 unnecessary, and those that are necessary to the being of the ministry 
 from those that are necessary but to the better being ; and nothing 
 should be imposed on pastors themselves as necessary to the com- 
 munion of churches, but jioints that indeed are necessary to such com- 
 munion, and those (if possible) in Scripture phrase. But because 
 Heretics will subscribe to Scripture and to ancient creeds, and simple 
 confessions of faith, therefore many have thought that other kind of 
 confessions must be made which they cannot subscribe to." — He pro- 
 ceeds to point out " the right way of obviating heresies, viz. a careful 
 execution of the law or rule of Scripture against them : 1. By casting 
 them out of our communion after a first and second admonition, when 
 they are proved guilty ; and, 2. By the magistrate's restraining them, 
 according to the quality of their offence."* 
 
 " Let tlie doctrinal jioint of the necessity of more pastors to ordain, be 
 let alone, and left to each man's liberty, (it being no article of our 
 Creed, nor a credendum of absolute necessity.) f 
 
 " All Christian magistrates must know that their subjects are, 
 1. Approveable. 2. Tolerable. 3. Intolerable: specially as teachers. 
 
 " I. The approveable they must encourage and maintain, 
 
 " II. The tolerable they must tolerate. 
 
 " III. The intolerable they must suppress. But if they misjudge, 
 God will judge them for it. 
 
 " Pastors of their own choosing should be licensed to tolerated 
 churches. 1. Subscribing the essentials of Christianity, kc.l 
 
 A Sermon was preached in London, upon the occasion of 
 ratifying these Heads of Agreement, by Mr. Matthew Mead, 
 an eminent Congregational minister, and pastor of a large 
 church at Stepney, which still flourishes, and is now under the 
 care of Dr. Joseph Fletcher. Mr. Mead (father of the cele- 
 brated Dr. Mead) had been one of the most active promoters 
 of the Union. His discourse, founded on Ezek. xxxvii. 1 9, was 
 * p. 13. t r. -'4. : p. 76. 
 
62 
 
 published under the following title : " Two Sticks made One 
 or, the Excellency of Unity. Being a Sermon preached by 
 the Appointment of the Ministers of the Congregational and 
 Presbyterian Persuasion, at their Happy Union, on the sixth 
 day of April, 1691, which was a day set apart by them, partly 
 to bewail former Divisions, and partly as a Thanksgiving to 
 God for their present Agreement ; and now, at their unani- 
 mous request, made public." 
 
 It is dedicated " to the Reverend the Dissenting Ministers 
 of London, formerly called Congregational and Presbyterian^ 
 but now known by the name of United Brethren." A few 
 extracts will shew the sentiments of the excellent author, in 
 reference to the nature and extent of the Union, as well as the 
 views, which he undoubtedly possessed in common with the 
 whole body, of the value and importance of some of the great 
 truths in which they were, as they professed to be, agreed ; 
 and at the same time afford some information concerning the 
 circumstances which led to the event. 
 
 " God hath eminently appeared among you hitherto, in carrying on 
 this blessed work.* 
 
 " Jerome calls divisions, Amicorum dispendia, inimiconim compendia, 
 divinx ira incendia. So that we may say of them what Austin says of 
 original sin — Peccatum, causa peccati, pwna peccati : They are not only 
 sin, and the cause of sin, but the punishment of sin too ; so that they 
 are nothing but a heap of sin.f 
 
 " There are several sorts of oneness in Scripture, Tliere is a oneness 
 of divers persons in one nature ; there is a oneness of differing natures 
 in one person ; and there is a oneness of sundry names and persons in 
 one quality. In the first is one God, Deut. vi. 4. In the second, 
 one Christ, 1 Cor. viil. 6. In the third, one church. Cant. vi. 9 ; 
 Actsiv. 32.t 
 
 " It implies a union in the truth ; every union is not one in God's 
 hand. There may be union in sin, a union in error. This is so far 
 from being a union in the hand of God, that it is the quite contrary ; 
 it is a union in the hand of Satan. 
 
 " In that day, [<//e day when Christ shall he King over all the earth,] the 
 Lord shall be one, and his name one, Zech. xiii. 19; differing ways and 
 modes of worship shall cease, all his people shall be united in tlie 
 
 : P. 5. 
 
63 
 
 same mind and judt^ment, and shall own God in the same truth, and 
 the same way of worship. "* [He here refers to the millennial state of 
 the church.] 
 
 Among those reasons against divisions which Mr. Baxter 
 a few weeks afterwards recommended to special attention, 
 are : — 
 
 " Divisions are a great grief to the Spirit of God, and we are com- 
 manded not to grieve him. Eph. iv. 80, Grieve not the Holy Spirit oj 
 God. Have ye not your light and life from the Sf)irit? Did not he 
 convince, and convert, and draw you to Christ ? Was it not he that 
 led you into the secrets of God ? that revealed the mysteries of the 
 kingdom, the deej? things of God, and eternal life, to you ? Your calling 
 had never been effectual, if the Spirit had not been in it to make it 
 so. Are not your parts, and gifts, and various attainments, all from 
 the Spirit? And is not every grace, and every degree of grace in you, 
 the workmanship of the Spirit ? And is it not the Spirit that quickens 
 you in duties, and maintains in you a frame of heart for communion 
 with God ? Who is it that comforts your souls in troubles, and that 
 teaches you to comfort others ? — that helps you against corruptions 
 within, and temptations without? — that conquers your difficulties, and 
 enables you to rejoice in tribulation ? Is it not the Spirit? Is not he 
 the earnest of your inheritance ? Hath he not sealed you to the day of redemp- 
 tion? And will you grieve this Spirit? Oh, what an evil is this ! 
 
 " 3. There is nothing more contrary to Christianity ; and yet we 
 cover our divisions under the cloak of religion, the very name whereof 
 carries union with it : Religio d religando. It is the bond of God upon 
 the soul, that binds us all to himself and one another. As God is the 
 God of peace, Christ the Prince of peace, the Holy Ghost the Spirit of 
 peace, his children the children of peace ; so the Gospel you profess and 
 preach is the Gospel of peace, full of precepts of peace.f 
 
 " Divisions are against love, as error is against faith. It cuts 
 asunder the bond of peace. Not only kingdoms, but churches, are 
 destroyed when their guides and leaders are divided in opinion and 
 affection. J 
 
 Among the reasons why they should humble themselves 
 before God, for their former divisions, he specifies — 
 
 " The offences and scandals given to many, whereby their souls 
 have been eternally hazarded. And should not the sense of this affect 
 us ? Some diseases are called opprobria medicorum ; I am sure these 
 are opprobria iheologorum. O let us join in this one thing, to mourn 
 
 * P. 13. t P 5, 16. + P. 17. 
 
G4 
 
 too-ether, till we have dissolved our hearts into tears, and see if they'l 
 run one into another, and let us resolve that nothing shall comfort 
 tliem, hut peace with God and peace with one another. 
 
 '• If anything sliould aftect us, the great appearance of God should, 
 wherein he hath put forth so much of his power, wisdom, love, and mercy. 
 Is it not a mercy you have long desired and prayed for ? And God 
 hath this day returned your prayers, like Noah's dove, with an olive 
 branch in the mouth. How long did our fathers sow in tears for this 
 harvest, and God hath reserved the reaping time for us their children. 
 And therefore let us joy before him according to the joy in harvest. 
 
 " This day hath the Lord rolled away our reproach ; for what hath 
 been the reproach we have been filled with ? Is it not that we have 
 been a divided people, crumbling into factions and parties, filled with 
 mutual animosities and jars, envying and hating one another? Now 
 God hath brought us to Gilgal, for this day is the reproach rolled 
 away ; and shall not God have the glory of this ? 
 
 " You have done that, in this Agreement, that promises great ad- 
 vantage and comfort to our brethren abroad ; it is like the beams of 
 the sun, which diff'use light and heat to thousands at once. And 
 what can please and rejoice you, who are by calling, by duty, by 
 affection, men of public spirit and aims, more than to be made such a 
 blessing to the whole interest of Christ through the nation ? 
 
 " In this ixnion you have shewed a high conformity to Christ. He 
 is all for union. There is a union between him and the Father, a 
 union between him and the Spirit, a union between him and the 
 Imman nature, a union between him and all believers. * 
 
 " Labour to manifest this union. If God hath made the ttvo sticks 
 one, let it appear that they are one. Make it evident by seeking each 
 other's welfare ; rejoice in the gifts, and graces, and successes of 
 others, as if they were your own ; contributing your counsels, assist- 
 ance, sympathy, and prayers for the common good. When we live 
 and act as they that have but one essence and interest, this makes the 
 Tinion manifest, and shews that we are in a sense one, as God and 
 Christ are one. 
 
 " LTse all means to preserve this union. God hath made the two 
 sticks one, and he looks you should preserve the oneness. You come 
 hardly by it ; but don't let it go ; it hath cost many prayers to obtain 
 it, and therefore we should spare no cost to preserve it. What is 
 hardly got, should not be easily lost.f 
 
 " All things in religion are reduced to one, that the people of God 
 may be one, and abide one. Eph. iv. 4. 
 
 " There isione Spirit. As all the natural members of the same body 
 have but one and the same soul, so all the members of the mystical 
 
 * Pp. 19, 20. t P- 24. 
 
(>5 
 
 body of Christ have one and tho same Spirit ; one Spirit to enligliten 
 and teacli, one Spirit to sanctify, one Sjiirit to direct and lead. 
 
 " There is one Lord, and that is the Lord Christ, whom we all wor- 
 ship and serve. And shall fellow-servants differ, that have the same 
 Lord ? Is Christ divided ?* 
 
 " Are not your names among the angels, who are to pour out the 
 vials upon the earth? For it is Ihe vengeance of the temple, and the 
 vials are in the hands of the angels tliat come out of the temple. And 
 how must these vials be poured out ? By preaching the everlasting 
 Gospel. And pray mind, the preaching of the everlasting Gospel is 
 said to be the work but of one angel, (Rev. iv. 16,) and yet the pouring 
 out the vials is the work of seven, to shew their unitedness in the 
 Gospel, and cause of Christ against Antichrist. f 
 
 " Do not impropriate Christ to any party. The apostle discovers 
 another spirit, and more truly catholic, when he writes to this Church. 
 1 Cor. i. 2. To the saints at Corinth, and to all that in every place call upon 
 the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs andours.X 
 
 " See that your union be laid in Truth. That must have the 
 first place; love the truth, and peace. Union in errors, in false princi- 
 ples, is no better than a confederacy against Christ. That is a cursed 
 accommodation, that is made to the disservice of religion ; because, 
 while we thus make peace with men, we make a breach with God. 
 
 "We are united to Christ by faith, but to one another by love, 
 and we should be careful to strengthen both the bands, that neither 
 of them be broken. Among the Romans, they had a temple dedicated 
 Jovi Depositorio, because there they laid aside their quarrels and dif- 
 ferences before they entered into the senate. Shall heathens lay aside 
 their mutual jars for common good, and shall not the ministers of the 
 Gospel do it much more for the Churches' safety V'k 
 
 This auspicious event was hailed with grateful joy by the 
 ministers of both denominations, in all parts of the country, 
 where meetings were held and associations formed. 
 
 Mr. Samuel Chandler, a Presbyterian minister at Fareham, 
 in Hampshire, published a small book, entitled, " 7^he 
 Country's Concurrence with the London United Ministers in 
 their late Heads of Agreement, shewing the Nature and 
 Advantages of a General Union among Protestants. In two 
 Discourses delivered before an Assembly of Ministers, in the 
 County of Southampton^ 1691. 
 
 Mr. Chandler, who had been invited by his brethren to 
 
 • Pp. 24, 25. t Pp. 27, 28. % P. 29. % Pp. 30, 31. 
 
 F 
 
G8 
 
 preach before them on this occasion, thus mentions in the 
 preface the general feeUng which then prevailed — 
 
 " The late liappy Union between two prevailing parties among us 
 is a fit subject of joy and thankfulness. That differences, which have 
 been managed with too much heat for so many years, should now be 
 so happily composed, and the contending parties should mutually 
 condescend and concur together in so fair an Agreement, is a blessing 
 we have reason gratefully to acknowledge ; that the Country should so 
 readily and unanimously agree with their brethren in the City on the 
 same terms, and throughout the whole nation there should be such a 
 willing consent to lay aside those dutinguishing names and terms which 
 have hitherto so miserably divided us : these things afford sufficient 
 matter for praise to that God, who rules the hearts of men, and stills 
 the ragings of the people." 
 
 He thus addresses his audience — " God hath indeed highly 
 favoured us by his Providence, by now calming our spirits, removing 
 our jealousies and misunderstandings one of another, and reconciling 
 those differences which have unhappily divided us many years : so 
 that now we can strengthen one another's hands in the work of our 
 Lord, and glory in the title of United Brethren. We are now come 
 together solemnly to testify our thankfulness to God for this happy 
 Union, which many of us have long sighed and prayed, and waited, 
 and laboured for in vain."* 
 
 After exposing in a lively and pointed strain the " undue admira- 
 tion of particular persons or parties," reproved by the Apostle, iCor. 
 i. 12. and iii. 4, 5. which he applies to the conduct of those who 
 exalt some ministers above others, on account of their excelling in 
 certain natural endowments, or ministerial qualifications, he says — 
 " We must consider they all preach the same Doctrine, and direct to 
 the same way to Salvation."! 
 
 ^' An hearty love to God will engage us to be at peace with the 
 whole fraternity of Christians, and love them without dissimulation. 
 
 " Make the great design of religion yours, viz. the advancement of 
 holiness, and recovery of the image of God in the souls of men. 
 Remember, religion is not designed merely to fill your heads with 
 airy notions, to tip your tongues for discourse, or enable you to talk 
 plausibly for the truth ; that it consists not in little speculative 
 opinions, or ceremonious trifles ; but the great design of it is to direct 
 us in the government of our passions, subduing our lusts, and con- 
 quering the impediments that hinder our recovery and salvation. In 
 a word, religion consists in a penitent return to God by Faith in 
 Christ, and obedience to his Gospel. "J 
 
 • Pp. 3, 4. t Pp. 30, 33, 34. X Pp- 34, 35. 
 
67 
 
 " Avoid extremes in disputable points. Every truth lies in the 
 middle between two falsehoods, and he that goes far from one is 
 apt to slip into the other. After all the confidence and boast of 
 disputers, there Avill be uncertainty in lesser points, and when we 
 travel in uncertain roads, 'tis best to choose the middle ; here we may 
 be sure to meet Avith charity and peace, and very probably truth in 
 their company. The great occasion of our differences hath been, that 
 men have looked so much at the evil of one extreme, as to forget the 
 error on the other side ; like an ignorant physician, who, to cure a man 
 of a dead palsy, casts him into a phrenzy. I dare with some confi- 
 dence aflirm, that most of those disputes that are so hotly agitated 
 among Protestants, are in the extremes, and consist more in words 
 than things, because the curse of Babel hath so confounded our lan- 
 guages, that though our sentiments are much the same, we understand 
 not one another's meaning. And if men would but hearken to calm 
 dispassionate reason, they might soon find out such healing, recon- 
 ciling principles, as would quickly make us one among ourselves, and 
 a terror to our Romish adversaries. Let the apostle's counsel be in 
 this sense therefore obeyed, Phil. iv. 5. Let your moderation he known 
 unto all men."^ 
 
 " Blessed be God that he hath in so great a measure healed our 
 breaches, and thus far united us together. How happy would it be if 
 this Union were yet more extensive — if the name of Reformed Chris- 
 tian were only known, and all those divided names laid aside 
 whereby we have been unhappily distinguished ! By mutual com- 
 pliances and condescensions tliis is no impossible task."t 
 
 The second discourse, addressed particularly to the assembled 
 ministers, is from John xiii. 34. He thus explains verses 31, 32. in 
 which our Saviour, to support the hearts of his disciples in the 
 prospect of his speedy departure, tells them that he should be glori- 
 fied, and God the Father in him, " i. e. that he should give great 
 discoveries of his Deity, and God the Father would discover the 
 unsearchable depths of his wisdom, inconceivable heights of his love, 
 and infinite strictness of his holiness and justice by his death, and 
 advance him straightway to the highest degrees of glory.]: 
 
 " Christ alone paid down a complete satisfaction for our brethren 
 and us. He had not the Spirit by measure, but the fulness of the 
 Godhead dwelt in him.|| 
 
 " Our Christian love must resemble our Saviour's. It must be 
 enlarged to all Saints — to the whole fraternity of Christians. To be 
 partial in our love is a sign 'tis unsound ; to make our own opinions 
 the shibboleth to distinguish between a true and counterfeit Christian, is 
 
 •Pp. 36— 38. t Pp. 41— 43. t P. 46. || P. 57. 
 
 F 2 
 
G8 
 
 very unreasonable. Where there is a Profession of tlie baptismal 
 covenant, the Essentials of the Christian Faith, and a life in some 
 measure answerable, we must love such as Christians, notwitlistand- 
 ing their mistakes and erroneous principles in lesser points. We justly 
 condemn tlie Cliurch of Rome for confining salvation to themselves, 
 and damning all the world besides. Let us take heed how we con- 
 demn ourselves, by contracting the church of God into a narrower 
 compass, lest we censoriously damn those whom Christ will save, 
 and perhaps place on higher seats of glory than ourselves. We 
 know who it was that said, ' Lord, I thank thee I am not as this 
 publican,' when he was really in a far worse condition. Our love to 
 a party must not blind our judgments, or pervert our affections as to 
 all the rest. Keep up, therefore, an impartial, universal love to all 
 professed Christians, as such, and hate a dividing spirit. Take heed 
 how you stigmatize those with the name of Heretics who shall stand 
 at the right hand of Christ, and take not up the devil's accursed employ- 
 ment, to become accusers of those that are really your brethren.* 
 
 " Our love to one another must resemble Christ's love to us in the 
 outward expressions of it : — 1. In the intimacies of our friendship and 
 familiarity with one another. Christ so loves all true Christians as to 
 enter into the strictest bands of amity with them ; he is nearly united 
 to them, as their head and husband, and calls them his friends and his 
 spouse ; he . is the head, and they are the members ; the vine, and 
 they are the branches ; the foundation, and they are the building.; 
 the root, and they are the fruit. The communications of his grace, 
 the quickening assistances and influences of his Spirit, are imparted 
 to them ; he writes his law in their hearts, and causeth them to run 
 in the way of his commandments ; sanctifies their natures, pardons 
 their sins, prevailingly intercedes for them, and prepares them by 
 grace for glory. He hath communion Avith them in his ordinances, 
 familiarly converseth with them in his sacraments, and is continually 
 fitting them for that happy fellowship with Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit, which glorified saints enjoy. While he was on earth, he 
 selected some few persons, prepared them by grace for his society, and 
 then made them his familiar friends. To them he clearly revealed the 
 mind and will of God ; to them he unfolded tlie mysteries of his love, 
 and commands of his Father ; to them he explained what was spoken 
 to others in parables. These he blessed with his heavenly discourses 
 and pious instructions ; with the special tokens of his love, and fami- 
 liar expressions of his friendship. Indeed, he did entertain a Judas in 
 his family, but he made a strict profession as well as the other 
 disciples, and was not known to be hypocritical by any but Christ 
 himself; and had not the wisdom of God designed by his means to 
 * Pp. C2— 04. 
 
69 
 
 bring about the great work of our Redemption, no doubt this son of 
 perdition would have been discarded and disowned.* 
 
 " 2. In our hearty prayers one for another. — Christ was very earnest 
 in his prayers for true believers. They were the peculiar objects of 
 liis love, and purchase of his death, and therefore he prays for them 
 in a peculiar manner : for Peter, he prays for strengthening, confirm- 
 ing grace (Luke xxii. 31) ; and he put up a famous prayer for his 
 disciples, and all that should believe on him, (John xvii.) that they 
 might persevere in the faith, live in unity, increase in grace, and at 
 last be translated to heaven, and abide with him in glory. And he 
 hath laid a special obligation on us to do likewise. Hence, in that 
 excellent form and directory of prayer. Mat. vi. 9, he teaches us to 
 say, ' Our Father,' intimating that if we would gain acceptance for 
 ourselves, we must come to God as in union with Christ and his 
 universal church. Our prayers must not be only for ourselves, but 
 for the whole church of God throughout the world. We must hold 
 communion with all Christians in faith, and love, and an holy profes- 
 sion thereof; and while absent in body, must be as present with them 
 in spirit ; and still beg of God for them a freedom from the same spi- 
 ritual evils, and enjoyment of the same spiritual privileges, we would 
 desire for ourselves. f 
 
 " 3. In forgiving one another. — Christ so loved u«, as to forgive all 
 the injuries and affronts we have offered to him. Pardon of sin is 
 the great purchase of his death : and though our sins be more numer- 
 ous than the hairs of our head, and exceed the sands of the sea for 
 multitude, yet, if we sincerely repent of them, we may be assured 
 they shall be forgiven. + 
 
 " 4. In our alms and bounty to the necessitous.— Those who have a 
 fruitless love to others, have but a fruitless faith to themselves. § 
 
 " 5. In our counsels and admonitions. — 'Tis not only the duty of 
 Ministers, but of every private Christian, in his station, to counsel and 
 instruct his brethren, to inform the ignorant, and seek their conver- 
 sion ; tell them their duty and danger, and shew them how they may 
 flee from the wrath to come. And it will be their wisdom and inte- 
 rest thus to win souls to Christ, and save sinners from death and 
 hell. Frov. xi. 30 ; James v. 20. 1| 
 
 " 7, In dying for one another. — The greatest testimony of Christ's 
 love was his dying for us. John xv, 13. Rom. v. 8. 1 John iii. 16. If 
 Christ, who was so much exalted above us in glory and majesty, did 
 lay down his life for us, much more ought we to die for our brethren, 
 who are of the same mould by nature, partakers of the same pre- 
 cious faith by grace, and heirs of the same inheritance in glory. If 
 Christ died for enemies and strangers, slaves to Satan, and rebels 
 against Heaven, surely Ave ought not to account it hard to die for 
 * Pp. 71—73. ■] Pp. 7(5, 77. % P. 7!), § Pp. 81, S2. || Pp. 81, 85. 
 
70 
 
 friends, linked to us by the nearest bonds of union, members of the 
 same body, and belonging to the same glorious Head. The great 
 instance wherein we are to lay down our lives for our brethren, is, 
 when we are called to seal the truth with our blood." * 
 
 He concludes with an address to his ministerial brethren, 
 of which the following is a portion : — 
 
 " Let us now, therefore, take up an unanimous resolution, that we 
 will live together as United Brethren. 
 
 " While we all profess the same holy religion, worship God after 
 the same manner, and pursue the same design of winning souls to 
 Christ, why should we be angry or displeased if perliaps we have not 
 the same sentiments on some lesser matters of difficulty, any more 
 than because we are not of the same age, stature, or complexion ?t 
 
 " The apostle Paul could say, that though some preached Christ 
 o\it of envy and strife (Phil. i. 15, 18.), yet Christ was preached; and 
 therein he did rejoice, yea, and would rejoice. We all preach Christ, 
 and, I am persuaded, none of us with contentious spirits. Let us 
 therefore rejoice in one another's success in the work of the ministry; 
 and make it our business to strengthen one another's hands in the 
 
 service of our Lord As we have begun to do thus, let us hold 
 
 on, that our Union together may be for the advancement of the king- 
 dom of Christ, and enlargement of the Gospel, and an earnest and 
 liappy presage of a yet larger and more extensive Union among all 
 the faithful Ministers of Christ throughout the land, and (if it be God's 
 will) throughout the whole Christian world. 
 
 " The plague of uncharitableness hath dangerously infected tlie 
 generality of Christians, and therefore it concerns every messenger of 
 peace to cry aloud, and persuade men to Love and Union. "+ 
 
 A General Meeting of the ministers of Devonshire was held 
 this year at Topsham, of which the eminent Mr. John Flavel 
 was chosen moderator, which office (we are told) he the more 
 readily accepted of, that he might have the better oppor- 
 tunity to carry on that blessed uniting work, which he brought 
 to so good an issue, that the Ministers there declared their 
 full satisfaction with the Heads of Agreement.^ and their 
 thankfulness to their brethren in London^ who had promoted 
 this great and good design.§ 
 
 • Pp. 90, 91. t Pp. 92, 93. X Pp. 94—96. 
 
 % Mr. Flavel, as his writings clearly shew, was a decided Calvinist, though 
 
 a zealous opponent of Antinomianisni; but eminent for candour and charity. 
 
 " He was of a peaceable and healing spirit, becoming an ambassador of the Prince 
 
 of peace, lie had a real love to, and kept a good correspondence with, those in 
 
71 
 
 He wrote a letter to an eminent minister in London, ^ving 
 him an account of these proceedings, on the morning of the 
 day on which he suddenly departed to his rest. He had pre- 
 viously composed a sermon to be preached at Taunton, at the 
 earnest and unanimous desire of several United Brethren of 
 Gloucester, Dorset, Soynerset, and Devo7ishire, at their meet- 
 ing, to be held there September 2d, the same year. From 
 this discourse, afterwards printed, I shall present the reader 
 with a few extracts. 
 
 It opens with the following words — " This great and solemn Assem- 
 bly (met upon a greater and more solemn account,) brings to my mind 
 those words, (Isa. xlix. 20, 21.) &cc. 
 
 " How many truths have we to study! Yea, we must fight in 
 defence of the truths we preach as well as study them to paleness, 
 and preach them unto faintness.* 
 
 " Remember, all souls are rated at one value in your Master's book, 
 and your Redeemer paid as much for the one as for the other, f 
 
 " Many of us have cause to bless the Lord, and greatly to rejoice in 
 his goodness this day, who enabled us to be stedfiist and unmoveable 
 in the trials that have past over us ; and when the great earthquake 
 shaked down our liberties, our estates, and made our hearts to sliake, 
 yet our resolutions for God and his truth stood firm and unshaken. 
 Our hearts turned not back, nor did our steps decline ; though we 
 were broken in the place of dragons, and covered with the shadow of 
 death."! 
 
 *' The greatest part of our congregations are poor, ignorant, and 
 
 whom he beheld the image of Christ, though in some controverted things their judg- 
 ments and practices differed from his; hoping at last that he should meet them in 
 the same heaven, where all their mistakes should be rectified, and their differences 
 adjusted and composed. He was even transported with joy, when, by a letter from 
 a reverend minister in London, he received the good news of the happy Agreement 
 of the ministers in that city, who in some lesser points were of different apprehen- 
 sions, and went under different denominations ; hoping that it would have a good 
 influence upon the whole kingdom, who having so fair a copy given them, would 
 endeavour to write after it. He did frequently bless the Lord for that mercy, both 
 in public and in private, and even melted into tears of joy at the mentioning of it, 
 saying, God had herein answered the prayers that his people had been putting up 
 to him these many years. When he saw the Heads of Agreement, which had been 
 assented to and subscribed by the London Ministers, he told a friend that was with 
 him, that he could now take up the words of old Simeon, Lord, now lettest thou 
 thy servant depart in peace. He zealously endeavoured to promote the same 
 blessed Union and Agreement among the ministers of this county (Devon), which 
 was the last work that God thought fit to employ him in before he took him to 
 himself." — Life prefixed to his Remains, 12mo. 1691. 
 
 • Flavel's Remains, 12mo. 1691, pp. 82, 83. t P. 84. t P. 85. 
 
72 
 
 unregenerated people, that know neither their miserj/, nor their remeJi/. 
 Tliis will direct us to the great doctrines of Conviction, Regeneration, 
 and Fail/i ; and make us sit with solicitous minds in our studies, pon- 
 dering thus in our hearts, Lord, what course shall we take, and what 
 words shall Ave choose, tliat may convey the sense of their sin and 
 danger, with the fulness and necessity of Christ, into their hearts !* 
 
 " And why, my brethren, do we think that God hath commissionated 
 lis, rather than angels, to be his ambassadors ? was it not, among other 
 reasons, for this, because we, having been under the same condemnation 
 and misery ourselves, and felt both the terrors and consolations of the 
 Spirit, (which angels ex2>erimentally know not,) might thereby be 
 enabled to treat with sinners more feelingly and affectionately, in a 
 way more accommodate to them, and therefore more apt to move and 
 win them?t 
 
 " As to our Brethren and Felloxv-workers in the Lord ; prudence will 
 dictate and enjoin it upon us, that by the firmest Union with them, we 
 make their gifts and graces as useful as is possible, for the furtherance 
 and advancement of our great and difficult work. We cannot be 
 ignorant how much Satan hath gained, and Christ's interest hath 
 sensibly lost, by those unhappy divisions and alienations amongst 
 brethren and fellow-labourers in the work of the Lord."! 
 
 " And as prudence directs us into the Avay of our profit and comfort 
 bj'^ this more private improvement of our gifts and graces, so into a 
 more excellent way by a General Union and coalition with all our bre- 
 thren farther distant in place from us. It calls upon us to bury and 
 forget henceforth the factious names of distinction growing out of our 
 different apprehensions about smaller disciplinary points. How many 
 fervent prayers have been poured out! How many excellent Ireni- 
 cui/is have been written by those excellent ministers that are now at 
 perfect unity in heaven ! Though thej/ did not, yet I hope we and otir 
 children shall reap the blessed fruits of those pious endeavours. God 
 hath spoken with a strong hand to our pious and i)rudent brethren, in 
 and about the great City of this kingdom. They have most wisely 
 and seasonably projected this great and glorious design : they have 
 followed it close with unwearied diligence, admirable patience. Chris- 
 tian humility and condescension ; and, by the good hand of the Lord 
 with them, have brought it at last to a comfortable issue. The happy 
 result of their fervent prayers, and frequent brotherly consults, (all 
 praise to the God of love and peace for it !) are now in our hands in 
 those blessed sheets, called Heads of Agreement ; wherein God hath 
 signally helped them to evidence their wisdom in the choice of 
 words, and their humility and charity in mutual and necessary conces- 
 sions. They have, by the mouth of an eminent brother, (whose i)raise 
 is in the Gospel, and whose hand hath eminently assisted in this 
 service,) cheerfully offered up their praises to Jehovah-Shulojn, for 
 
 * P. 93. t P. 97. : P- 101- 
 
7;3 
 
 iiiakiiig the two sticks of Jadah aiul Epiiriam to become one stick in his 
 own hand. And now, brethren, they wait, yea, give me leave to say, 
 Christ waits, as well as they, for our explicit consent and cheerful 
 suffrages," \^\^. 104—106. 
 
 These extracts are pervaded by a truly Christian spirit, 
 noble, generous, catholic, and comprehensive ; but they are, 
 at the same time, most remote from latitudinarian indifference 
 to doctrinal truth, or a disregard of the great vital principles 
 of Christianity. These, on the contrary, are prominent and 
 conspicuous through the vi^hole. But it is not so much for 
 the purpose of exhibiting this characteristic that I have intro- 
 duced them, as to give the reader an opportunity of judging, 
 from the evangelical strain, the earnest tone, the affec- 
 tionate style of address exhibited in them, what manner of 
 men those were, on both sides, who took a leading part on 
 this interesting occasion ; how completely they were agreed in 
 sentiment and feeling, as well as in opinion, with reference to 
 the peculiar doctrines of revelation — the Trinity — the ruin of 
 mankind by Sin — the work of Redemption accomplished by 
 the Son of God — the work of Regeneration and progressive 
 Sanctification by the Holy Spirit — ^Justification, or pardon and 
 acceptance with God, by grace, through faith in the Lord 
 Jesus Christ; — and how eminently practical were the views 
 which they took, and the manner in which they treated these 
 vital doctrines, as entering deeply into all the duties of 
 private, social, and public life. Such preachers were the Pres- 
 byterian, and by far the greater number of the Congregational 
 ministers of this period. The immediate successors of the 
 ejected clergy did not indeed possess either the fire and 
 energy, or the unction and pathos of Baxter, the most emi- 
 nent individual, perhaps, among that illustrious band of con- 
 fessors ; but they M'ere men of kindred spirit, and seem to 
 have looked up to him as their model and pattern. Truth 
 and candour compel me to acknowledge that, among the Con- 
 gregational ministers in London at this time, there were a 
 few who did not resemble Mr. Mead in comprehensive charity, 
 but were narrow and contracted in their views, rigid and austere 
 in their adherence to human systems of doctrine ; and who, 
 while conscientious in " contending earnestly" for what they 
 
74 
 
 regarded as " the faith once delivered to the saints," in 
 reference especially to the great doctrine of justification, 
 insisted too much on exact accordance with the terms and 
 phrases of a systematic theology, in the explication of it. 
 Since the death of Dr. Owen, in 1683, there had been no 
 individual who took a leading part among the Independent 
 ministers. 
 
 The occasion of the unhappy disputes which arose soon 
 after the formation and solemn ratification of the Union, was 
 a republication of the sermons of Dr. Tobias Crisp, a puritan 
 divine, generally considered as belonging to the Antinomian 
 school. To the sermons which had already appeared in print, 
 the doctor's son, by whom this new edition was published, 
 added several which had been left in manuscript, and a testi- 
 monial, or attestation, of their being his genuine production, 
 was prefixed, to which the names of several of the United 
 Ministers were appended. It will not be necessary to give a 
 particular account of this lamentable controversy, which, to 
 some of the parties, was most disgraceful, and to the entire 
 body deeply injurious. The reader's attention must, however, 
 be directed to the real subject in debate. The question about 
 Subscription did not arise, even incidentally ; neither was it, 
 as one of these writers has insinuated, a dispute concerning 
 Election or Predestination ; nor, indeed, about any of the five 
 points in difi^erence between Arminians and Calvinists. The 
 doctrinal questions involved in it related to the mode and terms 
 of Justification — the subject before adverted to, as forming the 
 chief theological difference between the two bodies previously 
 to the Union. This controversy was carried on for some time 
 with great violence, on the part of a few individuals among 
 the London ministers, and led, in 1G94, to an open rupture 
 among the preachers of the Merchants' Lecture at Pinner's 
 Hall, and to the establishment of a new lecture at Salters' 
 Hall. Of the six lecturers who officiated in succession, every 
 Tuesday morning, four had, from its institution in 1672, been 
 Presbyterians, the other two Independents. Whatever might 
 be the peculiar opinions of individuals on some points, there is 
 ample evidence to shew that the body in general was clear 
 from the imi)utation of all serious doctrinal error. 
 
75 
 
 One of the lecturers at this time, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Daniel 
 Williams, founder of the library in Redcross Street, soon became 
 a leading divine among the Presbyterians. 
 
 A few of the more rigid Independents, who " had opposed 
 the Union at first," retained their hostility after it was estab- 
 lished. Two of them, Dr. Chauncy and Mr. Mather, (the 
 latter of whom Dr. Williams charges with being " unwearied 
 in hindering and breaking that blessed Union which promised 
 so much good,")* brought charges of highly erroneous doctrine 
 against him, for some positions advanced in two sermons, 
 preached by him at Pinner's Hall, and in a book published in 
 1692, in reply to Dr. Crisp, entitled " Gospel Truth stated 
 and vindicated." Dr. Toulmin, in his " Historical View of 
 the State of the Protestant Dissenters in England, and of the 
 Progress of Free Inquiry and Religious Liberty, from the 
 Revolution to the Accession of Queen Anne,"f gives an 
 account of this publication, and tells us, that " having ex- 
 plained and stated the case, the author confirmed the truth, 
 which was opposed to a specific error, by the rule of faith 
 received by both sides. To the direct proofs were added cor- 
 roborating testimonies fi'om the approved Catechisms and 
 Confessions, both of the Presbyterian and Independent bodies, 
 viz. those of the Assembly at Westminster, of the Synod of 
 New England, and of the Congregational elders at the Savoy, 
 besides those of such particular authors as were generally 
 esteemed orthodox." Among these Dr. Owen is frequently 
 cited. The chief topics involved in this discussion were the 
 following points connected with the way and means of Justi- 
 fication and Salvation. 
 
 Imputation of the righteousness of Christ. 
 
 Nature of saving Faith. 
 
 Change of persons between Christ and the Elect. 
 
 Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace. 
 
 Authoritative command included in the gospel, and retri- 
 butive sanction annexed to it. 
 
 Necessity of confession and repentance, in order to pardon. 
 
 Necessity of holiness and perseverance unto salvation. 
 
 * Dr. Williams's Works, vol. iv. p. xii. t Svo. 18 V4, p. 202. 
 
76 
 
 Dr. Chauncy and Mr. Mather were inclined to favour some 
 of the views taken by Dr. Crisp on these points, though they 
 did not profess to adopt his system, or to hold many of his 
 opinions ; but they wrote with too much warmth and bitter- 
 ness against Dr. Williams. 
 
 In 1692, the United Ministers in London, who had been 
 often previously consulted by their brethren in the country, in 
 reference to " the erroneous principles and irregular practices" 
 of Mr. Richard Davis, a minister in Northamptonshire, pub- 
 lished a brief Account and Testimony, that (say they) " we 
 may not be wanting in our faithfulness and zeal for the truth 
 of Christ, and for that peace and order among his people, 
 which is so strictly enjoined by him ; nor be esteemed approvers 
 of those delusions and extravagancies, whereby souls are 
 endangered, divisions highly fomented, and our present liberty 
 abused, to the hurt and reproach of all of us as Dissenters." 
 They then proceed to bear their testimony against some of the 
 errors which he propagated, and " declare them repugnant to 
 the Gospel, as also to the doctrine of the CImrch of England, 
 and other Confessions agreeable to the Gospel, whereto they 
 had assented," &c. The errors enumerated are of the Liber- 
 tine or Antinomian class. Among his " unchristian practices," 
 were " his sending forth preachers unfit for the ministry, and 
 unapproved by the neighbouring ministers; his wickedly 
 railing at most of the orthodox laborious ministers," They 
 afterwards declare " that he never was, nor is esteemed, of 
 the number of the United Brethren."* 
 
 In 1693 was printed a tract, entitled " The Agreement in 
 Doctrine among the Dissenting Ministers in London, sub- 
 scribed December 16, 1692," in which, after noticing the dif- 
 ferences which had arisen, occasioned by the books of 
 Mr. Williams and Mr. Chauncy, &c. and entering into some 
 explanations as to the intention of those who subscribed their 
 names in approbation of the books and papers, which had 
 served rather to inflame than to allay the controversy, they 
 proceed to declare — " That in order to the more effectual 
 composing of matters in controversie, we all of us, having 
 referred ourselves to the Holtf Scriptures, and the Doctrinal 
 
 * Calaniy's Historical AiUlitioiis. pp. 512 — 514. 
 
77 
 
 Articles of the Church of E/igland, the fFestininstcr and 
 Savoy Confessions, the Larimer and Shorter Catechisms, do 
 subscribe these following propositions, as what do most fully 
 provide against the Armbiiun, Antinomian, Socinian, and 
 Popish errors; and shall always be content, that any ser- 
 mons or books of ours be interpreted by the said Articles 
 and Confessions ; desiring all others, if they meet with any 
 expressions from any of us, that are to them of doubtful 
 signification, they would judge of them, and interpret them 
 by the Holy Scripture, and [the] said Articles and Con- 
 fessions." 
 
 The propositions are arranged under nine heads, and the 
 whole are decidedly Calvinistie. I will subjoin one as a 
 specimen. 
 
 III. Of Christ the Mediator. 
 
 "1. It pleased God in his eternal purpose to choose and ordain the 
 Lord Jesus, his only begotten Son, to be the Mediator between God 
 and man, the Projihet, Priest, and King, the Head and Saviour of the 
 Church, the heir of all things, and Judge of the world, unto whom he 
 did from all eternity give a people to be his seed, and to be by him in 
 time redeemed, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified. 
 
 " 2. The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of him- 
 self, which he, through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, 
 hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father, and purchased not only 
 reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of 
 heaven for all those whom the Father hath given unto him. 
 
 " 3. To all those for whom Christ hath purchased redemption, he 
 doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same, 
 making intercession for them, and revealing unto them, in and by the 
 word, the mysteries of salvation, effectually persuading them, by his 
 Spirit, to believe and obey, and governing their hearts by his word and 
 Spirit, overcoming all their enemies by his Almighty power and 
 wisdom, in such manner and ways as are most consonant to his 
 wonderful and unsearchable dispensations."* 
 
 At the end they subjoin — " Though we have selected these Proposi- 
 tions, as conceiving them most accommodated to some points at this 
 time controverted ; yet we profess to have an equal respect to all other 
 the main parts of doctrine, contained in the forementioned Articles, 
 Confession, and Catechisms, as judging them agreeable to the word 
 of God." 
 
 December IG, 1692. — This day the brethren, who endeavoured to 
 * Pp. 5 — 7. 
 
iiocomniodate tliis controversy, tlid, with Mr. U'llliums, Mr. C/iaunci/, 
 and tliose other five brctliren wlio with liini objected against Mr. AVil- 
 lianis's book, subscribe to this agreement and these doctrinal ])roposi- 
 tions." [Seventeen names are subscribed, containing, besides the 
 above mentioned, those of Mr. Howe and nine others, most of them 
 Presbyterians.] 
 
 " On December, 19 — This expedient was consiclered by the United 
 Ministfi's, who unanimously declared their approbation of it."* 
 
 But, alas ! peace was not restored. There seemed to be a 
 determination, on the part of a few individuals, to embroil, if 
 possible, the whole body of the united ministers in London. 
 Towards the close of 1694, the rupture among the lecturers 
 at Pinner's Hall took place. An overture for peace, on the 
 part of the portion which included the Presbyterians, was 
 made shortly after, with a view to the satisfaction of those who 
 had left them, and also of those who from the first had re- 
 fused to join them. After stating that both these " pretended 
 nothing for their separation, but that there were erroneous 
 persons in the Union," — they add, " To gratify them as to this, 
 the persons deputed by us admitted such provision as pleased 
 those brethren, against whatever errors they suspected any of 
 our number guilty of." Of a paper then drawn up, " the 
 former part, which (they say) was brought to our meeting, as 
 what would satisfy the dissenters if assented to by us" — shall 
 be inserted : — 
 
 " We, the United Ministers in and about London, considering of a 
 way wliereby to preserve the Union, and prevent any mistakes, and 
 remove any prejudices that may arise amongst us to interrupt tlie 
 foresaid Union, do declare, that we still adhere to the Terms thereof, 
 and do still submit to the Holy Scriptures as the rule of faith and 
 practice, and do own the doctrinal part of those commonly called the 
 Articles of the Church of England, or the Confession, shorter and larger 
 Catechisms compiled by the Assembly at Westminster, or the Savoy Con- 
 fession ; and do renounce, and testify against, all opinions and doc- 
 trines dissonant therefrom ; as, for instance, among many others : 
 
 [1.] " That there is no definite number of persons elected from all 
 eternity, whom God will by his appointed means certainly save, and 
 bring to eternal life ; leaving the rest, who fall under a just con- 
 
 • Dr. Williams's Works, vol. iv. p. 327. 
 
<lemnation for their original and actual sins, especially for their neg- 
 lect and contempt of tlie means of salvation. 
 
 [2.] " Tliat Christ died equally for all men, not intending the final 
 salvation of some more than others. 
 
 [3.] " That men have it in their own power, by the use of the 
 natural faculties of their reason and will, unassisted by the special 
 light and grace of the Holy Ghost, to perform all that is necessary to 
 salvation ; or that his special efficacious light and grace is not neces- 
 sary to their conversion, perseverance, and final salvation. 
 
 [4.] " That any of them whom God hath foreknown, predestinated, 
 and called eftectually according to the purpose of his grace, shall fall 
 away, either totally, or so as not to be finally glorified. 
 
 [5.] " That faith, repentance, a holy conversation, or any act or 
 work whatever done by us, or wrought by the Spirit of God in us, are 
 any part of that Righteousness for the sake of which, or on the account 
 whereof, God doth justify any man, or entitle him to eternal life." 
 
 The document, after enumerating several (chiefly Antino- 
 mian) errors " on the other side," thus concludes : 
 
 " We have thought it our duty to bear our testimony against all 
 tliese erroneous oiiinions, or any other contrary to the plain tenor of 
 the Gospel of God. And we do further protest against any design of 
 undermining one another in any matter of church government, but 
 do heartily desire to maintain communion with each other, according 
 to the Heads of Agreement we have assented to. And if any thing hath 
 been done or spoken by any of us, through mistake or inadvertency, 
 that may cause any just offence to the prejudice of the said Union, we 
 are ready, upon better information, to rectify the same ; still desiring 
 and mutually resolving a brotherly forbearance towards one another, 
 in any lesser points wherein we may difter." 
 
 " Our concern for Union" say the writers, " will appear, if it be 
 considered that (to the best of our knowledge) we retained all the 
 very words sent by them to us, as a guard against each of the errors 
 of which they suspected any of us." 
 
 This paper was unanimously agreed to, and forwarded 
 January 7, 1694-5.* 
 
 Yet these are the men who, according to the writers now 
 under review, cared nothing about doctrinal truth or error, 
 who looked with calm indifference upon theological opinions 
 of the most opposite character; and this was at the end 
 
 • Dr. Williams's Works, vol. iv. pp. 329—334. 
 
80 
 
 of the very year of glorious emancipation, (1694,) during 
 which the English Presbyterians cast off their ignoble shackles, 
 and abjured for ever all kinds of doctrinal tests and confes- 
 sions, after having established a new lecture, at which they 
 might enjoy full liberty to broach any opinions, and whence 
 they might securely propagate tenets the most obnoxious 
 and offensive to the feelings of all Christian communities then 
 in existence ! This overture failed of producing the desired 
 effect, and most of the Congregational ministers withdrew, and 
 joined the separate meetings of those who had been decided 
 opponents of the Union. Their reason for so acting does not 
 appear ; and the whole affair, so far as their conduct is con- 
 cerned, is clothed with an air of mystery. 
 
 In 1696 another attempt was made, on the part of the 
 United Brethren, (for by that title the Presbyterian and 
 few remaining Congregational who continued then to meet 
 and act together were still called,) for an accommodation 
 with " such as had left the Union." A proposal (called " the 
 Third Paper") was, after mature consideration, unanimously 
 assented to, and forwarded, of which a large portion shall be 
 inserted: — 
 
 " Whereas some unhappy differences have arisen among us, prin- 
 cipally about the doctrine of Justification, as set forth in Mr. Williams's 
 book, entitled Gospel Truth stated, to which several of our names are 
 prefixed ; we being willing to give all reasonable satisfaction therein, 
 for the removing tlie present and preventing all future differences, 
 which will otherwise tend to the dishonour of God, disquiet of his 
 churches, and danger of souls, do hereby declare our judgment con- 
 cerning the same : 
 
 '* That we adhere to our former approbation of the doctrinal Articles 
 of the C/iurch of England, or the Confession of Faith compiled by the 
 Jssemblij at Westminster, or that at the Savoy, as agreeable to the word 
 of God ; and ])articularly to the Articles collected by us out of the 
 Confession with the Catechisms compiled by the same Assembly, printed 
 1693. And further we declare, that if any shall express himself dis- 
 agreeably thereto, in any momentous points of doctrine, we will, with 
 brotherly candour and kindness, endeavour to give and receive just 
 satisfaction therein ; bearing with one another's infirmities and dif- 
 ferent sentiments in matters of lesser weight ; not contending about 
 logical or philosophical terms, or mere human forms of speech ; nor judging 
 
81 
 
 it reasonable or just to charge upon any, such consequences of any 
 expression or opinion of his, which he himself shall disown. 
 
 They then proceed to declare as to the special matters in differ- 
 ence, viz. : 
 
 " I. Concerning Justification. That although the express word of 
 God do assert the necessity of Regeneration to our entering into the 
 kingdom of God ; and requires Repentance, that our sins may be blotted 
 out ; and Faith in Christ, that we may be justified ; and holiness of heart 
 and life, without which we cannot see God ; yet that none of these, or 
 any work done by men, or wrought by the Spirit of God in them, is, 
 under any denomination whatsoever, ani/ part of the Righteousness, for 
 the sake, or on the account whereof, God doth pardon, justify, or 
 accept sinners, or entitle them to eternal life ; that being only the 
 Righteousness of Christ without them, imputed to them, and received 
 by Faith alone. 
 
 " II. Of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us. As we 
 are to consider our Lord Jesus Christ in his obedience and sufferings, 
 as God and man invested with the office of Mediator ; so it is apparent 
 this commutation of persons with us was not natural, in respect of 
 either nature. * * * But it is to be understood in a legal or judicial sense, 
 (as we may call it,) viz. He, by agreement between the Father and him, 
 came into our room and stead, not to repent and believe for us, which the 
 Gospel requires of us as our duty, (though he hath undertaken the 
 elect shall in due time be enabled thereto ;) but to answer for our 
 violation of the law of works. He being made sin for us, who knew no sin, 
 that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. v. 21. 
 
 "III. Of God's being pleased or displeased with. Christ, as standing 
 and suffering in our stead. We judge that God was always pleased with 
 Christ, both in his person, and in the execution of all his offices 
 (which is expressed most particularly in that of his priestly, John 
 X. 17, \%.''JIherefore doth my Father love me, because Hay down my life, &c.) 
 and was no otherwise displeased, than as having a dispassionate will to 
 inflict upon him the punishment of our sins, which he had undertaken 
 to bear, that God might, without injury to his justice or honour, 
 pardon and save penitent believers, for his Satisfaction, and Interces- 
 sion founded thereon." 
 
 The Paper thus concludes — " And we do declare, that whosoever 
 shall be found to express themselves in their preaching or writing 
 agreeably to this Paper, and to the mentioned Articles or Confessions, 
 we shall esteem them to deliver the sincere Gospel of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ ; and it shall be remote from us to oppose or 
 reflect upon, but we shall to our utmost encourage and give counte- 
 nance to one another's ministry therein."* 
 
 * Williams's Works, vol. iv, pp. 334—339. 
 G 
 
82 
 
 This paper was accompanied by a letter, expressed in the 
 most affectionate terms, in which they say — 
 
 " All the light that we have received about matters in difference 
 between us hath been from a reverend Brother, who told us that, 
 by conference with some who forbear to come to our meetings, 
 he understood that they apprehended there are those in our Union, 
 who have sentiments about the doctrine of Justification, different from 
 the common faith of all orthodox Protestants, and so dissonant from 
 the Holy Scriptures and the Confessions, which have been owned and 
 approved by us ; and that if there were sufficient evidence and assur- 
 ance given them, that the body of the United Ministers would approve 
 tbemselves sound, clear, and stedfast in that most weighty and 
 important doctrine, (which we all acknowledge to be Articulus stantis 
 vel cadenlis EcclesicE,) they would then maintain all brotherly com- 
 munion with us." 
 
 The letter then proceeds — " When this was notified to us, we pre- 
 sently conceived great and good hopes, that all jealousies might be 
 easily removed, and that a redintegration of affections would imme- 
 diately follow. And what should hinder ? For if you do attentively 
 and deliberately weigh what is asserted in the article of Justification in 
 the enclosed paper, (which was unanimously agreed unto, after open 
 reading, and that upon several days,) we are confident that it will 
 evidently and undeniably appear that we perfectly agree with our 
 brethren in the evangelical doctrine of Justification, even in the very 
 phrases and modes of expression. 
 
 " Our agreement in the doctrine of Justification, which was as the 
 test and cement of our Union, being so happily established and fixed ; 
 we shall need to say but little touching the other two points mentioned 
 in the enclosed paper, which (as we think) are so clearly and candidly 
 stated, that we believe (as we suppose upon sure and certain grounds) 
 there will be nothing remaining (upon that account) to obstruct our 
 entire and hearty t/wJo«."Pp. 342 — 340. 
 
 After referring to some who sought occasion to reproach 
 them, and to hinder the success or acceptableness of their 
 ministry, they add — 
 
 ' But we trust the Lord will blast their designs, and frustrate 
 their expectations, by enlightening our minds to receive and hold fast 
 all truths, and especially those which are fundamental, and will by 
 his grace most sweetly and effectually draw our hearts to love as 
 brethren," &c. —Pp. 342—344. 
 
 They conclude by a pathetic appeal and an earnest request, 
 that their brethren would return and frequent the meetings as 
 
8:3 
 
 formerly, having intended to give them all possible satisfaction. 
 This letter was signed, October 27, 1696, by the Moderator. 
 
 Do we here discover the slightest indication of that equal 
 regard or disregard of all theological opinions, ascribed to the 
 English Presbyterians? Do not these papers, on the con- 
 trary, contain abundant evidence of firm adherence and zealous 
 attachment to doctrinal truth ? Whence otherwise the anxiety 
 which the compilers of them manifest, the pains which they take 
 to clear themselves from the imputation of holding erroneous 
 tenets, on any important point of the Christian system ? 
 
 The answer sent to this letter was brief and unsatisfactory, 
 and shewed no disposition to conciliate, — merely referring to 
 another paper, which had been drawn up some months pre- 
 viously. 
 
 ^Vhether the rupture among the lecturers at Pinner's Hall, 
 the subsequent withdrawment of the greater number of the 
 Congregational Ministers from the meetings of the United 
 Ministers, and their refusal to return, was equivalent to a 
 dissolution of the Union, so far as that part of the body 
 which belonged to London was concerned, is a point I do not 
 consider it necessary to discuss, but, whatever might be the 
 fact, there appears no trace of any formal act of dissolution.* 
 At all events, it could not be followed by a separation among the 
 United Ministers in all parts of the country, unless the London 
 Congregational Ministers exercised authoritative control over 
 those in the country, or the latter thought proper to follow 
 their bad example. To any such right or power, they never 
 pretended ; and had the body called United Ministers been 
 disposed to interfere, they, being chiefly Presbyterians, would 
 rather, it may be presumed, have encouraged and promoted 
 the continuance of that ministerial concord and brotherly 
 association among their country brethren, which they took 
 so much pains to restore among the London ministers. 
 
 * That the " breach in the lecture at Pinner's Hall" was not immediately fol- 
 lowed by a general separation in the body, appears evident^ from tlie fact, that the 
 United Ministers, as Dr. Williams informs us, met together upon general notice, to 
 the number of near sixty, April 8, 1C95." 
 G ^ 
 
84 
 
 But to pursue the course of events in connexion with this 
 most unhappy controversy — 
 
 In September, 1697, the United Ministers requested their 
 committee to notice two publications, and to prepare an 
 answer to the charges contained in them. The Answer w^as 
 not pubhshed in their name, for a reason which Dr. WilUams 
 particularly states ; yet he says, that " the doctrines therein 
 acknowledged are as much their common sentiments as if the 
 Answer had been published in the name of the body." Some 
 extracts shall be given from this publication. In the preface 
 they say — 
 
 " Had the charge contained only small mistakes, or lesser errors, 
 Christian prudence might forbid an answer. But when they publish 
 us guilty of such destructive opinions, as. they say, subvert the 
 doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction ; yea, and make it impossible ; and 
 this, not as rash censurers, but pretending to cite our own paper for 
 their charge, — a vindication is necessary, unless we ought to prostitute 
 our ministry, betray the truth, lie under the brand of heretical 
 opinions, induce others by our example to entertain such errors, and 
 confirm those who are already infected. Had the accusation been still 
 confined to some particular Brethren, our practice hitherto may convince 
 the world we had not as a body set forth this Vindication. But when 
 the authors of the Report, &c. accuse all who sent the Third Paper;* 
 that is, the body of the United Brethren in and about London; nothing 
 short of our own public testimony can be suflRcient to declare M'hat 
 our principles are, or acquit vis from holding those horrid errors they 
 so confidently as well as falsely ascribe unto us. 
 
 '' With this necessitated vindication of ourselves and ministry, we 
 think it incumbent on us to warn all persons, especially such of you 
 as stand more peculiarly related to us, that you be riot shaken in mind, 
 but tliat you remain steadfast in the faith in this time, when seducers 
 not only abound, but, under various disguises, are so unusually active 
 and successful, to the reproach of Christianity, and the apparent dan- 
 ger of the souls seduced by them. Lament with us, to see all reveale^l 
 Religion exposed by some, the Godhead and Satisfaction of Christ 0ur 
 blessed Redeemer denied by others, and doctrines which hate a 
 direct tendency to Libertinism esjwused by too many. All v*hich, 
 w ith the residue of the great errors at this time propagated, do (how- 
 
 " Whicli they afterwards desccibe as " that which the United Brethren sent as a 
 means of reunion to those who had left the Union." It will be found, pp. SO, 81, 
 ante. 
 
85 
 
 ever inconsistent they seem,) jointly contribute to the subverting or 
 the true Religion, and threaten misery to these kingdoms. 
 
 " And as we would excite your godly zeal for the truths and laws 
 of Christ, against opinions subverting the foundations of faith, and 
 militating against practical godliness ; so, with equal concern, we 
 must exhort you to have fervent charity towards all Christians, and 
 to walk in peace with all who call upon the name of the Lord out of 
 a pure heart. Notwithstanding differences in lesser matters, where 
 unto we have attained, let m all walk by the same rule; waiting with 
 mutual forbearance till God shall reveal those things to such who, at 
 present, are otherwise minded than ourselves."* 
 
 Referring to the doctrinal propositions printed in 1693, 
 called "An Agreement in Doctrine," subscribed by both 
 parties, after quoting the passage which describes them as 
 "most fully providing against the Arminian, Antinomian, 
 Socinian, and Popish errors," &c., they add, " Here was 
 declared a full provision against those respective errors. 
 And is it not strange that now such phrases and words must 
 be the standard of orthodoxy, which neither this Agreement, 
 the Church of England, the Assemhh/s, nor the Confession 
 of any church require?"! They were charged in one of these 
 pamphlets, entitled A ReporU &c., with denying "a commu- 
 tation or change of persons, which, (say they,) in the T/im/ 
 Paper, we had fully asserted in opposition to Socinianism, 
 but, (they add,) we say little of it in our Letter, where we 
 have enlarged on Justification; because, for several years, the 
 Dissenters [the brethren so called] pretended all their great 
 quarrel was about that doctrine. And may we not justly 
 grieve that, for our industry in clearing ourselves beyond 
 all their challenges as to this, we should be hereticated b^ 
 this Report, in the new controversy started by Mr. Lobb ?"% 
 
 The author of the publication just quoted had declared, 
 that the cause of the divisions was the United Ministers' con- 
 tending for Socinian errors against Christ's Satisfaction. The 
 particular charge alleged was, that " there is such a wrong 
 description given of a change of person in the Third Paper, as 
 perverts the doctrine of Satisfaction, and renders it impossible."§ 
 
 Works, vol. iv. pp. 317-320. t Ibid. p. 326. X Pp- : 
 
 364. 
 
86 
 
 This was certainly an important point. Wliile granting that 
 "Christ became a sin offering, and in our stead subject to the 
 punishments which, by the law, sinners deserved, that we 
 might be delivered ;" they deny that Christ put himself into 
 our state and condition, as vile offenders, destitute of a 
 righteousness entitling to eternal life, so as actually to become 
 himself a sinful 2jerso)i, which they justly denominate " a 
 horrid position."* In a word, they admit a commutation of 
 persons, but not a change of person. They say, " all Christ's 
 sufferings as a priest, were his sufferings as one mediating 
 for sinners, and not as one become himself a sinner."f In 
 answer to the remark from the other side, that if the thing 
 they contend for be granted them, they would not quarrel 
 about the term, they say — instead of complaining of a dis- 
 respect to fifty or sixty ministers, we'll desire all our brethren 
 were as temperate ; which would end all quarrels about human 
 woi'ds, when the sense is granted," and take occasion to anim- 
 advert on their opponent's stiffly contending for a set of 
 phrases, notwithstanding their " orthodox explications." | 
 
 In vindicating Dr. Williams from the charge of agreeing 
 with Socinians, they say : 
 
 " The Racovian Catechism in the Amsterdam edition, and not only 
 modern Siocinians, affirm, Christ died in our stead ; and Socinus, Crellius, 
 and others, asserted a change of persons between Christ and us ; and 
 tlie sense in which the first take dying in our stead, is as metaphorical 
 and improper, as the last do take a change of persons in. But if our 
 Reporter finds a Socinian to use a phrase explained in an ill sense by 
 themselves, and others make use of that phrase in a contrary sense 
 never so expressly, his way is presently to charge upon them the use 
 of that phrase in the Socinian sense. After all he hath said to make 
 the stress of our cause against the Socinians to depend upon the terms 
 change of persons, &Cx, an insight into that controversy would convince 
 him, tluit there are other things which do far more certainly deftie 
 that controversy about the satisfaction ; viz. Was Christ, in his death, 
 an expiatory Sacrifice ? Did he make atonement to the justice of 
 
 • Works, vol. iv. pp. 365, 366, 369. The words insisted upon were, he took 
 upon him the person of sinners. The United Ministers admit that his sufferings 
 were endured as the punishment of our sins, and that he died in our room and 
 stead, {vice nostra ff loco uostro,) p. 371. 
 
 t lb. p. 367. i lb. p. 369. 
 
87 
 
 God ? Did Christ endure the punishment of our sins ? &c. All these 
 Mr. Williams, in Gospel Truth, asserts. 
 
 They quote the following passage from that book : 
 
 " Our sins were imputed to Christ, with respect to the guilt thereof, 
 so that he, by the Father's appointment, and his own consent be- 
 came obliged, as mediator, to bear the punishment of our sins ; and 
 he did bear those punishments, to the full satisfaction of justice, and 
 to our actual remission, when we believe." 
 
 *•' The Reporter seems not to distinguish between a Surrogation, upon 
 which an innocent person expiates another's crime, and his becoming 
 the very sinning criminal.* 
 
 Speaking oiunscriptural tvords, they say — " It is matter of grief to us, 
 that in opposition to the preface of both papers law terms and human 
 forms of speech, in doctrines so fully expressed in the Gospel, and 
 capable of being expressed in the words used and appointed by the 
 Holy Ghost, should be made engines of division among persons who 
 agree in the sense of such phrases, and yet dare not say that God 
 designed to limit or extend his revelations by what such terms may 
 signify in human laws or usages ; especially when they need explica- 
 tions and limitations to prevent what is grossly erroneous." [Then 
 follow some remarks on the phrase ' Christ took upon him the person 
 of sinners.'] " But the Churches of Christ have been wiser than to 
 insert such phrases into their Confessions, knowing it would confound 
 the minds and perplex the consciences of Christians in points of 
 greatest concernment to their Salvation. 
 
 " The vindication of ourselves from a printed charge so severe, (as 
 the perverting, denying, and making the Satisfaction of Christ impos- 
 sible,) is so necessary, that all men must justify our publishing this 
 defence. 
 
 " We have, for a Re-union, proposed to subscribe the very phrases 
 they insist on ; provided their sense may be duly adjusted, and those 
 plain truths secured, upon which practical Godliness and a true Gospel- 
 ministry so much depend." f 
 
 In some Reflections on the other paper, called " Remarks," 
 &c. they say : 
 
 " These his papers, instead of removing, do proclaim and fix that 
 reproach upon him and his adherents, that they divide for dividing' s sake, 
 and know not about what they differ. For he assigneth their divisions to 
 one or two mere words or law-terms, as to the syllables and letters, and 
 not to the sense, upon which they will not openly fix their disagreement. 
 But if he would remove this reproach, let him plainly and honestly 
 contend for their errors, which we oppose, and no longer deceive the 
 
 * Works, vol. IT. pp. 377—379. t lb. pp. 382—385. 
 
88 
 
 world l>y impertinently nibbling at a few exprenhions, and from thence 
 charffin"- us with opinions which he is convinced we all of us abhor. 
 Only lie thinks it will be a greater reproach to acknowledge they divide 
 for such horrid errors, than that they divide for dividing's sake, &c. * 
 
 They speak cf having " fully cleared themselves of Arminianism" 
 by the Third Paper, and ask, ' Do not we and Mr. Williams's book 
 assert Christ's sufferings to be a punishment in satisfaction to punitive 
 justice V — which the Remarker declares to be the distinguishing point. 
 What a slanderous spirit acteth this man, that makes Chrift's Satisfac- 
 tion to punitive justice, to be that which distinguisheth the Arminians 
 and Socinians from the Orthodox ! and yet ranketh us among the former, 
 though he knows all of us assented to the Third Paper, which affirm- 
 eth Christ's sufferings were a satisfaction to punitive justice." f 
 
 Mr. Lobb, the author, it appears, of the " Remarks," had 
 frequently quoted Bishop Stilhngfleet and Dr. Edwards, 
 Master of Jesus College, Oxford, against Dr. Williams's 
 judgment on a commutation of persons. Letters from these 
 learned persons are subjoined, fully acquitting him from the 
 false and calumnious charges against him. The latter thus 
 writes to Dr. Williams : " You have very rightly, and in 
 an orthodox manner, stated the doctrine of Christ's Satis- 
 faction ; and it is in perfect agreement with the doctrine of 
 our own, and all the reformed Churches ; and therefore fully 
 acquits you fi'om the imputation of Socinia7iis?n"X 
 
 Speaking of certain phrases omitted in the Third Paper by 
 the United Ministers, Dr. W. says : " If they had used none 
 but what the Church of England and the Assembly of 
 Divines' Confession included, the Heads of Union were ob- 
 served by them, and violated by such as exacted more.§ 
 
 *' Mr. Lobb makes Christ's suffering the punishment of our 
 sins to the satisfaction of justice, the thing which distin- 
 guisheth the orthodox from the Socinians; and yet he re- 
 presents Mr. R. as a Socinian^ 'who oft asserteth, Christ 
 suffered the punishment of our sins to the satisfaction of 
 justice, even vindictive justice." || 
 
 He states that he did not ascribe "the various attacks 
 upon Gospel truth and its author, to the Congregationals as 
 a body." 
 
 • lb. p. 3K7. t P. 395. t r. 427. § P. 458. || P. 459. 
 
In a postscript to " Gospel Truth stated," &c. published in 
 1698, Dr. Williams farther vindicates himself from Mr. Lobb's 
 charge of Socinianism, in regard to the doctrine of Christ's 
 satisfaction. He explains Christ's dying in the stead of 
 sinners, by his " coming into their room, as they are liable 
 and obliged to die, and, suffering death, to make satisfaction 
 for their sins, and ransom them from death," and adds, " I 
 can easily prove it to be the sense of that phrase in our Con- 
 fessions of Faith."* Though he refuses to acknowledge that 
 Christ sustained the person of sinners, in the sense of being 
 adjudged himself a sinner, he allows that Christ " died to 
 satisfy vindictive justice, and that his sufferings were real 
 punishments, though vicarious" being endured for our sins.f 
 
 He subjoins a paper which he had sent to a general meeting 
 of the subscribers to the lecture at Pinner s Hall, which was 
 read publicly, before the unhappy breach in that lecture, in 
 which he declared that he was wilhng to join with Mr. Cole in 
 subscribing a Declaration and doctrinal articles. The former 
 is thus introduced : — 
 
 " Though there may be some lesser differences between us, yet we 
 account these following principles a ground of agreement, notwith- 
 standing any past debates, and of encouragement to each other's 
 ministry, being sorry for any misapprehensions of each other's doc- 
 trine, &c. 
 
 Among the doctrinal principles which, says Mr. Williams, " I 
 affirm as my judgment in all my books, and am ready to subscribe 
 with Mr. Cole," are : 
 
 " 1. God has eternally elected a certain definite number of men, 
 whom he will infulliblj/ save bj/ Christ, in that way prescribed by the 
 Gospel. 
 
 " 3. By the ministry of the Gospel, there's a serious offer of pardon 
 and glory, upon the terms'^ of the Gospel, to all that hear it ; and God 
 tliereby requires them to comply with the said terms. 
 
 " 5. It is by the power of the Spirit of Christ, freely exerted, and 
 not by the power oi free-will, that the Gospel becomes effectual for the 
 conversion of any soul to the obedience of faith. 
 
 " 6. When a man believes, yet is not that veryfaitk^ and much less 
 any other work, the matter of that righteousness for which a sinner is 
 justified, that is, entitled to pardon, to acceptance as righteous, and to 
 
 * Works, vol. iv. p. 517. t lb. p. 522. 
 
90 
 
 eternal glory before God : and it is the imputed righteousness of Christ 
 alone, for which the Gospel gives the believer a right to these and all 
 savino- blessings, who in this respect is justified by Christ's righteousness 
 alone. By both this and the 5tli head, it appears that all boasting is 
 excluded, and we are saved by free grace. 
 
 " 8. God has freely promised, that all whom he predestinated to sal- 
 vation, shall not only savingly believe, but that he, by his power, will 
 preserve them from a total or a final apostaci/. 
 
 " 10. The law of innocency, or the moral law, is so in force still, as 
 that every precept thereof constitutes duty, even to the believer ; 
 every breach thereof is a sin deserving death ; and this law binds 
 death, by its curse, on every unbeliever ; and the righteousness for or 
 by which we are justified before God, is a righteousness (at least) 
 adequate to that law, which is Christ's alone righteousness ; and this 
 is so imputed to the believer, as that God deals judicially with him 
 according thereto."* 
 
 In the same postscript, quoting the answer in the Assembly's 
 Catechism, on Justification, he calls it " our Catechism."t 
 
 The following contains a positive statement of their agreeing 
 with the Orthodox on this great doctrine : 
 
 " I pity the weakness of these men, who, when their noise is about 
 Justification, tell the world we are therein Amyraldians ; whereas Amy- 
 raldus was so exactly Calvinistical in this point, that the last Synod of 
 Charenton appointed him to defend the Protestant doctrine of justifi- 
 cation against MiUeliere — (yea, Arminius was professedly so too :) but 
 his offending notions respected the Divine will, decrees, subjective 
 grace, and the extent of Christ's death. Though the last was not 
 condemned by the French Church, and is ow^ned by Buvenant, Usher, 
 &c. Nay, see Mr. Lobb, in his Glory of Free Grace, pp. 66, 67, 
 proving, that the salvation of every man is become possible by Christ's satis- 
 fying divine justice by his death.^l 
 
 The reader will, from these extracts, be able to judge 
 whether the Presbyterians were, at this time, Arminians. 
 
 We are now approaching the termination of this unhappy 
 controversy. The Congregational ministers at length took 
 measures to clear themselves from those erroneous opinions 
 of which their body had been long suspected, and perhaps a 
 few individuals among them too justly accused. Toward the 
 
 • Works, vol. iv. pp. 534—538. + lb. p. 544. t lb. p. 548. 
 
91 
 
 end of 1698^ they published a declaration against Antinomian 
 errors ; and in 1699, Dr. Williams published " An End to 
 Discord ; wherein is demonstrated, that no Doctrinal Contro- 
 versy remains between the Presbyterian and Congregational 
 Ministers, fit to justify longer Divisions : with a true Account 
 of Socinianisra, as to the Satisfaction of Christ." The fol- 
 lowing is the title of the fourth chapter : " It is made evident, 
 that this Declaration of our Brethren, taken altogether, and 
 examined with due Charity and Candour, ought to be acknow- 
 ledged a sufficient Vindication of the Approvers thereof from 
 all hurtful Antinomian Errors." It thus concludes : " If the 
 reader consult these places, and compare with them our State 
 of Truth and Error, in the first chapter, he cannot but rejoice 
 in our brethren's testimony against Antinomianism." The 
 next chapter gives a particular account of Socinian errors 
 concerning Christ's Satisfaction, and as to Justification, (these 
 being the only points objected against the United Ministers;) 
 and also of Limborch's and some other Arminian errors 
 about these two articles, which the writer, in the name of the 
 Presbyterian brethren, proceeds to " renounce." 
 
 " Finding our Brethren suggest, in the Preface to this Declaration, 
 that, after all we have said, yet still we ought to do more to discharge 
 ourselves from hurtful errors about Christ's Satisfaction, and our 
 Justification ; we shall, to promote peace, renounce several more 
 errors about those two doctrines wherein we are suspected, and tell 
 them what we think to be truths. 
 
 " Error 1. Punitive justice against sin is no property of God, but 
 only an effect of his will, and therefore there was no need of any 
 satisfaction to be made by Christ for sin ; nor is it less than ridiculous 
 to say, God was at once just as well as inerciful, in bringing about our 
 salvation by Christ. 
 
 " Truth. God is essentially just, and so jealous for the honour of 
 his law, when enacted, and his government, that sin must not go 
 unpunished ; and, therefore, if sinners be saved from the punishments 
 threatened by the violated law, for Christ their Mediator's sake, it 
 was necessarif that he made satisfaction to punitive justice, by enduring 
 the penal effects of God's wrath. 
 
 " Error 2. Jesus Christ is not the true eternal most high God, of the 
 same substance, authority, and power with the Father. 
 
92 
 
 " Truth. Jesus Christ is the true eternal 7nost high God, of tlie 
 same substance, authority, and power with the Father ; and in time 
 assumed tlie liuman nature, and remaineth God -Man for ever- 
 more, 
 
 ''Note. This article is inserted because the value of Christ's obe- 
 dience and death, for satisfaction and 7iierit, was derived from the 
 dignity of Christ's person as God ; and, therefore, though the 
 Socinians faintly argue that, if Christ were the eternal God, it would 
 not render his death a satisfaction, yet it is evident tlieir great concern 
 in denying Christ's satisfaction, is to prevent the unanswerable 
 argument this would be for his Deity. The like is also to be seen by 
 their notion of the Lord's supper * 
 
 " Error 6. Christ was not an high-priest while on earth, nor was 
 his blood offered by him to God ; but it was himself was offered, and 
 tliat not on the cross, but when he entered into heaven. Yet the 
 death of Christ so far belongs to his priesthood, that he was prepared 
 by his death to become an high-priest, and to offer himself a perfect 
 sacrifice for sin in heaven, neither of which could be if his death had 
 not intervened, 
 
 " Truth. Christ was an high-priest while he was oti earth, and, as 
 such, upon the cross offered up himself, by his bloody death, a perfect 
 sacrifice, whereby his blood was a propitiatory offering at the very 
 time it was shed ; and though, in the virtue thereof, the saints were 
 saved before his incarnation, and Christ for ever intercedeth in 
 heaven, yet the presenting of himelf or it there, makes no additions 
 to the perfection of it as a sacrifice. f 
 
 " Error 8. Redemption, mentioned in the New Testament, signifies 
 no more nor other than a freeing us from the punishment of sin, 
 without any proper price intervening ; &c. 
 
 " Truth. Redemption by the blood of Christ, is, that we are bought 
 by his blood as a proper price, and delivered from the curse of the 
 law, and captivity under sin and Satan, as by a proper ransom paid to 
 the just governor of the world. | 
 
 " Error 15. Christ's sufferings were not a full satisfaction to justice, 
 nor was the price of our redemption fully equivalent to the misery we 
 deserved ; &c, 
 
 " Truth. Though the great mercy of God appeared in his being 
 willing to admit, accept, and provide Christ our Mediator, to make 
 satisfaction for our sins ; yet God our just Governor would have it, 
 that the terms of satisfaction proposed to our Mediator should be 
 such as strict Justice demanded for the honour of his violated law, and 
 securing the ends of his government ; which terms were no lower 
 
 * Dr. Williams's Works, vol, v. p. 43-45. t Ibid. p. 47, 48. i Ibid. 49, 50. 
 
•93 
 
 than that he sliould sufFer what was fully equivalent to the punish- 
 ments ihey, whom he was to redeem, desened to endure ; &c. 
 
 " Error 16. Our faith and regeneration were not merited by Christ. 
 
 " Truth. Considering that our new-birth and faith are the fruits of 
 the Holy Spirit, whom by sin we had expelled, his return to 
 regenerate and make us believers, must be for the sake, and with 
 respect to the ?nerits of Christ, as what vindicated the honour of God, 
 who restored him to us.* 
 
 " We shall also provide against Limborch's, and some other 
 Arminians notion of justification ; though it be none of the jive points 
 which constitute Arminianism, and in the former papers we have 
 opposed each of the said points, in concurrence with our British 
 divines in the synod of Dort.f [This relates to the meaning of faith 
 being imputed for righteousness.] 
 
 " The Socinians argue against Christ's sufferings being a full 
 equivalent to the punishments the sinner deserved, and, on that 
 account, they deny that his sufferings could be a full price of redemp- 
 tion, or a satisfaction ; and well they may, when they call him a mere 
 creature "X [After shewing that Baxter was orthodox and ' Anti-Socinian,' 
 with reference to the satisfaction effected by the death of Christ, the 
 writer says — ]'' I thought this account necessary, not only for the fore- 
 mentioned end, but also that our Agreement, in opposition to Socin- 
 ianism, might not exclude Mr. Baxter, and such as approve of his 
 scheme ; which would add strength to that Heresy, and be injurious 
 to many worthy persons. Nor ought a few words so fully explained 
 be pressed to brand them with that odious title, wh6 could more 
 plausibly fix the same character on persons, from things plainly 
 asserted in the Socinian sense, and subserving their hypothesis."^ 
 
 The Calvinism of the Presbyterians during the period in 
 question is denied in the most positive terms. Mr. Hunter, 
 who admits that " it is a Calvinian system of Christianity 
 which is embodied in the Catechisms issued by the Assembly 
 of Divines ;" asserts, that « fifty years after, Calvinism had 
 nearly, if not entirely, disappeared from the Presbyterian 
 ministers, who had declined from the system of their Cal- 
 vinian fathers into Arminianism." 
 
 " While the Presbyterian ministers, after the Act of Tole- 
 ration, scarcely in any instance carried the orthodoxy of 
 their faith higher than the point of that modification of 
 Arminianism which is sometimes called (after that eminent 
 
 * Dr. Williams's Works, vol. v. p. 55, 56. t lb. p. 58. I lb. p. 75. 
 
 § lb. p. 82. 
 
94 
 
 Presbyterian, Baxter,) Baxterianism, the Independent minis- 
 ters were for the most part Calvinists."* 
 
 " If the Presbyterians were strict Calvinists, how came 
 predestination to be a subject of contention?"! 
 
 It has been already stated, that neither this nor any other 
 of the five points in dispute between Calvinists and Armi- 
 nians was a subject of contention among Presbyterians, or 
 between them and the Independents. No controversy arose 
 on this point, even incidentally, during the warm debate 
 occasioned by the republication of Dr. Crisp's Sermons. I 
 do not, however, assert that, as a body, they were " strict 
 Calvinists," for I believe that, during the latter part of the 
 period in question, they held what is now commonly designated 
 " moderate Calvinism." f They agreed, in general, with the 
 Reformer of Geneva, or, to adopt Mr. Hunter's expression con- 
 cerning the Independent ministers, (which I admit to be accu- 
 rate in reference to them,) the Presbyterian ministers were, 
 " for the most part, Calvinists." Some of them, indeed, were 
 inclined to Baxterianism, but the system advocated by Baxter 
 was little more than a slight modification of Calvinism. In 
 other words, they professed to occupy a middle term between 
 what they regarded, and what these writers repeatedly men- 
 tion as two opposite extremes, Arminianism and Antino- 
 mianism. 
 
 Mr. Cooper boldly asserts that the Presbyterians of this 
 period " had adopted Arminian principles" previously to the. 
 "separation which speedily followed the Union of 1691," and 
 which, according to him, " was occasioned by the Armi- 
 nianism of the Presbyterians, and the ultra-Calvinism or 
 Antinomianism of the Independents." In proof of this asser- 
 tion, he produces a few passages from Calamy's Historical 
 Additions to the Life of Baxter ; the last of which appears to 
 me to prove just the opposite, at least so far as relates to that 
 part of the assertion which regards the Presbyterians. — " In 
 1695 the Dissenters still continued their doctrinal conten- 
 tions ; an attempt was made for re-union among them. There 
 
 • Hist. Dtf. pp. IG, 17. t Hist. pp. 35,40,41, 
 
95 
 
 was an offer, on one side, to renounce Arminianism, if the 
 other would but renounce Antinomianism ; but it did not 
 succeed.* 
 
 Here we have an offer made by the Presbyterian ministers, 
 in 1695, to renounce Arminianism, brought to prove that 
 they " had adopted Arminian principles ;" or, as the learned 
 counsel afterwards expresses it, " had quitted the tenets of 
 Calvin, to embrace those of the Leyden professor." 
 
 But let us hear Mr. Cooper again, speaking, it would 
 appear, of a somewhat later period, though the passage 
 occupies an earlier page in his printed speech — 
 
 " As is well known to all those who have made the history 
 of the Dissenters their study — the Presbyterians, towards the 
 close of the seventeenth century, began to decline from the doc- 
 trine of predestination, and at the beginning of the eighteenth 
 century they had very generally embraced the opposite opinion. 
 This secession from Calvin, and coalition with Arminius, 
 might be shewn by extracts from the sermons and controver- 
 sial tracts of the Presbyterians who flourished during the 
 period that I have mentioned." Mr. Cooper then proceeds to 
 " mention two doctrinal works published by eminent Presby- 
 terian ministers who lived at the close of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury, in both of which the Calvinistic tenets must have been 
 found, had they then been generally recognised by the deno- 
 mination to which those ministers belonged."! The first of 
 these, Dr. Williams's " Gospel Truth stated and vindicated," 
 1692, he tells us, was "written against the opinion of Dr. Crisp, 
 who, from having been a follower of Arminius, had gone into 
 the opposite extreme, and embraced Antinomianism." The 
 reader will be little prepared for the sentence which follows : 
 «' The system of divinity contained in this work is of course 
 Calvinistic ! !" How this fact, which I am not about to dis- 
 pute, will prove that the author had rejected Calvinism and 
 embraced the system of Arminius, is to me inexplicable. 
 
 ♦ Substance of the Speech of C. P. Cooper, Esq. as counsel for the Rev. Charles 
 Wellbeloved, in the suit of the Attorney-General versus Shore, 2d July, 1834. 
 2d edition, 1834, pp. 26, 27. f lb. pp. 24, 25. 
 
96 
 
 That Dr. Daniel Williams was a moderate Calvinist might 
 be proved by numerous extracts from his controversial writings, 
 Sufficient has already been produced to shew this ; but I may 
 quote the propositions which commence the first chapter of 
 his " Gospel Truth stated and vindicated — " Of the State of 
 the Elect before effectual calling." He thus lays down the 
 « Truth : It is certain, from God's decree of election, that 
 the elect shall in time be justified, adopted, and saved in the 
 way God hath appointed;" and the whole meritorious cause 
 and price of justification, adoption, and eternal life, were per- 
 fect when Christ finished the work of satisfaction. Neverthe- 
 less, the elect remain children of wTath, and subject to con- 
 demnation, till they are effectually called by the operation of 
 the Spirit." * 
 
 The other work referred to, is Matthew Henry's Exposition, 
 which Mr. Cooper asserts " is not favourable to Calvin." That 
 this celebrated expositor [was a decided Calvinist, I consider 
 a fact too notorious to require proof; but as it will give me 
 an opportunity of shewing what kind of Calvinist he was, I 
 will introduce a brief extract from his Exposition on John vi. 
 37 : " All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me, and 
 him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast ont ;" which was 
 the first passage that occurred to me on reading Mr. Cooper's 
 statement, and is the only one to which I have referred for 
 the purpose of refuting it. The following is the substance of 
 the author's remarks, expressed in his own words : — 
 
 " There is a certain number of the children of men, whom 
 God chose to be the objects of his "special love — the monu- 
 ments of his mercy. These were given by the Father to 
 Jesus Christ as a possession, lodged in his hands as a trust." 
 
 • In adducing " Testimonies" to this truth, he refers to the Confessions of the 
 Westminster Assembly, and the Congregational Elders at the Savoy, both of whom 
 DC says, " are fully of this mind : — all those whom God hath predestinated to life, 
 he is pleased, in the appointed and accepted time, effectually to call by his word 
 and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace 
 and salvation by Jesus Christ, bjr enlightening their minds," &c. He then quotes 
 a passage from Dr. Owen's Treatise of Justification, which he considers as 
 " c::press," in favour of the same doctrine. 
 
07 
 
 " Everij one may have eternal life, if it be nut his own 
 fault. This Gospel is to be preached — this offer made to all, 
 and none can say, ' It belongs not to me.'" 
 
 This, I may safely assert, was the Calvinism of the English 
 Presbyterians during the period in question, and it is the Cal- 
 vinism of the modern Independents. It recognises the unli- 
 mited value and universal aspect of the sacrificial death of 
 Christ, in connexion with the sovereignty of divine grace, in 
 applying the blessings procured thereby to the hearts of 
 individuals, by the power of the Holy Spirit enabling them 
 to believe and obey the gospel, which thus becomes the 
 gospel of their salvation. As the Holy Spirit is promised, 
 and will be assuredly granted, to all who implore that "perfect 
 gift" from God, in the name of Jesus Christ, the salvation of all 
 is rendered possible, while that of actual believers is certain. 
 
 But we may inquire more particularly, what were the tenets 
 of the Presbyterians concerning " Election or Predestination," 
 " which," says Mr. Cooper, " every body knows, is the great 
 and distinguishing doctrine of Calvin." 
 
 " Against the doctrine of Election," Mr. Hunter tells us, " the 
 whole body of the Presbyterian ministers of this period were 
 set with an united eflfoi't."* He even goes so far as to assert, 
 that " Christianity with, or without. Election, are quite dif- 
 ferent things."! 
 
 " To make Christianity comprehensive in its design, to 
 open its benefits to all, was the distinguishing principle of 
 their conduct, (the writer is referring to the Presbyterians,) 
 strongly contrasting with the narrow character and hopeless- 
 ness of the doctrine of Election." X 
 
 Yet Baxter himself believed in this narrow and hopeless doc- 
 trine. " I confess (he says) that God did eternally elect a certain 
 number of determinate individual persons, to be infallibly 
 justified and saved by Christ in time ; and that these were 
 given to Christ that he should die for them, and for them 
 only, with a special intention of actually justifying and saving 
 them." II He also held, that in a different, though consistent 
 sense, Christ died for the whole human race — " I yield that 
 
 * Hist. Def. p. 34. t lb. p. 4(1. X Mist- P- 2'J. |( Confession of his Fiiilh, p. 98. 
 H 
 
98 
 
 Christ's sacrifice was a sufficient satisfaction for the sins of the 
 whole world, and not for the elect only; and that it was not 
 only the sins of the elect which was the cause of Christ's 
 suffering, but of fallen mankind in general.* 
 
 Such were Baxter's views of particular election on the one 
 hand, and of universal redemption on the other. In the words 
 of Dr. Watts, he believed that " God has elected some which 
 shall certainly be saved : he owned, according to Calvin, the 
 merits of Christ's death to be applied to believers only ; but, 
 also, that all men are in a state capable of salvation." f 
 
 The English Presbyterian Association have elsewhere made 
 a nearer approach to accuracy on this point than Mr. Hunter. 
 " The distinguishing doctrinal opinion," say they, " of the 
 English Presbyterians, at, and for some time after, the Revo- 
 lution, seems to have been a modified Arminianism, frequently 
 called Baxterianism, occupying a middle station between strict 
 Calvinism and Arminianism. It admitted that Christ died for 
 some especially, and for all generally; all possessing the means 
 of salvation. Between Baxterians and Calvinists, the principal 
 Non-conformists may be considered to have been divided," 
 (Hist. p. 18.) In illustration of their view of Baxter's doctrine, 
 they quote these lines fi-om book iii. of Paradise Lost : — 
 
 " Some have I diosen of peculiar grace, 
 Elect above tlie rest ; so is my will. 
 The rest shall hear me call, and oft be warn'd 
 Their sinful state, and to appease betimes 
 The incensed Deity, while offered grace 
 Invites " 
 
 • Confession of his Faitli, p. 220. 
 
 + " The Life, Times, and Correspondence of the Rev. I. Watts, D. D., by the 
 Rev. T. Milner, M. A." 8vo. 1834; a work worthy of the Doctor's name. p. 194. 
 " But" so long," he adds, " as Mr. Baxter owns no salvation, but by the salvation 
 [•sacrifice ?] and merits of Christ, and no application of these without believing, and 
 no true faith but what is the gift of God : hence, there is sufficient ground to believe 
 that his opinions, and his followers, who are generally not so wide as himself, are 
 not so exceeding dangerous as some men think them ; and we may believe them 
 true Christians, though they may differ in many things from the Confession of 
 Faith, and the general opinions of the Reformers and Reformed Churches." 
 
99 
 
 I admit that Baxter held what is here ascribed to him, that 
 Christ died for some especially, yet he held also, that all (at 
 least all to whom the gospel is proposed, or who are within 
 the reach of its offered grace) possess the means of salvation. 
 To adopt the words of his late excellent and lamented 
 biographer — " He believed in election, but not that reproba- 
 tion is its counterpart, as is too commonly represented."* 
 
 But this agrees with the opinion entertained by modern 
 Calvinists, especially those among the Independents, who 
 now occupy about the position taken by Baxter, and long 
 maintained by many succeeding Presbyterians, and in 
 this respect would, perhaps, be more correctly designated 
 Baxterians. They believe in the election of certain indivi- 
 duals to eternal life, and, consequently, in a restricted appli- 
 cation of the work of redemption ; but they do not believe in 
 what may justly be called the horrible decree of absolute 
 reprobation, irrespective of a wilful and determined per- 
 sistence in impenitence and unbelief. 
 
 The reader will permit me to introduce here a passage 
 illustrative of the views now generally held by Congregational 
 Dissenters, from an able work, entitled, " A Defence of Modern 
 Calvinism, containing an Examination of Bishop Tomline's 
 Refutation of Calvinism," 8vo. 1812. The learned author, 
 Dr. Edward Williams, was many years Theological Professor 
 in the Independent College at Rotherham, in Yorkshire. 
 
 Dr. Watts, in the account which he afterwards gives of the English Presbyterians, 
 says, " Their doctrine is generally Calvinistical ; but many of those who are called 
 Presbyterians, have of late years inclined more to Mr. Baxter." p. 196. The date 
 at which this was written does not appear, but it was probably about 1702. 
 
 * Life and Times of Baxter, Vol. II. p. 77. — Mr. Orme, to confirm this, subjoins : 
 — " In the following passage, he seems to express this sentiment very fairly : 
 — ' By all this, it appeareth that election and reprobation go not pari passu, 
 or are not equally ascribed to God ; for in election, God is the cause of the 
 means of salvation by his grace, and of all that truly tendeth to procure it. But 
 on the other side, God is no cause of any sin which is the means and merit of 
 damnation; nor the cause of damnation, but on the supposition of man's sin. So 
 that sin is foreseen in the person decreed to damnation, but not caused, seeing the 
 decree must be denominated from the effect and object. But in election, God 
 decreeth to give us his grace, and be the chief cause of all our holiness ; and doth 
 not elect us to salvation on foresight that we will do his will, or be sanctified by 
 ourselves without him.' " — End of Controversies, p. 162. 
 
 h2 
 
100 
 
 " An unguarded reader of the Refutation might be induced 
 to apply the following language to Calvinists indiscriminately : 
 ' The equally erroneous and baneful doctrine of moral inca- 
 paciti/^ in the extent unhappily adopted by Calvin, tends to 
 produce hopeless melancholy, or hardened profligacy.'* By 
 ' moral incapacity' we are naturally led to understand a disin- 
 clination, a dislike, or a want of good will to what is right or 
 excellent, in a moral sense. Now it would be difficult to find 
 in the writings of Calvin a greater moral incapacity than is 
 expressed in the formularies of the Church of England, espe- 
 cially in the Article ' On Original Sin.' However, neither 
 Calvin, nor any other person, ever expressed it in stronger 
 terms than St. Paul, when he said, that ' the carnal mind is 
 enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, 
 neither indeed can be: so then they that are in the flesh, 
 cannot please God.f ' The natural man receiveth not the 
 things of the Spirit of God : for they are foolishness unto him ; 
 neither can he know them, because they are spiritually dis- 
 cerned.'J Is it possible for language to express a greater 
 degree of ' moral incapacity ?' Indeed, I allow and lament it, 
 that Calvin and some others after him have illegitimately 
 inferred an ' incapacity' beside what is ' moral ;' I mean, an 
 incapacity implied in a supposed decree of reprobation. 
 Nothing, I am persuaded, has more impeded the progress of 
 theological and moral truth, or set the sentiments of real 
 Christians more at variance, than an attempt to establish 
 this unfounded dogma. And to speak my mind impartially, 
 I freely concede to his Lordship that its tendency is ' to pro- 
 duce hopeless melancholy, or hardened profligacy.' But then, 
 his Lordship ought to have known, that very few modern 
 Calvinists ever advance it, and with the gi-eat body of them it 
 is a sentiment utterly exploded."§ 
 
 But it may be said, " if the Presbyterians who witnessed 
 the Revolution of 1688" (to use an expression of Mr. Cooper's || ) 
 were not Arminians, their successors, before the end of the 
 
 • Refut. p. 78. t Honi. viii. 7, 8. | 1 Cor. ii. IJ. 
 
 % Pp. 307, 308 ; see also p. '2C9. |) Substance of Speech, p. 32. 
 
101 
 
 next reign, might have widely departed fi-om ' the Calvinism 
 of the Assembly of Divines.'" Whether the Reformer of 
 Geneva would have " owned them as part of his flock,"* (to 
 borrow phraseology again from Mr. Cooper,) is a circumstance 
 I do not pretend to determine. Certain I am they were 
 generally, and for the most part, moderate Calvinists. 
 
 I shall now produce a passage from " A Defence of the 
 Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England," contain- 
 ing also an attack on Dissenters, by Dr. William Nichols, 
 published in 1715 : — " If ive consider the different phrase and 
 method of their prayers, some being Calvinistical, others Ar- 
 minian ; though we could think the Holy Spirit would descend 
 to the singularities of these theologists, yet ive must not charge 
 him with such contrarieties and clashings as they are guilty 
 of." The learned James Peirce, in his Vindication of the 
 Dissenters, pubhshed in answer to the work from which the 
 above is taken, thus animadverts on this vituperative passage: 
 " Who, I pray, are those Arminians among us ? Our author, 
 perhaps, here meant the Quakers, or some of the Anabaptists. 
 But if we will speak the truth, the Arminians themselves are 
 hardly Arminians in offering up their prayers to God."f 
 
 Can any person suppose for a moment, after reading this 
 passage, that the Presbyterians, any more than the Independ- 
 ents, or those called " Particular Baptists," were at that time 
 Arminians ? 
 
 But to place the matter beyond the possibiHty of doubt, I 
 will quote a passage from Dr. Calamy's " Brief but True 
 Account of the Protestant Dissenters in England," first printed 
 at the end of a sermon, published in 1717 : — 
 
 "But notwithstanding these, and some other such differences 
 among themselves [on the mode of Church Government and 
 Baptism] they generally agree in the doctrinal Articles of the 
 Church of England, (which they subscribe,) the Confession of 
 Faith, and larger and smaller Catechisms, compiled by the 
 Assembly of Divines at JVestminster, and the judgment of 
 the British Divines at the Synod of Dort^ about the Quiii- 
 quarticular Controversies." p. 44. 
 
 ♦ Substance of Speech, p. 27. t 2d Ed. collected, 1718, p. 401, 
 
102 
 
 We have seen how nearly Baxter's views coincided with 
 what, in a passage already quoted (p. 12, ante) he calls the 
 " moderation of the Synod of Dort," with whose sentiments and 
 decisions he almost entirely concurred. Dr. Calamy also, in 
 the preface to a sermon on Rom. ix. 16, preached at the 
 Merchants' Lecture at Salter's Hall, October 20, 1702, and 
 published under the title — " Divine Mercy exalted ; or. Free 
 Grace in its glory ;" thus expresses the same accordance : 
 
 " Some have given themselves a liberty to reflect on their brethren 
 who adhere to the suffrage of the British divines in the Synod of 
 Dort, as not duly concerned for the honour of the grace of God in 
 the salvation of sinners. One thing I aimed at in choosing this sub- 
 ject, was to prove that censure groundless. 'Tis true, I have consi- 
 dered divine grace as actually discovering itself to sinners, rather than 
 as purposed in the decree. But he that would see that discussed, and 
 the doctrine of ■Particular Election maintained, consistently with a 
 general love of God to the world, would do well to consult the learned 
 and peaceable Bishop Davenant's animadversions upon Hoard's 
 Treatise of God's Love to Mankind ; a book which is not valued 
 according to its worth, though one would think it were therefore the 
 more to be regarded in these points, because the worthy author was 
 so considerable a member of the forementioned Synod, in which the 
 controversy about Grace and Free Will was so distinctly debated."* 
 
 One of the earliest avowed Arminians among the Presby- 
 terians was Mr., afterwards the celebrated Dr., George Benson, 
 of whom the following account is derived from an authentic 
 source : — He was ordained at Abingdon, Berks, March 27 th, 
 1723, by Dr. Calamy, and five other ministers, and continued 
 there seven years. In early life, he had been instructed in 
 those principles that are usually termed Calvinistical, and 
 preached them during the first years of his ministry. While 
 at Abingdon he published three practical discourses, addressed 
 to young persons, which were well received. These, however, 
 on account of their evangelical tendency, he afterwards caused 
 to be suppressed. He continued at Abingdon till 1729, when 
 he was obliged to leave that place on account of the Arminian 
 sentiments he had lately embraced, which were very generally 
 disapproved by his people.f He removed to London, and 
 accepted an invitation (strange to say!) to succeed, at King 
 
 • Preface, pp. iii. iv. 
 t Hist, of Dissenting Churches in London, vol. i. p. 114. 
 
103 
 
 John's Court, Southwark, Mr. James Matthews, who died the 
 precedmg year, of whom we are informed that " he was a 
 plain and zealous preacher of Jesus Christ, and salvation by 
 him alone ; a hearty Calvinist, and a serious Christian." * Ar- 
 minianism, however, did not at this period prevail in London, 
 where, a few years before, a memorable circumstance occurred. 
 Mr. Henry Read, about 1721, became assistant to Mr. 
 Daniel Wilcox, minister of a Presbyterian congregation in 
 Monkwell-street ; but, in 1723, Mr. Wilcox, being a zealous 
 Calvinist, and judging Mr. Read's discourses to be too much 
 in the Arminian strain, dismissed him from that situation by 
 his own authority, without consulting his church, which occa- 
 sioned some of his hearers to leave him.f 
 
 The reader might suppose, from the manner in which the 
 writers now under review speak of Dr. Williams and his Pres- 
 byterian brethren, who, after his expulsion from Pinner's-hall 
 withdrew with him, and founded a new lecture at Salters' Hall, 
 that the lecture there established would have assumed a de- 
 cidedly heterodox character, and that all its preachers, from a 
 very early period, would have been ultra-Baxterians, and some of 
 them decided Arminians. Such, however, was not the fact. They 
 were, it is true, invariably selected from the Presbyterian mi- 
 nisters of London ; and biographical accounts of most of them 
 may be found in Mr. Walter Wilson's interesting and valuable 
 "History and Antiquities of Dissenting Churches and Meeting- 
 houses in London," published in four volumes, 1808-1814. To 
 this work I confidently appeal, for the purpose of shewing that 
 they were, for the most part, and even beyond the period 
 in question, almost exclusively moderate Calvinists. I will 
 introduce two brief quotations from the account Mr. Wilson 
 has given of the chapel in Carter-lane, Doctors' Commons, 
 which has lately become the place of meeting for a decidedly 
 Unitarian congregation -4 — "This church, like those of the 
 Presbyterian denomination in general, was constituted upon 
 principles strictly Calvinistical, and the pastors prior to Mr. 
 Newman were moderate Calvinists." § In the account which 
 
 * Hist. Diss. Ch. vol. iv. pp. 339, 340. t Ibid. p. 313. 
 
 : See the Christ. Ref, for J:in. 1835. p. 61. ^ Hist. Diss. Ch. Vol. ii. p. 107. 
 
104 
 
 Mr. Wilson gives of Dr. Wright, who became pastor in 1708, 
 and was afterwards chosen one of the lecturers at Salters'-hall, 
 we are informed that his " religious sentiments w6re in no 
 extreme. He was zealous for the Presbyterian form of church 
 government, and in doctrinal sentiment a moderate Calvinist."* 
 I have the means of accurate information concerning the 
 doctrinal opinions of the lecturers in 1731, and out of six it 
 will appear that even at that remote period not one was 
 reputed an Arminian. The authority to which I refer is a MS. 
 entitled " A View of the Dissenting Interest in London, of 
 the Presbyterian and Independent Denominations, from 1695 
 to December 25th, 1731." It was drawn up by a layman, 
 who, previously to his coming to London, had been a mem- 
 ber of the church under Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Doddridge at 
 Northampton, f After having given an account of the two 
 denominations together, he proceeds to give a view of them 
 separately, and arranges the Presbyterian ministers under 
 three classes, which he thus describes : 1st, " deemed Calvinists, 
 that is, such as agree with the Assembly's Catechism — 2d, 
 accounted Arminians, or [such as are far gone that way, by 
 which are meant such as are against particular election and 
 redemption, original sin, at least the imputation of it ; for the 
 power of man's will in opposition to efficacious grace, and for 
 justification by sincere obedience in the room of Christ's 
 righteousness, &c. — 3d, of the middle way, partly Arminians 
 and partly Calvinists, or that sometimes preach one doctrine, 
 and sometimes look towards the other." The first list con- 
 tains nineteen names ; the second, thirteen ; the third, twelve. 
 Of the lecturers at Salters'-hall at that time, (Drs. Harris, 
 Earle, Grosvenor and Wright, Messrs. Bayes and Newman,§) 
 
 *Hist. Diss. Churches, Vol. ii. p. 143. 
 
 t The original MS. was in the possession of the late Rev. Samuel Palmer, of 
 Hackney. 1 quote from a copy made by Mr. Walter Wilson, in his own hand- 
 writing, which he has kindly permitted to use. 
 
 i Mr. Thomas Newman, who became assistant to Dr. Wright in 1718, and was 
 afterwards pastor till his death in 1 758, was probably the first Dissenting minister who 
 defended the doctrine generally indicated by the phrase, the innocence nf mental error, 
 which hr-.d been broached in this country by Dr. Sykes, a clergyman of the Church 
 of England, in 17 15. This notion Mr. Wilson justly bligmatjzes as "most pernicious." 
 
105 
 
 the names of the two first and two last are found in the list 
 containing the Calvinists ; those of Drs. Grosvenor and Wright 
 are among the Baxterians or intermediate class. 
 
 Of the strain of preaching which prevailed in this lecture, 
 a good specimen may be found in two sermons preached 
 there in Nov. 1727, by Mr. John Newman, and published at 
 the request of the ministers, under this title, "The Impor- 
 tance of Knowing Jesus Christ, and him Crucified, both to 
 Ministers and People," from 1 Cor. ii. 2. These excellent 
 and evangelical discourses clearly shew, that at that time 
 there had been no considerable doctrinal relaxation among 
 the leading Presbyterian divines of the metropolis. 
 
 Of the ministers who were chosen at Pinner's Hall to 
 supply the vacancies occasioned by the removal of the four 
 who withdrew in 1694, (Dr. Bates, Mr. Howe, Mr. Alsop, 
 and Mr. Williams,) one was Mr. Timothy Cruso, pastor of a 
 Presbyterian church near Aldgate, of which Dr. Lardner was 
 afterwards one of the ministers.* Mr. Walter Wilson has made 
 
 " Such a supposition (he adds) goes directly to destroy the importance of divine 
 truth, and places the infidel upon a level with the]believer." I beg to refer the reader 
 to his judicious remarks, pp. 152, 153, and also to an able discourse by Dr. Ward- 
 law, of Glasgow, entitled " Man Responsible for his Belief," occasioned by Lord 
 Brougham's Inaugural Discourse on his installation as Lord Rector of the 
 University of Glasgow in 1825. I need scarcely add, after what has been already 
 produced, that the Presbyterians, of the period in question, did not admit " the 
 innocence" of what the English Presbyterian Association call " involuntary error." 
 Hist. p. 50. Of the immediate successor of Mr. Newman, Rev. Edward Pickard, 
 who is probably entitled to the honour of being the principal founder of that ex- 
 cellent charity, the Orphan Working School, in the City Road, London, (established 
 in 1758, and, I believe, the first institution of the kind in England,) much has 
 lately been said in discussions among the governors of that institution. I will 
 give one passage from Mr. Wilson's account of him : " Though Mr. Pickard, in 
 his views of some doctrines of Christianity, is known to have followed the tenets 
 of Arius, he is, nevertheless, to be ranked among the high Arians. We have 
 authority for saying, that he was wont to express himself in terms of strong disap- 
 probation of the writings of Dr. Priestley, and other Socinians, who have reduced 
 our Lord to the level of a mere man, and otherwise obscured the doctrines of the 
 gospel," p. 159. For some farther particulars concerning the original and long- 
 continued orthodoxy of this Presbyterian congregation, I may refer to a pamphlet 
 published several years ago by the Rev. John Hoppus, now Professor of Logic in 
 the University of London. The present congregation cannot claim any right, by 
 succession or descent, to occupy this chapel, whatever legal title they may possess. 
 * Wilson's Diss. Churches, vol. ii. p. 251. 
 
106 
 
 a slight mistake, in stating that the four were " selected 
 from the Independent denomination." He had previously 
 given an account of Mr. Cruso, in connexion with the his- 
 tory of the church near Aldgate, in which we are informed 
 that, " he possessed a sound mind and a steady judgment in 
 the great doctrines of the gospel, which he explained with 
 clearness and precision, and enforced with a becoming so- 
 lemnity. His religious sentiments harmonized entirely with 
 those of the assembly of divines at Westminster, and, for the 
 doctrines contained in their celebrated Confession, he was a 
 strenuous and able advocate. From a principle of con- 
 science, he sided with the Nonconformists ; but he inculcated 
 love and forbearance among Christians of all denominations.* 
 Mr. Matthew Mead, who, in 1697, preached a sermon (after- 
 wards printed) upon the death of this excellent man, who 
 appears to have been a powerful and eloquent preacher, speaks 
 of him in these terms — " How zealous was he for Christ ! 
 how sound in the faith ! how apt to teach ! He told me, the 
 day before he died, ' That he had a firm confidence of hope 
 in the infinite righteousness of Jesus Christ.' "f 
 
 The reader has already been apprised that the two lectures 
 remained distinct, and were both carried on for many years. 
 That at Salters' Hall, on account of the great falling off in 
 attendance, was dropped about 1794. The one carried on at 
 Pinner's Hall is still continued, and is now preached at New 
 Broad-street, the ancient meeting-house in which it was com- 
 menced, — a venerable building, which, if now standing, might 
 be almost regarded as the cathedral of Nonconformity, — having 
 been taken down. But, though the present lecturers, (Drs. Pye 
 Smith, Joseph Fletcher, and H. F. Burder, Messrs. Binney, 
 John and George Clayton,) are among the most learned and 
 popular ministers, it is not attended as formerly by a large con- 
 gregation, consisting chiefly of persons belonging to the most 
 respectable and opulent families among the Dissenters of the 
 metropolis. Yet the cause of Nonconformity, though deprived 
 of the support and countenance which it formerly received 
 from a large portion of the most wealthy citizens, flourishes 
 
 • Wilson's Diss. Chs. vol. i. pp. 58, 59. t Ibid. pp. 01, 02. 
 
107 
 
 by its native vigour. The great principles of liberty and truth, 
 on which it is founded, being permanent, have, amid numerous 
 external changes, remained immoveable, and are destined, we 
 doubt not, to obtain, ere long, universal prevalence. 
 
 The lecture was originally supported by the subscriptions 
 of the most eminent merchants among the Dissenters, and 
 was hence called the Merchants' Lecture. A list of the 
 lecturers may be seen in Mr. Wilson's History, vol. ii. 
 pp. 252-254. There are some important charitable trust 
 funds, which the donors have left to be managed and adminis- 
 tered by the lecturers for the time being. 
 
 I may here introduce a brief notice of one distinguished 
 individual among the four ministers who accompanied Dr. Wil- 
 liams to Salters' Hall — John Howe. Dr. Calamy states, that 
 " he had a considerable hand in drawing up the Heads of 
 Agreement,"* and Mr. Orme tells us, that he was " the leading 
 manager" on that occasion, f Dr. Watts, who was competent 
 to form a judgment, and was personally acquainted with him, 
 commences an ode inscribed to him in 1704, with these words, 
 which scarcely need the plea of poetical exaggeration to justify 
 them : — 
 
 " Great man, permit the muse to climb, 
 And seat her at thy feet." 
 
 In another line the poet has accurately described the dis- 
 tinguishing quality of his mind and character : — 
 " Howe hath an ample orb of soul." 
 
 This admirable person, himself a truly catholic Christian, 
 and of the most comprehensive charity, had been for many 
 years an earnest advocate for harmony and concord among 
 all the disciples of a common Master, the professors of 
 a religion, of which he regarded love as the pervading 
 spirit, the animating soul, the essential principle. He deeply 
 lamented that the Christian church, instead of presenting to 
 the world the inviting aspect of a coherent and united whole, 
 should exhibit a fractional and divided appearance, broken 
 into separate, and minute portions. His lofty philosophical 
 
 * Life of Howe, p. 181. t Life and Times of Baxter, vol. i. p. 492. 
 
108 
 
 genius, and calm placid temperament, raised him above the 
 element of storms, while the ardour of his devotional feelings 
 rendered him familiar with the objects of an higher sphere. 
 The views which he took of every subject which engaged his 
 attention were consequently large and comprehensive, and the 
 sentiments he entertained partook of the habitual elevation of 
 his mind and character. From the tranquil and serene region 
 in which he dwelt, he looked down with pity, not unmingled 
 with more severe emotion, on the eager combatants who occu- 
 pied the arena of theological debate below. In this respect 
 he presented a striking contrast to Baxter, whom, in the 
 general features of his character, he closely resembled. That 
 extraordinary man, with all his horror of sects and divisions, 
 had, it must be confessed, probably from some infirmity of 
 natural temper, or morbid physical affection, a disputatious 
 propensity, from which Howe was entirely free, though he also 
 too often encumbered the pages of his admirable writings with 
 metaphysical subtleties, and scholastic niceties. They both, 
 however, agreed in refusing to identify themselves with any 
 particular section of the Christian Church, and to both might 
 be justly applied the words of Howe, in reference to another 
 excellent divine, who, after being silenced by the Act of Uni- 
 formity, was occupied and useful, " not in servitig a party ^ a 
 thing too mean and little to be ever thought of by him without 
 disdain ; but in pressing the great and agreed things that belong 
 to serious, livitig religion." * To Howe also might be applied 
 what he says of the same person : " he liked not to discom- 
 pose his mind by busy agitations with others, about that truth 
 which he found himself in a pleasant secure possession of, nor 
 to contend concerning that which he had not found it neces- 
 sary to contend for; he declined controversy, not from ina- 
 bility, but dislike." f His natural disposition was eminently 
 sweet, benign, and gentle; his whole deportment marked 
 by dignified courtesy, suited to attract love and conciliate 
 esteem, while his intellectual endowments, of the highest 
 order, were fitted to command veneration and inspire awe. 
 
 » Funeral Sermon for Rev. Kichard Fairclough, 1682, p. .iS. f 'b. p- ■^-- ' 
 
109 
 
 His person ami character formed, in short, one of the rare 
 exceptions to the truth of that aphorism : 
 
 " Non bene conveniunt, nee in unti sede morantur 
 Majestas et Amor." 
 
 He was, from 1662, and continued to the last, what I may 
 call an unwilling Nonconformist to the national form of pro- 
 fessing the Christian religion. Placed, by circumstances over 
 which he could exercise no control, among those who felt 
 obliged by a sense of duty to stand aloof from the Church by 
 law established, he could not with any propriety be called a 
 separatist, and was far remote from being a schismatic or 
 sectarian. He was driven, by the unwarranted requirements 
 and unjust impositions of human law, to take his lot with 
 those who refused solemnly to declare their " full assent and 
 consent to all and every thing contained in and prescribed by 
 the book of Common Prayer." Thus was he compelled, (with 
 several hundreds besides,) by the force of conscientious con- 
 viction, and a sacred regard to religious principle, to assume 
 a position and occupy a situation which he exceedingly dis- 
 liked ; being placed in that predicament by no act and for no 
 fault of his own, but solely by the act of other parties ; an act 
 purporting, indeed, to be authoritative, being that of the legis- 
 lature of his country, but, in his judgment, one of usurpation, 
 and invading the prerogative of a higher tribunal, by claiming 
 to exercise control over conscience. 
 
 But while he counted Nonconformity an act, or rather a 
 state, rendered imperative by a paramount obligation to the 
 Supreme Ruler, the only Lord of conscience, he earnestly 
 longed, and for many years eagerly sought, though in vain, for 
 such an abatement in the terms of compliance, and such an 
 extension of the limits prescribed to the " National Church," 
 as might have embraced a large portion of his nonconforming 
 brethren, like-minded with himself. He was also an advocate 
 for occasional communion with that church, which he recom- 
 mended by his own practice. Some years, however, before his 
 death, (in 1705,) it appears he abandoned all farther expecta- 
 tion of seeing this desirable consummation accomplished. He 
 
110 
 
 preached a sermon, on the day of thanksgiving for the Happy 
 Return of King Wilham, on the restoration of peace, Decem- 
 ber 2, 1697, which he pubhshed, with a dedication to Lord 
 Haversham;* (who, it appears, was then connected with the 
 Dissenters, though I beUeve he afterwards left them,) in which 
 he says : 
 
 " I reckon your lordship is so much taken up with the great tilings 
 of religion, as to be less taken with the adventitious things men 
 have thought fit to affix to it. I do not more emulate your lordship 
 in anything, than a disdain of bigotry ; nor more honour anything I 
 discern in you, than true Catholicism. And recounting what things 
 and persons do truly belong to a church, I believe your lordship is not 
 professedly of a larger cliurch, as counting it too large for you, but 
 too narrow, and that you affect not to be of a self-distinguished 
 party." He concludes by avowing " the agreeableness of such sen- 
 timents to his own mind and spirit." 
 
 He pathetically laments tlie want of mutual love among Christians, 
 and deplores " that breaches should be kept open by trifles and unac- 
 countable things, of which no man of sense can pretend to give an 
 account. That there is strife, too manifestly not from the love of 
 truth, whereof not one hair needs be lost, (nor of any other valuable 
 thing,) but merely from the love of strife ; when, as to the most mate- 
 rial and important truths, men are agreed, but would seem to disagree ; 
 they mean the same things, but impute to one another a different mean- 
 ing, and pretend to know the other's mind better than themselves, 
 that on that pretence they may quarrel with them ! All this looks 
 fatally ; and our unjust angers at one another, are too expressive of 
 God's just anger with us all; that his good Spirit, that Spirit of love, 
 peace, kindness, benignity, is so notoriously resisted, vexed, grieved, 
 and despited by us. And the consequences are IxkaXy, for some time, 
 to be very dismal ; though when God hath proceeded in a way of 
 punitive animadversion, so far as he shall judge necessary for the 
 vindication of his own name, and the honour of our religion, so scan- 
 dalously misrepresented to the world, it will be easy to him, by one 
 victorious effort of tliat Spirit, to reduce the Cliristian church to its 
 original genuine temper, and make it shine again in its own native 
 light and lustre. But, in the mean time, I cannot see that there is 
 greater need of an over-pouring influence of the Holy Ghost, to draw 
 men into union with Christ, and thereby to bring back apostate souls 
 
 • To the Sermon is prefixed " Dr. Bates's Congratulatory Speech to the King, 
 November 22d, in the name of the Dissenting Ministers in and about London." 
 It does not appear whetlicr the Presbyterians and Inih-pendents united in this 
 address, but I consider it higlily probable that such was the fact. 
 
Ill 
 
 to God, or to work in them faith and repentance, than to bring them 
 into union upon Christian terms with one another ; or that the love of 
 this world, or any the most ignominious sensual lust or vice, (drunk- 
 enness, gluttony, or any other,) are more hardly or more rarely 
 overcome, than the envy, wrath, malice, which Christians, ordinarily, 
 are not at all shy of expressing toward one another. I speak upon 
 some experience, lamenting that, having this occasion, (which sense 
 of duty will not let me balk,) I have also so much cause, to mention 
 that foregoing observation. For I cannot forget, that some time dis- 
 coursing with some very noted persons about the business of union 
 among Christians, it hath been freely granted me, that there was not 
 so much as a principle left, (among those the discourse had reference 
 to,) upon which to disagree. And yet the same fixed aversion to 
 union continued as before ; as a plain proof, that they were not prin- 
 ciples, but ends, we were still to differ for. In this case, what but the 
 power of an Almighty Spirit can overcome ? 
 
 " Nor is it mere peace that is to be aimed at, hut free, mutual. Christ- 
 ian communion with such as do all hold the head, Christ. And whatso- 
 ever mistake in judgment, or obliquity in practice, can consist with 
 holding the Head, ought to consist also with being of the same Christ- 
 ian communion ; not the same locally, which is] impossible ; but the 
 same occasionally, as any providence invites at this or that time, and 
 mentally, in heart and spirit, at all times. And, indeed, there is not a 
 difference to be found amongst them that hold the Head, but must be 
 so minute, that it cannot be a jiretence for refusing ^communion. 
 
 To profess want of charity in excuse, [for not taking into communion 
 those whom the Lord has received,] is to excuse a fault by a wickedness. 
 It is to usurp Christ's judgment-seat, and invade his office, Rom. xiv. 
 4, 10. Therefore, wheresoever there is any such case to be found, 
 that, let a man be never so sound in the faith, never so orthodox, let 
 him be in all things else never so regular through his whole con- 
 versation, if he do not submit to some doubtful thing, thought, 
 perhaps, a matter of indifferency on the one side, and unlawful on the 
 other ; this person must be excluded Christian communion, for no 
 other known pretence, but only that he presumed to doubt some- 
 what in the imposed terms : — How will this be justified at Christ's 
 tribunal ! 
 
 " Nor yet do I look upon this proneness to innovate and devise 
 other terms of Christian communion than Christ hath himself ap- 
 pointed, as the peculiar character of a party ; but as a symptom of the 
 diseased state of the Christian church, too plainly appearing in all 
 parties ; as I also reckon it too low and narrow a design to aim at a 
 oneness of communion among Christians of this and that single i)arty and 
 persuasion. Nothing in this kind can be a design worthy of a 
 Christian, or suitable to the Spirit of Christ, but to have Christian 
 
\\'2 
 
 communion extended and limited according to the extent and limits 
 of visibli/ serious and vital Christianity. So far as a discrimination can, 
 and, according to Christ's rules, (not our own unbounded fancies,) 
 ouglit to be made, any serious living Christian, of whatsoever party or 
 denomination, I ought to communicate with as such, and with only such. 
 For living Christians to sever from one another, or to mingle with the 
 dead, is an equal transgression. 
 
 " To sum up all, when once we shall have learned to distinguish 
 between the Essentials of Christianity and accidental appendages, and 
 between accidents of Christ's appointing and of our devising, and to 
 dread affixing of our own devices to so sacred an institution : much 
 more when [since ?] every truth or duty contained in the Bible cannot 
 be counted essential or necessary, when we shall have learned not 
 only not to add inventions of our oAvn to that sacred frame, but much 
 more not to presume to insert them into the order of Essentials or Neces- 
 saries, and treat men as no Christians for wanting them ; when the 
 Gospel shall have its liberty to the utmost ends of the earth ; when 
 the regenerating Spirit shall go forth with it, and propagate a divine 
 and God-like nature every where among men ; when regeneration 
 shall be understood to signify the communicating of such a nature, 
 and such dispositions to men : when the weight of such words comes 
 to be apprehended, [He that hateth his brother ahideth in death, 1 John 2 ;] 
 when to be born of God ceases to signify, with us, being proselyted 
 to this or that church formed and distinguished by human device ; 
 when religious pretences cease to serve political purposes ; when the 
 interest of a party ceases to weigh more with us than the M'hole 
 Christian interest ; when sincerity shall be thought the noblest em- 
 bellishment of a Christian ; when the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, &c. 
 Isa. xi. 6 — 9; — then will our peace be as a river,'' &c. pp. 19 — 24. 
 
 The reader will easily perceive some of the particular 
 references in these extracts. But let it not be supposed that 
 there were none of the Independent ministers who sympa- 
 thised in these catholic and truly Christian sentiments. There 
 were no doubt several, though their opinion might be over- 
 ruled by a majority. We know that there was one, Mr. Mat- 
 thew Mead, who was the intimate fi-iend of Howe, and for 
 whom, '\n October, 1699, he preached a funeral sermon, after- 
 wards published, in which he thus refers to his friend's efforts 
 in the same cause: — 
 
 " His judgment, in reference to matters of church order, was for 
 Union and Communion of all visible Christians, viz. of such as did 
 
no 
 
 visibly hold the Head, as to the priiici])al oredenda and agenda of 
 Christianity ; tlie great things belonging to the faith and practice of a 
 Christian, so as nothing be made necessary to Christian communion, 
 but what Christ hath made necessary ; or what is indeed necessary to 
 one's being a Christian. What he publicly essayed to this purpose, the 
 world knows ; and many more private endeavourings and strugglings 
 of his for such an Union, I have not been unacquainted with ; the 
 unsuccessfulness of which endeavours, he said, not long before his 
 last confinement, ' he thought would break his heart ;' — he having 
 openly, among divers persons, and with great earnestness, some time 
 before, expressed his consent to some Proposals, which, if the jiarties 
 concerned had agreed in the desire of the thing itself, must un- 
 avoidably have inferred such an Union, without prejudice to their 
 principles ; and on such terms, as must have extended it much 
 further, else it had signified little. But this must be effected, as is 
 too apparent, not by mere human endeavour, but by an Almighty 
 Spirit poured forth, which (after we have suffered a ichile,) shall 
 KaraQT'taai, put US into joint, and make every joint know its place in 
 the body, 1 Pet. v. 10 ; shall conquer private interests and inclina- 
 tions, and overawe men's hearts by the authority of the divine law, 
 which now, how express soever it is, little availeth against such 
 prepossessions. Till then, Christianity will be (among us) a lan- 
 guishing, withering thing. When the season comes, of such an 
 eff'usion of the Spirit from on high, there will be no parties : and amidst 
 the wilderness desolation that cannot but be till that season comes, 
 it matters little, and signifies to me scarce one straw, wliat party of 
 us is uppermost."* 
 
 Thus it appears that Howe agreed with Baxter in his views 
 of catholic and comprehensive church communion ; but that 
 neither of them were advocates for promiscuous and indiscri- 
 minate admission to the most sacred ordinances of Chris- 
 tianity, is also sufficiently apparent. From the extracts just 
 given, let the reader judge whether Howe would have deemed 
 suitable for communion with the church, as visible, serious, 
 living Christians, persons who not only deny that regenerating 
 influence, of the necessity of which he speaks so strongly, but 
 
 * Pp. 54 — 56. Among the sayings of Mr. Mead, in his last ilhiess, Mr. Howe 
 mentions, ftiat he expected to be saved only by the righteousness of Christ imputed to 
 him, and adds, " tho' he well understood, as I had sufficient reason to know, that 
 Christ's righteousness is never imputed to any, but where, if the subject be 
 capable, there is an inherent righteousness also, that is no cause of our salvation, 
 but the cliaracler of the saved."— pp. 57, 58, 
 1 
 
114 
 
 even the personality of the " Almighty Spirit," by whom alone 
 that influence is exerted. By the phrase, those who " hold 
 the head,'' borrowed from Coloss. ii. 19, he evidently meant 
 those who hold the substantial and vital articles of the Chris- 
 tian faith, which enter into the very essence of our religion, 
 and which he calls essentials or necessaries. Among these, 
 there can be no doubt that he placed the doctrine of the 
 Trinity, and redemption by the sacrificial death of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, as many passages in his writings clearly shew. 
 In 1693, soon after the lamentable contention began, he 
 preached two sermons at the Pinner's Hall Lecture, from Gal. 
 V. 16, which were published under this title, — "The Carnality 
 of Religious Contention." In the preface, he says : 
 
 " When in one place '(Jud. 3.) Christians are exhorted to contend 
 earnestly for the faith ; and in another (2 Tim, ii. 24,) we are told 
 the servant of the Lord must not strive ; 'tis plain, there is a conten- 
 tion for religion which is a duty, and there is a contention, even 
 concerning religion too, which is a sin. We ought to contend for the 
 faith as earnestltf as you will, but with a sedate mind, full of charity, 
 candour, kindness, and benignity towards them we strive with. 
 Nothing is more evident, or deserves to be more considered, than 
 that, as the Christian Church hath grown more carnal, it hath grown 
 more contentious ; and as more contentious, still more and more carnal. 
 The savour hath been lost of the great things of the Gospel, which have 
 less matter in them of dispute or doubt, but which only "did afford 
 proper nutriment to the life of Godliness ; and it hath diverted to 
 lesser things, (or invented such as were, otherwise, none at all, ) about 
 which the contentious disputative genius might employ, and where- 
 with it might entertain, feed, and satiate itself." — pp. ii — iv. 
 
 He then proposes this inquiry — 
 
 " Whether for any party of Christians to make unto itself other 
 limits of communion than Clirist hath made, and hedge up itself within 
 those limits, excluding those whom Christ would admit, and admitting 
 those wliom he would exclude, be not in itself a real sin ?" 
 
 and proceeds to distinguish between the essentials of Chris- 
 tianity, or wherein it doth consist, and the several accidents it 
 may admit of, and shews that Christ hath in his Gospel ex- 
 pressly represented some things as of absolute necessity to 
 salvation; which he distinguishes into things necessary to be 
 believed, and things necessary to be done. 
 
115 
 
 " For tliirteeii or fourteen hundred years hatli the clnireh been gra- 
 dually growing a multiform, mangled, shattered, and most deformed 
 thing; broken and parcelled into nobody knows how many several sorts 
 of communions : the measures whereof how strangely alien have they 
 been from those which were genuine and primitive, i. e. from substantial 
 Christianiti,, and the things that must concur to make up that. Instead 
 of sound knowledge of the/ew dear and great things of religion, a great 
 many doubtful opinions, the taking one side in a disputed point*^ the 
 determination of a logical question, understanding, or saying one 
 understands (whether we do or no) a metaphysical nicety ; and some- 
 times professing to believe somewhat that Scripture never said, or 
 shews itself never to have meant, and that is most manifestly contrary 
 to all reason and common sense." — p. xiii. 
 
 It must be admitted, that if there was any one of the early 
 Presbyterian ministers* who exhibited a tendency toward 
 latitudinarianism, it was Howe; and it might be almost 
 suspected that he was opposed to all doctrinal summaries and 
 declaratory confessions. The contrary, however, was the 
 fact. After expressing his opinion that a general union is 
 hopeless till the addition of unnecessary things can be re- 
 moved, he proceeds — 
 
 " That only which the present state of things admits of is, that we 
 keep ourselves united, in mind and spirit, with all serious Christians, in 
 the plain and necessary things wherein they all agree ; that we pre- 
 serve in our own spirits a resolved unaddictedness to any party in the 
 things wherein they differ ; that for ac^?^a/ and local communion (which 
 we cannot have with all Christians in the world, and can have, com- 
 paratively, but with a few) we join with them that come nearest to 
 us : i. e. that we judge come nearest to our common rule : that (as some 
 
 * It appears doubtful whether Mr. Howe agreed with the Presbyterians or the 
 Independents, in his own views of church government. He certainly ranked witii 
 the former after the Toleration Act; but in the earlier years of liis public life he 
 had been a leading minister among the Independents, and one of Oliver Cromwell's 
 chaplains. Mr. Increase Mather, who succeeded him in the ministry at Great 
 Torrington, Devon, expressly states that his worthy friend and ancient acquaint- 
 ance, the reverend and learned Mr. John Howe, had been " pastor of a Congrega- 
 tional church" at that place.— (T/^e Order of the Gospel professed and practised hi/ 
 ttie Churches in New England, justified. \2mo., 1700, p. 13.) This most excellent 
 man was pastor for many years before his death of a church which ranked under 
 the Presbyterian denomination, formerly meeting in Silver-street, in a building 
 now occupied by an Independent congregation, under the care of Dr. James 
 Bennett, one of the authors of the History of the Dissenters, published in 4 vols. 
 8vo. 1808-1S12, and editoi of a second edition, 2 vols. Svo. 1833. 
 
 I 2 
 
IK) 
 
 ineuns hereto) we espocially hibour to centre in some such schtme of 
 doctrinuls as tor whicli all these profess to have a common reverence. 
 
 " Such schemes or collections of doctrines, reduced into an order, 
 (as gold formed into a vessel, whereas truth, as it lies in the Holy 
 Scriptures, is as gold in the mass,) may be of use (as they have always 
 been used in the Church in all ages) more distinctly to inform others 
 concerning our sentiments, (though the use is less, that after thorough 
 search and inquiry they can be of to one's self) provided they be 
 avowed to be looked upon but as a mensura mensurata, reserving 
 unto the Scriptures the honour of being the only mensura memurans ; 
 and so that ^xe only own them as agreeable to the Scriptures: and again, 
 that we declare we take them to be agreeable thereto in the main, or for 
 substance, ^without attributing a sacredness to the very words of a mere 
 human composition, which, indeed, we cannot attribute to the words 
 used in the translation of the Bible itself; and that, for the things, we 
 believe them with a degree of assent proportionable to their greater 
 or less evidence. This, through the blessing of God, such as have 
 used a sincere and ingenuous freedom with one another, have found an 
 effectual ex})e(lient to deliver their minds from mutual doubt, concern- 
 ing eacli other, that because of some different modes of expressing their 
 sentiments, they held very different opinions ; which they have found to 
 to be a mistake on one hand and the other, and have given and received 
 satisfaction, they intended nothing that ought to be reckoned into the 
 account of Socinian, Pelagian, Popish, Arminiun, or Antinomian errors."* 
 
 He afterwards says, 
 
 " Heresies must be understood to be a corruption of Gospel doctrine, 
 and, as the word is used in Scripture, mostly of a very high and de- 
 structive nature, as Tit. iii. 10, 11. 2 Pet. ii. l."t 
 
 " No words of Scripture can be plainer, than that they who believe 
 on Christ shall not perish, but have everlasting life." John iii. 16. &c.]: 
 
 He then quotes various passages, containing the doctrine of 
 hfe and salvation, "wherein all serious Christians are, and cannot 
 but be, agreed." The purport of these passages is to she wthat 
 faith, repentance, love to God, and obedience to Christ, are 
 necessary to justification and eternal life. He then proceeds — 
 
 " We agree that such faith, such repentance, such love to God, 
 such obedience even in the most entire sincerity, are not to be 
 considered at all, as any cause of such a person's accejitance with 
 God. No internal work of the Holy Ghost, though in this our 
 I)resent state, it were most absolutely perfect, so as to exclude 
 every thing of sin, could be any part of tliat rigliteousness that must 
 justify us before God. To suppose that it could, would be mani- 
 festly to confound tlie offices of the Redeemer and of the Uoli)Ghost. It 
 * Tp. XX— xxiii. t Pp. 23, 24. J P. 31. 
 
117 
 
 was Christ that was to merit for us ; it was not the Holy Ghost that 
 died tor us, nor can his operations or productions in us have any 
 causative inftuence to the meriting the justified and accepted state of 
 any person before God. They cannot make us never to have sinned, 
 nor can atone for our having done so. 
 
 " We cannot but be agreed in this, for 'tis plain, and carries its 
 own evidence in itself; i. e. suppose we a person, as soon as he is 
 converted, made perfectly free from sin that very moment, by some 
 extraordinary powerful work of the Holy Ghost on his soul, how 
 shall that expiate for his having been a sinner ? Now, where there 
 are so great things wherein we agree, and we make little of them ; 
 things that should raise up our souls, and awaken all our powers, 
 unto highest acts of love, gratitude, and praise to God and our 
 Redeemer, and fill us with wonder and pleasure,"* &c. 
 
 From this it is apparent, that, among the great things 
 which constitute the substantials of Christian truth in 
 Mr. Howe's judgment, the redeeming work of the Son, and 
 the sanctifying internal operations of the Hofy Spirit, occu- 
 pied a prominent and conspicuous place. Is it possible, 
 then, that he should have considered those, partakers of 
 "like precious faith through the righteousness of our God 
 and Saviour Jesus Christ," who " deny the Lord that bought 
 them," God's own Son, whose precious blood is the price of 
 human redemption — and that Divine Spirit (to use his own 
 expression) "by whom the whole frame of the Christian insti- 
 tution is animated, into whose name we are baptized, (as well as 
 into that of the Father and the Son,) and which will be given 
 where he is sought for, and not afFronted."f It appears to me 
 placed beyond the reach of contradiction, that he would have 
 considered both of these errors as " damnable heresies," and 
 their abettors among those " who bring upon themselves 
 swift destruction." The reader will observe that I merely 
 use expressions contained in one of the passages which 
 Mr. Howe himself quotes. 2 Pet. ii. 1. 
 
 He speaks afterwards of some who may be " wholly taken 
 up about what they are in themselves, to be and do," without 
 due reference to the grace. Spirit, and blood of a Redeemer, 
 inclining more to a philosophical (and scarcely Christian) 
 Christianity, forgetting Christ to be their Redeemer, their 
 Lord, and Vital Head"X In what terms would he have 
 
 * Pp. 35-37. t Preface, p. xxxi. X Pp- 52, 53. 
 
118 
 
 spoken of those who deny the necessity both of his blood 
 to redeem our souls from destruction, and of the grace of 
 his Holy Spirit to regenerate and sanctify our hearts, and 
 understand not that close union to him, and constant depend- 
 ence upon him, which form the very element of spiritual life. 
 
 Let the reader now decide, whether the distinction be- 
 tween the Presbyterians and the Independents was at this time 
 "chiefly doctrinal;"* whether the former had renounced, 
 either formally or virtually, those heads of agreement on 
 the basis of which they still professed to be desirous of 
 uniting with the latter ; whether they did not, on the contrary, 
 firmly and steadfastly adhere to the faith of their forefathers ? 
 The question, it should be observed, is not whether they 
 were "at liberty to vary fi'om the doctrines of those who 
 preceded them," but whether they did actually so vary; 
 or whether, on the contrary, they did not profess to be clear 
 from the imputation with which they had been charged, of 
 "doctrinal deviations and degeneracy."f May I not, then, 
 safely affirm that, up to the very end of the seventeenth 
 century, there is no evidence of any degree of "doctrinal 
 relaxation," among the English Presbyterians fi'om their 
 original standard, the Confession and Catechisms of the 
 Westminster Assembly ? 
 
 It will now be proper to notice more particularly those 
 Associations among the ministers, in all parts of the country, 
 which arose out of the Union in 1691, and which, it appears, 
 continued to exist in peace and harmony, notwithstanding 
 the lamentable disputes in London, and for many years after 
 they came to an end-J The nature and design of these 
 associations it will not be difficult to ascertain. They were 
 what Mr. Neal designates, " brotherly associations," formed 
 to promote and facilitate mutual sympathy, communication, 
 and assistance among the ministers residing in particular 
 
 • Hist. p. 35. t Ibid. p. 36. 
 
 X There is " reason to conclude that associations were spread over the greater 
 part of England. The dispute about Dr. Crisp's works disturbed the harmony of 
 the meetings in London; but it does not appear to ha\c had any effect on the 
 country associations."— //«/o7y o/ Dis^enlas, by Messrs. Bogue and Biuncll, 
 vol. ii. p. MO. 
 
119 
 
 counties or districts, in the labours of their office, and not 
 for the exercise of any kind or degree of authority. Even 
 in Devonshire and Lancashire, which have been considered 
 as exceptions, this, I beHeve, was not the case. 
 
 The reader has already been apprised of several associa- 
 tions formed in the west of England, and of the views and 
 purposes of those who took a leading part in them. Similar 
 associations were, I have reason to believe, formed in most 
 parts of the kingdom, in which the ministers, previously dis- 
 tinguished as Presbyterian and Congregational, united, and 
 those terms of distinction were merged, never afterwards to be 
 revived. There is ample evidence to prove that the happy 
 event of 1691 was hailed by ministers belonging to the two 
 bodies in every part of the country, as an auspicious omen 
 of increased efficiency and usefulness. Dr. Williams, at the 
 end of the list of ministers who testified their approbation 
 of his " Gospel Truth stated and vindicated," annexed to the 
 second edition, 1692, says, " I am credibly informed, that 
 the most learned country ministers of the Congregational 
 persuasion disallow the errors here opposed ; and are amazed 
 at such of their brethren in the city as are displeased with 
 this book." The fact, however, is indisputable, that, in those 
 parts of the country where such brotherly associations were 
 formed among the ministers of the two denominations, they 
 continued to meet, consult, and act together, long after the 
 separation among their brethren in London. As a proof of 
 their entire sympathy with the Heads of Agreement, they 
 assumed the title of United Brethren, or, as the designa- 
 tion seems to have been afterwards varied by general consent, 
 " United Ministers." 
 
 I will now produce evidence in support of these statements ; 
 and I shall first quote the words of Mr. Tong, in his Life of 
 the Rev. Matthew Henry, pubHshed in 1716. " In the 
 year 1691, the Dissenting ministers in Cheshire agreed to 
 have their General Meetings twice in the year. The Yearly 
 Meetings then set up, I think, took their rise from that Agree- 
 ment between the ministers of the Presbyterian and Congrega- 
 tional way, that was concluded and published in London, and 
 
1'20 
 
 recommended to all parts of the nation. At the first meetmg, 
 [held, it appears, at Knutsford, June 30,] the Articles of Agree- 
 ment were approved and subscribed ; Mr. Angier was Mode- 
 rator, and many things were discoursed of to their mutual 
 satisfaction and advantage. On the Uth of August there 
 was another meeting, to meet and settle more fully the 
 methods to be observed for the future."* 
 
 I can speak more confidently concerning the origin of the 
 Association of Ministers formed in Lancashire, having been 
 favoured, several years ago, with a sight of the IMS. book in 
 which their proceedings are recorded, from which I shall pre- 
 sent the reader with a few extracts : — 
 
 " Bolton, April 3, 1693. — At a General Meeting of Ministers of 
 ye United Brethren, within the county of Lancaster, 
 
 " It was agreed — That the Pastors of the several Congregations 
 should set apart a day in May or June next, (as it may consist best 
 with their convenience,) by way of humiliation to confesse before 
 ye Lord wherein they have failed, (so far as they are convinced,) and 
 to bewail their past differences and present short-comings, and thank- 
 fully acknowledge ye Lord's great goodness in agreeing and carrying 
 them on thus far, according to ye pious example of the United Bre- 
 thren in London. 
 
 " 2. That for baptizing of children of those that are not fixed 
 members, it shall be left to ye pious discretion of the jjastors whom 
 to baptize, taking ye best care they can for the religious education of 
 ye children. 
 
 " Signed in ye name of ye United Brethren, by us, 
 
 " Henry Newcome, Moderator. 
 " Charles Sager, Scribe. " 
 
 A General Meeting was held at Bolton, May 7, 1694, at 
 which it was agreed that the ministers should perform the 
 exercise of catechizing publicly. 
 
 General Meetings of the " Ministers of the County," held 
 twice every year, are recorded, during several following years. 
 The last, of which the minutes are entered, was at Manchester, 
 August 13, 1700. At these meetings, various matters per- 
 taining to the welfare of the congregations under their charge, 
 and the general interests of the Dissenting body, were arranged 
 and agreed upon. A few cases also occur, in which they inter- 
 
 • Pp. 253, 256, 257. 
 
121 
 
 fered to determine matters referred to them for arbitration or 
 advice. The county was divided into four districts, denomi- 
 nated Northern, Bolton, Warrington, and Manchester, which 
 held separate meetings, investigated the details of particular 
 cases, and thus prepared the business for the general meetings. 
 
 At the general meeting held at Bolton, April 4, 1696, at 
 which Mr. Frankland (tutor of a large and flourishing 
 academy in Yorkshire) was present, " A letter was signed by 
 the Moderator and Scribe, drawn up by Mr. Jolly,* and 
 ordered to be sent to the London Ministers, and particularly 
 Mr. Howe and Mr. Mead, to encourage those that endeavour 
 y^ composing of the present differences depending amongst 
 them." At the meeting, August 10, 1698, a certificate was 
 drawn up and signed " that Thomas Crompton and John 
 Chorlton, both Ministers of the Manchester district, are by 
 us, in the name and with the consent of all the Ministers now 
 assembled for this county, delegated to represent us in the 
 next General Meeting at London." At the meeting held at 
 Preston, April 9, 1700, it was " Agreed, That a Letter be 
 sent to our worthy friends in London, who are concerned in 
 the disposal of the Fund raised by a charitable Contribution 
 for the maintaining of the Ministry, and for propagating the 
 Gospel." The object of this application was to obtain a 
 grant for the benefit of " the northern parts of the county 
 where Popery and prophaneness abound." 
 
 Here is certainly some appearance of an attempt to exercise 
 general discipline, but even if such were the nature of this 
 Association, it was one in which the Independent Ministers 
 (of whom there were several in that county) united, and from 
 which it does not appear that they withdrew, at least not till 
 a much later period. Mr. Timothy Jollie, minister of a Con- 
 gregational church at Sheffield, attended the General Meeting, 
 held August 4, 1696, at which the case of a minister removing 
 
 * This was, no doubt, Mr. Thomas Jollie, an Independent Minister. In his 
 Funeral Sermon, printed in 1704, it is said — " The great design which filled his 
 head, hand, and heart, which he left as his dying testimony, was The Communion 
 in Churches and the Co77imumon of Churches, as the only available expedient to 
 retrieve the languishing state of Christianity. His heart was entirely in the 
 Heads of Agreement among the Ministers at London, in the year 1()!)1." — p. 27. 
 
122 
 
 from a congregation, upon a call to some other place, was 
 " referred to Mr. Angier, and Mr. Jollie, of Attercliffe, (him- 
 self,) upon a hearing of the people of Newton."* 
 
 Dr. J. B. Williams, of Shrewsbury, to whom the Chris- 
 tian public are much indebted for enlarged and greatly 
 improved editions of the Lives of Phihp and Matthew Henry, 
 gives the following account of the design of the Cheshire Asso- 
 ciation : — " The union formed by the ' Dissenting Ministers' 
 in Cheshire for Christian edification and the advancement 
 of the Redeemer's kingdom, had in Mr. Henry a cordial 
 friend, and an able and zealous advocate. That union, formed 
 in 1691, met twice a year, in May and August; for some 
 time at Knutsford, and Bucklow Hill alternately; but after- 
 wards at Knutsford only. At those meetings, after the work 
 of prayer and preaching was over, the ministers consulted 
 together about the affairs of their several congregations. 
 Whatever difficulties presented themselves in connexion with 
 the admission of any to church membership, or suspension 
 from it, or the removal of ministers from one place to another, 
 were here proposed, and advice was accordingly given."-f 
 
 In " The Diary of Ralph Thoresby, F. R. S. Author of |the 
 Topography of Leeds, (1677 — 1724,)" who was for many years 
 connected with the Presbyterian congregation in that town, 
 
 • It has been questioned whether Mr. Timothy Jollie was an Independent. 
 Without reference to other evidence, which might be produced, I will only quote 
 the title-page of his Funeral Sermon, by Mr. John De la Rose, 8vo. 1715, in 
 which he is described as "late Pastor to the Congregational church at Sheffield." 
 
 t Life of Mat. Henry pp. 140, 141. Mr. Tong's account is more explicit: — 
 " In these general meetings, after the work of prayer and preaching was over, the 
 Ministers consulted together about the affairs of their several congregations ; whatever 
 difficulties they met with about the admission of any to church membership, or sus- 
 pension from it, about the removal of Ministers from one place to another, they were 
 here proposed, and advice was given how to proceed, but not as authoritatively bind- 
 ing the conscience of any particular person. Minister or other. Affairs of the State, 
 or the Established Church, were never meddled with ; they kept themselves within 
 their own line, counselling and comforting each other; and God was pleased to 
 make these their consultations a means of preserving and promoting love, peace, 
 and order among them ; and this prudent method was kept up by them all the 
 time Mr. Henry lived at Chester, and is continued to this day at the same place." 
 [Knutsford.] — Account of the Life and Death of the late Rev. Mr. Matthew 
 Henry, 1716.— p. 25S. 
 
1'23 
 
 published in 1830, from the original MS., under the editor- 
 ship of Mr. Hunter, we have the following account of the 
 Union formed in Yorkshire. 
 
 '' September 2, 1691. Morning — at worthy Mr. Sharp's, with whom, 
 and with Mr. Whitaker, and Mr. S. lb. (Ibbetson, a lay Dissenter,) 
 rode to Wakefield; heard the lecture sermon; Mr. Heywood preached 
 well, and suitably to the Convention, from Zech. xiv. 9. ' In that day 
 there shall be one Lord, and his name one." Afterwards that good 
 man (itinerant preacher or apostle of these parts) read each of the 
 Heads of the Agreement of the United Ministers in and about London. 
 Most were unanimously assented unto by the brethren of both per- 
 suasions ; others modestly discussed and explained, and, which I 
 rejoice to observe, without the least passionate expression. The truly 
 Rev. Mr. Frankland and Mr. Sharp in their arguments shewed abun- 
 dance of learning as well as piety, and were unanswered even in what 
 was not readily assented to by some juniors about synods and reordi- 
 nation. Had the pleasing society of many excellent ministers from 
 all parts of the West Riding," 
 
 " This (says Mr. Hunter) was the first of a series of periodical 
 meetings of the Presbyterian Ministers of the West Riding, in which, 
 for a time, something of the appearance of Presbyterian discipline was 
 maintained. In the Manuscript Remains of Mr. Heywood is a very 
 particular account of what was done in this Assembly ; where are also 
 briefer notices of what was done at nine subsequent meetings." Vol. I. 
 p. 210. 
 
 That these were not merely meetings of Presbyterian 
 ministers is apparent on the face of the extract, and is 
 rendered unquestionable by one expression — " the brethren 
 of both persuasions." In the pamphlet now under review, 
 the Association formed in Yorkshire is thus noticed by 
 Mr. Hunter, than whom there is no individual possessed 
 of more particular information concerning Dissenters in that 
 county — "The meeting of the Ministers in the West Riding 
 began in 1691, and has been continued to the present time."* 
 He intimates that the Ministers assembled at these meet- 
 ings claimed and exercised something like " a regulating 
 power," or at least assumed some degree of authority, but 
 evidence is wanting to shew there was any thing of this kind 
 intended from the first. I see not with what propriety these 
 ministerial associations can be called " an attempt to estab- 
 
 * Hist. Def. p. II. 
 
124 
 
 lish a Presbyterian form of church union and government." 
 There is in print "A Sermon, preached at the Provincial 
 Meeting of the Lancashire Ministers at Manchester, May 8, 
 1744, by James Daye," which shews that these meetings 
 were kept up in that county during many years, as they 
 also were in Cheshire.* The Unitarian Ministers of these 
 two counties have, for some years past, held meetings in 
 conjunction; but, since the commencement of the present 
 century, the pastors of Independent churches in both counties 
 have met separately, and held no ministerial intercourse 
 with the Unitarian ministers; and this, I believe, is the case 
 in all other parts of the country, unless, perhaps, Devonshire 
 forms an exception. The Assembly of Ministers, which met 
 annually at Exeter, is, I am informed, yet continued, but most 
 
 * I have been favoured by the Rev. T. Scales, of Leeds, who has for several 
 years been collecting materials for a History of Dissenting Congregations in York- 
 shire, with the following copy of a letter in his possession, which will shew that, 
 many years after the period in question, there was a disposition among the 
 Presbyterian Ministers in that county to keep up friendly intercourse with those 
 of the Independent denomination. Mr. William Turner, Minister of the Presby- 
 terian congregation at Wakefield, writes to Mr. Scott, an Independent Minister, 
 and Tutor of an Academy at Heckmondwike, about 1760 : — 
 
 " Rev. Sir, — I am informed that the course of lectures usual in the summer 
 season is to commence this year at Wakefield. I beg leave therefore to inform 
 you, that I have fixed on the 9th of June for that purpose, and to request the 
 favour of your company, if agreeable and convenient to yourself. I remember 
 seeing you at Pudscy on a like occasion the last year, which encourages me to 
 hope for your presence with us at the time mentioned. I doubt not your disposi- 
 tion to maintain brotherly fellowship with all who call on the name of our Lord 
 Jesus out of a pure heart, as I trust we all do; and that this is the design of these 
 lectures, to promote harmony and love among Brethren. To contribute to this in 
 any degree will give great pleasure to, Rev. Sir, your affect: Brother and humble 
 Serv'. " Wm. Turner." 
 
 A sermon preached July 4, 1781, at Bradford in Yorkshire, "before an Assem- 
 blage of Dissenting Ministers," was published at their request, and respectfully 
 inscribed by the author (Rev. William Wood, of Leeds,) to "the Associated Dis- 
 senting Ministers of the West Riding of Yorkshire." 
 
 In Lancashire, as I was informed several years ago by an Unitarian Minister of long 
 standing in that county, since deceased, inquiry was formerly made by the Moderator 
 at the annual Meeting, whether the Ministers kept their churches orthodox — or to 
 that effect. He also mentioned, that for several years, this had degenerated into 
 a mere form, and the answer given on one occasion, producing a ludicrous effect, 
 the custom was afterwards dropped. 
 
V25 
 
 of the Independent ministers have withdrawn since those 
 professing to be Presbyterians have become decided Uni- 
 tarians. 
 
 Formerly, it appears, the ministers of Somersetshire united 
 with those of Devon, as did also for many years those of Corn- 
 wall. An Assembly of Ministers of the counties of Devon and 
 Somerset was held at Exeter, April 16, 1693, when a sermon 
 was preached by Mr. John Bush, who had been ejected by the 
 Act of Uniformity at Langport, which was printed under this 
 title — " The Necessity and Reward of a Willing Mind," fi-om 
 1 Cor. ix. 17. I will give a few brief extracts : — 
 
 " The will must be fxed; without this, nothing is done willingly. 
 The great controversy of late hath been, who doth determine the will, 
 Ood by the irresistible operations of his grace, or ?«aw by making those 
 operations to be effectual ? In which controversy, whilst some have 
 given to man more power than in truth is in him, others have gone 
 into another extreme. Those that go in the former extreme, though 
 otherwise very learned men, do so rarely mention the supernatural 
 operations of the Holy Spirit, which are as necessary to deliver the 
 $oul from the bonds of sin as to release the bod^ from the jiower of the 
 grave at the last day ; that, as one saith of the Socinians, 'tis hard to 
 call them Hereticks, for they scarce deserve to be called Christians; so 
 of these men, 'tis hard to say that they preach another Gospel, for they 
 seldom preach fin>/ Gospel; and yet some have erred on the other hand, 
 as if God's grace had so superseded ma7i's duty, that there were nothing 
 for us to do, but to look when God will do it, that we may sit still 
 and do nothing. The truth lieth between these two extremes, which 
 will the sooner appear if you consider, that they only are willing, 
 whom God doth make willing ; and yet every man that is truly will- 
 ing, his heart doth stir him up to his own duty, and his own spirit 
 doth make him willing. 
 
 " Why should it not suffice us what so many have said in this 
 matter, that the turning of the will is done by moral persuasion, as 
 man is a rational creature, made for moral government ; but the effi- 
 cacy of God's grace lieth in the immediate operations of God's Spirit 
 \ipon man's will, which is subdued in a way of power, as man is a 
 wicked creature, and yet so subdued, that no man is forced against 
 nis will, but made willing; and yet that which makes him so, is not 
 the co-operation of his own will with God's Spirit, but the conquest 
 of the Spirit over the will, which being ejfectual, man shall not be able 
 to resist it ; and if he could, he would not, he is so drawn by love, as well 
 as subdued by power. Now, to scorn all this, which in effect so many 
 have done, by saying, how can this be, and man act as a self-deter- 
 mining creature, master of his own actions? is to pretend that we can 
 
1-26 
 
 rpfine upon every thing that is dune in tlie world, wlien in the mean 
 time, if we descend into the 7>ui)im'7' of things, we can give account of 
 7iothing ; for thougli we do all know that we can will, and choose, 
 and refuse, and think, and love, and hate, yet inquire how this is done, 
 how the soul, that is a spirit, doth operate upon the fcoc/y, to move and 
 stir it, and how one thought doth beget another, and who can give an 
 account of all this? Why then should we pretend to know how far 
 the Spirit of God can operate upon our souls to incline us to good, and 
 not destroy that determining principle which is in all men ? and there- 
 fore it will more become us to believe that which the Scripture is so 
 positive in, though we cannot give an account hoiv it is.* 
 
 " As to many of them [the Clergy of the Established Church] we 
 ought to rejoice that the sanie Christ, the same Gospel is preached to 
 the people that attend their ministry, as is preached by us to the 
 people that attend ours ; and whilst the contention is whose way is best, 
 who do preach w?o.<i^ suitably to the design of the Gospel, let us remember, 
 that that Minister doth most answer the design of the Gospel, who 
 doth most preach love and charity ; and truly that Minister's charity 
 is not very large, that limits the Catholic Church to his own party, 
 to men of his own mind and way." f 
 
 The Heads of Agreement, as we are informed by Mr. Harmer, 
 a Congregational Minister, author of the Observations on Pas- 
 sages of Scripture, formed the model on which the Congrega- 
 tional churches of Norfolk and Suffolk were regulated and 
 conducted.^ 
 
 The associations in Somersetshire, Hampshire, and other 
 western counties, and also in some midland districts, con- 
 tinued for many years after the separation in London, and 
 some of them, I believe, to a comparatively recent period, 
 but I am not able to give detailed accounts of them. At 
 their meetings, a sermon was always preached by a minister 
 belonging to the association : copies of several of these, which 
 were afterwards printed, are in my possession. There is one 
 
 • Pp. 7—9. t P. 28. 
 
 i " The correspondence between London and the counties of Suffolk and Norfolk, 
 at that time, is not so well known ; but there is the utmost reason to suppose these 
 Heads of Agreement were equally adopted there, since the management of the 
 Congregational churches among us has been conformable to them as far back as the 
 memory of man reached. Whoever, therefore, would acquire a thorough acquaint- 
 ance with the most perfect scheme of Congregational church government and disci- 
 pline, or with that at least which has prevailed among us ior some generations past, 
 
 should consult those Heads of Agreement." Remarks on the ancient and present 
 
 state of the Congregational Churches of Norfolk and Suffolk. By a Suffolk Minister, 
 8vo. 1777. — A copy of the Heads is inserted in the Appendi.x. 
 
1-27 
 
 publication of this description which deserves particuhir 
 notice. In 1723 Mr. John Jennings, an Independent minister, 
 and tutor of an academy at Kibworth-Harcourt, in Leicester- 
 shire, in which the celebrated Dr. Doddridge, and other 
 eminent ministers, were educated, published " Two Discourses 
 on Preaching Christ, and on Particular and Experimental 
 Preaching," which he dedicated " To the United Ministers of 
 the several Congregations of Protestant Dissenters in the 
 Counties of Leicester, Northampton, Warwick, and Rutland." 
 These excellent discourses have been frequently reprinted. 
 Throughout most of the English counties, the original design 
 of the union in 1691 was thus accomplished. The ministers 
 of both denominations met in brotherly association, and main- 
 tained friendly intercourse and communication. The very object 
 proposed as the result was attained, and the terms of distinc- 
 tion previously in general use were dropped. We do not find 
 in the title-pages of sermons, and other publications, the 
 ministers of a particular county or district spoken of as Pres- 
 byterian, nor is there any reason to believe that particular 
 congregations were commonly so designated, except in those 
 towns where churches of both denominations existed. The 
 distinction, indeed, in many parts of the country, if it obtained 
 at all, was rather nominal than real, or, at least, was so far 
 matter of indifference, that the same congregation would, 
 \vithout hesitation, invite ministers of either denomination to 
 fill up the vacancies that occurred. The chief note of distinc- 
 tion, which I can trace, is the circumstance of several ministers 
 over small congregations receiving a yearly grant or allowance 
 from the funds established in London for assisting in the 
 education of students and the maintenance of poor ministers. 
 Originally there was a joint fund for the two denominations ; 
 but, after the greater number of the Congregational ministers 
 had withdrawn, and held separate meetings, a distinct fund 
 was established by them, afterwards called the Independent 
 Fund, while that which continued under the management of 
 the remaining portion of the United Ministers assumed the 
 name of "The Presbyterian Fund." I believe the fact of 
 ministers in the country receiving from one of these funds 
 
1-28 
 
 was the circumstance wliicli (generally speaking) gave dis- 
 tinction to the congregations over which they presided.* A 
 large portion of the Presbyterian fund, however, has for 
 many years past been distributed among ministers reckoned 
 Congregational, and known to be decidedly orthodox.* " It 
 has always (we are told) been a fundamental principle of 
 the Presbyterian fund, not to require any confession or 
 explanation of faith, as a qualification of relief."-f- This may 
 be correct. I have not the means of obtaining accurate 
 information of the original rules of the managers of the fund. 
 If still in existence, they may be produced, and will supply 
 the requisite evidence.^ That " the Congregational Board, 
 by its standing orders, requires satisfaction to be given that 
 the person applying is sound in the faith, on the doctrine of 
 the Trinity, and on other matters of belief," no one will be 
 surprised to hear, after the lamentable defection from the 
 orthodox faith, on that and other important doctrines, which 
 took place during the latter part of the last century. The 
 reader will scarcely be prepared to blame regulations of this 
 kind, completely as they are in accordance with the views and 
 opinions of so liberal and moderate a Presbyterian as Baxter. 
 
 * In 1715 a list was compiled by Dr. John Evans, successor to Dr. Daniel 
 Williams, of Dissenting congregations in all the counties of England and Wales, 
 in which those who received contributions from either of these funds are distin- 
 guished, and in many cases the amount of the annual grant is specified. The 
 list was carried forward till 1729, in which year the Doctor died, and contains 
 other particulars, collected probably for some political purpose. It is now depo- 
 sited in the Library at Redcross-street. 
 
 t Hist. p. 19. 
 
 X I have before me a copy of the " Rules of the Presbyterian Fund," which were 
 acted upon about twenty years ago, and are probably still in force. In these I can 
 find not the slightest allusion to any such fundamental principle. The only regula- 
 tions bearing upon the point are part of the Cth and the 10th, which follow — 
 
 " 6. Every petition [from a congregation presented on behalf of a new minister] 
 is also required to be accompanied by a testimonial, signed by two neighbouring 
 ministers known to, and approved by, this Board, to the moral character and other 
 qualifications of the person for whom the allowance is requested. 
 
 " 10. That two extraordinary supplies be granted annually to ministers— if the 
 circumstances of the Fund will admit. At such periods, each manager present 
 shall be allowed to nominate any minister, belonging to the class of Protestant 
 Dissenters, whom he may think proper, for the sum of £5, without any restriction 
 of sentiment or denomination, but subject to the approbation of the Board." 
 
129 
 
 The breach in the lectui'e at Pinner's Hall was certainly 
 followed by a rupture among the united body of ministers in 
 London ; which, though not total or permanent, could not after- 
 w^ards be completely healed. Whatever might be the real cause 
 of this ultimate separation, which there are not, probably, at 
 this time means for enabling us to ascertain, I trust sufficient 
 evidence has been produced, to satisfy all candid readers that 
 Mr. Cooper is in error, when he states that it was " occasioned 
 by the Arminianism of the Presbyterians, and the ultra- 
 Calvinism, or Antinomianism, of the Independents."* At 
 least, it is quite clear this could not have been the cause of 
 its continuing, after satisfaction given on both sides, in re- 
 ference to doctrinal points on which their orthodoxy had been 
 questioned. I admit that the two denominations in the 
 metropolis did not afterwards coalesce ; but it should be 
 recollected, that the original design of the Union was rather 
 to bring them to combine and co-operate, than to destroy 
 their separate identity, and incorporate them into one. While, 
 however, the Independents, at least the great majority of 
 them, continued to hold separate meetings, the alienation of 
 feeling and aiFection, which had been produced, was in a few 
 years completely removed. A separate Fund was raised, and 
 another Board established ; but still, it appears, some of the 
 Congregational ministers acted ecclesiastially with their Pres- 
 byterian brethren. Of this there is at least one instance on 
 record. A custom referred to in the Heads of Agreement,! P^'^" 
 vailed for many years, that candidates for the ministry, after 
 completing their academical course, and previously to being 
 allowed to preach, should undergo examination, for the pur- 
 pose of enabling competent parties to ascertain their minis- 
 terial qualifications. In this work it appears that ministers of 
 the two denominations united about this time. Mr. W. Wilson, 
 in his account of the eloquent Dr. Grosvenor, tells us that he 
 "entered upon his pubhc work in the year 1699, having first 
 passed his trials before several ministers eminent for their 
 soundness in doctrine and gravity of manners. These were, 
 Mr. John Quick, Mr. John Spademan, IVIr. Thomas Rowe, 
 
 * Substance of Speech, p. 2G. t See p. 55, ante. 
 
130 
 
 Mr. Robert Fleming, Mr. Joshua Oldfield, Mr. John Nesbitt, 
 and Mr. William Harris.* Mr. Rowe and Mr. Nesbitt were 
 eminent Independent ministers, the rest were Presbyterians. 
 
 On the accession of queen Anne, in 1702, the Dissenting 
 Ministers of London and the neighbourhood united in present- 
 ing an address to her Majesty. Dr. Calamy gives the following 
 account of this memorable fact : — " They made an address to 
 her Majesty, in a large body, made up of the three deno- 
 minations, Presbyterians, Independents, and Antipaedobaptists ; 
 and, this being the first time of their joining together in an 
 address at court, it was much taken notice of, and several 
 were surprised, and commended their prudence." f This asso- 
 
 * History of Dissenting Churches, vol. i. 347. 
 
 t Historical Account of his Own Life, vol. i. p. 4G0. A remarkable ptissage in 
 the first part of Dr. Calamy's Defence of Moderate Nonconformity, shews that in 
 the year 1703 the Presbyterian and Independent ministers throughout the country, 
 if they did not form one united body, at least generally met and acted together, 
 and this apart from the Baptists. The Rev. Theophilus Dorrington, then a bene- 
 ficed clergyman of the established church, who had himself been educated, and 
 had for some years officiated, as a Dissenting minister, after having forsaken the 
 Nonconformists, basely misrepresented their principles and practices, in reference 
 to " a learned and regular ministry." The following are his words — " Many 
 of them take upon them the office of ministers of religion, who are neither in 
 any measure fit or qualified for this work, nor have any right or title to this 
 office. The greatest part of the Dissenters by /ar, receive and follow such as 
 ministers." Dr. Calamy, after remarking that at least three parts in four must be 
 included in such an expression, and challenging him to produce good evidence of 
 the assertion, thus proceeds — " As to the Quakers, they are a considerable body 
 indeed: but I am not so much acquainted with them as to be able certainly to say, 
 whether they have any ministers or no. I can't see any great need they have of 
 them, when they deny both the sacraments. But if he'll rank them with the rest 
 of the Dissenters in his calculation, he would do well to take in the Romanists too, 
 who also dissent from the Church of England. Among them he knows ministers 
 abound, and such as his church owns, too, for ministers, tho' we dare not. But if 
 he desires our conviction, he must confine himself to those who are stiled the 
 United Brethren and the Anabaptists. As to the Anabaptists, there are some 
 among them that are men of good sense and learning. Our author, I believe, 
 would hardly deny that character to Mr. Tombs formerly ; or to Mr. Stennett 
 and Mr. Piggot, and some others, at the present, if he were acquainted with them. 
 But whatsoever remains there may be of the ancient aversion to human literature, 
 among those of this denomination, in that dark corner of the country which 
 Mr. Dorrington is endeavouring to enlighten, it is far from prevailin^j among those 
 
1:31 
 
 ciation has continued to the present time ; and nearly all the 
 ministers of the denomination still called Presbyterian, having 
 been for some years past decided Unitarians, that circum- 
 stance has lately excited considerable prejudice, and given 
 rise to much unfounded clamour, against the orthodox Dis- 
 senting ministers of the metropohs. 
 
 Whether the meetings of the ministers belonging to the 
 three denominations were originally confined, as for many 
 years past they have been, merely to "civil and secular 
 purposes," is a point upon which I am not prepared to com- 
 mumcate precise information. I will, however, mention one 
 or two facts which seem to prove the contrary. In 1703, 
 Mr. John Quick, an eminent Presbyterian minister, published 
 a tract, entitled « A Serious Inquiry into that weighty Case 
 of Conscience, Whether a man may lawfully marry his deceased 
 Wife's Sister," 4to.; the dedication of which, dated London, 
 June 7, « To the truly honoured Sir Samuel Blewitt, of Wal- 
 thamstow in the County of Essex, knight," thus commences:— 
 "It pleased the R. R. pastors of this city, in one of their 
 synodical assemblies, to request me to give them my thoughts 
 on this difficult subject."* From this it would appear, if meet- 
 ings of the whole body are referred to, that they discussed and 
 dehberated upon topics of a religious and moral character, 
 and did not confine their attention to matters arising out of 
 public events, and their intercourse with Government, as for 
 
 of this persuasion in other parts. They are generally convinced of the necessity of 
 learning in the ministerial office; and, as an evidence of it, have determined in 
 their general meetings to train persons up in order to the ministry, and give them 
 a polite education ; and many have been learnedly brought up, that are now in the 
 ministry among them. As to the Independents, I have not one word to say in 
 excuse of those among them who have encouraged raw and unfurnished persons to 
 enter into the ministry ; yet I am well assured the body of them are so far from 
 discouraging education and learning, that they are zealous for it. And as to those 
 called Presbyterians, (who are far from being such a contemptible handful as Mr. 
 Dorrington represents them,) I can't think them, by what I have observed, gene- 
 rally speaking, less careful as to the qualifications of such whom they own and 
 encourage as ministers, than the Church of England itself," pp. 242—244. 
 
 * In this dedication he says, " There is not a minister of the gospel who doth 
 not, by virtue of his office, lie under an indispensable obligation to destroy sin and 
 
 sav(! sinnprs " 
 
 save sinners 
 
 2 K 2 
 
IS'2 
 
 many years past has been the case.* The probabiUty of this 
 will be confirmed by the fact, that for many years after the 
 commencement of the last century, a Latin discourse, in the 
 nature of a Concio ad Clenwi, was delivered by one of the 
 ministers at the annual general meeting which has been regu- 
 larly held in Red-cross-street Library, since that building was 
 erected. Of these, I believe the only one which has been 
 printed, was delivered by Mr. Joseph Burroughs, a learned 
 minister of the Baptist denomination, in 1734, on the Holiness 
 of Places, from Isa. Ixvi. 1-3, which is annexed to a volume of 
 sermons published by him in 1741.f These anniversary ora- 
 tions have been discontinued many years ; and there is now, I 
 believe, nothing in the meetings of the ministers at Red-cross- 
 street, which involves or implies " any religious union or com- 
 munion" among the members of that association. 
 
 In the metropolis, at least, it appears quite evident, that the 
 only circumstance which constituted the reputed, if not the 
 real distinction between a Presbyterian and an Independent 
 congregation, was the fund to which they made their annual 
 contribution. I will give two instances, recorded by Mr. Wil- 
 son, of a change in this respect, as illustrative of the general 
 fact — "This church, (New Court, Carey-street,) in its original 
 constitution was strictly Presbyterian ; and till the time of 
 Mr. Bradbury, the ministers carried the contributions of the 
 society to the Presbyterian fund. Mr. Bradbury, however, 
 made it a condition of his acceptance of the pastoral office, 
 that the people should join the Independents, and send their 
 contributions to the Independent fund : and this has been its 
 state ever since. There has been no material alteration in this 
 people, as to doctrinal sentiment, from their origin as a church." f 
 Here we have a church at first strictly Presbyterian " joining 
 the Independents" by merely transferring their annual col- 
 lection to what was called the Independent fund. 
 
 * See an admirable letter to Professor Lee, annexed to a Sermon on the Temper 
 to be cultivated by Christians of different Denominations towards each other. By 
 John Pye Smith, D.D. p. 44. 
 
 t " De locorum sanctitate. Oratio Anniversaria ad coetum Theologorum in 
 Bildiotliera Giiliflmiana, a.d.x. oai. Junias mdccxxxiv. hahita a Joscpbo Hurroiighs. 
 i History of Dissenting Churches, vol. iii. pp. 493, 494. 
 
133 
 
 The congregation at the Weigh House, Eastcheap, which 
 for many years had made the largest collection for the Presby- 
 terian fund of any in London, except the one at Salters' Hall, 
 soon after the settlement of their late venerable minister, the 
 Rev. John Clayton, senior, " carried their contributions for 
 country ministers to the Congregational Fund," or, as Mr. Wil- 
 son here also employs the equivalent expression, "joined the 
 Independents." In point of religious sentiment, he adds, there 
 has been but little variation among their successive pastors.* 
 
 The Independents agreed with the Presbyterians in duly 
 estimating the value of a learned and well-educated ministry, 
 and contributed their full share to this most important object. 
 At a very early period after the Act of Uniformity, private 
 academies were set up by several ejected ministers, for the 
 education of students for the ministry, and of other young 
 men, whose parents preferred their being trained in what was 
 called " university learning" under pious tutors, who could 
 exercise a vigilant superintendence over their morals and beha- 
 viour. Of these, the largest, and perhaps the most cele- 
 brated, was that kept by Mr. Richard Frankland, at several 
 places successively, most of them in the North Riding of 
 Yorkshire. He educated above 300, of whose names, with the 
 dates of their admission, a complete list is preserved in print, f 
 Both Mr. Hunter and the English Presbyterian Association 
 have spoken of " the Presbyterian academies,"^ but with 
 obvious inaccuracy, in reference, at least, to those institutions 
 which existed during the period in question ; for they were all, 
 I believe, without exception, equally open to persons belonging 
 to both denominations. Among Mr. Frankland's pupils were 
 several sons of Independent ministers and others, who after- 
 wards became pastors of Congregational churches. Of these 
 one of the most eminent was Mr. Thomas Whitaker, pastor of 
 the Independent church in Call Lane, Leeds, which, after 
 
 • Hist. Dissenting Churches, vol. i. p. 149. 
 
 t Annexed to a Funeral Sermon for the Rev. Daniel Maddock, of Uttoxeter, by 
 Dr. E. Latham, 8vo. 1745. 
 I Hist. Def. pp. 25, 51. 
 
134 
 
 being, for a considerable interval, Arian, bas during the last 
 few years degenerated, if I am not misinformed, into a 
 Unitarian congregation. Another was Mr. Timothy Jollie, 
 of Sheffield, who succeeded Mr. Frankland as tutor, and 
 who, like his father, Mr. Thomas Jollie, of Lancashire, and 
 other members of the same family, was an Independent. I 
 admit, however, that his academy is inaccurately called " the 
 Independent College at AtterchfF.* Thus to designate it is 
 equally inaccurate, as to call Mr. Frankland's a " Presby- 
 terian Academy." Yet I will not retort Mr. Hunter's charge, 
 and say, " It is called so for a purpose." My object is ic 
 ascertain facts, and to estabhsh them by producing suitable 
 evidence ; not to ascribe motives, or to allege personal impu- 
 tations. It is true, that several of Mr. Jollie's students became 
 Presbyterian ministers ; but among those who settled over 
 Independent churches are to be found the names of Thomas 
 Bradbury, his brother Peter Bradbury, John Sladen, Timothy 
 JoUie, the tutor's son, all afterwards pastors of Congregational 
 churches in London, and, I believe, several others. 
 
 The tutors who belonged to the race of ejected ministers 
 were generally Presbyterians, but some of the most eminent 
 of their immediate and next following successors were Inde- 
 pendents. In confirmation of this statement, it will be suffi- 
 cient to mention the names of Thomas llowe, John Jennings, 
 Thom.as Ridgley, D.D. John Eames, F.R.S. David Jennings,D.D. 
 and Philip Doddridge, D.D. 
 
 Where does the reader here find the least trace of that 
 broad and palpable line of demarcation which, according to 
 the waiters under review, separated these two kindred denomi- 
 nations — a line, or rather a barrier, which neither of them was 
 willing to pass. Is there the least shadow of proof, that a 
 very few years after the commencement of the last century, 
 the Presbyterians were " a class who had long been separated 
 from the Independents,"! with whom they could hold no 
 friendly intercourse, and sustain no fraternal alUance ? 
 
 • Hist. Diss. pp. 76, 77. t Ibid. p. 30. 
 
135 
 
 -' Identity,"* may not be accurately descriptive of the real 
 state of things. An incorporating union was not intended from 
 the first, but a mutual interchange of fi'iendly offices, — the 
 reciprocation of brotherly feelings and affections. In London, 
 certainly, this met with a serious interruption for several 
 years ; and it must be confessed that, to use the expression of 
 Mr. Walter Wilson, " they continued ever after to hold sepa- 
 rate meetings." But though the two lectures on Tuesday 
 morning continued, there were several other lectures in which 
 the ministers of both denominations united. One of these was 
 established in 1707, at the Weigh-House, on Friday evening, 
 in which Mr. Thomas Bradbury, a well-known and zealous 
 Independent, was associated with Drs. Wright, Grosvenor, and 
 other Presbyterian ministers, f They also united in other 
 religious services, acknowledged the churches over which they 
 presided as affiliated churches, and interchanged ministerial 
 offices. 
 
 Mr. Peirce speaks of the Independents, in 1718, in the 
 following terms : — " It must be owned, that the ingenious 
 and learned Mr. Ainsworth, and some other of the old 
 Brownist vn-iters, used many expressions, in their writings 
 against their adversaries, which were scandalously harsh and 
 severe ; with which it would be very unreasonable to charge 
 the Independents in after-times. They only now differ from us 
 in some notions relating to the discipline of the church ; and 
 that difference daily abates. Nor is Mr. Sjxmlieim mistaken 
 in his judgment, who calls them jjious and orthodox ;1^ and 
 says, they only differ from the Presbyterians in what I just 
 now mentioned.§ 
 
 * Hist. p. 35. 
 
 t It may here be mentioned, that the author of a Dictionary of all Religions, 
 published in 1704, and generally ascribed to that famous Dissenter, Daniel Defoe, 
 under the head " Independents," refers, " for a more particular account of their 
 principles and agreement with the Presbyterians, to the Heads concerted among 
 them both in 1691," which he inserts nearly at length. The same reference to 
 the Heads of Agreement is made " in the second edition, with very large addi- 
 tions, 1723." 
 
 X Church Controv. p. 90. 
 
 § Vindication of the Dissenters, 2d edition, p. 208. Mr. Peirce, it should be ob- 
 served, was himself a veal Presbyterian, 
 
136 
 
 I have admitted that the more liberal divines among the 
 Presbyterians, such as Baxter and Howe, were opposed to the 
 rigid exaction, and still more to the penal enforcement, of 
 subscription to creeds, articles, and confessions, composed by 
 uninspired, and therefore falhble, men, and expressed in mere 
 human phraseology. While I am not disposed to retract this 
 admission, I must now advert to a fact, of which there is 
 ample proof — that for many years after the passing of the 
 Toleration Act, the greater number of these ministers, in- 
 cluding the most eminent individuals among them, readily 
 comphed with the requisition contained in that act, of sub- 
 scribing the doctrinal articles of the Established Church, as 
 the condition of being allowed to officiate under the protection 
 of law, and of being released from the proscription of the perse- 
 cuting acts of Charles II. The consistency of their conduct 
 with the professed principle of their leaders, it is not my busi- 
 ness to explain ; yet I may suggest a few things for the consi- 
 deration of the reader. The question concerning the law- 
 fulness and propriety of requiring subscription to human 
 creeds and articles had not then excited general attention, or 
 undergone formal discussion, as a separate branch of argu- 
 ment, involving an important principle ; at least, it does not 
 appear that any class of Dissenters opposed all kind of sub- 
 scription. If, moreover, there were some grounds of objection, 
 there were also reasons for compliance, which might appear to 
 them to possess still greater force ; and I am inclined to think 
 that such was the case. They probably considered the prac- 
 tical advantage of openly professing their doctrinal agreement 
 with the church by law estabhshed, a motive of sufficient 
 strength to countervail an objection merely theoretical, and 
 founded on abstract principle. The Presbyterians especially, or 
 at least a large portion of them, who were then desirous of being 
 included in a scheme of comprehension, could scarcely have 
 objected to this demand, with which, in that event, they, no 
 doubt, were prepared to comply. However, the fact is noto- 
 rious — that they jirofessed, at the time of this act passing, 
 and for many years after, to agree with the Established Church 
 in doctrine, and their profession was unquestionably according 
 
137 
 
 to the actual state of things. It was, indeed, alike indis- 
 putable and undisputed ; fully acknowledged on the one side 
 — avowed, proclaimed, even boasted of, on the other.* 
 
 * The evidence of this fact is abundant. A few testimonies may be here 
 inserted : — 
 
 " And here, Sir, you must own, as to Doctrine, that the Dissenting Ministers, by 
 their Subscriptions, plainly shew there is no separation on their part ; and, indeed, 
 those that are acquainted with the preaching and writing on both sides, will easily 
 judge who keep closest to the doctrinal articles. The separatists from the Church 
 of England then, in this sense, are, on the one hand, the Socinians and Arminians, 
 by what names or titles soever dignified or distinguished, and on the other hand, 
 the poor deluded Quakers, and such like enthusiasts. 
 
 " In Doctrine, there is no separation at all on the Dissenters' part ; rather are 
 they the truest sticklers for the doctrinal articles." — l^lotes upon the Lord Bishop of 
 Salisbury's four late Discourses, 4to. 1695, pp. 16, 20. 
 
 In 1700, several tracts were published in answer to " the Cases to recover Dis- 
 senters to the Communion of the Church of England." These were written by Dr. 
 Collinges, of Norwich, and other eminent Presbyterian divines, and contain many 
 passages which might be produced in proof of this point : — I will insert two — 
 
 " We must consider what communion it is with the Church of England which is 
 required ; and for the withdrawing of which. Dissenters are stigmatized with the 
 unintelligible names of Schismaticks and Separatists. Is it for their not agreeing 
 with the Doctrines of Faith expressed in the Thirty-nine Articles? — or because the 
 Doctrine of our Church presseth a necessity of an holy life in order to salvation ? — 
 or because she is fully constituted for devotion, &c. ? There is nothing less true." 
 Examination of a Discourse concerning Edification, pp. 4, 5. 
 
 " We would willingly know what unity it is they plead for. Is it an union in 
 Doctrines ? We have often enough professed ourselves, in heart, to believe all 
 Doctrines of Faith contained in the Holy Scripture, particularly those in the Articles 
 of the Church of England, so far as concerneth Doctrine." — Animadversions upon 
 Dr. [£t'?y.] Calamy's Discourse concerni/ig a scrupulous Conscience, p. 28. 
 
 The following is from " Three Questions of present Importance modestly re- 
 solved, &c. (on the proper Treatment of the ' Presbyterian Party' by the State, and 
 in favour of an ' Accommodation,') 4to. 1702: — 
 
 " As touching holy Doctrine, they both receive the nine-and-thirty Articles of 
 the Church of England, unless that one side may demur upon one or two passages 
 respecting the form of ecclesiastical government and ceremonies, being the matters 
 now in question, and remote from the foundation. And in very deed, the Doctrine 
 
 of the English Bishops in general, that lived in the elder times of Protestantism 
 
 as Jewel, Pilkington, Babington, and of the later Bishops their followers, as Abbot 
 Carleton, Morton, Usher, Hall, Davenant — is entirely embraced by the Presbyte- 
 rians ; whereas many of the later prelatists departed from it in the great points of 
 predestination, redemption, free-will, effectual grace, perseverance, and assurance 
 of salvation, and termed it Puritan Doctrine." p. 33. The writer, it appears from 
 pp. 47, 48, was against " forced large subscriptions," which he considered unne- 
 cessary in order to the attaining of unity in doctrine. 
 
138 
 
 These writers have asserted that, from the first, this restric- 
 tion, (this " coercive subscription," as they represent it,) was 
 offensive to the greater number of Dissenters, especially to 
 those of the Presbyterian denomination ; and that where sub- 
 scription could not be avoided, it was no doubt often evasive.* 
 " It is notorious," says Mr. Cooper, " notwithstanding some 
 writers amongst the Independents have asserted that Church- 
 men and Dissenters were nearly of the same mind in matters of 
 religion ; — I say, it is notorious to those who have studied the 
 ecclesiastical history of the Revolution, that the bulk of the 
 Dissenters of the three denominations who came in and made 
 this declaration and subscription, entertained opinions upon 
 many of the doctrines comprehended in those Articles, at 
 variance with those of our divines." f He then refers, as an 
 example, to Baxter, who " alleged that many of the expres- 
 sions in the Articles were dubious," and mentions his " Sense 
 of the subscribed Articles," of which I have already spoken. % 
 Mr. Cooper describes this as " a document which, it is said, 
 proves that his sentiments upon many points were estranged 
 from those w'hich the church regards as orthodox ; and Calamy 
 states that many of Baxter's brethren concurred in this expli- 
 cation." Those by whom Mr. Cooper was instructed might have 
 referred him to the document, and thus enabled him to judge 
 for himself, and speak of it from his own knowledge. Mr. 
 Cooper, however, placing full reliance, it appears, on the 
 accuracy of his instructions, exhibits no lack of confidence in 
 speaking upon this point. " The fact is," he proceeds — " and 
 here, again, I am aware that some Independent writers have 
 asserted differently — have asserted that the three denomina- 
 tions did not consider this obligation to sign a human creed a 
 hardship ; that no complaints were made, no burden was felt ; — 
 I say, notwithstanding these assertions, the fact is incontestable, 
 that the Dissenters in general signed the Articles with gi-eat 
 reluctance ; and those who did not, like Baxter, avow that 
 they interpreted them differently from the Established Church, 
 pleaded as an excuse for a step, (which was, to say the least, of 
 
 * Hist. p. 15. I 5>ubslanLC of Spcccli, p. GO. t Pp. 41—41, ante. 
 
139 
 
 very doubtful honesty,) the urgent necessity of their situation."* 
 I am not about to introduce the opinions entertained on this 
 point by " the three denominations" generally, or to bring 
 forward any extracts from the books of " Independent wi'iters." 
 The only evidence I shall produce, is ^that of persons who 
 ranked among Presbyterians, and were eminent in that con- 
 nexion. But I will first notice the testimony advanced by the 
 English Presbyterian Association. After asserting that " the 
 great body of nonconformists did not subscribe," they quote 
 fi-om a book, or manuscript, called " A Journey in the West of 
 England," a conversation there reported as having taken 
 place at an interview between the writer, who is merely 
 described as " Mr. Fox, a student of the Dissenting ministry," 
 and Dr. Calamy, who, after relieving his mind from all appre- 
 hension as to any injurious result of not subscribing the 
 Articles, provided only he kept the circumstance a secret, 
 acknowledged that " he had never taken them." Now let us 
 hear Dr. Calamy's own account of this matter, which looks 
 rather suspicious against him, as here reported ; it is there- 
 fore but fair that he should be permitted to speak for himself. 
 These are his words : — 
 
 " Mr, Olhjffe lays a mighty stress upon the subscription of tlie 
 Nonconformists to 36 of the 39 Articles, in order to their being 
 capable of the benefit of the Act of Toleration. In this, he intimates, 
 we could not comply, if we did not put the best construction on the 
 Articles that the words ivill bear. Ujion which occasion I shall not stick 
 to declare, that, finding subscriptions so apt to create debates instead 
 of composing them, I care not how few of them I meddle with. The 
 freer I keep myself, I reckon I am so much the safer. But when 
 I do subscribe to any human composure, I do it only to the substance, 
 and what appears to me the design ; and I am very ready to put the 
 best sense upon any phrases that are seemingly harsh, that the words 
 will bear, and which is not otherways precluded ; and I'll own that a 
 like method is but reasonable as to the terms of conformity. But 
 then, as I would never subscribe the Articles if I did not think tliem 
 fairly reconcileable to truth ; or would give my sense in matters that 
 were dubious, before I subscribed them ; (which, by the way, many 
 of us did ;) so neither would I bind myself to compliance with tlie 
 terms of conformity, if I were not satisfied in every particular to act 
 agreeably ; unless room were left for a dispensation, which is what I 
 cannot observe. 
 
 * Substance of Speech, pp. 6(), 67. 
 
140 
 
 " He very pleasantly will suppose, that I had forgotten that we 
 Nonconformists had subscribed the Articles. But had he acted aecord- 
 ino- to his own rule, of interpreting words in the most favourable sense, he'd 
 have spared that insinuation. For though I, from Mr. Baxter and 
 others, bring in an objection against the damnatory clauses of the 
 Athanasian Creed, which creed is subscribed to in the 8th Article ; yet 
 he might, without the least stretch, have been so favourable as to 
 have supposed, that I looked upon those damnatory clauses as not 
 belonging to the subscription. And I here give it him under my 
 hand, that had I not been satisfied as to that, nothing would have 
 prevailed with me to have subscribed that Article. And does 
 Mr. OUyffe really think there is no difference between the creed, the 
 Catholic faith, and those damnatory clauses that are as the hedges of 
 the creed ? Is there not an express distinction made ? After the pre- 
 fatory introduction, it is said. The Catholic Faith is this, &c. That 
 faith we thoroughly receive. But certainly this is somewhat different 
 from being obliged, by an unfeigned assent and consent, to use this 
 creed, with its introductory and conclusory sentences, in the worship 
 of God.* 
 
 He afterwards declares in very positive terms, that " the 
 ejected ministers were generally of that sense, and says, that 
 therein he heartily concurred with them." After stating that 
 while they " thoroughly received the substance of that creed, 
 they yet abhorred its appendages — the damnatory clauses ;" 
 he adds, " this very sense of the 8th Article was given in by 
 
 • In 1706, a tract was printed, (4to.) entitled, " The Balm of Gilead ; or, the 
 Reconciler and Composer of the present Differences and unhappy Divisions 
 among us ;" addressed to Queen Anne, to both houses of Parliament and 
 Convocation, and to all sober Churchmen and Dissenters. The writer, who de- 
 scribes himself" E. E. a true Friend of the Church and Kingdom of England," 
 thus expresses the sentiments of Dissenters concerning this creed : — 
 
 " As to Athanasius's Creed, they look upon it to be very peremptorily expressed, 
 with a Quicunque vult ; whosoever will be saved, &c. They profess to be as remote 
 from Arianism, Sabelllanism, Socinianisvi, or any other Heresy, ancient or modern, 
 against the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Ghost, and the plenary redemption 
 and satisfaction of our Saviour, as any in the world ; and that they believe all the 
 fundamental articles of the Athanasian Creed as Gospel truths ; but they do not 
 approve such a dogmatical and magisterial way of rehearsing it, as he took in the 
 inditing it. They say he was but a man, and therefore he might err, though he 
 is sainted; and they further argue, from his being canonized by the Church of 
 Rome, and our using, "his Creed in his own words, that we go too near the popish 
 doctrine of infallibility. However, some small matters being altered, as to the 
 manner of expressing it, they allow this creed may be conveniently used on occa- 
 sion." — p. 31. 
 
141 
 
 many of us as an explication of our subscription, before we 
 could be satisfied to subscribe."* He afterwards addresses 
 his opponent in these terms : — " I hope you will not think 
 I subscribed in my sleep." f Such language the author could 
 scarcely have used consistently with a due regard to truth, 
 had he not himself actually subscribed. 
 
 In 1702, Mr. Nathaniel Taylor, minister of the flourishing 
 Presbyterian congregation which then met at Salters' Hall, and 
 one of the preachers of the lecture held there, a very smart 
 and lively writer, whom Dr. Doddridge calls " the Dissenting 
 South," published a small book, entitled, " Dr. Sherlock's 
 Cases, and Letter of Church Communion, (lately summed up 
 in the Abridgment of the London Cases,) considered, and the 
 Dissenters vindicated from the Charge of Schism." In this 
 shrewd and spirited performance, the author proves, from 
 the Doctor's own principles, that the body of Dissenters were 
 then a part of the Catholic Christian church, having been 
 admitted by baptism into the same common gospel covenant, 
 praying to the same common Father, in the name of the same 
 common Saviour, for the same common blessings for themselves 
 and all other Christians, and celebrating the Lord's Supper as 
 the common feast of Christians." " These (he says) being 
 acts of Cathohc communion, we are in communion with the 
 whole Cathohc church, and therefore we are not schismatics, 
 nor do we divide from the Christian church, though we are 
 reproached as if we did." Dr. Sherlock having admitted that 
 a person hving in actual communion with a sound and orthodox 
 part of the Cathohc church is in communion with the whole 
 Christian church, Mr. Taylor avails himself of that acknow- 
 ledgment, as follows : — 
 
 " Now, our churches are a sound and orthodox part of the church, 
 if the doctrinal Articles of the Church of England are sound and 
 orthodox, which we have subscribed to ; and perhaps with somewhat 
 more sincerity than some others have done. We are willing our 
 churches should be tried by the definition of a church which we have 
 in the 19th article of the Church of England — The visible church of 
 
 * Defence of Moderate Nonconformity, part ii. 8vo. 1704, pp. 106, 107,264,265. 
 t lb. p. 266. 
 
14-2 
 
 Christ is a congregation of faithful wen, in the which the pure uord of 
 God is preached and the Sacraments be duly administered according to 
 Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of necessifi/ are requisite to the 
 same. Now, I hope the generality of our members may pass for 
 faithful men, as well as the generality of the members of diocesan 
 churches. We appeal to all the world, whether the pjire ivord of God 
 is not preached, and the sacraments duly administered according to 
 Christ's ordinance ? — though we don't bajjtize according to the church's 
 ordinance, excluding the parents, and superadding the sign of tlie cross ; 
 nor impose the posture of kneeling in the Lord's Supper. And we 
 believe our brethren dare not say these things are of necessifi/ requisite 
 to the same, so that it should be no baptism for want of godfatliers or 
 the cross ; and no Lord's Supper, because we don't oblige men to kneel 
 when they receive it. So, then, our author has furnished us with an 
 argument to prove himself and the generality of his brethren to be 
 notorious schismatics from the Catholic church, because they refuse 
 even so much as occasional communion with our sound and orthodox 
 churches which are in the places where they live."* 
 
 Referring aftervv^ards to the state of religious parties in 
 Scotland, he says — " I suppose the Scotch Presbyterian 
 Church may pass for a sound and orthodox one ; their confes- 
 sion of faith has been so esteemed hitherto, and I don't know 
 that they have thrown aside their old one, and set up a new 
 heretical one in its stead."! 
 
 In the preface, he says, " The learned bishop of Sahsbury, 
 (Dr. Burnet,) as though he had laid aside his usual candour, 
 ranks us with Atheists, Socinians, and Papists ; though I 
 believe he can't think we deserve to be hound up in the same 
 bundle with them. "J 
 
 He subsequently quotes the language of Dr. Clagget — 
 (speaking of the Church of England) — " She doth not unchurch 
 those parts of Christendom that hold the unity of the faith ; 
 no, not that church itself, the Church of Rome, which hath 
 added thereto so many erroneous innovations; and adds, " We 
 desire the eager sons of the church to use the milder language 
 of their mother, and not to unchurch and unchristian us, who 
 hold the Unity of the Faith without any erroneous inno- 
 vations. "§ 
 
 • Pp. 44— 4G. t P. 51. t I*- i'i- § P. 92. 
 
143 
 
 As a specimen of the author's facetious manner, (not 
 always, it must be confessed, in keepinp^ with the grave and 
 serious nature of his subject,) I will subjoin a few sentences 
 which precede a very important passage, which they will also 
 serve more clearly to explain. 
 
 After quoting Dr. Sherlock's acknowledgment, that all the 
 Christian churches in the world, which retain the essentials of 
 the true faith and worship, are members of Christ's one mys- 
 tical body, Mr. Taylor brings forward his assertion, that men 
 not living in constant communion with a sound part of the 
 Catholic church, separate from the whole church, "because 
 the communion of the church is but one," and thus proceeds 
 in reference to that assertion — 
 
 " These are not passages dropt on the bye, but some of the main 
 stamina of his discourse. This is tlie sandy foundation of his cruel 
 sentence against us—' That we have forfeited our interest in the cove- 
 nant of grace, and have no right to the blessings of it ;' for they are 
 confined to the Catholic church, from which we poor creatures are 
 broken off, because we don't live in constant communion with the 
 Church of England ! And this is his great medium, to prove that 
 ' constant communion is a necessary duty, where occasional commu- 
 nion is lawful ; and the great step on which he advances his beloved 
 assertion, ' That 'tis necessary to continue in constant communion 
 with the Established Church of England ;' which he thus triumphantly 
 brings in : ' Now, if these things be true, which I have so plainly 
 proved, then it will easily be made appear,' &c. ; whereas he has 
 plainly proved nothing, but that he can contradict himself as well as 
 the truth, and the most famous divines of his own church. His very 
 subject is contagious to him. He has written so long about Schism, 
 that he is the furthest of any man alive from unity with himself. 'Tis 
 natural for every man to imitate the object which he adores. This 
 doctor hath made to himself a God of Three Minds ;* 'tis no wonder 
 if we often find him of t^co. 
 
 " Besides these great clergvmen, I shall produce three emperors as 
 vouchers for us, viz. Gratiun, Valtritiniau, and Theodosius; to whom I may 
 add the Emperor Justinian, as a fourth ;t for he has confirmed, and put 
 into his Code, that law of theirs, wherein they command all their sub- 
 jects to follow that religion which the apostle Peter delivered to the 
 
 * The reader will understand this allusion to Dr. Sherlock's hypothesis, in ex- 
 planation of the Trinity. 
 
 t Code Just. 1. i. de Summa Trinit. &c. Tit. i. Cunctos populos, &c. 
 
144 
 
 Church of Rome, and whicli Pope Damasm and Peter of Alexandria 
 did follow ; i. e. That they believe the Trinity, according to the 
 Apostolical and Evangelical Doctrine. And they require, that all 
 who do so shall embrace the name of Christian Catholics; but all 
 others they brand as mad, wild heretics, fit to be destroyed by God 
 and man. Now, St. Jerome tells us what Damasus's faith was as to this 
 particular ;* and Peter's of Alexandria may be seen also ; f both of 
 which, I suppose, will be allowed to be orthodox ones. And if sound- 
 ness in the doctrine of the Trinity be the test of men's being Christian 
 Catholics, We shall come off well enough ; but the doctor had need 
 to look about him. J 
 
 The following passage will shew how remote the author was 
 from any narrow, sectarian feeling : — 
 
 " This I dare to say, that if a man be a true believer on our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, a fearer of God, and a worker of righteousness, whether 
 he be a Church of England man, a Presbyterian, an Independent, or 
 an Anabaptist, he shall be saved. Let him get the best directions he 
 can, and walk charitably according to the best light he has ; and not 
 be disturbed at the hideous noise of our ecclesiastical bigots ; but let 
 him know, for his own comfort, that however these bold men may sit 
 in judgment upon him now, they shall not do so at the last day. The 
 world shall then be judged in righteousness, bi/ one only man, our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, who is also God over all blessed for evermore. Amen." J 
 
 I may now transcribe a curious passage, to shew the views 
 and sentiments which then, I believe, generally prevailed 
 among the Presbyterians, concerning the relation in which 
 Dissenters'stood to the Estabhshed Church : — 
 
 " The plain truth of the case is, the King and Parliament are the 
 makers and the head of the Church of England ; and I think they 
 have a just power to rule their own creature ; and our Convocation, 
 in the true notion of it, are but their ecclesiastical council. Now, 
 King, Lords, and Commons have granted us a toleration ; and the 
 collection of all the churches, whether conformists or nonconformists, 
 are the Church of England, united under one civil government. Our 
 conformable brethren, indeed, are the church triumphant : they have the 
 temples, and the tythes, and other large revenues, by the law of the 
 land. We live by the voluntary contributions of our people, which 
 we have a right to, in the general, only by the law of God. They are 
 
 * Op. Tom. 4. p. 42, Edit. Erasmi. f Trip. Ills/. 1. 7, c .37 ; 1. 8, c. 14. 
 
 t Pp. 91— 98. 
 
145 
 
 the elder sister, who has a large fortune ; we like the younger ones, 
 who were not so kindly dealt with. But we neither envy nor 
 murmur ; we only plead, that merely because we are poor, we should 
 not be called bastards, and, as such, kicked out of the family. Autho- 
 rity has made them a church ; but the same authority has given us a 
 permission to form ourselves into churches ; so that we stand on the 
 same ground, though not on the [same] level with them ; and the cry 
 of the church's jurisdiction and authority over us, and of rebellion 
 against her, is quite turned out of doors." * 
 
 A learned and eminent Presbyterian Minister in Lanca- 
 shire, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Charles Owen, of Warrington, 
 published, in 1715, a tract entitled, "Plain Dealing; or Sepa- 
 ration without Schism, and Schism without Separation, exem- 
 plified in the Case of Protestant Dissenters and Church-men," 
 which, containing a development of an important principle in 
 a compendious form, and illustrated by a brief sketch of histo- 
 rical facts, attracted considerable attention, and passed through 
 several editions in the same year. In a dedication addressed 
 to the moderate and genuine sons of the Church of England, 
 which thus commences — "I stile you genuine sotis of the 
 
 * The above passage is a remarkable anticipation of Lord Mansfield's doctrine 
 concerning the position which Dissenting congregations occupy in the eye of the 
 law, as equally established with those of the Episcopal Church, having the direct 
 sanction and countenance, the special protection, though not the favour and 
 patronage, of the legislature. Nor is there anything in the Act of Toleration to 
 support a different representation. It contains no proscription of Dissenters, 
 as schismatics ; it regards and treats them as members of the Established Church, 
 whom the State thenceforth permits to meet for the worship of God in separate 
 assemblies, where that worship may be conducted in the mode which they prefer, by 
 ministers of their own choice and appointment. Indeed, the whole ecclesiastica 
 system proceeds on the principle, that Dissenters belong to the Established Church. 
 How otherwise could they be amenable to her spiritual courts for the exercise of 
 discipline, or be liable to the payment of church-rates and other ecclesiastical dues ? 
 The act, it is true, seems to call in question the validity of their ministers' ordina- 
 tion ; but even that is so cautiously expressed, that no decisive inference can be 
 drawn from it, unfavourable to the view above given. The words are, "persons in 
 holy orders, pretended holy orders, or pretending to holy orders." Those who 
 framed this act of parliament, intended, it would appear, to leave the matter 
 undetermined, at least to leave it, without interposing any decision on the part of 
 the legislature. 
 
 t Pp. 103, 104. 
 L 
 
146 
 
 church, because of your Christian moderation, charity 
 being the essential characteristic of a true Protestant;" he 
 takes similar \-iews as those of Mr. Taylor, of the relation 
 subsisting between Dissenters and the Church, or rather 
 the State, as a few extracts will shew — 
 
 " The distracting divisions this nation has so long laboured under, 
 have been fomented mostly by the fury of a set of men, who, by their 
 intemperate zeal for the shell of religion, beyond any concern for the 
 substance of it, and their rigorous imposition of an impracticable 
 Uniformity, have so far outflown the true intention of the Church, 
 as justly to acquire to themselves the appellation of Highfli/ers. Not 
 only the Dissenters have suffered by these furious incendiaries, but 
 the Church herself has received a manifest prejudice, by being mis- 
 taken among foreign Protestants for a persecuting church, on account 
 of the violent procedures of such men, in enjoining human rites with 
 more rigour than essentials themselves could demand ; since force in 
 religion is professedly disclaimed among Protestants as an anti-scrip- 
 tural practice. 
 
 " To palliate their wholesome severities, (as they affect to call 
 them,) we are branded with the odious name of Schismatics ; but it is 
 observable that none are more forward in this charge than sucli, who, 
 from their notorious enmity to the law of love, are errant schismatics 
 themselves. That man (say they) is a schismatic, because he does 
 not worship where we do; that fellow a heretic, because his faith is 
 not of the same dimension with ours. Our church is established by law, 
 therefore we are certainly in the right ; the Dissenters are only tole- 
 rated, therefore they are in the wrong, &c. This is generally the cant 
 of the high-flying faction, however differently modified in their various 
 invectives, not considering that the Ecclesiastical Establishment, as 
 different from us, does finally resolve itself into Acts of Parliament. I 
 appeal to you, gentlemen, who are the brightest ornaments of the 
 Cliurch, whether tlie treatment we have all along met with for our 
 conscientious Nonconformity, be agreeable to the rules of Christianity, 
 good policy, or the privilege of a free-born people, since our dissent is 
 not from any essential part of the Doctrine or Worship of the church, 
 but only from some accidents, which, as circumstantiated, we (after the 
 most impartial search) think to be unlawful ; so that we do not volun- 
 tarily leave the Church, but are driven out. And yet in that case, we 
 don't forsake communion with her in any one instance wherein she is 
 the Church of Christ, I mean in opposition to human establishment ; 
 if therefore we can shew a just cause for our separation from her, in 
 things not divinely instituted, the common charge of schism must 
 necessarily cease. 
 
147 
 
 " The dcsicfii of the followinGr treatise is to justify the modern 
 Protestant Dissenters, who are sound in the Faith, though in the hoily 
 of the book I usually mention the Presbyterians only, it being the 
 party mostly levelled at by our adversaries in all their attacks upon 
 Nonconformists. 
 
 " I'll only add, gentlemen, that as we have always heartily joined 
 with you in opposition to Popery, in all its sha2ies and advances, so 
 now the end of all our struggles being obtained (in the happy and 
 glorious accession of our great deliverer [George I.] to the throne,) 
 we hope your best endeavours will not be wanting to strengthen the 
 Protestant interest, by enlarging the pale of the church, wherein 
 nothing should be made necessary to conmunion but what is neces- 
 sary to salvation, since the gates of the cliurcli ought to be no narrower 
 than those of heaven." 
 
 The tract itself commences with these words — " The English Pro- 
 testant Dissenters agree with the Established Church in all the Essen- 
 tials of our Religion, and circumstances and acts of worship too, as 
 far as they are agreeable to the word of God ; the difference only con- 
 sists in the imposition of a few controverted accidents and human 
 modes, which the church accounts indifferent, and we, for several 
 reasons, unlawful. Have we not the same God and Saviour, as the 
 object of our faith, with the Church?" &c. 
 
 The learned author, after disproving from scripture the unwarrant- 
 able claim of authority on the part of the church to impose indifferent 
 things in divine worshiji, as a religious test and term of communion, 
 especially when they are offensive, much more to punish persons for 
 their noncompliance with them ; and stating that when such things 
 were first imposed, a general corruption in doctrine and discipline 
 immediately ensued, proceeds to shew that separation from the 
 Established Church is lawful in a political sense, when allowed by the 
 government, which he thus proves — " The terms of distinction between 
 us and the Church as they are imposed, are not ecclesiastical but civil, 
 i. e. the imposition of them is merely a civil act, since the Church of 
 England by law established is altogether dependent upon the State, 
 and all her canons, constitutions, orders, &c, and any thing else that 
 distinguishes her from other Protestant Churches, derive their force 
 from acts of parliament, which acts are of the constitution no other- 
 wise than other acts of parliament. Now the terms of communion 
 required by the Church of England being purely political and parlia- 
 mentary, the Protestant Dissenting churches may, without schism, 
 separate from such political parliamentary terms, if the king and parlia- 
 ment give such liberty by law. Time was when such who scrupled the 
 ceremonies of the Church continued to be legal members of her, even 
 before Oliver^ usurpation, and had still been so, but for the rigour of 
 certain statutes enacted against them, by virtvie of which they were 
 l2 
 
148 
 
 turned out of the church, and punished for worshipping God in a 
 mode different from the established worship.* The government find- 
 ing the inconvenience of those penal laws, did not only repeal them, 
 but, by the Act of Toleration, allowed of our separation as legal. We 
 appeal to Cssar ; we are subjects to the State, and not to the national 
 Church, who having no external jurisdiction but what she derives from 
 the State, can't demand subjection from such whom the State exempts ; 
 and if she charge such with schism, she charges the government, by 
 which she stands, with the same crime of establishing iniquity 
 ty a law.f 
 
 " Neither are we in reality schismatics from the Eng^tsA Church. I 
 can't see how we cease to be members of the church, since what we for- 
 sake in the church is not of the Essence of it. We may be parts of the 
 Church, though we don't join with it in all its ceremonious observances. 
 Since then we agree with the Church in the great essentials of Chris- 
 tianity, and differ from her only in some of her eercmonies, we can't 
 justly be termed schismatics, unless the ceremonies be made more of 
 her essence than the Fundamentals of our Religion. [He then quotes 
 the 11th Canon, which asserts, that such congregations that are allowed by 
 the law of the land, are true and lawful churches ; and the definition of a visible 
 church of Christ, given in the 19th Article, to prove that their societies 
 are true churches.] Our separation as suchj is forced, and not 
 voluntary, for we are obliged to depart from the Church by force of 
 certain laws, that impose terms of conformity which we can't with a 
 safe conscience comply with. We would much rather be in the 
 Church, and would gladly purchase our readmission at any rate but at 
 the expense of conscience and truth. We don't separate for separation- 
 sake, but are driven out by oaths, subscriptions, declarations, sta- 
 tutes, &c. concerning the reasonableness of which we could never 
 yet see a convincing proof. Gladly would we incorporate with the 
 Church, provided nothing were imposed upon us that were contra- 
 dictory to our consciences ; but since that can't be obtained, it's 
 hard to condemn us as schismatics ; call us rather unfortunate exiles, 
 because we refuse no scriptural term of communion, and are will- 
 ing to conform, provided the things in question be left indifferent 
 to be used or not, as persons find themselves persuaded in their own 
 minds. "J 
 
 Tlie author speaks in the following manner of the doctrinal agree- 
 ment lietween Dissenters and the Church : — *' We profess no religion 
 but that of the Churcli, whose doctrinal Articles our ministers sub- 
 
 • This point is placed In a clear and convincing light in a powerful Discourse, 
 entitled, " Dissent not Schism," lately published by the Rev. Thomas Binney, 
 minister of the (New) Weigh House Chapel. 
 
 t Tp. 20, 21. : Pp. 18—25. 
 
149 
 
 scribe ex anirno,* as a test of their Protestantism, and, I am sure, sti^fc 
 closer to 'em than many of the Churcli." 
 
 The following extracts will further shew the general feeling of 
 Dissenters on tliis point : — 
 
 " Nay more, multitudes of the Clergy dissent from the established 
 Cluirch in principle. It's true, they subscribe all her Articles, and are 
 obliged to do it sincerely ex animo ; but after all, 'tis well known, that 
 in their judgments they are Nonconformists to several of them, espe- 
 cially in the quin-quarticular points. So a learned doctor of the 
 Establishment tells us — 
 
 ' I can't, (says he,) but observe, that some of those doctrines which 
 were rejected as popish by our first reformers, are now commonly 
 preached up and defended as articles of orthodox faith, as predestina- 
 tion upon fore-sight of works, the extravagant power of man's free- 
 will, the final apostacy of the regenerate." Edwards's Preacher, 
 Part II. 
 
 ' Though these, and such like doctrines, were condemned by the 
 first Protestants, as savouring very rankly of Rome, yet now (adds he), 
 they pass for sound propositions, and every pulpit rings with them. 
 'Tis amazing to see so many subscribe the Articles, to qualify them for 
 benefices, and run away with the name of the only Church of Eng- 
 land, though at the same time they rail at many of them from pulpits 
 and press."! 
 
 " He proceeds to acquaint us, in particular, that Mr. Bennet, 
 Rector in Colchester, has affirmed, he would rather be charged with 
 popery than predestination, though predestination be one of the Articles of 
 the Church of England, to which he has subscribed. Art. 17. 
 
 " I say nothing of Hicks, Lesley, Bret, Higgins, and the rest of 
 that Cassandrian club; since the very bulk of the clergy avowedly 
 dissent from Calvin, whose doctrine is contained in the 39 Articles ; 
 it's true, the name of that glorious Reformer (since Ar?ninianism 
 obtained in the Church) is become odious to many of those that 
 appropriate to themselves the title of the Church, who shew their 
 degeneracy from their reformed mother, who in her infancy look'd 
 upon Calvin as the brightest light of the Reformation, and her pattern 
 in doctrinals. 
 
 "Thus Dr. Carlton, bishop of Chichester, (in a book dedicated to 
 K. Charles I. 1626,) writes, Js for Calvin, his name and doctrine are 
 made odious, but why I know not. 
 
 " Dr. Hakewel, chaplain to Prince Charles, says, That those whv 
 spoke against Calvin, did, thro' his side, strike at the throat and heart of our 
 Religion. Vide his book dedicated to K. James I., 1626. 
 
 • These italics are in the author's printed copy. + P. 40. 
 
 X The reader will be reminded of Lord Chatham's words when speaking of the 
 Church of England—" We have a Calvinislic Creed, and an Arminian Clergy." 
 
150 
 
 Dr. Hoyle, a reverend divine of the Church, in a book he writ by- 
 direction of Archbishop Usher, and dedicated to hiin, has these 
 words — 
 
 ' John Calvix was a man, of whom I had almost said, as once 
 it was of Moses, That there arose not a prophet since like him in 
 Israel, nor since the Apostles' days was before him.' 
 
 " In short, many doctrines of the church are scarcely to be found 
 any where else but among the dissenters. I might add, besides the 
 Armiiiian points, the differences in Convocation between the Bishops and 
 Presbyters, (who have at last asserted their independency on their 
 diocesans,) with the A nti- Trinitarian Heresy, which is grown to such a 
 height, that the Church and Christianity itself is in real danger from it, 
 whereby the present, as well as former governments, has been obliged 
 to take notice of it. See Can. 5., by which such are excommunicable 
 who impugn any of the 39 Articles." pp. 29-31. 
 
 This tract excited a great clamour against the writer. An 
 indictment was preferred the same year at the Lancaster assizes; 
 the chief occasion of which was his giving the government 
 certain information of the riots at Manchester, and a true bill 
 was found against him; but a nolle prosequi was obtained, pro- 
 bably through the royal interference. Two curates, or, as he 
 calls them, "a brace of high-church Levites," were the chief insti- 
 gators of this prosecution, and "of the violent conduct and threat- 
 ening language of the mob, who " bellowed out their furious in- 
 vectives and curses against him and his book in every corner, 
 threatening death to his. person and demolition to his house," &c. 
 
 One of these reverend gentlemen, whose holy wrath and 
 pious zeal had been excited by this harmless pamphlet, pub- 
 lished a diminutive tract in reply, under the courteous title — 
 •■' Plain Dealing proved to be Plain Lying;" in which he 
 attempts to convict the writer of deliberate and wilful false- 
 hood; with what success the reader may judge from the 'first 
 lie' which he charges against him : — "The English Protestant 
 Dissenters agree with the Established Church in all the essen- 
 tials of our religion, and circumstances and acts of worship too, 
 as far as they are agreeable to the word of God." — Ans. I'his 
 cannot be truly said by a Presbyterian, of either Quakers, 
 Anabaptists, or Independents, who are all of them English 
 Protest an t Dissenters." 
 
 The author of •' A Vindication of Plain Deahnc: from the 
 
151 
 
 base and malicious aspersions of two country Curates," &c. 
 (probably Mr. Owen himself) after quoting this sentence 
 from the preface to Plain Dealing, p. 5 : — " The design of the 
 following treatise is to justify the modern Protestant Dis- 
 senters who are sound in the faith" adds — " Here it is plain 
 Mr. Owen's meaning is, that those Protestant Dissenters who 
 are sound in the faith, agree with the Church in all the essen- 
 tials of our religion, &c. The Curates answer : " This can't be 
 justly said by a Presbyterian, of either Quakers, Anabaptists, or 
 Independents." Now, pray, what is this to the purpose ? For 
 if any of these be not sound in the faith, (which Mr. Owen 
 does not determine, and the Curates would be hard set to 
 prove,) they are not those Mr. Owen pleads for; if they be 
 sound in the faith, the curates' answer is impertinent, p. 2. 
 
 He mentions the Assembly's Catechism and the 39 Articles 
 as " Abstracts of Religion," p. 12. and in reference to the asper- 
 sion against Mr. O. of having "receded from the subscription he 
 had made, and was obliged to by the Act of Toleration;" 
 denies that he had " dissented from what he had once sub- 
 scribed, as many Clergymen have done," p. 15. 
 
 The author of another tract, entitled " The Church of 
 England Vindicated," &c. in reply to Plain Deahng and its 
 Vindication, renews the same charge. After quoting the 
 passages in which Mr. Owen speaks of his including Pro- 
 testant Dissenters generally who are sound in the faith, and of 
 their agreeing with the Established Church in all essentials, 
 &c. he asks, " How this can be truly said by a Presbyterian of 
 English Protestant Dissenters in general, [or] of any besides 
 those of their own sect, is what I cannot apprehend?" p. 1. 
 
 To this tract, ascribed to a clergyman, and more decent in 
 its tone, Mr. Owen replied in another, entitled " Plain Deal- 
 ing and its Vindication defended," in which he states — 
 " The first thing urged by the reverend answerer against 
 Plain Dealing, is an objection formerly used and fully an- 
 swered in the Vindication ; and if this gentleman can't com- 
 prehend (as he says) how the Presbyterians can have so much 
 charity as to think any besides themselves sound in the Essen- 
 tials of religion, circumstances and acts of worship, too, as far 
 
152 
 
 as they are agreeable to the word of God, I can't help that; 
 I am sure if he cannot, or rather will not, apprehend it, it's no 
 argument at all to the contrary," pp. 1, 2. The Dissenters (he 
 states) professed to be sound in the faith, to agree with the 
 Church in doctrine ; in short, they maintained that their religion 
 was the very same with that of its adherents, and that they were 
 equally true members of the body of Christ ; and that wherein 
 they disagreed with the Church of England, they generally 
 agreed with the reformed churches; that " they carried no other 
 design than the same common interest of reformed Christianity 
 with her." " We (he says) are of the Church of England as it 
 is a Christian Protestant church ; we believe her Fundamental 
 Doctrines, use the same ordinances and worship, and only dissent 
 from some human modes and ceremonies, in which the essence 
 of a church does not consist," p. 15. 
 
 These extracts need no comment. They exhibit no indica- 
 tion of what a writer in a number of the Quarterly Review, 
 just published, calls " one of the most unmitigated evils of 
 religious dissent — that zealous exclusiveness which still coops 
 up the different sects of English Dissenters within their o\a n 
 narrow pale, and teaches them to confine all virtue, all truth, 
 all Christian excellence, to their own sects."* The sentiments 
 here expressed, on the contrary, like those of Baxter and 
 Howe, are catholic and comprehensive. 
 
 The reader needs not to be informed after the copious 
 extracts which have already been produced, that the Presby- 
 terians were zealous maintainers of what they regarded as the 
 great essential truths of the Christian system, in distinction 
 from minor and less important points. Herein they were true 
 followers of Baxter. I have admitted, and am ready to admit 
 again, that they were not rigid, severe, and punctiHous in their 
 demand of doctrinal orthodoxy, as measured by any human 
 standard; but I must positively deny that any evidence can be 
 produced to shew, that during the period in question they 
 were latitudinariaji. Their Calvinism, I grant, was moderate 
 Calvinism ; like Baxter and Calamy, they " held the articles of 
 the Synod of Dort to contain sound and moderate doctrine ;"' 
 
 • No. 103, publiblied Fcbiuaiy 7, p. 185. 
 
153 
 
 in short, to borrow an expression from the will of Dr. Daniel 
 Williams, they were at once " orthodox and moderate." They 
 were ready earnestly to contend for what they regarded as 
 the substance of Christianity, — those great fundamental veri- 
 ties which constitute the essence of the Christian system, — 
 its pecuUar distinguishing doctrines and principles ; but to 
 human terms employed in the explication of these doctrines, 
 they were not disposed to demand full assent and consent. 
 They were not such as Baxter calls " over-orthodox ;" " they 
 dared not (to adopt the words of Dr. Calamy) urge those who 
 sat under their ministry to believe any thing necessary to 
 salvation,* but what can be proved and confirmed from 
 scripture ;"f but equally, if not still farther remote, were they 
 from that miscalled charity, that false and spurious liberality, 
 which regards with equal complacency " all differences of 
 doctrine, provided only they be conscientious.":}: Declining 
 the imposition upon conscience, of things not warranted by 
 scripture, is a very different thing from holding out equal 
 sanction and encouragement to " any religious opinions." § 
 Let it be granted, in one word, that they were moderate — did 
 they set no bounds to that moderation ? and was moderation 
 peculiar to them ? I admit there were some among the Con- 
 gregational denomination who were stiff and rigid, not to say 
 narrow and sectarian ; but taking a general account of the 
 whole body, these, I doubt not, formed an inconsiderable 
 portion. Even in London, where a few individuals of con- 
 tracted views and sectarian feelings, seemed bent upon 
 embroihng all their brethren of both denominations, and too 
 well succeeded in that design, at least to a considerable 
 extent ; there were men among the ministers belonging to this 
 class, of larger souls and loftier sentiments. 
 
 • Thomas Cartwright, one of the earliest and most learned of the Presbyterian 
 Puritans, did not acknowledge the distinction in importance between matters of 
 doctrine and matters of discipline, but placed ceremonies, order, and government 
 on the same level with " matters necessary to salvation and of faith ;" and asserted 
 that " the Discipline was one part of the Gospel."— See Hooker's Ecclesiastical 
 Polity, edited by B. Hanbury, Vol. I. pp. 20S, 209, and notes. 
 
 t Calamy's Own Life, Vol. II. pp. 161, 169. 
 
 : Hist. p. 46. § Ibid. p. 51. 
 
154 
 
 With Matthew Mead, and his efforts to promote renewed 
 harmony, and a cordial redintegration of the original Agree- 
 ment, the reader has already been made acquainted. I may now 
 introduce to his notice a few others. Mr. Thomas Rowe, who 
 from 1678 till his death in 1705, was pastor of the ancient 
 Independent church which formerly met in Westminster Abbey, 
 had the honour of educating Watts, Neal, Grove, and Say; 
 besides Hughes the poet, and Hort, afterwards an Irish arch- 
 bishop. It appears that he stood altogether aloof, and took 
 no part in the unhappy controversy about justification. 
 Mr. Walter Wilson informs us, that he was deservedly in high 
 repute for learning, candour, and liberality ;* that, " although 
 himself a doctrinal Calvinist, he allowed to his pupils the most 
 enlarged freedom of inquiry, and possessed a noble and gene- 
 rous mind, free from the shackles of a party, and utterly 
 averse to all impositions in the concerns of religion.f 
 
 To Rowe, the muse of his grateful pupil, the Nonconformist 
 poet,J inscribed an Ode, entitled " Free Philosophy," which 
 clearly shews, that the " much-honoured director of his 
 youthful studies" had not " a soul born to be confined," but 
 " A genius which no chain controls." 
 
 Dr. Calamy gives the following account of one of the first 
 pastors of an Independent church which met at Pinner's 
 
 • Hist of Diss. Churches, vol. iii. p. 191. t Ibid. p. 171. 
 
 t Lyric Poems. Dr. Southey, in a Memoir of Dr. Watts prefixed to a late 
 edition of this work, seems unwilling to concede to him the praise of being either 
 a conscientious Nonconformist or a genuine poet, though he has done justice to his 
 character as a man, a Christian, and a minister of religion. A gentleman who has 
 not felt bound to retain the opinions and principles in which he was educated, or 
 which in early life he had professed, (a circumstance which I do not insinuate as 
 an imputation,) might have given a young aspirant for learning credit for being 
 actuated by honest and sincere conviction in declining a generous offer to " provide 
 for him at one of the English Universities," and determining to "take his lot with 
 the Dissenters," at a time when Nonconformity was a reproach, if not a crime. 
 Instead of this, he merely tells us, "having been bred up a Dissenter, he deter- 
 mined to remain one." p. ix. The poet-laureat might also have condescended to 
 inform us, in direct terms, whether, in his judgment, the author of " Divme 
 Songs for Children" is worthy to be enrolled among the British poets. Instead of 
 this, he merely tells us, that " Watts may be placed about half way between 
 Milton and I'.lackmore ;" (p. xlvii.) though afterwards he would seem to insinuate 
 that the Doctor did not rise above the level of the unpoetical knight, p. Ixxv. 
 
l55 
 
 hall, who died December 19th, 1705: — "Mr. Richard Wavel 
 was a very worthy man, of Congregational principles, but an 
 extensive charity. It was his principle and constant practice 
 to receive all whom Christ had received, without quarrels and 
 controversies about doubtful disputables. His preaching was 
 plain, and tended very much to exalt Christ, and the grace 
 of God in him ; and yet it was his dying advice to the church 
 he had the care of, that they would choose one to succeed him 
 of whom they should have some ground to hope that he would 
 preach Christ crucified more than he had done." * 
 
 The church to whom he tendered this dying counsel, did 
 not, however, act upon it : for Mr. Walter Wilson informs us, 
 that although Mr. Wavel and his predecessor, had been zealous 
 Calvinists, those who succeeded them, " though divines of 
 considerable eminence in their day, were of a very different 
 stamp, and preached, in a manner, to empty pews. It is a 
 most surprising circumstance, how a number of Christians, 
 and many of them of long experience, should, from a warm 
 evangelical pastor, fix upon one who, however learned and 
 amiable, strove to keep his people in the dark as to his sen- 
 timents concerning the leading doctrines of the gospel." f 
 
 Mr. Hunt,:}: chosen pastor in 1707, was probably the person 
 referred to in the following passage of a letter from Dr. Watts 
 to his friend, the Rev. Samuel Say, who afterwards succeeded 
 Dr. Calamy, as minister of a then flourishing Presbyterian 
 church at Westminster, dated December 23d, 1708. 
 
 " I believe with you, that Mr. H.'s insisting so much on the duties 
 of morality, and pressing them upon the motive of Christ's example, 
 above and beyond all other motives, has been a reason why some 
 persons have suspected him of Socinianizing, though he has several 
 
 * Account of Ejected Ministers, p. 58. Continuation, pp. 87, 88. 
 
 t Hist. Diss. Churches, Vol. 2, p. 254. 
 
 I Mr., afterwards Dr., Jeremiah Hunt, had been educated by Mr. Rowe, from 
 whose academy he removed to the university of Edinburgh, and thence to that of 
 Leyden in Holland, to complete his education, (so desirous were the dissenting 
 ministers of this period to be thoroughly furnished with learning and scholarship,) 
 and, for his attainments in the Hebrew language and literature, afterwards acquired 
 the title of Rabbi Hunt.§ Though pastor of an Independent church, his ortho- 
 doxy was always suspected, as " his discourses were dry, critical, and destitute of 
 that evangelical savour which distinguished the preaching of his predecessors. "|| 
 
 § See Anecdotes of Bishop Watson, Vol. I. p. 226. || Hist. Diss. Ch. -lol. ii. p. 2CT. 
 
156 
 
 times, in the pulpit and in converse, expressed his sentiments very 
 plainly opposite to Socinus in the great points of controversy. I wish 
 he had always done it, and talked with caution in all places on those sub- 
 jects. He has raised many scruples among many persons ; but I quash 
 them wherever I find them. Now, my dear friend, I would lay aside 
 all thought of Mr. H. in what follows. Let me inquire of you, whe- 
 ther you imagine the great and glorious doctrines of the gospel were 
 all contrived, and the aifairs themselves transacted, merely to subserve 
 a little morality ; whether our greatLord Jesus Christ was incarnate and 
 died, rose and lives, and gave such a gospel, chiefly that we might be 
 just and kind to our neighbours (for those two things include all 
 moral duties) ; or rather, whether the honour of the wisdom, grace, 
 and justice of God, the glory of his Son Jesus Christ, and the eternal 
 enjoyment of his own love, which his chosen ones obtain thereby, be 
 not far the greater ends of God's contriving the gospel, and sending 
 it among men ; and consequently, whether these ought not to be 
 insisted on in our preaching, at least as much as moralitj^," &c. * 
 
 Yet Dr. Watts, trained as he had been to charity and can- 
 dour under the " gentle influence" of his amiable tutor, whose 
 liberal sentiments he had deeply imbibed, though associated 
 in the pastoral care of the Independent church which 
 afterwards met in Bury-street with Dr. Chauncey, one of 
 Dr. Wilhams's warmest opponents, was himself a zealous advo- 
 cate for 'moderation. Early in 1707, he printed "an Essay against 
 Uncharitableness, written to expose that most unchristian in- 
 iquity of censures, writings, church-anathemas, on the account 
 of smaller disputables in Christianity." This piece was soon after 
 incorporated in a larger work, entitled "Orthodoxy and Charity" 
 — virtues which, as Dr. Johnson well remarked, were in his 
 mind as well as in his book — " united." " By orthodoxy (says 
 his recent biographer, whose valuable work has been already 
 quoted) the author understands all those doctrines which were 
 generally received and professed by Protestants at the Reform- 
 ation ; and he advocates the extension of a fraternal love 
 towards all those who agree here, however widely in other 
 respects they may differ." t 
 
 Of the book just referred to, which consists of " several 
 reconcihng Essays on the Law and Gospel, Faith and Works," 
 Mr. Milner gives the following account : — 
 
 * Milner's Life, Times, and Correspondence of Dr. Watts, pp. 228, 229. 
 t lb. p. 213. 
 
157 
 
 " This is an attempt to unite those who liold the important doctrines 
 of the gospel, but differ upon minor points ; to illustrate the evil con- 
 sequences of altercation respecting minute and trivial peculiarities of 
 faith or discipline ; and to gather within the bounds of Christian love 
 all true believers in the Saviour, without limiting the flow of kindly 
 feeling to a perfect conformity with our views. It is addressed to " the 
 moderate men among those who are called Calvinists, and those that 
 are named New Methodists." As for the " high-fliers" of both parties, 
 he discards them as incorrigible offenders. He anticipates, in his pre- 
 face, a Socinian objection to his book, that no attempt is made to 
 plead the cause of those who deny tlie atonement, and to procure for 
 them a share of fraternal regard ; but a proper answer to this is given, 
 that the doctrine is not one of the lesser things of the Christian system, 
 but a fundamental principle, the denial of which is subversive of its 
 whole genius and design. The substance of the gospel treated of in 
 the first essay, is defined to embrace the great truths of the fall and 
 depravity of our nature — the propitiatory work of Christ — divine 
 influence— the necessity of repentance and faith— and the constant 
 practice of a holy life. Those who agree here are united in the 
 essential articles of religion, and assuredly ought not to be at vari- 
 ance in spirit. But questions as to the logical relations of different 
 parts of divine truth— whether the gospel is an absolute promise, or 
 a conditional covenant — whether the law ought to be proclaimed, or 
 free grace alone exhibited— have kept their respective advocates at a 
 distance, and separated, as with walls of triple brass, the several par- 
 ties to which they have belonged." * 
 
 I have mentioned these circumstances, and introduced these 
 quotations, to prove that there were some individuals, and 
 those leading persons among the Independent ministers, willing 
 to reciprocate the feehng of their Presbyterian brethren, and 
 respond to their call for union and communion, on the great 
 principle so warmly inculcated by Baxter, Howe, and Calamy : 
 in necessariis, unitas ; in non necessariisy libertas ; in om- 
 nibus charitas. 
 
 " Dr. Hunt was the ultimate friend of [the first] Lord Bar- 
 rington, who was a member of his church." f His lordship, 
 who, we are told by Mr. Prebendary Townsend, as quoted by 
 the English Presbyterian Association, « had a strong sense of 
 the importance of free inquiry in matters of reUgion, quitted 
 the ministry of Mr. Thomas Bradbury, on which he had 
 
 • Life, Times, &c. of Dr. Watts, pp. 674, 675. 
 t Wilson's Diss. Churches, Vol. II. p. 268. 
 
158 
 
 formerly been an attendant, on account of that gentleman's 
 bigoted zeal for imposing unscriptural terms upon the article 
 of the Trinity." Yet, strange to say, he did not forsake this 
 bigoted Independent to join a fi-ee-thinking Presbyterian 
 society, but " attended divine worship, and for many years 
 received the sacrament, at Pinner's Hall," of which a member 
 of the Independent Board was during that time the pastor. * 
 
 To shew the agreement in opinion and feehng between 
 the leading ministers of the two denominations, in the early 
 part of the last century, I will now introduce some passages 
 from " A Sermon preached at Chester on occasion of Opening 
 the new Meeting-house there, August 8, 1700, by the late 
 Rev. Mr. Matthew Henry." It was printed for the first time 
 in 1726, with a short preface by Dr. Watts, in which, after 
 commending Mr. Henry's writings as adapted " to enlighten a 
 dark world in the knowledge of Christ, to keep practical reh- 
 gion warm and lively among men, and to diffuse a spirit of sacred 
 love thro' all the professors of Christianity ;" he says, " those of 
 his surviving friends who have the best right to publish his 
 remains, desired me to assure the world in their name, that 
 this sermon belongs to him whose name it bears," and men- 
 tions, " the savour of piety and love which breathes through 
 it," as supplying internal evidence of its being his genuine 
 production. The text is Joshua xxii. 22, 23, and the design 
 of the discourse is to vindicate Dissenters from the censure 
 and reproach of being actuated by narrow, factious, and secta- 
 rian views. Some extracts follow: — 
 
 " They who have themselves found how good it is to be near to 
 God, and what an unspeakable pleasure and happiness there is in 
 communion with him, cannot but be concerned to take all possible 
 care, and make all probable provision, that their cliildien after them 
 may not be made to cease from following the Lord, or be looked on as 
 having no part in him. With the human nature which we transmit 
 to posterity, depraved and corrupted, 'tis very desirable to transmit 
 pure and entire those sovereign remedies which religion has provided 
 for the cure of that hereditary disease : not the narrow and private 
 interests of a party, which in kindness to posterity we should study 
 how to bury in oblivion, but the great and noble principles of Catholic 
 
 * Hist. p. 47. 
 
159 
 
 Christianity. These we should desire to Mitail the knowledge and 
 faith of, upon our seed's seed henceforth and for ever, Is. lix. 21. 
 They who rejoice in the light of the Gospel will desire that it may not 
 die in their hands ; and they w ho find themselves enriched with the 
 true treasure, and know how to value it, can't hut wish it may not bo 
 buried in their graves, Psa. xxii. 30; cii. 28., but well secured to their 
 heirs, that in their tribe, and the families thereof, the name of Christ 
 may endure for ever, and his throne as the days of old, pp. 2, 3. 
 
 " Those who build altars on which to offer in the eucharist a pro- 
 pitiatory sacrifice for the sins of quick and dead, (as the Church of 
 Rome does,) do in effect deny the sufficiency of that one great sacrifice, 
 which Christ offered once for all upon the cross. Those that build 
 altars for the maintaining and propagating any heresy,* or the pro- 
 moting and carrying on any design against religion in the power of 
 it; that build altars to support a monopoly of the church, and enoross 
 to themselves its privileges, to the exclusion of others — spoil the 
 acceptableness of the altars they build ; and it will be construed to be 
 done in transgression against the Lord, p. 13. 
 
 " Some unthinking people are apt to look upon those that go to 
 church, and those that go to meetings, as of two different religions ; 
 and the distance between them is widened to a degree equal to that 
 between Papists and Protestants. Thanks be to God, the matter is 
 not so. 
 
 " We also are Israelites in common, and therefore in communion 
 with those of the national establishment. Are they Christians ? so 
 are we. We worship the same God, in the same name, and heartily 
 consent with them in all the articles of the ancient creed, holding j!/s^ 
 the same form of soundwords, (2 Tim. iii. 16) and contending earnestly for 
 the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 3.) We are baptized, and do 
 baptize, into the same great and sacred name of Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost, as three Persons, but one God : we read the same scrip- 
 tures, and adhere to them as the standing rule of faith and practice, 
 and make use of them as our oracle and touchstone. We build our 
 hopes of salvation upon the covenant of grace, and the promises of it 
 made to us and to our children, and submit to all gospel ordinances, 
 particularly that of the ministry. Whatever the way in which we 
 worship the God of our fathers is called and counted, we believe all things 
 which are written in the law, and the prophets, and the everlasting Gospel, &c. 
 
 " We are far from engrossing religion and the church to ourselves 
 and those of our own way, or thinking that we are the only elect 
 
 * Little did this excellent man expect that this Meeting-house would ever be 
 used for propagating the tenets broached by Socinus, whom he called " that arch- 
 heretic." (Life, edit. Williams, p. 181.) I have heard it stated, that the galleries 
 of this chapel were built at the expense and for the use of an Independent con- 
 gregation, which joined in .Mr. Henry's time. 
 
160 
 
 people of God ; irom our hearts we abhor and renounce all such narro\T 
 principles as are contrary to catholic Christianity, and undermine and 
 straiten its sure and large foundations. We do here solemnly profess, 
 and shall take all occasions to repeat it, that Ave celebrate our religious 
 assemblies in communion with all that in every place cull on the name of 
 Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours. 1 Cor. i. 2."* — Pp. 15, 16. 
 
 There was a considerable difference, both of opinion and 
 practice, between a portion of the Congregational denomina- 
 tion and the generaUty of the Presbyterians, as to the lawful- 
 ness and propriety of holding occasional communion with the 
 Church of England, by joining with its members in pubhc 
 worship and in the participation of the Lord's supper, accord- 
 ing to the form and with the rites prescribed in the Liturgy. 
 In 1705, Mr. Tallents, a learned and excellent Presbyterian 
 minister at Shrewsbury, pubhshed " A Short History of 
 Schism, for the promoting of Christian Moderation and the 
 Communion of Saints," in which, after entering into an 
 examination of several texts of scripture, the records of eccle- 
 siastical history, and some passages in the Fathers, particularly 
 Cyprian, he proceeds to lay down this proposition — " To 
 worship God sometimes, with those with whom we do not 
 always, is oft a duty, and a special means to prevent, remove, 
 or greatly to lessen the sin of schism, and to promote that 
 which is so desirable — catholic communion, "f He afterwards 
 states, " It's plain, that generally they who are called Presby- 
 terians, and some other Dissenters also, judge it lawful, and 
 sometimes a duty for them to do so, and practise accordingly. 
 Many have not opportunities to join with those of their own 
 way ; and there are many bishops and others, who are worthy 
 persons, and preach excellently, and Dissenters oft go to 
 hear them, and greatly honour them; and sometimes the 
 main reason is, to shew" they hold communion with them; 
 that though there be many things amiss, against which they 
 bear a real testimony by their Nonconformity, yet they go to 
 
 • This can scarcely be said in any sense of the modern Unitarians. The Im- 
 proved Version unwarrantably varies from Archbishop Newcome's translation of these 
 words — rote iTrticaXovfiivoic to ovofia — which agrees with the Common Ver- 
 «ion (call on the name) ; rendering them — " are called by the name." 
 
 t Pp.103, 104. 
 
161 
 
 shew to the world, they separate not from them, and the better 
 to maintain that spiritual love which ought to be among the 
 members of the churches of Christ. The Dissenters who are 
 of the Congregational way, say, they are not guilty of schism ; 
 and Dr. Owen and others have writ to shew they are 
 free from it ; yet they generally think they may not worship 
 God with the Conformists at any time." He then quotes a 
 passage from Dr. Owen, ' Of Evangelical Love,' &c., in which 
 they say, "The Church of England, or the generality of the nation 
 professing the Christian Rehgion, are a part, and as sound and 
 healthful a part of the catholic visible church, as any in the 
 world ; that there is nothing in it that may directly and abso- 
 lutely hinder men's eternal salvation; that to this catholic 
 church they owe all love ; and that it's their duty to hold 
 constant communion with it, and that they do so by a Pro- 
 fession of the same Faith and Obedience, yet judge they ought 
 not to worship God with them," &c. "This," adds Mr. 
 Tallents, " deserves to be well considered. But the Presby- 
 terians go further, as they think in their souls they ought ; 
 though this grieves those their brethren the higher Noncon- 
 formists, and doth not please the high Conformists."* 
 
 The reasons against the practice he proceeds to state and 
 answer. He lays down this as the true catholic sjnrit — to 
 communicate with persons sound in the faith, of all com- 
 munions that impose or practise no sinful things.f 
 
 One of the chief advocates for occasional conformity 
 was the cathohc Dissenter, John Howe, who pubhshed, 
 in 1701, a tract in vindication of this practice, in reply to 
 a publication by Defoe. Mr. Howe, in a sermon preached 
 on the 5th of November, 1703, published the next year, after 
 
 * Pp. 108, 109. Dr. Owen, it appears, held, that it was unlawful to unite in 
 public worship with those who used the liturgy. A tract, which he published on 
 this point, was answered by Baxter, in another entitled, " Catholick Communion 
 Defended," 4to. 1684. But the opinion of Dr. Owen was not universal among 
 members of the Congregational denomination. In 1683 a tract was published 
 entitled, " The Lawfulness of Hearing the publick Ministers of the Church of 
 England proved, by Mr. Philip Nye and Mr. John Robinson, two eminent Con- 
 gregational Divines," &c. 4to. 
 
 t P. 118. 
 M 
 
162 
 
 referring to the deliverance eifected by Divine interposition, 
 "from the power of darkness," which that day was com- 
 memorated, says — 
 
 " We ought to take much to heart the mercies of God herein. 
 And although we are here met under somewhat a distinct character, to 
 bear a part in the solemn thanksgivings of this day, we are not the 
 less obliged to be very serious herein ; and, however, have, for our 
 part, great reason not to expect any thing hard or grievous from such, 
 differing from us, as understand religion ; between whom and us there 
 is an agreement in all the Siibatantials thereof. We have t/ie same 
 Articles of Doctrine, the same institutions of worship, and the same rules of 
 life, conversation and practice towards our Sovereign and fellow-subjects. 
 And when there is so great an Agreement, that which is left to be the 
 matter of disagreement, can only be very little circumstantial things ; 
 and which they from whom we differ professedly call indifferent, 
 not tending, therefore, in themselves; to make either better men or 
 better Christians. And whereas some of us do not think so, through- 
 out ; that disagreement is, we hope, the rather to be pardoned, both 
 because it is little, so little that there are few men, of considering 
 minds, that, upon strict inquiry and comparing of thoughts, will not 
 be found to differ in much greater things, and very consistently with 
 most entire mutual love, or, at least, no design of hurt to each other. 
 And yet the difference is real, and not to be dissembled, nor thrown off 
 at pleasure, it being in no man's power that would keep a conscience 
 void of offence towards God and man, to form his judgment this way 
 or that, as he will. And whereas there are Churches, abroad and at 
 home, wherewith we agree, and from whicli we differ in these smaller 
 things ; we are not willing quite to disjoin ourselves from eitlier sort, 
 in which the Substance is visible of our common religion. For they 
 are in their nature and kind one and the same ; nor can we apprehend 
 how a church or society, formed for the purposes of religion, can be 
 constituted and distinguished for sole communion with that and no 
 other, by such things as are confessed on all hands to be no parts of 
 religion ; nor to have any necessary connection with it. The more 
 truly catholic the commujiion of Christians is, the more truly Chris- 
 tian. There is a mental communion which is more intimate than 
 merely local, which yet we cannot have with them with whom we 
 judge it unlawful to have actual local communion, if there be occa- 
 sion. But one may have 6oM, wheresoever the Essentials of Chris- 
 tianity do appear ; not subverted by the addition of other things, that 
 are inconsistent with any of those essentials."* 
 
 * Pp. .18-40. 
 
163 
 
 Dr. Calamy, in his Brief Account of the Protestant Dis- 
 senters, (1717,) thus refers to the then prevaihng practice on 
 this point : — " Such fiiends are they to that Christian charity, 
 upon which the writings of the New Testament lay so great a 
 stress, that, while those of the Established Church are gene- 
 rally for confining their communion to such as are of their 
 own way only, a number of the Dissenters have, from the first, 
 (though they declared they foresaw the disservice it would do to 
 their particular interest,) owned themselves free for occasional 
 conformity with Christians of all forms, who agree in the Essen- 
 tials of religion, in testimony of their esteeming them brethren, 
 notwithstanding their differences in lesser matters." p. 34. 
 
 This was precisely the view of Christian communion enter- 
 tained by the most distinguished men among the founders of 
 the English Presbyterian churches. Mr. Howe, in his funeral 
 sermon ( 1 699) for Dr. Bates, another eminent and leading divine, 
 who was often honoured to " stand before kings" on behaK of 
 his Nonconformist brethren, says — " His judgment in eccle- 
 siastical matters was to be known by his practice ; and it was 
 such, that he needed not care who knew it. He was for entire 
 Union of all visible Christians, (or saints, or believers, which 
 in Scripture are equivalent terms,) meaning by Christia7iiiy, 
 what is essential thereto, whether doctrinal or jiractical ; as, 
 by humanity, we mean, what is essential to man, severing 
 accidents as not being of the essence; and by visibility, the 
 probable appearance thereof: and for free Communion of all 
 such, of whatsoever persuasion, in e.r^ra-essential matters, if 
 they pleased. And this design he vigorously pursued as long 
 as there was any hope ; desisting when it appeared hopeless, 
 and resolving to wait till God should give a spirit suitable 
 hereto." pp. 96, 97. 
 
 After the numerous quotations that have already been 
 produced, it will be easy to determine what they considered 
 essential to Christianity, in distinction from those lesser 
 extra-essential matters, about which they were ready to allow 
 diversity of apprehension, as forming no barrier to Christian 
 communion. 
 
164 
 
 Both the EngUsh Presbyterian Association and Mr. Hunter 
 have quoted some passages jfrom the dedication of a printed 
 funeral sermon by Mr. Shower, whom the latter calls " one of 
 the most eminent Presbyterian ministers" of the period in 
 question, for Mr. Nathaniel Oldfield, a pious and devoted 
 young minister, who died December 31, 1696, and may be taken 
 as a fair specimen of the class of Presbyterian divines, who 
 were immediate successors of the ejected clergy. These pas- 
 sages clearly recognise the important distinction between 
 Fundamentals and little matters of dispute.* 
 
 To shew that Mr. Hunter has misrepresented or misinter- 
 preted the design of these passages, it will not be necessary to 
 pass beyond the bounds of the brief pubUcation in which they 
 are contained. That the writer had no intention of giving 
 countenance to an unlimited toleration within the pale of the 
 Christian churchy of all kinds of opinions, will sufficiently 
 appear from the sermon itself. The text is Heb. xiii. 7. 
 " Remember them who have [had] the rule over you, who have 
 spoken unto you the word of God; whose faith follow," 8cc. 
 He thus explains the former words — " Remember those who 
 have been your spiritual guides — who have been your in- 
 structors in the faith — preachers of the Everlasting Gospel ; 
 
 * " Next to his piety, or as a part of it, his Peaceableness and Charity, in opposition 
 to bitterness and dividing zeal, and a narrow spirit, was very commendable and 
 exemplary. lie could unite with all Christians in things necessary, and was 
 not for making more Fundamentals and Necessaries than Christ hath made, or for 
 other terms of Ciiurch communion, than the terms of our common Christianity ; 
 and therefore was ready to receive all whom he believed Christ would receive." 
 
 " He was of otie Church with all those whom he hoped to meet in heaven. 
 Endeavouring to hold the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, because he 
 acknowledged there 'is but one body, one Spirit, one Lord Jesus Christ, one 
 hope, one faith, one baptism, (and consequently but one holy table,) one God and 
 Father of all, from whom and by whom and for whom are all things.' 
 
 "This charitable spirit, (let who will call such Moderation lukewarm- 
 ness,) with serious diligence to please God, and do what service we can in 
 our several places, will be accepted with God, and yield us comfort living and 
 dying; and will, I doubt not, be better thought of hereafter, when the little 
 names of distinction and matters of dispute, that now divide Christians and 
 Protestants, shall be forgotten "—His. pp. 41, 42. His. Dcf. pp. 42, 43. 
 
1 (!.■) 
 
 whose office it was to feed the flock of Christ hy sound doc- 
 trine ; to unfold the mind of God to others ; to teach them 
 what they must know, beheve and do, avoid and hope for; to 
 acquaint their hearers with their several maladies and reme- 
 dies, dangers and duties, to hold forth the excellency of 
 Christ, so as to make him be received and obeyed, admired 
 and loved."* The importance which, in the writer's view, is 
 attached to this part of their office, will appear from the fol- 
 lowing extracts : — 
 
 " How much the welfare of the church depends upon tlie ministers 
 and teachers of the word, and how little the beauty and glory of reli- 
 gion can ever be kept up in the world, if ministers do not labour in the 
 ■word and doctrine, will very easily appear to such as consider how reli- 
 gion has declined and been lost by the ignorance, and unfaithfulness, and 
 negligence of those that ought to have preached the Gospel of Christ ; 
 and how the denial or contempt of the ministry hath always been 
 accompanied with the growth of atheism, infidelity, and profaneness. 
 How solemnly does the apostle charge the elders of the church of 
 Ephesus, Acts xx. 28, 30. ' Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the 
 flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the 
 church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood, and to 
 warn every man, lest they be perverted by false teachers,' &c.t 
 
 " Another thing concerning these deceased ministers the Apostle 
 mentions, is, their exemplary Faith. They would not have been jiro- 
 posed as patterns with respect to faith, if they had not been famous 
 and exemplary, as to the clearness of their minds, and the soundness 
 of their doctrine. Follow their faith. Doubtless he means it, of such 
 who, as to knowledge, and firmness of jjersuasion concerning the 
 truths of the Gospel, and fruitfulness in suitable effects, did in spirit 
 and practice shew themselves believers. They would not, otherwise, 
 have been named as fit examjiles for the people to follow, as to their 
 faith. You find ministers are exhorted to take heed to their doctrine, 
 1 Tim. iv. 16, and to continue therein, that they may save themselves 
 and them that hear them, and to speak the things that become sound doctrine, 
 1 Tim. vi. 3. They are to keep the doctrine of the Gospel pure and 
 uncorrupt, and to feed the people with the sincere milk of the word. 
 For if the Doctrine, which should jiromote faith and holiness, should 
 be depraved by the ministers of the word, how is it possible that true 
 Christianity should spread and flourish, or be preserved and con- 
 tinued? What need liave we to beg that God would give and continue 
 such pastors after hi'i own heart, as may feed his people witli i^ood know- 
 
 • Pp. 2, 3, 1.-;, 17. + Pp. 15 lU 
 
166 
 
 ledge and sound understanding. They must hold fast the faithful word 
 that they have been taught, that they may be able, by sound doctrine, to 
 exhort and convince thegainsayers,Tit.i. 6 — 9, chap. ii. 1.; such speech 
 that cannot be condemned, that he who is of the contrary part may 
 be asliamed. And how comfortably and usefully may they preach to 
 others, who are firmly persuaded of the truth of what they say, who 
 believe and live the truth they deliver !"* 
 
 This shews the strong feeling which the writer entertained 
 concerning the indispensable necessity of soundness in " the 
 faith of our Lord Jesus Christ" — a clear perception and firm 
 conviction of the truths which eminently constitute the Gospel, 
 as a qualification for the useful and efficient discharge of the 
 ministerial office. So far from exhibiting any thing like indif- 
 ference in this matter, he positively states that the doctrine of 
 the Gospel being dejiraved by those who call themselves, or 
 are called by others, " ministers of the word," renders it im- 
 possible that TRUE Christianity should spread and flourish, 
 or even be preserved in the world. The moderation of Mr. 
 Shower and his Presbyterian brethren did not degenerate into 
 latitudinarianism, or proceed to the lawless length of unbounded 
 license. The admitted fact of their liberality of sentiment 
 only serves to confirm the paramount importance which they 
 attached to those great essential truths, which they did not 
 regard as fit subjects or occasions for its exercise. 
 
 But in proof of the allegation, that they prescribed hmits to 
 their liberality, I may appeal not only to the words of the writer 
 whom Mr. Hunter quotes, contained in the self-same tract, 
 but to the remarks made by Mr. Hunter himself. Referring 
 to the passages quoted by him, he says, "they do not indeed 
 shew us the precise limitations which they would set up to 
 bind the Christian church, but they shew quite inteUigibly 
 that they would enlarge it as wide as possible, and that the 
 heresy must be very decided indeed, which placed a man 
 beyond their comprehensive pale."f " I do not deny that it was 
 only " very decided heresy" which would place a man beyond 
 their comprehensive idea of church communion — only such 
 heresy as would place the man who held and broached it 
 beyond the pale of " Cathohc Christianity," — a denial of some 
 
 • p.p. IS— 20. t Hist. Def. P. 43. 
 
1{)7 
 
 one or more of the essential Articles of the Christian faith. 
 But such, undoubtedly, was the Anti-Trinitarian heresy in 
 their estimation. To adopt the words of Howe, in his fune- 
 ral sermon for Dr. Bates, " the great substantials of Chris- 
 tianity were the measure of their communion." 
 
 " Passages such as these," says Mr. Hunter, " shew that 
 there was something in the minds of the Presbyterian ministers 
 of that age, which prevailed above anything like zeal for 
 orthodox opinions." Mr. Shower expressly states, that Mr. 
 Oldfield had a "zeal for truth," but, while he also describes 
 him as eminent for charity, he does not intimate that this pre- 
 vailed above his earnest regard for doctrinal purity. After 
 stating that he did not confine the church of Christ to a. party, 
 or endeavour to make proselytes to any — for he was of none, 
 but that, with all Christians, for Christ against the Devil — 
 that he was an enemy to censorious heats and bitterness, and 
 all such narrow principles as destroy love, and of a truly 
 healing and catholic spirit — the author proceeds to describe 
 his character as a minister of Christ, and applies to him the 
 words of the apostle Paul, Titus i. 9 : " holding fast the 
 faithful word, as he had been taught ; able, by sound doctrine, 
 to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." He afterwards 
 enumerates the following particulars : — 
 
 " With clearness he would ojien and apply the Doctrinal Articles of 
 Religion, and by catechizing instruct the ignorant. He would often 
 use the expression of the Apostle, " I am not sent to baptize, compara- 
 tively, but to preach the Gospel, which is the power of God, to the salva- 
 tion of the soul. You remember concerning his preaching, how prac- 
 tically, both for matter and manner, he insisted on the Great Tilings of 
 Religion. He did not amuse his hearers (whom he considered as near 
 the grave and the eternal world) with controversies which they need 
 not understand, and concerning which wise and good men may have 
 different sentiments, and yet be wise and good, be accepted of God, 
 and bear with one another. He carefully avoided extremes, in opening 
 and applying the truths of the Gospel. He was wont to exhort men 
 to work out their own salvation with all diligence, and to strive to the 
 utmost to enter into lieaven ; and yet, after all, to trust and rely onli/ 
 on the mediation and righteousness of Christ. He preached and proved 
 the necessity of an imputed righteousness, and yet urged the necessity 
 of an inherent one ; that the priestly office of Christ, and his sacrifice 
 
168 
 
 for sin might be honoured, and yet the Holy Gliost, in his siuiotify- 
 ing influence, uiight be honoured too. He did not make morality the 
 whole duty of man ; nor yet deceive the people, by saying that Christ 
 repented for them and believed for them.* He magnified the special 
 grace of God in the conversion of a sinner, and yet preached repent- 
 ance towards God as necessary to forgiveness, with faith in our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, without curiously considering which is first, when both 
 are needful, and never parted. He laid the whole stress of our 
 salvation on Jesus Christ. He ascribed the beginning, progress, and 
 finishing of all spiritual good, entirely to the free grace of God ; and 
 yet the impenitence, unbelief, aud damnation of sinners, he justly 
 charged on their own wilfulness, in hearkening to the devil. And if 
 this be legal preaching, what is it to preach the gospel of Christ ?"t 
 
 It thus appears that he was opposed to Antinomian tenets, 
 and that his views of the Gospel were practical ; but where do 
 we find any evidence of what Mr. Hunter imputes to the 
 Presbyterian body at that time — " a latitudinarian spirit, which 
 is inconsistent with the possession of zeal for any particular 
 modification of Christian behef ?" We see, indeed, " a compre- 
 hensive spirit, a loving good men of all denominations ;" but 
 not " the setting works before faith." He laid as the founda- 
 tion of virtue and morality, repentance toward God, and faith 
 in our Lord Jesus Christ, and regarded faith as a principle 
 which, if genuine, will certainly produce good works. He 
 was zealous for " the truth which is according to godliness," 
 and was ready to contend earnestly, though in the spirit of 
 meekness, for the faith once dehvered to the saints; and (to 
 use Mr. Shower's own expression) was not so unreasonable as 
 to " think that a heretic may preach the truth as well as the 
 orthodox.":]: Mr. Shower mentions a circumstance towards 
 the end of the sermon, which shews in what high estimation 
 Baxter and his writings were held among the young Presby- 
 terian ministers of that time. 
 
 " That great and good man, Mr. Baxter, who very much esteemed 
 and loved him, not long before he left this world, sent him this kind 
 message — that he should take heed lest he spent too fast. Tliat Mr. 
 
 • This was one of the offensive tenets ascribed to the Antinomians of Dr. Crisp's 
 tinie. " When I read in Saltmarsh (says Baxter) that Christ repented and believed 
 for us, it let in more light against libertinism than I had before." — Defence of the 
 Nonconformist's Plea for Ptace, p. 110. fP. 60— fi I. * P. 69. 
 
169 
 
 Baxter loved liim, I reckon to his honour. He was one, of many, who 
 thanked God for the assistance he received as a Christian, and as a 
 minister, from the useful books, preaching, and conversation of that 
 excellent man. I freely concur with him therein, having reason to 
 thank God upon the like account." * 
 
 In summing up his character, Mr. Shower describes him as 
 " one of a clear head and warm heart, who understood, 
 believed, and obeyed the Gospel." f 
 
 That Mr. Shower held the Socinians of his time to be 
 deniers of the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, is apparent from 
 a passage in his Exhortation to Ministers and People at the 
 Ordination of Mr. Thomas Bradbury, July 10, 1707, where, 
 after mentioning the circumstance that ministers of different 
 denominations were concurring in the service, he adds — 
 
 " How needful is it, that we do our utmost to unite against the 
 enemies of our common Christian faith, and encourage and strengthen 
 one another in our endeavours for the common interest of real Chris- 
 tianity ? Do we not all hold the Head ? and shall we not own and 
 love one another? agreeing in so many more and greater things than 
 they are about which we differ ? Do we not all of us profess to dissent 
 in some things from those of the National Establishment, upon the 
 like principles of conscience ? and yet to own and honour them as 
 Protestants and brethren ? Let us always distinguish between those 
 things about which good and wise men may differ, and yet be good 
 men, who love God and love one another ; and those things that are 
 essential to Christianity. Have not all English Protestants common 
 enemies, that would be glad to involve us in a general ruin ; and shall 
 we contribute to it by discords among ourselves, for want of a spirit of 
 charity, unity, and mutual forbearance? — Common enemies, I say, not 
 the Romanists only, but such as strike at all revealed religion, over- 
 throw the authority of the holy scriptures, and deny the Divinity of our 
 Blessed Lord ; who would run down and ridicule the sacred ministry^ 
 and all the positive institutions of the Christian religion V'l 
 
 Here, the reader will observe, he associates those who deny 
 the Divinity of Jesus Christ with deists, free-thinkers, and 
 infidels, and this in immediate connexion with passages con- 
 taining a pathetic appeal for unity, peace, and love, among 
 different denominations of Protestant Dissenters, and different 
 classes of English Protestants. 
 
 • p. 69. t P. 82. t Pp. 47, 48. 
 
170 
 
 It has now, I trust, been proved to the satisfaction of every 
 cancUd reader, that the Presbyterian fathers and their suc- 
 cessors held certain doctrines to be essential to Christianity — 
 that in their judgment there were doctrinal limits to the prin- 
 ciple of free inquiry, at least among those who were to be 
 admitted or retained as members of the Christian church ; and 
 that while they objected to implicit assent to " creeds, litur- 
 gies, and articles, being enforced by violent persuasives or 
 dissuasives,"* they refused to "tolerate the opinions of all, "for 
 at least to open the door of church communion to the holders 
 of all opinions, to acknowledge as Christians those who rejected 
 any of the fundamental articles of Christianity, or to admit the 
 principle of equally receiving and regarding with equal favour 
 those, whose decisions concerning any religious doctrine, even 
 the most vital and the most important, were opposite and 
 contradictory.:}: Whether right or wrong, it is clear, that such 
 conduct was entirely at variance with judgment and practice. 
 They allowed diversity of opinion upon minor points, not affect- 
 ing the substance of Christianity, and inculcated mutual charity, 
 moderation, and forbearance, in reference to matters on which a 
 variety of opinion was not destructive of that unity of the 
 faith for which they earnestly contended. 
 
 It is true there might be a sense, in which they allowed 
 unlimited freedom of "inquiry to all ivithout the pale of the 
 church, though it may be doubted whether in the early part 
 of the last century they would have extended toleration in the 
 state, by the civil magistrate, to the fi-ee propagation of opinions 
 generally deemed heretical and blasphemous, even by means 
 of sober argument and learned discussion.§ Certainly the Irish 
 Presbyterians would not have granted that permission. But 
 not to enter farther at present into this question, I will leave 
 it to the reader to decide whether, if the exercise of that 
 liberty of thought which they allowed, degenerated into 
 licentiousness, if freedom of inquiry and the right of private 
 judgment passed beyond the limits which separated funda- 
 
 • Hist. i>p..-)3, .5(). t Ibid. p. 29. X Ibid. p. 5S. 
 
 § " We aie still, (says Dr. Calamy,) of the same inirul wltli the ministers concerned 
 
171 
 
 mental truth fi-om non-essential, they would not have refused 
 to admit, or, in the exercise of disciphne, have east out of the 
 church, such parties as heretics, fit only to be numbered with 
 unbelievers and apostates. 
 
 A few words will now suffice, in reference to what is called 
 " the great Presbyterian principle,"! about which so much 
 has been said by these writers, with such strength of expres- 
 sion and in such studied variety of phrase. The right of pri- 
 vate judgment, so far as it tvas a principle adopted by them, was 
 neither their great nor their distbigimhing- principle. Instead 
 of being jjeculiar to them, it was common to the whole body 
 of Nonconformists ; and even these writers themselves call it 
 " the great Protestant principle." But then we are told they 
 were the only body who practically adopted it, carried it to its 
 full extent, and "followed it out in all its consequences.":}: 
 This cannot be correct, or whence has arisen the Unitarianism 
 among the General Baptists, not to mention that which has 
 found its way into some of the Congregational churches, of 
 which Yorkshire now supplies two instances, the chapel in 
 
 in the Conference at tlie Savoy; who, in their Petition for Peace, thus expressed 
 themselves — " ' Grant us but the freedom which Christ and his apostles left unto the 
 churches; use necessary things as necessary, and unnecessary things as unneces- 
 sary, and charitably bear witii the infirmities of the weak, and tolerate the toler- 
 able while they live peaceably, and then you will know when you have done.' " — 
 Defence of Moderate Nonconformity, 1703, Part I. p. 192. 
 
 t The English Presbyterian Association expressly call " the right of private judg- 
 ment the great principle of Protestant Dissent," pp. 45, 46 ; and Mr. Hunter, p. 47. 
 in proof of this being the principle of the Presbyterian founders, quotes passages 
 from two " books, esteemed of authority in such a question." One of these is, 
 "Towgood's Dissent from the Church of England fully justified," in which he speaks 
 of it as ' the only principle on which the Dissenters rest their cause.' The other is a 
 popular manual, by the late Rev. Samuel Palmer, of Hackney, an eminent Inde- 
 pendent minister, than whom no one better understood, or more highly valued, the 
 grand principles which he here expounds as those of the entire body : — 
 
 " Q. What are the grand principles on wliich the Protestant Dissenters ground 
 their separation from the Church by law established? 
 
 " A. The right of private judgment and liberty of conscience, in opposition to 
 all human authority in matters of religion ; the supremacy of Christ ^as the only 
 Head of his Church; and the sufficiency of the holy scriptures as the rule of faith 
 and practice."' — The Protestant Dissenters' Catechism, S:c. 13th edit. 1S07, 
 p. 21. 
 
 t Hist, p .52. Hist. Def. pp. 41, 46. t Hist, pp-1— 3, 50, 56—58. 
 
17-2 
 
 Call Lane, Leeds, and the Upper Chapel, Sheffield ? But this 
 principle was not only well understood, but held sacred, and 
 firmly maintained by all other denominations of Dissenters, 
 who did not tie the minds and consciences of men in the 
 strict bonds of creeds, confessions, and articles, by " coercive 
 subscription." It was regarded as forming the very basis of 
 enlightened and consistent Nonconformity ; and is, in fact, the 
 great principle embodied in the famous maxim of Chilling- 
 worth, " the Bible, the Bible only, is the religion of Protest- 
 ants," or the sole rule of their faith, on which the Reformation 
 was founded, and on which alone it can be defended and 
 maintained. 
 
 Mr. Hunter acknowledges that the modern Unitarians have 
 " renounced all which some men now incline to call the pecu- 
 liar and distinguishing principles of the Gospel,"* and extends 
 this remark to the Arians of a much earlier period. But the 
 question, in my view, at least for the purpose of the present 
 argument, is not what some men now incline to call the pecu- 
 liar and distinguishing doctrines of the gospel ; but whether 
 the Presbyterians of the period in question did not take the 
 same view of the obnoxious tenets held by those then called 
 Socinians, or Unitarians, although they were a class of persons 
 who had not proceeded to nearly the same length in the career 
 of doctrinal deviation as the present race of them ? This, I 
 think, I may now say has been 'proved. 
 
 " The varieties of the heterodoxy" may, indeed, be " little 
 material in this inquiry ;" but when " first the departure took 
 place from the orthodoxy of the founders" it was very different 
 from what it subsequently, though not till after an interval 
 of many years, became in several congregations, and that not 
 (to use Mr. Hunter's words) "by any sudden transition, but 
 by a gradual sliding."! 
 
 " The various modifications of the heresy" may be, compara- 
 tively speaking, " of small importance," but there were several 
 great doctrines held by the earliest heterodox ministers, which 
 are totally rejected by modern Unitarians. I could quote 
 strong and remarkable language employed by Mr. Peirce, to 
 
 • Hist. Def. p. 53. t Ih. p. 50. 
 
173 
 
 shew that he made a very near approacii to orthodoxy on some 
 of the points closely connected with the doctrine of the proper 
 essential deity of Christ, which it is well known that he 
 abandoned.* 
 
 The English Presbyterian Association distinguish between 
 " Arianism," and what they call " proper Unitarianism ;" and 
 even among Arians, there are varieties and shades of opinion, 
 some of which, when compared to modern Unitarianism, ap- 
 proximate to orthodoxy. 
 
 Mr. Martin Tomkins, minister of a Presbyterian congre- 
 gation at Stoke Newington, Middlesex, who was dismissed 
 for Arianism in 1718, was author of a tract in defence of the 
 doctrine of atonement, pubhshed in 1732, under this title — 
 "Jesus Christ the Mediator between God and Man, an 
 Advocate for us with the Father, and a Propitiation for the 
 Sins of the World," which Dr. Doddridge calls " an excellent 
 treatise."! 
 
 It was not till Dr. John Taylor, then of Norwich, after- 
 wards theological professor at the Warrington academy, one 
 of the earUest and most decided heresiarchs among the Pres- 
 byterians, published his ' Scripture Doctrine of Atonement' 
 in 1751, that Socinian tenets on that essential doctrine were 
 openly broached among the Dissenters of that, or indeed of 
 any, class.if 
 
 * The following may serve as a specimen — " Well may we call the universe to 
 observe and wonder at this. Hear, oh heavens ; and give ear, oh earth ! The 
 Creator, he by whom God made the worlds, has become an infant ; and he that made 
 all things has been made of a woman. He that gives life to all, has condescended 
 to receive life by the means of such to whom he gave it. His dwelling thus with 
 men on earth is the more marvellous, if we consider the design of it. What a per- 
 fect expiation and atonement has he made for our sins ? This was the end of his 
 appearance. We knoio he was manifested, to take away our sins. Astonishing 
 grace!" &c.— Fifteen Sermons, 1728, pp. 300, 301. 
 
 t Family Expositor, note on John i. 29. A second edition of this tract was 
 published in 1761, with an essay by another gentleman, to prove the credibility 
 of the gospel, from the doctrine of the efficacy of Christ's death for the redemp- 
 tion of the world. 
 
 X Dr. Taylor also made the first attack on the doctrine of natural depravity, 
 in his "Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin," published in 1740, which gave 
 occasion to one of the masterly argumentative works of that " prodigy of meta- 
 physical acumen," President Pjdwards, the great American divine and philosopher. 
 
174 
 
 Mr. Hunter himself speaks of "material points,"* and 
 mentions " the great question " between Trinitarians and 
 Unitarians.f The question at issue between them is, indeed, 
 greaf, for it relates to the sole and proper object of reli- 
 gious veneration and homage, the moral condition of the 
 human race, the method of acceptance with God, and eternal 
 salvation. He allows that Christianity has its " great doc- 
 trines," and has enumerated several, which in his estimation 
 are such.l So far, he agrees Avith Mr. Shower; but his 
 catalogue of "lesser matters" would include some doctrines 
 which that excellent moderate Presbyterian would have placed 
 in the list of "fundamentals and necessaries."§ Among these, 
 the latter would certainly have included the proper essential 
 deity of the Son of God, the sacrificial design of his death, 
 the distinct personality, true divinity, and sanctifying agency 
 of the Holy Spirit. If I rightly understand Mr. Hunter's 
 meaning, he admits that the Trinity was, in the estimation of 
 the old Presbyterians, "a great and fundamental principle." || 
 This, however, I will venture to assert, it unquestionably was, 
 whether Mr. Hunter admit the fact or not. They would 
 have made no scruple to deny, that what is now called 
 "Unitarian Christianity," was not that "common Chris- 
 tianity," that "one faith," the sincere professors of which 
 they were willing to acknowledge as brethren, whom Christ 
 had already received, and one heaven would hereafter contain. 
 Mr. Henry, in his Brief Inquiry into the true Nature of 
 Schism, (1690,) gives this definition of the true scripture 
 notion of it — " an uncharitable distance, division, or alienation 
 of affections, among those who are called Christians, and agree 
 in the fundamentals of religion, occasioned by their different 
 apprehensions about little things ;" and another Presbyterian 
 minister, (Rev. John BiUingsley, of London,) in a small tract 
 entitled ' A Brief Discourse of Schism,' (1714,) in which he 
 condemns, on the one hand, " causeless disputes about trifles 
 
 • Hist. Vind. p. 49. + lb. p. 57. 
 
 ♦ lb. p. 35. Tlie English Presbyterian Association also speak of " essential 
 points," Hist- p- 10, and " the greater points of religion," p, 2!>. 
 § Hist. Vind. p. 42. II lb. p. 16. 
 
175 
 
 and undue scrupulosity," and on the other, "the imposing 
 spirit," which he . calls the usurping of God's throne and 
 lording it over conscience, adopts this definition of heresy — 
 " any Doctrine that overthrows the faith, and destroys the 
 foundation of rehgion, and the hope of salvation by Jesus 
 Christ; especially if it be openly espoused, industriously 
 propagated, and obstinately persisted in." pp. 13, 16. 
 
 It has now, I hope, been proved, that the Presbyterians, 
 during the period in question, professed to be, and actually 
 were, decided Trinitarians and in general Calvinists. But while 
 conceding that they were themselves moderately orthodox, 
 these writers deny that they took any precautionary measures 
 to secure the orthodoxy of their successors ; that they erected 
 any barriers against the intrusion of error, or adopted any 
 means to hinder the encroachment of heresy. Even persons 
 orthodox from deliberate conviction, might be comparatively 
 indiiferent about the perpetuation of orthodoxy among those 
 that should hereafter occupy the chapels which they erected, or 
 share in the benefit of the endowments or other trust-funds 
 which they conveyed and settled for the use of future genera- 
 tions. The following assertions embody the substance of what 
 has been said on this point. 1. They did not bind their suc- 
 cessors to an entire agreement with their own opinions, " by 
 any interpretative creeds, or catechisms, or articles." — This I 
 have already admitted, so far as relates to the imposition of 
 such documents as the tests of orthodoxy, thereby supplanting 
 and superseding the scripture as the only rule of faith. — 2. They 
 did not introduce any tests into the trust-deeds of their 
 chapels, but " left them at large, in respect to the doctrinal 
 opinions of those who were to be beneficiaries under them," 
 instead of inserting clauses " to secure the perpetual preva- 
 lence of their own sentiments in their congregations."! — 
 3. They placed no barriers in the way of the exercise of that 
 freedom of mind, the love of which was the great characteristic 
 of the body — " surrounded their communion with no fences — 
 required no confessions or professions of belief, in order to 
 
 • Hist. Def. p. 48. t Il>. PP- 49, 39. 
 
176 
 
 admission to the Lord's table"*— or, to use the words of the 
 Enghsh Presbyterian Association, " it appeared to them to be 
 plainly expedient, and consistent with scripture doctrine and 
 their religious principles, to adopt open communion."t 
 
 I might meet these last assertions with a direct denial, and 
 challenge the writers to prove them, which they have not 
 even attempted to do ; but the fact was so incontestably other- 
 wise, and the evidence in support of it is so superabundant, 
 that I cannot refrain from producing a portion of that evidence. 
 The general statement which I shall substantiate is, that the 
 Presbyterians, fi'om the Revolution to the death of queen 
 Anne, took precautionary measures to secure the continued 
 orthodoxy of their churches and ministers, and to restrain, by 
 the exercise of discipline and government, the introduction of 
 erroneous and heretical doctrine. Whether the measures they 
 adopted were suitable in kind or strong enough in degree, and 
 whether they proved, in fact, efficient and available for this 
 ])urpose, are distinct questions, with the discussion of which I 
 shall not now meddle. The following are the principal facts 
 which I shall adduce in support of the above statement : — 
 
 1. They required a confession of faith from parents, pre- 
 viously to admitting their children to baptism, and from adults 
 previously to their being received among the number of com- 
 municants at the Lord's Supper, and asserted the right of 
 their churches to excommunicate heretical members. 
 
 •2. They used the Assembly's Shorter Catechism in the 
 religious instruction of their children. 
 
 •'3. The ministers invariably recjuired a formal profession of 
 faith from candidates for the ministerial office, previously to 
 their being admitted into it by the solemn rite of ordination ; 
 and their congregations not only claimed, but in several cases 
 actually exercised, the right of dismissing their ministers for 
 embracing heterodox and erroneous opinions on what were 
 deemed fundamental points of doctrine. 
 
 So far from " allowing unrestrained access to the Lord's 
 Supper to any persons whatsoever," there was invariably 
 exercise of discretion by the ministers and 
 
 Hist. Def, pp. 38, 18, 16. t Hist. p. 33. 
 
177 
 
 other officers, explicitly or implicitly, in the name and on the 
 behalf of the Church, that is, the body of communicants, in 
 admitting to and excluding from that sacrament." They re- 
 quired from candidates, previously to their admission, a declara- 
 tion or profession of faith. Let it be granted that they 
 required only a confession of 'Faith in Jesus Christ,'as necessary 
 to salvation;* which Dr. Calamy expressly calls, "that great 
 and essential point."f In explanation of the extent of meaning 
 which they attached to the phrase " believing in Christ," or 
 the truths which they considered as included in it, I will again 
 have recourse to Baxter, and make a few brief extracts from 
 his « Key for Cathohcs," 2nd edit. 12mo, 1674:—" The Pro- 
 testants say that a man cannot be justified or saved without an 
 actual faith in Christ, (or being the infant of a believer, dedi- 
 cated to Christ,) and that this faith must extend to all things 
 that are essential to Christianity," p. 358. After distinguish- 
 ing between material points, (which he describes as " precious 
 truths of God, which men ought to believe, but in which they 
 may err, and yet be true Christians,") and points essential to 
 Christianity, he asks, " Must you needs know what these 
 Essentials are? In a word — those which the Apostles and the 
 ancient Church <pre-required the knoivledge and profession of, 
 unto baptism." pp. 164, 165. 
 
 " The Reformed Cathohcs hold that none should be taken 
 into the church by baptism, unless themselves or their parents, 
 if they be infants, do make Profession of the Christian faith, 
 and of an holy life, for the time to come, and seem to under- 
 stand what they say and do, and be serious in it." p. 356. 
 
 " The orthodox hold, that none are to be admitted to the 
 eucharist, and communion of the church therein, but those 
 that believe actually (or profess so to do) the articles of the 
 faith, and understand the nature of the sacrament, and live 
 according to the law of Christ." — p. 357. 
 
 * The reader will recollect, that in the Heads of Agreement, among the " Essen- 
 tial Requisites to Church Communion," one is, that the person seeking admis- 
 sion " be knowing and sound in the Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian reli- 
 gion." The Presbyterians never renounced this principle, and for many years 
 afterwards adhered to it in practice. 
 
 t " Defence of Moderate Nonconformity," part ii. p. 207. 
 N 
 
178 
 
 Baxter held that baptism included " a profession of faith in 
 God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; a sincere giving up of 
 ourselves in covenant to him, as our God and Father, our 
 Redeemer and Saviour, our Sanctifier and Comforter;" and 
 that it thus " expresseth all the essentials", of the Christian 
 religion in a few words, but sufficiently intelligible "to him that 
 hath learned truly to understand the meaning of them ; but to 
 an ignorant man, a large plain catechism is short enough to 
 express the same things." He then proceeds as follows : — 
 
 '' But as to the use o{ public Professions of faith, to satisfi/ the church, 
 for the admittance of members, or to satisfy other churches to hold 
 communion with any particular church, a form of words which is 
 neither obscure by too much conciseness, nor tedious or tautological 
 by a needless multiplication of words, I take to be the fittest. To 
 which ends, and because the ancient churches had once a happy union 
 on those terms, I think that this is all that should be required of any 
 church or member (ordinarily) to be professed: — 'In general, I do 
 believe all that is contained in the sacred canonical scriptures, and 
 particularly I believe all explicitly contained in the ancient Creed, 
 and I desire all that is contained in the Lord's Prayer, and I resolve 
 upon obedience to the Ten Commandments, and whatever else I can 
 learn of the "will of God.' And for all other points, it is enough to 
 preserve both truth and peace, that men promise not to preach against 
 them, or contradict them, though they subscribe them not."* 
 
 The Presbyterians, for many years after the death of Baxter, 
 took the same view of the baptismal covenant, as a solemn 
 profession of being Christians — a formal admission into the 
 kingdom of Christ — a solemn dedication to the sacred Trinity, 
 
 • Narrative of his Own Life, Part II. p, 198. This passage immediately pre- 
 cedes the quotation introduced by the E. P. Association, Hist. p. 39, from a tract 
 published in 1719, where Baxter's words are not copied with literal accuracy. In 
 answering the objection, that " a Socinian, or a Papist, will subscribe all this," 
 he says, " if you are afraid of communion with Papists and Socinians, it must not 
 be avoided by making a new rule or test of faith, &c., but by calling them to 
 account whenever in preaching or writing they contradict or abuse the truth to 
 which they have subscribed." With these words the quotation ends. Baxter 
 thus inmiediately proceeds : — " This is the work of Governvient ; and we must not 
 think to make laws serve instead of Judgment and Execution ; nor must we make 
 new laws as oft as Heretics will misinterpret and subscribe the old," &c. 
 
 t The part of a godly parent — is professing his Faith, dedicating his child to 
 Cod, and promising a religious education. — Calamy's Abr. Life of Baxter, p. 510. 
 
 Children baptized in their infancy are by that solemnity dedicated and devoted to 
 God,tlieFatlier, Son, and Holy Ghost. Mat. Henry, Scrm. on Catechizing,1713,p.28. 
 
179 
 
 Father, Son, and Holy Spiritf They considered a profession 
 of the Christian faith on the part of parents the condition of 
 their children's right to baptism. 
 
 From a popular tract, printed in 1716, it appears that Dis- 
 senters generally, at least those who practised infant baptism, 
 administered that ordinance on a confession of faith, and pro- 
 mise for the religious education of the child, but they did not 
 always use one particular form of words.* 
 
 What qualifications they required from adult persons offering 
 themselves for stated communion with their churches in the 
 Lord's Supper, it will not be difiicult to ascertain. 
 
 Mr. Tong says, in 1691, " We desire no more than a credible 
 Profession of Faith and HoUness, in order to admission to the 
 most solemn ordinances ; we require no oaths, subscriptions, 
 declarations of assent and consent to canons, &c.t" 
 
 Dr. Watts, in the account he has given of the opinions and 
 practices of the Presbyterians and Independents, states, that 
 while the former usually required no more from those whom 
 they admit into their churches, than sufficient evidence of 
 their " good knowledge and sober conversation," the latter 
 required also an account of the means of their conversion, 
 or the evidences of the sincerity of their faith, t But let it not 
 be supposed that all that the Presbyterians required was mere 
 speculative knowledge of doctrinal truth, without influence to 
 sanctify the heart and regulate the life. 
 
 Mr. Henry, in a short catechism for the instruction of those 
 that are to be admitted to the Lord's Supper (1703), shews the 
 view then entertained of this engagement, as the solemn and 
 dehberate act of the party, accompanied by lively faith in the 
 Redeemer. The following may exhibit the general opinion 
 concerning the nature and design of that sacrament : — 
 
 * Lay Nonconformity justified, 6th edit. 1717, p. 28. 
 
 " Nothing is to me more evident, than that all who soberly profess an adhe- 
 rence to the baptismal covenant, have a right to all the ordinances of Christ, in any 
 church, in any part of the earth where their lot is cast. And this I know (and 
 could prove, if need were) to have been the sense of several who have gone under 
 the name of Independents." — Calamy's Defence of Mod. Nonconformity, 1704, 
 Part II. p. 64. 
 
 t Vindication of Mr-Henry's Brief Inquiry on Schism, p. 54. 
 X Life, &c. by Milner, pp. 196, 197. 
 
 N 2 
 
180 
 
 " Q. 11. Why would you be admitted to this solemn ordinance? 
 
 " A. Because I desire to take the Covenant of my Baptism upon 
 myself, and to make it mine own act and deed to join myself unto 
 the Lord. 
 
 " Q. 13. What do you think of Christ, who is there set before you? 
 
 " A. I think he is a gracious and all-sufficient Saviour, and I accept 
 of him as my Lord and my God. 
 
 " Q. 30. Who shall be welcome to this ordinance ? 
 
 " A. They that by Faith cordially consent to the covenant of grace, 
 and do honour to tlieir Redeemer, by shewing forth his death.''* 
 
 The English Presbyterian Association, speaking of the 
 differences among the London ministers toward the close of 
 the seventeenth century, say — " These disputes widened the 
 distinctions between the two parties, and the more violent 
 became strict in their inquiries respecting the doctrines of their 
 members; while the more tolerant Presbyterians adhered to 
 the principle of comprehensive and open communion." f 
 
 What authority they have for ascribing such an effect to 
 these lamentable disputes does not appear. The distinction 
 between the two parties, at least so far as it related to church 
 government and discipline, instead of being widened, was not 
 in the least affected by them. I will here introduce a remark- 
 able passage from the substance of two sermons, preached in 
 London, in March, 169.5, by Mr. Richard Mayo, a Presby- 
 
 • Mr. Henry, in addressing the catechumens of a Presbyterian minister in 1713, 
 after charging them to retain the remembrance of what they had been taught, that 
 they might be enriched with all good knowledge, adds, " You must hold it fast iu 
 Faith. It is not enough to remember the good truths that are taught you, but you 
 must mix them with faith, or they will not profit you. You let them go, though 
 you remember them never so well, if you let go the belief of them, and the pro- 
 fession of your faith concerning them. You must give a firm assent to them as 
 faithful satjings ; must set to your seal that God is true, and every word of his is 
 so, even that which you cannot comprehend the mystery of; as, the eternity of 
 God, the immensity of all his perfections, the Trinity, the Incarnation of the Son 
 of God, the operations of the Spirit upon the soul of man, and the like; yet, 
 because they are things which God has revealed, you must subscribe to the truth of 
 [them ;] if you do not, you make God a liar, and do, in effect, make yourselves wiser 
 than God, when you say, how can this be ? whereas you should say. Lord, I believe, 
 help thou my unbelief." He then proceeds to explain the sentiments and affec- 
 tions with which the truths of Christianity must be received, and the practical 
 influence and sanctifying effect of them, when truly known and sincerely believed. 
 — Sermon concerning the Catechizing of Youth, p. 24. 
 t Hist, p 20. 
 
181 
 
 terian minister, who had taken a leading part in the formation 
 of the Union, to shew the sentiments entertained concerning 
 the differences existing at that time, when the controversy was 
 
 '^ Never contend about those things which you do not fully under- 
 stand. I might have mentioned Ignorance amongst the make-bates. 
 This is certain, that most of our peace-breakers are persons that are 
 very ignorant, that know not what they say, nor whereof they ajjirm. This 
 may be truly said, that most of our contentions are mere logomachies ; 
 the strife among us, for the most part, is about words, and not things. 
 There was a great strife of old between the Eastern and Western 
 Churches. The Eastern Churches and Christians said, there were 
 three Subsistences in the Trinity, but not three Persons. The Western 
 said, there were three Persons, but not three Subsistences. Athanasius 
 steps in, and reconciles them both. The contentions that were amongst 
 the Nestorians and Eutychians were only verbal, so that we may 
 wonder, and ask with the Apostle, ' If there was not a wise man among 
 them?' And what shall I say of the strife and division that is among 
 the more religious peo2)le of this island at this day? It is unaccount- 
 able. A thinking Christian is ready to wonder, and say. Are there 
 no wise men, and endued with knowledge, that can with meekness of 
 wisdom compose these differences that are among us? Are they all 
 such fools as Solomon describes, Prov. xviii. 6 ? I can't say, that all the 
 debates in England and London about matters of religion are merely 
 verbal ; but I dare affirm this of many, if not the most of them, naj-, 
 the greater part by far, of our litigant and contentious Christians, can 
 give no account of those points about which they contend, nor do 
 they know the hinges upon which the things in controversie turn. 
 Here let me insert a story of modern date : Two persons lately met 
 together at a friend's house, where they had a great deal of -warm 
 discourse about those that go under the denomination of Presby- 
 terians and Independents. One standing by, interposed, and desired 
 them to inform him, what was the real difference betwixt those two 
 sorts or parties. For a while there was deep silence, till anon he 
 urged them to answer him, telling them, it was a most unseemly 
 thing, for persons to contend about what they did not know or under- 
 stand. At length one of them answered. The Independents were 
 stricter in their admission of members into their particular congrega- 
 tions than the others were. Hereuijon the other replied, that, to 
 his knoMdedge, that was false ; forasmuch as some that had been 
 rejected for scandalous conversations, by Presbyterians, had been 
 received into Independent congregations. This threw oil into the 
 fire, and increased their warmth ; till, by and by, this third person 
 
182 
 
 began sharply to reprove them both, telling them, he expected to 
 have heard of some difference in the principles of these parties, 
 which miglit have made for his information ; but all that he could 
 hear did amount to no more, than that there was a difference in the 
 practice of some particular congregations, which would be in the 
 most reformed churches to the world's end. Therefore he desired 
 them to lay aside those unchristian heats that were betwixt them, 
 and not inveigh one against another, for they knew not what them- 
 selves. And his admonition was not ineffectual, for they parted 
 good friends, and in a better temper."* 
 
 What was the precise mode of administering government, 
 and conducting discipUne, generally adopted among the 
 Presbyterians, I am not prepared to state. It probably 
 varied in different churches. Dr. Calamy, in a Charge de- 
 livered to several young ministers, in December, 1716, says — 
 " Be not neghgent of Christian Discipline ;" and intimates, 
 that it should be exercised by " reproving, or suspending, or 
 rejecting from communion,"! p. 34. 
 
 " If," say the English Presbyterian Association, " exclusion 
 from the Lord's table ever was a distinguishing characteristic 
 of one body of Dissenters rather than another, it certainly was 
 not of the Enghsh Presbyterians. The question is one merely 
 of disciphne, always admitted to belong to every church, and 
 subject to every possible alteration, without interfering with 
 questions of doctrine."| 
 
 To this a sufficient answer will be furnished by a passage 
 which the writer himself has quoted from Mr. Peirce's Re- 
 flections upon Dean Sherlock's Vindication of the Corporation 
 and Test Acts, 1718. I will give the entire quotation — " But 
 any such power as this is disclaimed and abhorred by the 
 Dissenters. They pretend not to impose upon the belief or 
 
 * The Cause and Cure of Strife and Divisions, by Richard Mayo, Minister of 
 God's Word. 4to. 1695, pp. 25-27. 
 
 t That God has appointed Government in his Church, they freely own: and it 
 is an opinion that prevails much among tliem, that no one particular form of church 
 government is of Right Divine ; but, its being managed by more or fewer persons, 
 with more or less of superiority and subordination, they look upon as com- 
 paratively indifferent, so that the end, which is Christian purity, be but sub- 
 served.— Cfi/(77?iy'.s «riV/ //reo»^n^ 1717. p. 43. 
 X Hist. p. 32. 
 
183 
 
 practice of any ; they are against any other compulsion but 
 that of reason and argument ; they pretend not to extend their 
 discipUne to any but those of their own communion; they 
 think they have no warrant for any proceedings with those of 
 their own communion besides brotherly admonitions, and 
 rejecting them from their communion in case of their denying 
 the fundamental doctrines of Christianity ; such as, that Jesus 
 is the Christ the Son of God, the Resurrection, &c. ; or in case 
 of plain immorality and wickedness."* 
 
 Another provision made by the Presbyterians for securing 
 the continuance of orthodoxy in their families, and among the 
 successive members of their congregations, was the communi- 
 cation of religious instruction to children and youth by means 
 of catechisms ; for which purpose the Shorter Catechism of the 
 Assembly of Divines was in general, if not universal, use. 
 For many years after the Toleration Act, it was, I believe, the 
 invariable custom, in Presbyterian congregations, for the 
 ministers to instruct the young persons of their Hock in a 
 catechetical form. 
 
 The ejected ministers were distinguished for the strong 
 opinion they entertained of the necessity, and the great pains 
 many of them took in the management of this work, which 
 they regarded as not merely the duty of parents, but as an 
 important branch of the ministerial office ;t and which they 
 conducted pubhcly, a practice which was generally continued 
 by their successors, | and in several places for many genera- 
 tions. Mr. Hunter accurately states, that the meeting-houses 
 erected for the celebration of public worship by Dissenters, 
 after the Toleration Act, were " places also for the catechising 
 of the young."§ 
 
 * Hist. p. 24. 
 
 t " Use catechising. Heretofore catechising justled out preaching ; now, 
 preaching justles out catechising. Let the ship be ballasted with fundamental 
 truths. Hearers will then not be so easily whirled about with every wind. Luther 
 was called discipulits catechismi." — Mr. Porter, 1(559, from the MSS. of Rev. 
 P. Henry— Life, edit. J. B. Williams, 1825, p. 29. 
 
 X In some congregations, the youth are catechized on the afternoons of the 
 Lord's days, in others on the evenings, and in others on some week-day." — Dr. 
 Calamy's Brief Account of the Protestant Dissenters, (1717,) p. 45. 
 
 § Hist. Def. p. 9. 
 
184 
 
 The excellent John Flavel, in the sermon already quoted, 
 intended to be preached at Taunton in 1691, entitled "The 
 Character of a complete Evangelical Pastor drawn by Christ," 
 from Matt. xxiv. 45 — 47, thus addresses his ministerial 
 brethren : — 
 
 " Prudence will direct us to lay a good foundation of knoivledge in our 
 people's souh, by catechising and instructing them in the principles of Chris- 
 tianity, without which we labour in vain. All your excellent sermons 
 will be dashed to pieces upon the rock of your people's ignorance. 
 You can never pitch upon a better project to promote and secure the 
 success of your labours, than the fruitful way of catechising. What 
 ige of Christianity ever produced more lively and stedfast Christians, 
 than the first ages? And then the care of this duty most eminently 
 flourished in the churches. Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Op- 
 tatus, Basil, Austin, and Ambrose, Avere all catechists. And it is 
 the opinion, both of Chemnitius and Zanchy, that that exercise which 
 Christ honoured with his presence in his youth, was a catechistical 
 exercise. 
 
 " We that live in this age, have as much obligation as they, and 
 God hath furnished to our hands the lest help for it, that ever any 
 age since Christ enjoyed. As chymists extract the spirits of herbs and 
 minerals into some rare elixir : so have our venerable Assembly (lately 
 sitting at Westinijister, now in glorj^) composed for us the most judi- 
 cious and compendious system that ever blessed this age. And to 
 make it yet more useful, divers worthy hands have been employed, 
 some in one method, some in another, to make those compendious 
 Answers more intelligible to the people. And yet I am of opinion, 
 somewhat may be further done to advance that great design in a third 
 method, that shall not only make those points more intelligible than 
 in answering hy yea, or no; or drawing out the subservient answers to 
 such a length, as too much charges the people's memory, but withal 
 to intermix the most useful practical matter with what is doctrinal.* If 
 such a course might obtain in all our congregations, I think it Avould 
 greatly discover our prudence, and turn richly to the account of our 
 people's profit, pp. 89 — 92. 
 
 In 1713, Mr. M. Henry published a Sermon concerning the 
 Catechizing of Youth, preached [in London,] to Mr. Harris's 
 Catechumens, April 7, from 2 Tim. i. 13, which fully explains 
 the views then prevailing on this matter : 
 
 * Mr. Flavcl's Exposition of the Assembly's Catechism, -with practical inferences 
 from each question, as it was carried on in the Lord's Days Exercises atDartmouth, 
 in 1GS8, was published after his death, in 1692. 
 
185 
 
 He understands by tlie form of sound works, " a brief summary of 
 the Christian doctrine, and of all those tilings which are most surely 
 believed among Christians" — whether, he adds, "a Creed, ot Confession 
 of Faith I cannot say; I rather think it was in the way of a Catechism, 
 because that method of instruction was used in the early ages of the 
 church ; so that I think if we apply it especially to our Catechisms, we 
 shall offer no violence at all in [to] the text."* 
 
 " It is good to have forms of these sound words drawn up, for the 
 use of those that are to learn the first principles of the oracles of God ; 
 not to be imposed as of equal authority with the Scriptures, but to be 
 proposed in order to the further study of the ScrijJtures. Bear us 
 witness, we set up no other rule of faith and practice, no other oracle, 
 no other touchstone or test of orthodoxy, but the Holy Scriptures of 
 the Old and New Testament. These only are the fountains whence 
 we fetch our knowledge ; these only the foundations on which we 
 build our faith and hope ; those the dernier resort of all our enquiries 
 and appeals in the things of God, for they only are given by divine 
 inspiration. This is the principle we abide by, to the law and to the tes- 
 timony — that's the regula regulans — every other help we have for our 
 souls we make use of as regula regulata, in subordination and subser- 
 viency to the Scripture ; and among the rest, our catechisms and con- 
 fessions of faith. t 
 
 " That which is intended in these forms of sound words, is not, like 
 the Council of Trent, to make a new creed, and add it to what we 
 have in the Scripture, but to collect and methodize the truths and laws 
 of God, and to make them familiar. By these forms of sound words, 
 the main principles of Christianity, which lie scattered in the Scrip- 
 ture, are collected and brought together. Our catechisms and con- 
 fessions of faith pick up from the several parts of Holy "Writ those 
 passages which, though perhajis occasionally delivered, contain the 
 Essentials of religion, the foundations and main pillars upon which 
 Christianity is built, which we are concerned rightly to understand 
 and firmly to believe, in the first place, and then to go on to perfec- 
 tion. We cannot contain all the Scripture, but there are some more 
 weighty and comprehensive sayings, which, (like those which the Jews 
 wrote in their piiilacteries) we should bind for a sign upon our hand, 
 and which should be as frontlets between our eyes. And our forms 
 of sound words furnish us with these. J 
 
 After mentioning the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer, 
 he adds: — "The form of Baptism is another Divine form of sound 
 words peculiar to the Christian dispensation ; but that also needs to 
 be explained by other Scriptures, as it is excellently well in the 
 ancient creeds ; which we receive and embrace, and greatly rejoice in, 
 
 * P- 5. t p. 8. i pp. 9, 10. 
 
186 
 
 as standiii!?, lasting testimonies to the faith once delivered to the saints, 
 Jude 3 ; which, by the grace of God, we will not only adhere to, but 
 earnest ti/ contend for, and live and die by. And all these divine forms 
 of sound words you have fully and faithfully set before you, and 
 opened to you in the Assembly's Larger and Shorter Catechisms ; as, 
 blessed be God, they are in many other, both in our own and other 
 Reformed Churches.* 
 
 " They that are not catechized nor taught the forms of sound words, 
 apprehend not what we mean when we speak of their misery by nature, 
 the sinfulness of sin, the mediation of Christ, the operations of the 
 Spirit, and the great things of the other world ; we had as good talk 
 Greek to them.f 
 
 " Hereby you will be armed against the assaults and insinuations 
 of seducers, and such as lie in wait to deceive, and draw you into the 
 paths of error. I 
 
 " Hereby you will be enabled to transmit, pure and entire, to those 
 that come after you, that good thing which is committed to you. The 
 truths and ordinances of Christ are a sacred depositum, a trust handed 
 down to us by our predecessors in profession, and lodged in our hands, 
 to be carefully kept in our day, and faithfully transferred to the gene- 
 rations to come. But how can we do that, if we be not ourselves 
 both righth/ and ./«% apprized of it. We are false to this trust, not 
 only if we betray it by the admission of heresy and idolatry, but if we 
 lose it, and let it drop by ignorance and carelessness, and unacquaint- 
 edness with, and unconcernedness for, the interests of Christianity. § 
 
 " Many have had the form of sound words, and with it a form of 
 godliness, and a name to live, but have let them go, and lost them ; 
 have made shijiwreck of the faith and of their own souls. I know 
 I speak to those that have the form of sound words, that have hold of 
 it ; in God's name therefore I charge you to hold it fust, to keep your 
 hold of it in faith and love ichich is in Christ Jesiis. The Gospel is that by 
 which we are saved, if we keep in memori/ w^hat has been preached unto 
 us. 'Tis necessary that you should be well acquainted with the 
 Mystery of the Gospel, with your need of a Saviour, witli the method in 
 which the salvation was wrought out by the Son of God, and is applied 
 by the Spirit of Goc/."|| 
 
 Mr. Henry had published, in 1703, a "Plain Catechism for 
 Children," brief and simple ; in the address to the reader pre- 
 fixed to which, he says — " The children into whose hands it 
 is designed to be put, are supposed to have learnt the Creed, 
 the LonVs Prayer, and the Te7i Commandments, those first 
 forms of sound words ; and then, perhaps, some time spent in 
 
 *p. 11. t 5, 14. J p. 15. ^pp. IS, 19. Ilpp. 20, 21. 
 
187 
 
 this, may prepare them afterwards to improve by the fulness 
 and accuracy of the Assembly's CatecJiism, with which this 
 doth very little interfere, and which, therefore, I hope it will 
 not be suspected of a design to supersede."* This passage 
 sufficiently, proves in what high estimation the Shorter 
 Catechism of the Assembly was held, and what general use 
 was made of it at that time.f 
 
 I will now insert some extracts from a discourse, preached 
 at Newport Pagnel, Bucks, July 14, 1714, before an Asso- 
 ciation of Ministers, at whose request it was published the 
 same year, by "John Gumming, M. A. Minister of the Gospel at 
 Cambridge," and pastor of the Presbyterian congregation there. 
 It was preached at the time when the Schism Bill was expected 
 to pass — a measure of cruel persecution, happily frustrated by 
 the death of a queen, who had proved herself a hopeless apostate 
 from the cause of liberty — and is dedicated " To the Worship- 
 ful Edward Leeds, of Croxton, in the county of Cambridge, 
 Esq." a firmly attached friend of the Dissenters, grandfather 
 of the second wife of the illustrious philanthropist, John 
 Howard, a name in which the Nonconformist body, especially 
 the orthodox portion to which he belonged, though intimate with 
 Dr. Price and other Arians, may be allowed to glory. In this 
 excellent discourse, Mr. Cumming refers particularly to the 
 declining state of religion, and the general corruption of man- 
 ners then prevailing through the land; and intimates, that 
 among Dissenters there were Symptoms of a relaxation of zeal 
 for some important points of the Calvinistic system, or at 
 least of a shrinking from the open avowal and bold assertion 
 of them. He thus addresses his ministerial brethren — 
 
 " We ought, in a special manner, to instruct and catechize the 
 rising generation, the young and ignorant, in the first principles of 
 the doctrine of Christ. This should be the main care of parents, 
 
 * The ninth Edition of this Catechism was printed at Shrewsbury, by J. Eddowes. 
 
 t Mr. Henry published in 1702, and again in 1708 with the addition of proof- 
 texts, a Scripture Catechism, in the method of the Assembly's, which exhibits the 
 mode adopted by him in the discharge of this office, which, we are told, he " inde- 
 fatigably performed every Saturday afternoon." — See his Life, edit. Williams, 
 pp. 130,225. 
 
188 
 
 with respect to their children. But the duty of parents will be no 
 plea for tlie omitting what may lie in our power towards the reli- 
 gious education of the young ones that attend our ministry. No 
 exercise was more in request at the Reformation, or more successful 
 in promoting Christian knowledge, than Catechizing, and the good 
 effects of it are still visible in those j)laces where the greatest care 
 is taken about it." He then refers to the restraint upon the reli- 
 gious education of their children, under the apprehension of which 
 Dissenters were then trembling, which he represents as a penal visita- 
 tion for their improving it to so little advantage when they enjoyed 
 it. " That," he adds, " Avhich renders this restraint more grievous 
 to us, and the farther views and designs of it more suspicious in 
 themselves, is, that it strikes in a special manner at the Assembly's 
 Catechism, which all the Reformed Churches look upon as the most 
 excellent and unexceptionable summary of the Christian Faith, that is 
 extant in the world. Something might be alleged for prohibiting 
 schoolmasters and schoolmistresses to teach ihat form of sound words, 
 if it had any thing in it rejjugnant to the doctrinal articles of the 
 National Churcli, or contained any reflections upon her ecclesiastical 
 politj^, but this can't be pretended ; so that the very doctrines of 
 the Gospel, asserted and explained therein, seem to be levelled at ; 
 which can gratify none but Papists and Arminians, and such as are 
 for changing their own articles and homilies, and rendering them 
 more compliant to the Romish principles. This should be a powerful 
 argument to induce us to double our diligence for the time to come, 
 in explaining the great truths of tlie Gospel to young people in the 
 familiar way of catechizing, whereby they may be more capable to 
 understand what we preach; especially considering the gross ignorance 
 of the scriptures that has spread itself over the land." pp. 31, 32. 
 
 It appears from some remarks here introduced, that among 
 the ministers, at least in that part of the countrj-, this " great 
 duty" had fallen into " partial neglect ;" but in private families 
 it was, I believe, the uniform practice for parents to use this 
 catechism for the purpose of instructing their youthful 
 oiFspring in what Mr. Gumming calls " the doctrine of sal- 
 vation." Mr. Peirce, in his Vindication of the Dissenters, 
 thus delivers his opinion of it — " Although I will not vin- 
 dicate every expression in it, yet in the main I will venture to 
 commend it as the best and most orderly summary of religion 
 I have met with, considering the bigness of it. Let the 
 foreign divines compare it with the catechism of the book of 
 common prayer: I am sure we need not fear the verdict. 
 
189 
 
 'Tis translated into Greek and Latin, by Mr. Harmar.* And 
 what reputation it gained among pious and learned men, we 
 may guess by what Mr. Hickman says of two famous divines : 
 ' When a copy of it was sent to Mr. Peter du Moulin, he 
 returned this answer, that he never saw a more perfect cate- 
 chism ; nor did archbishop Usher less esteem it' "f 
 
 Mr. Neal, as already mentioned, states that the Indepen- 
 dents, in 1736, " agreed with the Presbyterians in the use of 
 this Catechism in their families." The English Presbyterian 
 Association intimate that the Independents formerly required 
 subscription to it; J but I am not aware that such was at any time 
 their practice, or that, even on extraordinary occasions, the 
 whole, or any part, was imposed as a test of orthodoxy. 
 
 In 1700 was published, " The Baptist Catechism ; agree- 
 ably to the ConfessioJi of Faith, put forth by the Elders and 
 Brethren of many Congregations of Christians (baptized upon 
 Profession of their Faith) in London and in the Country ; 
 owning the Doctrines of Personal Election and Final Perse- 
 verance." The following address to the reader, prefixed, will 
 explain the design and circumstances of its pubhcation : — 
 " Having a desire to shew our near agreement with many 
 other Christians, of whom we have great esteem, we some 
 years since put forth a Confession of our Faith, almost in all 
 points the same with that of the Assembly and Savoy, which 
 was subscribed by the elders and messengers of many churches, 
 baptized on profession of their faith ; and do now put forth a 
 short account of Christian principles, for the instruction of our 
 families, in most things agreeing with the Shorter Catechism 
 of the Assembly. And this we were the rather induced to, 
 b cause we have commonly made use of that catechism in our 
 families ; and the difference being not much, it will be more 
 easily committed to memory." § 
 
 * In conjunction with Du Gard, Cantab, per J. Field, 1659. Preface to Doo- 
 ]ittle's Complete Body of Divinity. 
 
 t Second edit, corrected, 1718, p. 210. 
 
 t Hist. p. 89. 
 
 § Editions of this Catechism, with and without the Scripture-proofs, were 
 printed at Bristol in 1775. A Scriptural Exposition of it had been published in 
 1752, by Mr. Benjamin Beddome, M.A.an excellent minister of this denomination. 
 
190 
 
 One of the most zealous advocates for the practice of minis- 
 terial catechizing, was Mr. Thomas Doolittle, an ejected minis- 
 ter, afterwards pastor of a Presbyterian congregation which 
 formerly met in Monkwell-street, London; of whom Dr.Calamy 
 says : " He was a warm, practical preacher, and his catechizing 
 was profitable to many."* 
 
 In 1698 he published, " in compassion to the ignorant, a 
 Plain Method of Catechizing ; shewing that Ministers, Parents, 
 and Masters, ought to be faithful Teachers of the first Prin- 
 ciples of the Christian Doctrine." In 1 723, several years after 
 his death, (in 1707,)t was published, in a folio volume, " A 
 Complete Body of Practical Divinity ; being a new Improve- 
 ment of the Assembly's Catechism, wherein the Truths and 
 Duties of Christianity are applied to the Conscience in a most 
 serious and pathetic manner." | Prefixed to the work, is a 
 short recommendatory notice, accompanied by a brief account 
 of the author; in which we are informed that he looked on 
 the Assembly's Catechism as an excellent summary of Chris- 
 tian doctrine, collected from the holy scriptures, and agreeing 
 with them. Some part of this he opened every Lord's day ; 
 and in a Wednesday lecture, set up on purpose, he went 
 through the whole in a method most grateful and profitable, 
 though perfectly new. The publication, which " had long 
 been desired," is then recommended to the world as a work 
 that may prove of singular service to the church of God. This 
 recommendation is subscribed by twenty names, being those 
 of some of the most eminent Presbyterian and Congregational 
 ministers of London, the larger number belonging to the 
 former class. 
 
 I shall now advert to the alleged silence of trust deeds — 
 
 * Contin. p. 75. f His Funeral Sermon, preached by Dr. Daniel 
 
 Williams, may be seen in Vol. ii. of the doctor's works. 
 
 + In the Memoirs of his Life, prefixed to this volume, we are told — " He had 
 a great felicity and delight in catechizing, and urged ministers to it, as of special 
 tendency to propagate knowledge, establish persons in the truth, and prepare them 
 to read and hear sermons with greater advantage. The Assembly's Catechism 
 he greatly valued as a form nf sound words ; two expositions of which he pub- 
 lished in his lifetime, and left that which follows prepared for the press with his 
 own hand." 
 
191 
 
 a circumstance, however, which I am not going to dispute. I 
 will first quote the words of the writer, who is the organ of 
 the English Presbyterian Association — " With hardly an 
 exception, all the Presbyterian trust - deeds are without 
 restrictions, and contain no clauses of restraint of the course 
 of opinion in the congregations for whose use they were im- 
 mediately founded. Neither the minister nor his congregation 
 are bound to pursue any given set of doctrines. Every free- 
 dom is afforded to the pursuit of theological inquiries." " Had 
 the perpetuation of a peculiar system of discipline or doctrine 
 been intended, what prevented the declaration of such an 
 intent? Why are the deeds silent respecting the unsound 
 doctrines, when the Nonconformist world was ringing with 
 the controversy, as to whether heresy should or should not be 
 repressed by subscription? If endowments to propagate 
 Calvinism, or to support chapels and a ministry favouring it, 
 were intended, why were no fences erected to prevent the pre- 
 valence of errors, as some represent them to be, which were 
 seen and were debated by the very persons whose indignation 
 we are now told would have been excited by them ?* 
 
 The force of these assertions and inquiries will be completely 
 destroyed, by the statement of two facts in connexion with dates 
 — for chronological accuracy is of the greatest importance in 
 this inquiry. 
 
 1. The controversy as to whether heresy should or should 
 not be repressed by subscription, with which the Noncon- 
 formist world, according to this writer, was ringing, at the 
 time when the original trust-deeds of the Presbyterian chapels 
 were framed, did not arise till 1719. The controversy of 
 1692-9 was totally unconnected with this question. 
 
 '2. Nearly all the ancient Presbyterian chapels now in 
 existence were erected previously to 1719 — a great num- 
 ber, between 1688 and 1696—1 believe very few so late as 
 1719. On this point Mr. Cooper bears decisive testimony — 
 " Within a single lustre after the revolution of 1688, and the 
 passing of the Toleration act, Presbyterianism covered the 
 country with a thousand meeting-houses."t The fact is 
 
 • Hist. pp. 50, .51. t Substance of Speech, p, 10. 
 
192 
 
 stated with more precise accuracy by Mr. Hunter, who, after 
 telUng us that at the Revokition the whole Nonconforming 
 body set themselves to form congregations, and to erect 
 meeting-houses in every part of England, adds, " Between 
 1689 and 1693 was the chief period of the work;" and after- 
 wards mentions, that the whole number of congregations, 
 founded in the first twenty years after the passing of the 
 Toleration act, by Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, 
 amounted in England to between one thousand and eleven 
 hundred.* He afterwards says, "The trust-deeds of the 
 Presbyterian foundations generally are free from any restrictive 
 clauses in respect to doctrine ; so that there is no ground what- 
 ever from these deeds to support the opinion that the founders 
 meant to fetter the ministers or their congregations in their 
 theological inquiries, or to prevent them from acknowledging 
 and professing that truth which future inquiries might bring 
 to light." t The question is not whether these pious founders 
 intended to impose any restraint upon the exercise of free 
 inquiry ; but, whether they meant that persons, who embraced 
 certain tenets then deemed fundamentally erroneous, should 
 be permitted to occupy the pulpits of the meeting-houses 
 which they reared. Surely they must have fixed some limits, 
 beyond which freedom of inquiry would not be allowed, or a 
 rejection of the Divine authority of revelation would not 
 amount to a disqualification. 
 
 I have not obtained a sight of many original trust-deeds of 
 Dissenting chapels : in those which I have seen, I acknowledge 
 the description of the purposes for which the property was 
 intended to be appropriated is usually general. Mr. Hunter, 
 however, admits that there are exceptions, and I have heard 
 of several in Lancashire, now occupied by Unitarian congre- 
 gations, in which the Assembly's catechism is required to be 
 taught. That it was taught in many of the Presbyterian 
 cha})els in England till nearly the middle of the last century, 
 and in some considerably later, I have no doubt* 
 
 • Hist. Def. pp. 8, 9. t lb. p. 37. 
 
 * I will mention one instance, in which I have private means of information. 
 What is called " the Great Meeting-house," at Coventry, is one of the oldest Presby- 
 
193 
 
 I am treating this question as purely one of historical fact, 
 with a view to ascertain, by means of historical evidence, what 
 were the real opinions and sentiments of a particular class of 
 persons at a certain period, without adverting to the legal 
 position at that time of those who held obnoxious tenets, the 
 propagation of which was rendered penal by acts of parlia- 
 ment ; or adverting to it only as involving another important 
 fact — that the persons to whom this inquiry relates, approved of 
 such a state of the law, and so far coincided in judgment and 
 feeling with the legislature. If my view of the justice and 
 equity of the case cannot be sustained without calling in the 
 direct support of prohibitory statutes, I am prepared to aban- 
 don it. But to my mind, I confess, the entire question is 
 plain and simple — because solely one of intention on the part 
 of the original founders. That abstract intention, indepen- 
 dently of the state of the law — not indeed without reference to 
 their approbation of it, yet irrespectively of all penal disabi- 
 lities imposed by the legislature — is, I apprehend, the one 
 point to be determined. 
 
 I entirely concur in the principle laid down by the English 
 Presbyterian Association, " in order to determine on the due 
 administration of any charity, it is necessary to ascertain the 
 intent of its founder."* Let us apply this principle to the 
 matter under discussion. Here are trusts created, as I may 
 concede, in " exceedingly general terms," by a class of persons 
 who, though constrained by conscientious conviction to sepa- 
 rate from the Church of England, avowed their agreement 
 with it in doctrine. The fact, indeed, is admitted by this 
 writer, but he ingeniously avails himself of it, to deduce a 
 
 terian meeting-houses, and was formerly occupied by one of the most respectable 
 and flourishing congregations, now greatly reduced, and, I am informed, com- 
 pletely Unitarian. In that chapel some of my ancestors worshipped, and my paternal 
 grandmother, (to whose venerable memory I cannot forbear inserting this pass- 
 ing tribute of affectionate respect,) was in her youth one of those who were 
 instructed or examined in the Assembly's Catechism by Mr. Warren, the last 
 orthodox minister, who was a moderate Calvinist. Whether any restrictive clause 
 is to be found in the original trust-deed, I know not, but the fact appears little 
 material for the purpose of my argument. 
 
 • Hist p. 52. 
 O 
 
194 
 
 startling inference, which, however, he does not venture to 
 express in direct terms. The premises which he states, and 
 the conclusion at which he evidently wishes the reader to 
 arrive, though this he merely insinuates, may be thus put : — 
 The Presbyterian founders did not differ with the Church of 
 England about doctrine ; this renders it apparent that doctrine 
 could not have been " the leading consideration," which 
 operated as an inducement on their minds to the erection of 
 their chapels, and the creation of the trusts attached to them: 
 therefore these founders were altogether unconcerned about 
 doctrine ! Let it be granted, that, considered merely as a 
 motive or reason for the erection of these chapels, doctrine 
 scarcely entered into their contemplation ; does it follow that 
 they cared nothing about doctrine ? The fact proves, indeed, 
 that they were not indifferent to what they considered a scrip- 
 tural form of worship and discipline.* The immediate object 
 which, as a distinct class of religious professors, they had in 
 view, related to the mode of conducting divine service; but 
 when this writer says, " nothing seems clearer than that these 
 foundations were not established with a view to the mainte- 
 nance of ayiy doctrine as opposed to another, or in assertion 
 of any point which can strictly be called a point of faith," 
 I am at a loss to discover the sequence. They professed 
 accordance with the estabUshed church on doctrinal points — 
 they gloried in their orthodoxy ; but, because they could not 
 conscientiously join in rites and ceremonies which they held 
 unlawful, and worship God statedly by a liturgy, which, in 
 many respects they disapproved ; therefore their sole feeling, 
 in reference to doctrine, was one of total indifference ! That 
 might, indeed, be a merely collateral consideration to them, 
 considered solely as founders of separate congregations under 
 the Toleration Act. Regarded in that predicament, I admit 
 that such it was, because they actually held the doctrine of 
 the Established Church ; but, intrinsically considered, it was 
 of the highest value in their estimation, as a body of religious 
 professors, believing not only in the Christian Scriptures 
 
 • His!, p. 62. 
 
195 
 
 as a divine revelation, but eminently in its great distinguish- 
 ing truths. If it can be proved, aliunde— a.nd I appeal to the 
 reader whether this has not been done — that the whole body 
 of Presbyterians, during the period in question, attached the 
 greatest importance to what they considered doctrinal ortho- 
 doxy, at least in reference to what they regarded as the 
 great vital points, the fundamental articles of Christianity, — 
 the mere circumstance, that legal instruments, framed by pro- 
 fessional men exclusively for legal purposes, and of course 
 accommodated to the existing state of the law, contain no 
 restrictive clauses, because prepared at a time when such 
 clauses were not necessary for any legal purpose — a mere cir- 
 cumstance of this kind, (granting it to have been the general 
 fact,) which can be so well accounted for, so easily explained, 
 on other grounds, may surely be admitted without having 
 recourse to a supposition so highly improbable, not to say 
 absurd, even were it not contradicted by direct evidence — as 
 that all diversities of doctrine were in their view alike. The 
 true solution of this seeming difficulty is, the highly probable 
 supposition— and, as I have no doubt, the real fact— that they 
 did not anticipate the future occurrence of any thing like the 
 fearful aberration from that " faith once deHvered to the saints," 
 for which thei/ were prepared to " contend earnestly," which 
 subsequently (though by a very gradual process, a slow and 
 almost imperceptible declension) took place among their suc- 
 cessors. It did not enter into their imagination to conceive 
 such an awful degree of " doctrinal deviation and degeneracy" 
 as even possible. 
 
 The following strange mixture of concession and denial 
 completely exposes the fallacy which lurks under the specious 
 guise of argument, by a fair reductio ad ahsurdum :— " The 
 founders [it is said] were orthodox. Granted ; but it is never- 
 theless denied, that those who do not agree in the doctrine of 
 the Trinity* are not orthodox also, in the proper sense of 
 those who insisted on the Scripture as the only rule of faith, of 
 
 * A nice distinction is taken between non-agreement and denial ; but modern 
 Unitarians, in most pointed and positive terms, entirely reject and abandon the 
 doctrine — Hist. P. 62. 
 
 o 2 
 
196 
 
 which each, according to his ability, was the true and only 
 
 judge."* 
 
 Can it for a moment be soberly thought possible, that in 
 the view of Presbyterian founders, who, while they received the 
 Bible as their only rule of faith, were fervent admirers of 
 Baxter, Howe, Bates, and other eminent Nonconformist writers, 
 those distinguished theologians, and such religious teachers as 
 Priestley, Belsham, and Lindsey, had they been then living, and 
 allowed by law the utmost freedom to avow and disseminate 
 their pernicious tenets, could have been esteemed alike and 
 equally orthodox ? The supposition is so palpably absurd, that 
 it may safely be left to refute itself, and to prove the utter 
 futihty of the argument which it is brought to supportf 
 
 Mr. Hunter pursues nearly the same line of argument, 
 along which it will therefore be unnecessary minutely to follow 
 him. He also admits, in direct terms, that " there was no dif- 
 ference between the Presbyterians and the Church of England 
 respecting doctrine ;" and in so doing, it appears to me, 
 concedes the whole matter in dispute. His view of the 
 design of these foundations slightly differs from that given by 
 the Presbyterian Association ; though both may be correct, 
 and I dispute not the accuracy of either. According to him, 
 the chapels were founded, in order to enable the ejected minis- 
 try, and the preachers formed by them, to conduct public ser- 
 vices in what was supposed to be a more effective and inte- 
 resting manner than the church had prescribed for its minis- 
 ters." | He proceeds, in contradiction to evidence of which 
 much has been produced, and much more might be produced, 
 to add — " Neither is there any reason to believe that zeal 
 for what are called orthodox opinions, which is founded on the 
 principle that a peculiar faith is essential to salvation, actuated 
 the minds of the Presbyterian founders." As mere opinions, 
 indeed, they might hold them of little value, but as embo- 
 
 • As to the Norwich charity, mentioned by the English Presbyterian Asso- 
 ciation, and other foundations by professed Arians, for " Protestant Dissenting 
 ministers," dates and other particular circumstances must be mentioned, before the 
 reader can be prepared to form a judgment upon them, whether or not he admit 
 the force of the above reasoning. — Hist. p. 49. 
 
 t Hist. Def. pp. 62, 7S. i lb. p. 3S. 
 
197 
 
 dying most of those great facts and principles which 
 modern Unitarians deny, they held the lively and practical 
 behef of them " essential to the enjoyment of heavenly hap- 
 piness." That they did consider " a peculiar faith essen- 
 tial to salvation," has, I trust, been proved. That pecuhar 
 faith included, at least, the doctrine of the Trinity, or a 
 belief in God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Yet " the 
 notion that their chapels were founded as Trinitarian chapels, 
 in the same sense as a new foundation by Unitarians would 
 be called the Unitarian chapel," is, we are told, false and 
 delusive, because " doctrine had little or nothing to do with 
 the operation."* On the contrary, the open profession of 
 doctrine, and such doctrine as is now commonly designated 
 evangelical, was the very basis on which their churches were 
 originally founded. They considered the Church of God as 
 " the pillar and ground of the truth" embodied in that 
 incontrovertible mystery — " God was manifest in the flesh," 
 &c. 1 Tim. iii. 1 6. f The entire Christian community, in its 
 collective capacity, they regarded as an associated body " a 
 great cloud of witnesses" to " the truth which is according to 
 godhness." The first of the Heads of Agreement, in 1691, 
 defines the catholic church in this world, as " the whole 
 multitude of visible believers ;" and the eighth requires that 
 every particular church " not only acknowledge the scrip- 
 tures to be the word of God, the perfect and only rule 
 both of faith and practice," but also " own," (not as an 
 authoritative standard of orthodoxy, but as a convenient and 
 suitable measure or rule f by which to ascertain and deter- 
 mine soundness of judgment in matters of faith,) "the doc- 
 trinal part of the 39 Articles, or the Confessions or Cate- 
 chisms of the Westminster Assembly, or the Savoy Confes- 
 sion":}: — all strongly Trinitarian, and decidedly Calvinistic; 
 
 * Mensura mensurata, non mensurans, according to Howe ; regula regulata non 
 regulans, according to Matthew Henry. See pp. 116, 185, ante. 
 
 t The common reading of this important passage, has been ably defended in a 
 learned critical examination, entitled " The Great Mystery of Godliness Incontro- 
 vertible, by Ebenezer Henderson, DD. Theological Professor at Highbury College, 
 8vo. 1830. 
 
 X Pp. 53—56, ante. 
 
198 
 
 for even Mr. Hunter admits, that " it is a Calvinian system 
 of Christianity which is embodied in the catechisms issued 
 by the Assembly of Divines."* 
 
 The Presbyterians, at least till the end of the seventeenth 
 century, solemnly professed adherence to all these symbols 
 of faith, and subscribed the doctrinal Articles ex atiimo for 
 several years after. Nor did they only " think their own views 
 concerning the Christian doctrine to be the truth ;" they also 
 insisted upon the "peculiar views of gospel truth" which 
 they entertained on the doctrine of the Trinity, and other 
 fundamental articles, (at least in substance and effect,) as 
 " essential ;" or, in other words, they held that those who 
 rejected and denied what they considered essential parts of 
 the Christian system were not true believers, and conse- 
 quently, in the strict and proper sense of that word, not real 
 Christians. Taking even much lower ground, and merely 
 assuming that they " thought their own views to be the 
 truth," which, as Mr. Hunter justly says, " all other persons 
 do," could they have intended that their endowments should 
 be afterwards appropriated to the support and propagation 
 of what they must, therefore, have regarded as error, and 
 we happen to know, from abundant sources of information, 
 as dangerous and malignant error. The two systems, the 
 Trinitarian and Unitarian, cannot both be true, being opposite 
 and contradictory. If, therefore, the Presbyterian founders 
 intended to create trusts for the support of Trinitarian 
 worship, they must have " established them with a view 
 to the maintenance of Trinitarian sentiments against, or as 
 opposed to. Unitarian;" for surely it cannot be pretended that 
 they established them equally for either, or alike indifferently 
 for both. But if I have succeeded in shewing that they 
 believed the doctrine of the Trinity, as expressed in the form 
 of baptism contained in the apostolical commission, to be one 
 of those fundamental truths of Christianity which "can 
 strictly be called a point of faith," | it will follow, from the 
 nature and design of the ordinance, in the administration 
 of which it is thus embodied, and the place which that 
 
 • Hist. Def. p. 40. t Hist. p. 61. 
 
199 
 ordinance occupies in the Christian economy that it per- 
 vades, and gives a Trinitarian character to the entire system 
 of Christian truth. I may, on this more general ground, 
 venture to assert that, if they intended the meeting-houses 
 which they erected and endowed to be appropriated, in 
 all future time, for Christian worship by Protestant Dissenters, 
 they intended them for the use of congregations who should 
 adopt Trinitarian, in distinction from, and consequently in 
 opposition to, that which is now called " Unitarian worship."* 
 I may take the account given by both these writers of the 
 design of those foundations, as the ground-work of this part 
 of my argument. "They were founded," say the EngHsh Pres- 
 byterian Association, «to secure the benefit of regular religious 
 worship, unfettered by liturgies, and the advantage of Christian 
 ordinances in what appeared to be a scriptural form. This was 
 the object, and the trusts were created merely to secure it."f 
 But what kind of religious worship ?— and, to express the two 
 opposite kinds in a brief but intelligible form— was it Unitarian, 
 or Trinitarian ? Then as to the mode of administering Chris- 
 tian ordinances, — I am not prepared to state whether modern 
 Unitarians adopt in performing the baptismal rite what appeared 
 to their predecessors the scriptural form — a solemn dedi- 
 cation to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as one God, or 
 whether their ministers even use the words prescribed, at 
 least according to the general opinion, by the founder of 
 Christianity. In what manner Unitarian preachers now admi- 
 nister the other sacrament, I am not aware. Dr. WilKams, in 
 a passage already quoted, speaking of the Socinians of his 
 time, after stating that their great concern, in denying Christ's 
 Satisfaction, evidently was, to prevent the unanswerable argu- 
 ment this would be for his Deity, adds, " the like is also to be 
 seen by their notion of the Lord's Supper.":j: 
 
 Mr. Hunter, speaking of "what was done during a few years 
 after the Act of Toleration in 1688, by the Nonconformists, 
 
 • Their object is well stated, I believe by Mr. Hunter, elsewhere — " for 
 worshipping God, and preaching Christianity according to their views and con- 
 sciences." — Observations on the Title of Unitarians, &c. p. 11. 
 
 t Hist. pp. 61, 62. t P. \)2, ante. 
 
200 
 
 and by the Presbyterian section especially, to give consistency 
 and perpetuity to their efforts, and to form a body of persons 
 who are capable of a distinct consideration," thus describes 
 the object which they had in view in the erection of meeting- 
 houses throughout England : — " Their aim was nothing less 
 than the estabhshment of a kind of second church, in which 
 provision should be made for pubhc religious instruction, 
 divine worship, and the ministration of Christian ordinances by 
 ministers no longer fettered by Subscription or a Liturgy."* 
 He afterwards tells us, that "these meeting-houses, or chapels, 
 were placed under the protection of the law in the manner 
 prescribed in the Act of Toleration, and devoted to the pur- 
 pose for which they were erected, by a religious service, the 
 same in principle, and differing only in form, with the conse- 
 cration-service of the Church:" and speaking of the deeds by 
 which they were conveyed to certain persons to hold in trust 
 for the use of the congregation, he says, " the declaration 
 of uses is commonly to allow a congregation of Protestant 
 Dissenters to assemble for the worship of God, and such 
 minister to officiate as shall be elected by a majority of the 
 congregation to be their pastor." f All this I do not dispute ; 
 but again I ask, what was " the purpose for which they were 
 erected," as they were places for public religious instruction, 
 divine worship, and the ministration of Christian ordinances, 
 (for this, Mr. Hunter allows, was the primary and original 
 design of their erection,) unmixed indeed with human inven- 
 tions, and unfettered by human impositions, but to be con- 
 ducted in a manner agreeable to Scripture, strictly conformed 
 to the original divine institution, in other words, for what 
 in their judgment might properly be designated Christia7i 
 instruction. Christian worship, and the ministration, in the 
 purely Christian form, of the ordinances instituted by the 
 Christian Legislator ? 
 
 For confirmation, if any were needed, of the view just given 
 of the intention of the Presbyterian Nonconformists in erecting 
 chapels, in which separate congregations might carry on divine 
 worship, and observe Christian ordinances, I will refer to one 
 
 • Hist. Def. p. 9. + lb. p. 10. 
 
201 
 
 of the very few extracts which the English Presbyterian 
 Association have ventured to give. In two sermons, preached 
 in March, 1712, by Dr. Wright, he states, that while the 
 Dissenters adhered to the way of worship " which they thought 
 most agreeable to Scripture," and contended for this, as the 
 grand point, that no terms of communion be insisted on but 
 such as are there laid down, which he calls " standing up for 
 the original plan oi o\xx religion, and the first pure, unmixed 
 institutions of it ;" they would only admit within the sacred 
 e?iclosure of the church " those who sincerely beheve and obey 
 the Gospel."'* Whether they considered the Socinians of their 
 day as persons answering to this description, I leave the reader 
 to decide. In another extract from a sermon by Dr. Harris, 
 (colleague with Dr. Lardner,) preached in 1729, the same class 
 of persons is thus described — " those who have all the essen- 
 tials of the Gospel religion, and whom Christ will own at 
 last."t 
 
 " The new Independents (as Mr. Hunter is pleased to call 
 the modern Congregational Dissenters) act," he tells us, "in a 
 very different spirit" from the Presbyterian founders. " They 
 have this zeal for their own peculiar views, and they seek to 
 perpetuate them in their foundations. Clauses, I am told, 
 are generally introduced into their Trust-deeds, binding down 
 the minister and congregation to some settled form of reUgious 
 belief.":]: I believe it is the general practice, in cases of new 
 erections, to insert what may be called protecting clauses, not 
 for the purpose of binding the minister, or individual mem- 
 bers of the congregation, to any human creed or articles, but 
 of securing the chapel and premises to those who hold what 
 the founders regard as the orthodox faith, and thus guarding 
 the trust created by them from what thei/, at least, would 
 consider as a flagrant violation. This mode of securing the 
 future appropriation of places of religious worship to the pur- 
 poses originally intended by those at whose expense they are 
 erected, appears to me a reasonable proceeding. Mr. Hunter 
 represents it as an interference with " the duty and the right 
 of private judgment;" but, in my opinion, that is far from 
 
 * Hist. p. 43. t lb. p. 42. + Hist. Def. p. 39. 
 
202 
 
 being a correct view of the subject. No restraint is imposed 
 on the exercise of this right by individuals. Such clauses 
 merely purport that the chapel is built for the preaching of a 
 particular kind of doctrine. All future ministers must therefore 
 believe and preach that doctrine, or vacate the pulpit. As to 
 hearers and subscribers, if they do not approve of the doctrine 
 held by the founders, they may at any time withdraw their 
 attendance and subscriptions. But in several places those who 
 approve of that doctrine have been compelled to withdraw. 
 The necessity of such protecting clauses has been proved by 
 the history of too many Presbyterian congregations ; and since 
 the law now (very properly) allows all sects professing Chris- 
 tianity openly to propagate their opinions, and affords special 
 protection to their preachers, it has become the more important 
 that the purpose of the trust should be stated in a specific and 
 definite manner. I have no doubt, however, that upon exami- 
 nation it would appear, that the original trust-deeds of the more 
 ancient Independent meeting-houses were expressed in the 
 same general terms as those of many Presbyterian chapels. 
 " That those founders i7itended to do what they have done," 
 would indeed be " one of the most natural and legitimate of 
 inferences," if the fact assumed were correctly stated. Before 
 such intention can be proved, evidence should be produced 
 to shew that they ever contemplated the possibihty of what 
 has actually taken place. After the ample historical evidence 
 that has been produced, I confidently leave the decision to any 
 candid and impartial person, merely reminding him that the 
 only question, as admitted on both sides, is what was the real 
 intention of the founders — I say, what was their intention — 
 not what might have been, under other than existing circum- 
 stances, or what, it may be supposed, would have been their 
 intention had they lived a century later, of which no human 
 tribunal is competent to take cognizance. 
 
 No charge, in my view, can be more unjust or inappro- 
 priate, than that of persecution against those who contend 
 that persons who have forsaken nearly all the great doc- 
 trines peculiar to Christianity, held dear by founders, are 
 not the class of beneficiaries for whom the trusts created by 
 
203 
 
 them were intended. Mr. Hunter, who speaks of it as " a 
 case of pure persecution for religious opinion," says, " there 
 is no doubt that the present possessors are the rightful re- 
 presentatives of the founders, if the question be considered 
 as a question of representation."* But, notwithstanding some 
 pathetic appeals to the reader's feelings, the question, I submit, 
 is not at all one of representation, with regard to particular 
 perso7is or families, but entirely one of intention in respect to 
 a class or description of rehgious professors and divine wor- 
 shippers. The mere circumstance of trustees or ministers 
 being " descendants or relatives of their predecessors, or 
 having followed them in regular series," cannot, surely, in a 
 matter which is neither one of " hereditary descent nor 
 of corporate succession," f establish the claim of parties who 
 belong not to the class which alone the founders contem- 
 plated. 
 
 I proceed to notice the grand means taken by the original 
 Presbyterians to preserve the pulpits of their chapels from 
 the intrusion of erroneous teachers, and thus to secure the 
 continued orthodoxy of their successors. This was not only 
 the instituting of previous examination into the quahfications, 
 and especially the theological attainments, of all candidates for 
 the ministerial office, but also the requiring of explicit state- 
 ments and declarations of their faith, previously to their being 
 solemnly set apart to that office. It may first be proper briefly 
 to advert to the subject of ordination, especially as that was 
 one upon which, in the earlier periods of their history, a 
 considerable difference of opinion existed between the Pres- 
 byterians and Independents. Among the " many things" 
 which Baxter " disliked in the Independent way," one, and 
 the first which he mentions, was, that " they made too hght 
 of ordination."+ When he treated with Mr. Phihp Nye, about 
 an agreement with the Independents, he tells us, " the 
 greatest difference was upon the point of ordination." The 
 earlier and more rigid Independents attached Httle import- 
 ance to this rite, whereas all the Presbyterians laid great 
 
 Hist. Def. p. GS. t Hist. p. 26. 
 
 Narrative of Life, part ii. p. 188. 
 
204 
 
 stress upon it : the former held that the parties by whom 
 it should be administered were the people, or at least the 
 oflBcers of the church over which the pastor was to be set 
 apart ; the latter approved and practised only what was com- 
 monly called " ministerial ordination :" the former, I believe, 
 generally objected to its being accompanied by imposition 
 of hands, which the Presbyterians invariably used in the 
 performance of that solemnity.* Of the mode adopted at 
 ordinations, during what may be called the reign of the 
 Presbyterians, several accounts are preserved. The certifi- 
 cates subscribed on those occasions, by the officiating minis- 
 ters, state, that, after formal examination of the party, they 
 had " solemnly set him apart to the office of a Presbyter, 
 and work of the ministry of the gospel, by laying on of their 
 hands, with fasting and prayer; by virtue whereof they 
 declare him to be a lawful and sufficiently authorized minister 
 of Jesus Christ."t Baxter describes this as " authoritative 
 ecclesiastical ordination ;" and the light in which it was gene- 
 rally viewed by his adherents and followers was that, not 
 merely of a public act of designation to the sacred office, or 
 a solemn rite of inauguration, but an investiture of the 
 party with authority to preach the gospel and administer the 
 ordinances of Christianity. They consequently regarded it 
 as an indispensable prerequisite to the stated exercise of the 
 Christian ministry. 
 
 One of the greatest objections felt by the Presbyterian 
 ministers to the terms of ministerial conformity prescribed 
 by the Act of Uniformity, was the submission it required 
 from those who had not been previously ordained by English 
 prelates, to re-ordination by them ; and for many years after, 
 
 * See History of Diss. vol. ii. p. 124. Life of Mat. Henry, edit. Dr. Williams, 
 p. 148. Dr. Owen, however, expressly states, that one of the things " required 
 unto officers of the church," is, " the solemn setting them apart by imposition 
 of hands," which he calls " the symbol of authoritative ordination." Enquiry into 
 the True Nature, &c. of Evangelical Churches, pp. 83, 85, 139. There was a 
 difference of opinion, in reference to this rite, among the Baptists. See Ilist. of 
 Diss, by Bogue and Bennet, vol. ii. pp. 125, 12C. 
 
 t Calamy's Contin. pp. 66, 82. Toulmin's Histor, View, pp. 272, 273. 
 
 X Appendix to Narrative of Life, pp. 26, 27. 
 
205 
 
 there was no point for which they more strenuously con- 
 tended than the vahdity of Presbyterian ordination, or the 
 ordaining power of Presbyters, in opposition to the exclusive 
 claims and arrogant pretensions of diocesan bishops. Their 
 maxim was that ascribed by Baxter to Archbishop Usher — 
 " Ordinis est or dinar e ; he that is in orders may confer 
 orders;" and, though regarded by the advocates of diocesan 
 episcopacy, as themselves mere pretenders to holy orders, they 
 claimed and exercised this right of transmitting them to 
 others. 
 
 The Independent ministers, about the time of the Revolu- 
 tion, were generally in favour of ministerial ordination ; and 
 in 1691, the fifth Article of the second Head of Agreement, 
 declares, that in the ordination of a pastor over a particular 
 church, "'tis ordinarily requisite that the pastors of neigh- 
 bouring congregations concur with the preaching elder or 
 elders, if such there be."* Nothing is said concerning imposi- 
 tion of hands, which was probably left to the discretion of the 
 several ministers engaged at these services, in which both 
 classes united. But it continued to be practised by the 
 Presbyterians for many years, and was generally, it appears, 
 afterwards adopted by the Independents. The leading Pres- 
 
 • It appears from Animadversions on a Letter from a Congregational minister 
 in the country to Dr. Calamy, annexed to Part ii. of his Defence of Moderate 
 Nonconformity, 1704, that there were at that time some Independents who held 
 that ministerial ordination had no warrant in scripture. Dr. Calamy says, " it 
 looked strange there should be so much ignorance of the principles and practice of 
 those of the Cungregational way, in one that pretends so much zeal for it." P. 391. 
 He refers to the clause in the Heads of Agreement,'concerning ordination, and adds : 
 " This being so directly contradicted by the author of this letter, I think I may 
 safely gather, that if he be a Congregational brother, he never assented to these 
 Heads of Agreement." P. 397. In answer to one of the Questions put to him by 
 this writer, " What are you ? A rigid Presbyterian, or a Latitudinarian ? How can 
 your stiffness and your freedom be reconciled?" He says, " You may give me what 
 name you please, provided you'll give me but leave jointly to pursue the interests 
 of truth and charity. My chief stiffness is against unscriptural impositions ; in 
 which I should think I might depend upon my Congregational brother's hearty con- 
 currence. My freedom is no other than what, as far as I can judge, the word of 
 God will warrant, and therefore not justly liable to blame. All that I aim at upon 
 this head is, that a true scriptural ordination may not be run down for want of 
 an ecclesiastical nicety ; nor an irregular intrusion into the ministry encouraged 
 
206 
 
 byterian divines, after the Act of Toleration, hesitated to 
 take part in the ordination of a new race of ministers, 
 then rising up ; or, as the Enghsh Presbyterian Association 
 express it, shewed " a great unwiUingness to perpetuate, 
 by ordination, a dissenting ministry."* The first service of 
 this nature, pubHcly held in the metropolis, was performed 
 June 22, 1694; but in various parts of the country, parti- 
 cularly in the north of England, instances had occurred 
 of public ordination several years previously. The service 
 was peculiarly solemn, and occupied upwards of eight hours. 
 The persons who officiated were six ejected ministers, Drs. 
 Annesley and Williams, Messrs. Alsop, Sylvester, Stretton, 
 and Kentish. The persons ordained were seven, of whom 
 one was Dr. Calamy, who tells us he " did not pretend, while 
 a probationer, to act with the attested authority of an ordained 
 minister, and did not in this time baptize, because he knew 
 he had not a commission." 
 
 Dr. Williams called for the confessions of faith of two of 
 the candidates, and put the usual questions to them out of 
 the Directory of the Westminster Assembly, as the other 
 ordaining ministers did, respectively, from the other candidates. 
 Previously to the ordination, they had been strictly examined, 
 both in philosophy and divinity ; and every one made and 
 defended a thesis upon a theological question, being warmly 
 opposed by the several ministers present. f The same method 
 was pursued in the ordination of ministers in the country, 
 of which several instances may be found in the Life of 
 Matthew Henry, between the years 1692 and 1708.| On 
 
 for want of a solemn investiture into that sacred office." ..." I'm stiff for the rule 
 of Scripture, both against those who represent an ecclesiastical bishop as absolutely 
 necessary, and those who look upon the agency of any ministers at all in ordina- 
 tion to be unrequired and insignificant." Pp. 412, 413. * Hist. P. 17. 
 
 t Dr. Calamy says, " I was very strictly examined by Mr. Alsop. It fell to 
 my lot to make and defend a Latin Thesis upon this question, (which he himself 
 gave me :) An Christus officio Sacerdotali fwigatur in ccelis tantum ? He, for 
 argument sake, as is the way of the schools, opposed me with all the vigour, smart- 
 ness, and fluency of a young man, though he was then considerably advanced in 
 years. — Calamy's Own Life, Vol. I. pp. 348—350. 
 
 X Edit. Williams pp. 141—147. 
 
207 
 
 June 18, 1700, he joined with the ministers of Lancashire 
 and Cheshire in an ordination at Macclesfield, at which the 
 Moderator " demanded of the candidates, in order, a confession 
 of their faith, and a distinct answer to the questions ; which 
 was done fully."* April 12, 1708, he tells us, "Mr. Lawrence 
 and I examined Mr. Beynon, (the day previous to that fixed 
 for his ordination.) Mr. Tallents had given him his thesis 
 — Justitia qua coram Deo subsistimus est Justitia Christi 
 Mediatoris, — 'The righteousness by which we are justified 
 before God, is the righteousness of Christ the Mediator.' "f 
 
 I will now advert particularly to a fact which has already 
 become apparent, but has been denied in the most positive 
 terms by the EngUsh Presbyterian Association. Mr. Hunter 
 has accurately stated what he has thought proper to com- 
 municate on the mode of performing this solemn rite which 
 prevailed among the Presbyterians. | He also speaks of 
 " Presbyterian ordination," § and states that Mr. Jollie was 
 
 • lb. p. 143, t lb. p. 146. 
 
 J " Another important object which engaged their attention, was the making pro- 
 vision for a succession of well-educated ministers. The early Presbyterian minis- 
 try were all men of education, and possessing considerable acquirements in theo- 
 logical and general knowledge. The notion of lay-preaching, or of admitting into 
 the ministry any persons who had not gone through a course of study preparatory, 
 submitted themselves to examination, and been designated as qualified for the 
 work in some solemn ordination service, never entered into the conception of the 
 founders of the Presbyterian chapels. They knew too well, how important it is 
 to the interests of truth, and to maintaining society at that pitch of intellectual 
 elevation at which it may have arrived, to keep such an office as the ministerial in 
 the hands of men of attainment and some refinement, who can defend the truth, 
 and set their flocks an example of decency in their domestic affairs. If any thing 
 contrary to this has ever made its way in the Presbyterian congregations, it has 
 been in contravention of one of the most cherished principles of their founders. 
 When a suitable course of education was completed, the designation to the ministry 
 was done in a very solemn manner. The previous examinations were severe. 
 The candidate was expected to maintain a given thesis in the Latin language, and 
 to exhibit proof of his acquaintance with the languages in which the Old and New 
 Testaments were written. He was expected to assign sufficient reason for his 
 engaging in the ministry at all, and especially for engaging in it among the Pro- 
 testant Dissenters. When this was done, there was, for many years, the imposition 
 of hands, by a company of elder ministers assembled for the purpose, in the midst 
 of solemn prayer." Hist. Def. Pp. 11, 12. 
 
 § lb. p. 42. 
 
208 
 
 ordained the minister of what he calls (but incorrectly) the 
 Presbyterian congregation at Sheffiefd, " in the Presbyterian 
 manner."* But he has not seen fit, when speaking of this 
 matter, to state, for the information of his readers, though I 
 will not say that he has, " for a purpose," concealed the very 
 important fact, that during the period in question, and for 
 many years after, it was the uniform and invariable practice 
 among the Presbyterian Dissenters, to demand a full and 
 formal statement of the doctrinal tenets of all persons offering 
 themselves for ordination.f This fact I now proceed to place 
 beyond the reach of contradiction. 
 
 I shall first mention, that there is evidence to shew that, 
 both in London and in the country, the ministers of the two 
 denominations, during the early part of the last century, 
 united in the performance of this rite, as they certainly did 
 in the metropohs and in all parts of the country, until toward 
 its conclusion. Of this, two remarkable instances occurred in 
 the year 1707, one in London, the other in Cheshire. An ex- 
 tract has already been inserted from the exhortation delivered 
 by Mr. Shower, (an eminent Presbyterian minister, and one of 
 the Salters' Hall lecturers,) at the ordination of Mr. Thomas 
 Bradbury, a well-known and zealous Independent, who had 
 been educated by Mr. Timothy Jollie, which took place 
 July loth, this year. The exhortation is published with 
 Mr. Bradbury's Confession of Faith, which is decidedly Tri- 
 nitarian, and strongly Calvinistic. One branch of the counsel 
 tendered to the young preacher is the following — " Approve 
 yourself a lover of peace and unity ; and join with your 
 brethren who would seek peace, and promote it. As ever 
 you expect God's blessing on your ministry, remember this 
 advice ; and, whatever self-denial it may cost you, endeavour 
 
 • Hist Def. p. 76. 
 
 t He does indeed, in another place, mention incidentally, and in support of a 
 different position, that confessions of faitli were made at ordinations, p. 48. — 
 Mr. Henry mentions that at the ordination of Mr. Samuel Benyon, at Broad Oak, 
 Jan. 24, 1C99, the Moderator, Mr. James Owen, "demanded a confession of his 
 faith and ordination vows, which he made abundantly to our satisfaction;" and 
 Mr. Benyon commenced that confession which is in print with these words — 
 " Being obliged to confess my faith." — 
 
209 
 
 to follow it I don't mean the peace and unity of your par- 
 ticular congregation, (though it will much concern you to take 
 ca,re to preserve that,) nor do I intend by it, any churches of 
 such or such a name and denomination among Protestants^ 
 bui; of the whole body of Protestants, who, under several 
 names and forms, are separated from the church of Rome, 
 on the same common principles of the Reformation. I am 
 glad to see the concurrence of ministers of different deno- 
 minations in a solemn ordination by Imposition of Hands.* 
 
 The other instance occurred a few weeks afterwards, at 
 Decn Row, (near Winslow,) in Cheshire, which is recorded 
 in the Diary of Matthew Henry. He mentions that Mr. 
 Birch, late pastor of the Nonconformist church at that place, 
 who had been ordained by the people twenty years before, 
 not being satisfied with the want of ministerial ordination, 
 procured three or four ministers privately to ordain him 
 with the imposition of hands ; and adds, " the moderate of 
 that congregation are contriving to gain that point from the 
 other party." At the annual meeting of ministers, held 
 August 5, he says, " We were fourteen, in peace and love. 
 Mr. Waterhouse preached very well, [from] 2 Cor. v. 20. 
 We had no business at all — no complaint — blessed be God. 
 I was urged by the congregation at Dean Row,f to join 
 with Mr. Jollie in ordaining Mr. Hugh Worthington, now 
 come among them, upon the removal of Mr. Birch to Yar- 
 mouth." With this request he complied, as the following 
 extracts will shew : — 
 
 "■ Sept. 1 — Went by appointment to Winslow, willing to become 
 all things to all men, and to spend and be spent, &c. 
 
 2. — A solemn fast in the congregation at Dean Row, for the 
 
 ordination of Mr. Hugh Worthington, whom they have chosen to be 
 their pastor in the room of Mr. Birch. I preached [from] 2 Cor. v. 18, 
 Mr. Angier prayed over him. Mr. Jolly, of Sheffield, gave the exhor- 
 
 * P. 46. The passage quoted at p. 169 ante, immediately follows this sentence. 
 
 t If the information communicated to a most respectable person resident on the 
 spot, which he mentioned to me in the summer of last year, be correct, this con- 
 gregation, which, it appears, was originally formed on the strict Independent model, 
 Las now become w/Zra-Unitarian. 
 
 P 
 
210 
 
 tation, from Matt, xxviii. 20. We were much refreshed with mutual 
 love, which is as the holy anointing oil, 
 
 3. Mr. Jolly is of a healing, loving sjiirit."* 
 
 Thus it appears, that, in 1707, the two denominations were 
 again in harmony and peace, and their ministers united in 
 cordial co-operation. 
 
 I will now quote at length the strong denials to which 
 reference has been made, of what I am compelled to call 
 a notorious and indisputable fact, with which it will be 
 scarcely possible that the English Presbyterian Association 
 should obtain credit even for wilful, much less for involuntary 
 ignorance. They not only speak of the Presbyterians of the 
 last century, as a body "which required no confession of faith, 
 and maintained none as the symbol of congregational union ;"t 
 but positively affirm, in reference to their entire history, 
 that, from the very commencement and earliest origin of the 
 body, at least since the Revolution, they not only " imposed no 
 creed," (this I have repeatedly admitted, ) but adopted no other 
 means of any kind to restrain or hinder the departure of their 
 successors in any direction, and to any extent, from what 
 they regarded as doctrinal truth; or, in other words, from 
 those views of the Gospel which they considered as not only 
 agreeable to scripture, but also of the highest importance, 
 on account of their being replete with sanctifying influence 
 and practical effect on the character and conduct. " Had the 
 founders been attached to their own sentiments so strongly, 
 that deviation from them would, by them, have been treated 
 as objectionable, how happens it that no expression denoting 
 such feeling is to be found in their trust-deeds ? How is it 
 that their congregational acts did not assist or promote it ? 
 The Independents did not thus act. Religious behef is, on 
 the admission of their ministers, distinctly stated. % " The 
 difference in the whole course and practice of the two parties 
 
 • MS. Copy of Orig. Diary, by Dr. Williams, and his edit, of Life, pp. 145, 149. 
 
 t Hist. pp. 27, 28. 
 
 X The sentence which immediately succeeds this, and precedes that wliich 
 follows above, relates to confessions of faith by members of their congregations, 
 which have been already noticed. 
 
211 
 
 indicates a distinguishing principle. There was nothing to 
 prevent the Umitations required by the one, from being re- 
 quired by the other, or the confessions of doctrines demanded 
 by the one from being demanded by the other."* 
 
 "The value the Presbyterians attach to the ceremony 
 (ordination) may not be great; and it has always been of 
 less importance to them than to the Independents, because 
 the former do not, like the latter, make it a contract, a 
 declaration by the minister of his faith, a pledge as to the 
 doctrines he is chosen to preach."t Now, it so happens 
 that these very words contain an accurate and exact descrip- 
 tion of what the Presbyterians during the whole of the period 
 in question, actually did. They considered " soundness in the 
 faith" one of the essential quaUfications for a minister of the 
 Gospel; and before they would admit a person, who had 
 received a suitable education for the ministry, into that office, 
 they required from him a public confession of his faith, which 
 if it were esteemed orthodox, was accounted a valid and satis- 
 factory " pledge as to the doctrines he was chosen to preach," 
 and the act of ordination followed. The whole service, they 
 unquestionably regarded, on the part at least of the indivi- 
 dual ordained, in the light of a solemn contract ; and so, for 
 many years afterwards, it was generally regarded by their 
 successors. Mr. Hunter, who tells us that " the Inde- 
 pendents adhere ostensibly to similar views, as to discipline 
 and the propriety of subscriptions and confessions now, as 
 during the period in question," asks — " Would the Inde- 
 pendent ministers now admit as fellow -ministers, and share 
 in the ordination of persons who should hesitate, at the time of 
 their ordination, to give a pledge of belief in the doctrine 
 of the Trinity ?| I answer. Certainly not ; and equally certain 
 is it that neither formerly would the Presbyterian ministers. 
 
 Of the confessions of faith delivered on these solemn and 
 interesting occasions, there are many in print, and copies of 
 a considerable number are in my possession. I may venture 
 to assert, that not one can be produced during the period 
 
 Hist. p. 50. t lb. p. 34. t Hist. Def. p. 45. 
 
 p2 
 
212 
 
 in question, and, I might add, for several years after, which is 
 not decidedly orthodox, understanding by that term either 
 strongly (as in some cases) or moderately Calvinistic, and 
 unequivocally Trinitarian. Abundance of extracts might be 
 produced in proof of this assertion, were it necessary. But 
 if any one can be found, not answering to this description, 
 let it be produced. 
 
 Dr. Toulmin, though himself an Unitarian, has, in his 
 Historical View, furnished decisive testimony to the fact, that 
 a profession of the orthodox faith was deemed one of the 
 requisite qualifications of a minister among the Presbyterians, 
 by inserting copies of "the written certificate formerly given to 
 the candidate," who thereupon, as Mr. Hunter states, " went 
 forth an accredited minister of the Presbyterian denomina- 
 tion." That signed at the ordination of one of the early pastors 
 of a (now) Unitarian congregation at Birmingham, will serve 
 as a specimen of the manner in which these documents were 
 drawn up : — 
 
 " Forasmuch as Mr. Thomas Pickard, of Birmingham, in the parish 
 of Birmingham, in the county of Warwick, hath earnestly desired to 
 enter orderly, according to the rules of the Gospel of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ, into the sacred office and function of the minis- 
 try ; and having requested us, whose names are under-written, solemnly 
 to invest him with ministerial authority ; and knowing him to be a man 
 sound and orthodox in his judgment, of a pious and unblameable con- 
 versation, and competently qualified with ministerial abilities, (no 
 exception being made against his ordination or admission :) We have 
 approved him, and have proceeded solemnly to set him apart to the 
 office of preaching presbyter, and all the parts and duties belonging 
 to it, with fasting and prayer, and imposition of hands ; and do, so 
 far as concernetli us, impower him to perform all the offices and 
 duties of a faithful minister of Jesus Christ. In witness whereof we 
 have hereunto put our hands, the 19th day of September, 1705."* 
 [The names of three ejected Ministers are subscribed.] 
 This document shews the light in which ordination was then 
 regarded by the Presbyterians ; and though Dr. Toulmin says 
 " the authoritative tone" had been " lowered," since the time 
 
 • Pp. 275, 27G. A certificate to precisely the same effect, and nearly in the 
 same words, may be seen at p. 230, dated August 21, 1702, signed at the ordination 
 of Mr. William Woodhouse, (ancestor of the late venerable Archdeacon Woodhouse,) 
 at Rearsby, in Leicestershire. 
 
213 
 
 of the Commonwealth, it appears to me that a power to confer 
 an official character was assumed by the parties who signed it. 
 The reader, however, will be able to judge of this from the 
 tenor of the instruument itself. 
 
 We have a particular account of the prevaiHng method of 
 conducting these services in connection with a Sermon by 
 Mr. Jeremiah Smith, (of Silver-street,) delivered at the ordina- 
 tion of Mr. Samuel Clark, at StAlban's, Sept. 17, 1712, in which 
 the two most eminent Presbyterian divines of that day, Dr. 
 Williams and Mr. Matthew Henry, were prominently engaged. 
 The pamphlet is introduced by " a Preface, shewing the method 
 and solemnity of Presbyterian ordinations," by Dr. Williams, 
 fi'om which the following are extracts : — 
 
 " They who are most zealous for the ceremonies of the Established 
 Church call most of the Dissenters Presbyterians; whereas at the 
 same time, several parties among Dissenters oppose and brand those 
 as Presbyterians, to whom that name is most proper, on account of 
 their different princijiles and practices in sundry points, and particu- 
 larly in what concerns the ministerial office and Ordination. 
 
 " It will be no just cause of offence to either side, that I give a 
 narrative how we Presbyterians admit and ordain men to the order of 
 Presbyters. 
 
 " Several among us (notwithstanding past discouragements) being 
 desirous to subserve the interest of the Christian religion, have 
 designed one or more of their most hopeful sons to be preachers of 
 the EVERLASTING Gospel. To effect which good purjiose, they care- 
 fully seek and choose what they esteem the best and safest helps, for 
 their education in all such learning as tends to qualifie them for that 
 sacred office. 
 
 " The course of their studies being finished, and their behaviour 
 promising, they are, at a fit age, presented before such of our pastors 
 as are appointed to examine candidates for the ministry. 
 
 " These ministers give the proposed person some controverted 
 theological question in Latin, upon which he frames an Exegesis; this 
 he delivers, and sustains the Orthodox side of the question in the same 
 language against all opponents. 
 
 " [Afterwards] he is strictly examined as to his skill in the Greek 
 and Hebrew text of Scripture, and also in i^hilosophy and scripture 
 chronology; and all present are at liberty to propose such questions 
 as they think fit, concerning any difficult texts of scripture, and any 
 points in Doctrinal a7id Casuistical Divinity: to all which questions he 
 is obliged to answer. 
 
214 
 
 " After wliich examination, he is desired to withdraw ; and the 
 judgment of the ministers concerning his seriousness, and the suffi- 
 ciency of all his performances, is asked. If they declare a full satis- 
 faction, then upon sufficient testimonials of his sober and godly con- 
 versation, he is licensed to preach as a probationer for some time. 
 
 " The day of ordination is observed as a Fast. The ordainers are 
 senior pastors, who were ordained Presbyters. 
 
 " One of them preacheth a sermon relating to the ministerial office; 
 as to its institution, duties, and privileges. Then one of the most 
 aged pastors, with great seriousness, appoints the Candidate to make 
 a public Confession of his Faith, which he performs, (having composed 
 it himself beforehand.) If this be esteemed Orthodox, the pastor pro- 
 ceeds to ask him what are the governing and principal Ends for which 
 he desireth this Order? Then he proposeth the more essential duties 
 incumbent on a Gospel minister, and demands his Promise to perform 
 each of them. This he engageth with the greatest solemnity." 
 
 The Questions proposed by Dr. Williams are introduced 
 by a Preface, evidently written by the Dr. himself. It con- 
 tains so much important matter, that I shall insert the 
 greater part of it. 
 
 The custom among the Dissenters, of delivering a Confession of 
 their Faith at their Ordination (of which several have been printed), 
 tho' not generally used by other Churches, yet is certainly very proper 
 and useful upon such occasions : since it not only gives a more satis- 
 factory evidence of the person's acquaintance with and assenting to 
 the truths of the Gospel, than barely to subscribe any imposed form ; 
 but also by this it may effectually appear, what an Agreement there is 
 in the great Doctrines of the Gospel, both among themselves, and with 
 the Scripture, the Doctrine of the Church of England, and other 
 Reformed Churches. And whatever variety or difference may be in 
 smaller matters, in method, manner of thinking, or speaking, it is so 
 far from breeding confusion, that it rather sets off that Unity of Faith, 
 and harmony of sentiments, which appear in all material points ; and 
 is an instance of that true freedom of thought, under the con- 
 duct of the Scripture, which the Dissenters stand up for, as the 
 privilege of every man. And agreeable to their's was the practice of 
 the most ancient Fathers. The several short Confessions of Faith we 
 meet with in their writings, are very different botli in method and 
 expression, though agreeing in the substance. And how much more 
 reasonable and just is it, that every one should have the liberty of 
 delivering their own sense of the Doctrines of the Scripture in their 
 own words, than to be tied down to the arbitrary invented expressions 
 of others ; as if all men's minds were of the same make, or one coat 
 
215 
 
 would fit all shapes and sizes ! And yet 'tis this Imposition of 
 unscriptural forms of words in matters of Faith, that has constantly 
 disturbed the Church, ever since the three first and purest ages of 
 Christianity. This has been always one great engine of division, and 
 in many respects very prejudicial to the Church. How often has it 
 been deprived thereby of the labours of the most valuable persons, 
 who tho' not disagreeing in any thing material from their neighbours, 
 yet could not frame to pronounce right their shibboleth 1 But it would 
 carry me too far, to take notice of the several mischiefs of these impo- 
 sitions. The method, then, taken among us, is certainly much more 
 for the interest of the Church of Christ, than to cramp men with any 
 particular form, by whomsoever invented. As for the Questions 
 solemnly proposed at our ordinations, the reason of them is plain 
 from the nature of the thing, and the practice of other Churches is 
 agreeable thereto." 
 
 This preface is remarkably illustrative both of the liberty 
 allowed by Presbyterians, in reference to modes of expression, 
 and of the zeal manifested by them for those great doctrines 
 which constitute the substance of Christian truth. The fol- 
 lowing is the first question proposed: — 
 
 " That one who desires to be a minister be sound in the Faith, is 
 principally to be regarded, because this is what you are appointed to 
 preach. That you also firmly assent to the Doctrines of the Gospel, 
 and unfeignedly believe in the Lord Jesus, is not only necessary to 
 your own salvation, but to render you also more fitted to benefit 
 others by your ministry. I therefore desire you to confess, as in the 
 sight of God, what that Faith is which you truly Believe yourself, and 
 solemnly engage to Preach to others." 
 
 The following clause in the Confession of Faith, delivered 
 in answer to this question, relates to the doctrine of the 
 Trinity :— 
 
 " I FIRMLY BELIEVE,* tho' I cannot fathom, what the Scripture has 
 revealed concerning the Father, Son, and Blessed Spirit, when it attri- 
 butes equally to each of them. Eternity and all other Divine Perfections 
 and Titles; ascribes to them the same almighty works; and claims for 
 them the same homage and subjection of the creature ; yet so as not 
 to destroy the Unity of the Godhead, nor confound the Persons one 
 with the other, but distinguisliing them by their personal properties, 
 and more plainly by the different parts they act in the oeconomy of 
 man's redemption." 
 
 * It is worthy of notice, that this expression occurs in no other place through 
 the whole Confession, the phrase being elsewhere merely "/ believe;' which is re- 
 peated about twenty times. 
 
216 
 
 Question 6 is as follows : — 
 
 " The Devil is active to influence seducers, and by them to turn 
 men from the Truth to error and delusions. Ministers are, by tlieir 
 office, set for the defence of the Gospel, and under special obligations 
 to contend earnestly for the Faith, and oppose gainsayers with meek- 
 ness of wisdom. Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in 
 maintaining the Truth of the Gospel ? 
 
 Answer. I desire to entertain a very great regard to, and veneration 
 for, all the truths of the Gospel ; to give them the freest admittance 
 into my own mind, and to endeavour to propagate them to others. I 
 resolve to set myself vigorously to oppose the spreading of errors, 
 especially those that strike at the Fundamentals of Christianity ; yet 
 in meekness instnicting those that oppose themselves, if God, perad- 
 venture, will give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the 
 truth." 
 
 Mr. Henry, in the Exhortation delivered on this occasion, 
 mentions, among those that contradict the Great Truths of 
 Christianity, " those that deny the Trinity, the Godhead of 
 Christ, and his Satisfaction," whom he associates with " those 
 that question the Being of a God." 
 
 In a sermon preached at the ordination of Mr. B. A. Atkinson, 
 in London, January?, 1712-13, the same excellent man says: 
 " The Three Persons in the blessed Trinity gloriously concur 
 as in the creating of man, so in the redeeming and governing 
 of man, and particularly in sending messengers to the children 
 of men, to bring them revelations of the will of God. Minis- 
 ters are ordained in the same Name into which Christians are 
 baptized Li the name of the Father, and of the So)i, and of 
 the Holi/ Ghost ; Matt, xxviii. 19. Nor could they baptize in 
 that name, if they were not commissioned by the authority, 
 and devoted to the glory of that Name." He afterwards, in 
 allusion to those words in the text, (Is. vi. 8,) ivho ivill go 
 for us f describes a Christian minister as an agent for God the 
 Father, Son, cmd Holy Ghost, employed for God the Father, 
 to bring the souls to him he has made, as their chief good and 
 highest end ; for God the Son to bring the souls to him he has 
 redeemed, as their prophet, priest, and king; for God the 
 Holy Ghost to bring the souls he has the charge of, under his 
 conduct, and his sanctifying power and influence.* 
 
 • Pp. 11, 27. Mr. Atkinson, in his Confession of Faith, thus declares his belief in 
 the Trinity — " I believe in the Unity of the Godhead, there are Three Persont 
 
217 
 
 Although the evidence abeady produced on this point will 
 probably be considered as complete, I cannot forbear sub- 
 joining the testimony of Dr. Calamy. In a Letter to a Divine 
 in Germany, giving a brief but true account of the Pro- 
 testant Dissenters in England, annexed to a sermon preached 
 by him at the ordination of [Dr.] Samuel Chandler, and 
 several others, on January 19, 1716-17, he says, 
 
 " They are denied tlie advantage of educating tlieir youth, either at 
 Oxford or Cambridge, by oaths and subscriptions that are imposed ; 
 and therefore, besides private seminaries, where philosophical and 
 theological lectures are read, they send their children to North Bri- 
 tain and Holland for academical education. 
 
 " They are zealous for a learned ministry ; and therefore, after 
 several years spent in preparatory studies, young men are carefully 
 examined amongst them, before they are allowed to enter upon 
 l^reaching in public : and upon their being in time called to take the 
 pastoral charge of any Christian society, or after they have continued 
 so long Candidates as to have evidence of the acceptableness of their 
 gifts, and to be able with freedom to make choice of the ministry for 
 the employment of their lives, they are solemnly ordained, by fasting 
 and prayer, and imposition of hands, after making a public Confession 
 of that Faith in which they engage to make it tlieir Business to 
 instruct others. And this Examination and Ordination is managed 
 according to the Rules laid down in the Directory published by the 
 Westminster Assembly, about the year 1644, which also gives direction 
 about the several parts of public worship which are generally approved 
 among us."* 
 
 I shall add an extract from an elaborate tract, by the 
 learned Dr. Chandler, published in 1748, entitled, "The Case 
 of Subscription to explanatory Articles of Faith, as a QuaUfi- 
 cation for Admission into the Christian Ministry, calmly and 
 
 that are distinguished one from the other in their ways of subsisting, yet equally 
 enjoying and possessing all the essential Attributes and Perfections of the Deity, as 
 immensity, eternity, infinity, immutability, omniscience, and omnipresence." In 
 proof of this doctrine, he thus refers to the baptismal formula : — " Persons are com- 
 manded to be baptized in the Name of this sacred Trinity, whereby it appears that 
 the very same Worship which is due to the Father, is to be paid unto the Son and 
 the Spirit, which could not be, if they were not the most high God, in the same 
 Essence with the Father ; and though this is a mystery above my comprehension, 
 yet I believe it on the word of that God that cannot lie." p. 33. 
 
 • See Neal's Hist, of Puritans, vol. iii. Appendix, pp. 602 — 605. 
 
218 
 
 impartially reviewed," &c. as it will shew, that while the prac- 
 tice continued among the Presbyterians, till that time, of 
 requiring confessions of faith previously to ordination, they 
 distinguished between subscription to human creeds or arti- 
 cles, and a confession by a party himself, in his own words : 
 
 " Mr. Bingham tells us, that the fourth Council of Carthage, that 
 met A.C. 398, prescribes a particular form of Examination, by way of 
 interrogatories, to the bishop that was to be ordained. What then ? 
 How doth this prove that they made use of this very method of Subscrip- 
 tion, as he undertook to prove ? Why, examination by interrogatories is, 
 with every honest man, equivalent with subscription. Suppose it is, doth 
 every honest man, that honestly answers a question, subscribe to it ? 
 We did not want to be informed that the primitive Church examined 
 the candidates for the ministry, but that they forced them to subscribe 
 to some explanatory articles or creed. But there is not a word of this 
 in the canons of the Council of Carthage. And suppose there was, 
 doth he think we will take the Council of Carthage, held at the close 
 of the fourth century, for the primitive Church ? And doth he not 
 know, that there is even some question as to the truth and authenticity 
 of these very canons? Whether he did or did not know it, why did he 
 quote them upon us as authorities? The other authority is from an edict 
 of Justinian, who lived so low down as the sixth century. And what 
 doth he say ? Why, that he who ordains a bishop shall demand from 
 the person to be ordained, a libel, subscribed by himself, containing a 
 Confession of the Orthodox Faith ; i. e. the person to be ordained shall 
 make his orvn confession, and subscribe it. But what hath this to do 
 with the modern method, of making the person to be ordained to sub- 
 scribe a creed ready drawn up to his hand by others, and which he 
 had no share himself in making of? This was what he should have 
 proved in order to justify the practice of subscription in the Church 
 of England. Justinian's Novel is rather a justification of the maimer 
 of Ordination amongst the Dissenters, who don't impose their own Con- 
 fessions on the persons to be ordained, but desire them either to give in 
 their own Confession in writing, or to read it publicly in the congrega- 
 tion before whom they are to be ordained. Thanks to the gentleman 
 for this kind testimony in proof of the antiquity of our Method of 
 Ordination. What now is become of this same practice of the primi- 
 tive Church ? Of his two proofs, one is not earlier than the fourth 
 century, and that says not a word about Subscription ; and the otlier 
 is fetched out of the sixth century, and vindicates, not the practice 
 of the Church's method of Subscription, but the more just and 
 equitable one made use of by Dissenters in the manner of their 
 Ordinations."— Pp. 78, 79. 
 
219 
 
 One exception to this practice occurred in 1740, when 
 Mr. Caleb Fleming was ordained without a confession of faith. 
 This is mentioned by Mr. Walter Wilson as a " remarkable 
 circumstance," and as "probably the first instance of an 
 omission of the kind that ever occurred at a Dissenting 
 ordination. The only declaration that he used was, that 'he 
 believed the New Testament writings to contain a revelation 
 worthy of God to give, and of man to receive ; and that it 
 should be his endeavour to recommend these teachings to the 
 people, in the sense in which he could from time to time 
 understand them.'"* 
 
 Of the six ministers engaged in this ordination, (Drs. Chandler, 
 Hunt, and Benson, Messrs. Mole, Simmons, and Sandercock,) 
 two, if not three, were at that time pastors of Independent 
 churches. 
 
 Here we certainly have a deviation from the ordinary mode. 
 The custom of requiring confessions of faith at ordinations, 
 continued, however, in general use among the Presbyterians 
 at least as late as 1778; and till about that time, or even 
 later, it was the frequent practice, both in London and the 
 country, for Presbyterian and Independent ministers to unite, 
 and take part together in such services. 
 
 Let the reader, after perusing these extracts, compare 
 the follovnng statements made by Mr. Tottie, who is endea- 
 vouring to prove the total variance between the two bodies in 
 practice and principle; "The laxity, so far as it exists in practice, 
 as to ordination, may be fairly traced to an essential difference 
 between the plan and object of the ordinance, as practised by 
 the two bodies ; and, therefore, so far from the result identi- 
 fying one body with the other, it only marks their separation. 
 The Independents have, I believe, always made the ordination 
 an occasion for requiring and recording the creed or confession 
 of the minister, and it therefore serves what is, in their view, 
 an important practical purpose. The Presbyterians have not 
 only omitted this test or inquiry, but constantly made it their 
 distinctive boast that they did so. From neither minister nor 
 
 * History of Dissenting Churches, Vol. III. p. 384. 
 
220 
 
 people has creed, confession, or experience been required. 
 What, according to the view of the other body, must be an 
 important practical object in the ordinance, was therefore 
 entirely wanting upon Presbyterian principles."* 
 
 The ordination services, as practised by the English 
 Presbyterians for a long succession of years, have, within the 
 last half century, been generally discontinued by their 
 Unitarian successors. The English Presbyterian Association 
 admit, indeed, that the old form of ordination has " fallen into 
 partial disuse," but they tell us that a ceremony now called 
 " settling," " equivalent in many respects," is still frequent ;f 
 but, from their own description, it appears to differ widely 
 from the original rite. Mr. Hunter states, that " the ordi- 
 nations have almost dwindled down into a short service of 
 exhortation and prayer, at the close of the students' academical 
 course."! Another recent writer admits, that "the ceremony 
 of ordination contained a declaration of faith, at first of some 
 strictness, but continually becoming more relaxed, till at 
 present reduced to httle more than a simple avowal of belief 
 in the religion of Christ." Alas, that the body who gloried 
 in their firm and stedfast adherence to the faith of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ — the Gospel of God our Saviour — should have 
 been succeeded by men who merely require from the occu- 
 pants of their pulpits a general declaration of belief in the 
 divine origin and authority of the Christian religion, as a matter 
 of external revelation ! 
 
 Concerning the view taken by modern Unitarians of the rite 
 of ordination, we have a competent and unexceptionable wit- 
 ness, in their great champion and chieftain, the celebrated 
 Dr. Joseph Priestley. 
 
 In the preface to a Sermon, entitled, " A View of Revealed 
 Religion," 'preached by him at the ordination of the Rev. 
 William Field, of Warwick, July 12, 1790, published with a 
 
 • A Plain Statement of the Trusts and Recent Administration of Lady Hewley's 
 Charities, 1834, p. 43. 
 
 t His. p. 34. Hist. Def. p. 12. 
 
 X Observations on the Title of Unitarians and other English Presbyterians, to 
 administer or partake in the benefit of English Presbyterian and General 
 Protestant Dissenters' Trusts. 1S34. p. 11. 
 
221 
 
 Charge, delivered at the same time, by the late Mr. Belsham, 
 he undertakes to explain " the idea of ordination that prevails 
 among Dissenters." He give the following account — 
 
 " We (at least many of us) do not now mean by it the giving oj 
 orders, without which a person could not be considered as properly 
 qualified to exercise the office of minister in a Christian society. 
 As all our societies are independent of each other, the members of each 
 of tliem are, of course, the sole judges of the qualifications of the person 
 whom they chuse to be their minister. Consequently their appoint- 
 ment is his proper orders or title to officiate among them ; and all that 
 is done by the ministers who bear any part in what is usually called 
 the ordination service, (besides thereby virtually expressing their apjiro- 
 bation of the choice of the congregation, and giving their miiiister the 
 right hand of fellowshiji,) is to recommend him pnd his labours to the 
 divine blessing by prayer, and to give him and the people proper 
 advice.* 
 
 " On this idea, it is now customary with many Dissenters, especially 
 those who are called Presbyterians, for the minister to discharge all 
 
 * This was precisely the view taken by the earlier and more rigid Independents. 
 Indeed, it is a fact not a little remarkable, that while the modern Congregational 
 Dissenters agree with the moderate Presbyterians of the period in question, the 
 Unitarian successors of the latter hold, on the subject of ordination, the opinions 
 entertained, and practise (if any) the mode adopted, by the strict Independents of 
 the seventeenth century. 
 
 The reader may compare with the above the language of high - church 
 writers in the reign of George the First, concerning the Presbyterians at that time, — 
 who were zealously opposed to all preaching by laymen, and to any person's 
 administering either of the sacraments, or exercising the ministerial office, without 
 being solemnly ordained by presbyters. 
 
 " That the generality of the Dissenters do utterly condemn lay baptism, is 
 known to every body. And that those Independent, but more especially those 
 Anabaptist teachers, who pretend to no other orders than that of getting a 
 congregation to join with them, are jnere laymen, ever was and ever must be 
 acknowledged by all that hold the Presbyterian principles, and indeed by all 
 others that own any orders at all." — A Defence of the Reply to the Caveat, &c. 
 by Benjamin Reed, Exon. 1715. Postscript. 
 
 " Mr. Peirce, I acknowledge, is as capable as any of his brethren to make a 
 specious harangue for any sort of Ordination ; and before I saw this Sermon, I 
 thought he had been more of an Independent than a Presbyterian; I shall not, 
 therefore, call upon him to reconcile his useful Ordination Sermon with this of 
 Presbyterian ordination, which he now calls, ' that solemn Ordination without 
 which,' says he, * / should not dare to act as a minister myself; because I am 
 surprised that a man of his learning dare act with it.'" — The Invalidity of the 
 Dissenting Ministry, by a Presbyter of the Church of England. 1717. p. 3. 
 
222 
 
 tne functiofks of his office, baptizing and administering the Lord's- 
 supper, as well as preaching and praying before ordination, in order 
 more eifectually to remove the i^rejudices which still remain with 
 many, founded on the idea that some powers are conferred on this 
 occasion, powers which qualify him to do after this ceremony what he 
 could not do before. 
 
 " The proper ordination service, therefore, consists in the prayer 
 over the candidate^ and the charge. But the congregation, and also many 
 strangers, being usually assembled on the occasion, and especially a 
 number of ministers being present, it has been usual for one of them 
 to deliver a discourse or serinon on some subject relating to Chris- 
 tianity in general, or the ministry of it in particular." 
 
 He next informs the reader, that " instead of the particular 
 Confession of Faith, which was formerly required of all can- 
 didates for the ministry, (his soundness in which was then 
 deemed essential,) certain questions are put to him, which 
 lead him to give as much as he thinks proper of his views of 
 Christianity and the ministry of it, and the motives and 
 maxims of his own conduct, for the instruction of the 
 audience." He then refers to " the ceremony of imposition of 
 hands, which in primitive times accompanied the action of 
 praying for a particular person, by which the apostles com- 
 mimicated spiritual gifts, and which was afterwards supposed 
 to be necessary to the conferring of proper qualifications for 
 the gospel ministry." This, he says, " is now generally laid 
 aside by us, since we are conscious that we have nothing to 
 impart, and wish not to encourage superstition." After 
 stating, that " ordination being now no longer considered in 
 the light of conferring orders, as in Episcopal, and the proper 
 Presbyterian churches, many of the more liberal Dissenters 
 neglect it altogether," — he concludes by " expressing his msh, 
 that some service to which the name of ordination may well 
 enough be given, may be kept up among us, at the same time 
 that every precaution is taken to prevent superstition with 
 respect to it." In that case, the name ordination would, as 
 he had just before stated, " no longer suggest the idea that 
 was formerly annexed to it." Whether the practice can be 
 justified, of retaining a name, to which a specific and definite 
 meaning has by long prescription been attached, after the 
 
223 
 
 idea properly denoted by it has been abandoned, I do not now 
 inquire. It seems, however, adapted, if not intended, to mis- ' 
 lead. The modern Unitarians have abandoned both name 
 and thing. The practice called jilacitig or settlement^ men- 
 tioned by Mr.Tottie,* is a different kind of service, and though 
 it may bear a slight resemblance to what the old Presbyterians 
 understood by ordination, it corresponds in fact to the idea of 
 that rite, which Dr. Priestley has described in the above 
 extract, not to that which he mentions as formerly held by Dis- 
 senters, especially Presbyterians, and which all modern Unita- 
 rians have entirely discarded. Mr. Hunter admits, that " of 
 late years they have not been very choice in their admissions to 
 the ministry.":}: They certainly do not, like their Presbyterian 
 forefathers, invariably expect and require " their ministers 
 to be educated and set apart for their office ; to be learned, 
 not la)mien; or to undergo ordination derived through 
 presbyters and from other ministers." § At all events, they 
 have long since ceased to demand the particular Confession 
 
 * Mr. Daniel Mayo, a Presbyterian minister, published in 1706, (12nio.) a 
 sermon, preached at Chertsey, in October of the preceding year, entitled, " The 
 Necessity of a Regular Mission to the Ministry asserted and proved." Another 
 Presbyterian minister, Mr. James Waters, of Uxbridge, wrote a preface, in which 
 he speaks of the violence and fury with which a regular admission into the sacred 
 ministry had been attacked by men of different principles. After referring to the 
 intrusion of men destitute of the requisite qualifications, into an office to which 
 they were never called, he adds — " This pernicious practice has not only been 
 patronized by those who are tainted with the vile principles of the Socitiians, but 
 by many who have sucked in the silly tenets of the Antinomians." Speaking of the 
 sermon itself, he says, " I hope that as the author has solidly and judiciously 
 exposed the sinfulness and great mischiefs of such irregular principles, so it may 
 (by God's blessing) be effectual to open the eyes of many, who have been too 
 indifferent about the commission of those to whom they commit the conduct of 
 their souls. Besides, it may serve to stop the mouths of such uncharitable clergy- 
 men as Mr. D ,+ and others of the same spiteful temper, who unfairly charge 
 
 the main body of Protestant Dissenters with the disorders of a fetv, who are 
 unjustly ranked amongst us, and whose principles we as much detest as the most 
 zealous among themselves." He undertakes to prove that ministerial ordination is 
 requisite before any man ought to preach publicly and constantly, and that it 
 should be performed with fasting and prayer, and imposition of hands, which last, 
 he says, " might be shewn to have been the constant practice of the Church," and 
 t Rev. Theophilus Dorrington, See p. 130, ante. 
 
 t Plain Statement, &c. p. 42. 
 § Hist. Def. p. 55. Observations on the Title, &c. p. 11. 
 
224 
 
 formerly regarded as at once the proof and the pledge of that 
 "soundness in the faith," which Dr. Priestley acknowledges 
 was tlien deemed essential. That practice, at least, they 
 universally disown and reject. Their " liberty of private 
 inquiry and judgment," to use Mr. Cooper's language, " is 
 unimpeded by any such confession of faith."* 
 
 After perusing these copious extracts, I might safely leave 
 every reader to judge for himself, of the correctness of such 
 assertions as the following: — " Had the perpetuation of a 
 peculiar system of d( »ctrine been intended, why were no fences 
 erected to prevent the prevalence of errors, as some represent 
 them to be, which were seen and were debated by the very 
 persons whose indignation we are now told would have been 
 
 adds, " I tbirk 'tis very faulty to omit the use thereof, though I dare not say the 
 ordination is a nullity where this is wanting, especially where the lawfulness is 
 doubted," pp. 34, 35. Speaking of probationers for the ministry, he says, " I 
 think care should be taken that none preach, even as candidates, without some 
 previous examination and allowance, nor suffered to continue too long without 
 ordination ; and also that some distinction should be made between these and such 
 as are ordained." p. 38. 
 
 There might be some difference of opinion among the Presbyterians of the 
 period in question, as to the nature of ordination, and the kind or degree of 
 authority (hereby conferred; but Peirce, the learned Arian, was a strenuous advo- 
 cate for " the proper Presbyterian idea." He also approved of requiring confes- 
 sions of faith on the occasion. In his sermon, entitled " Presbyterian Ordination 
 proved regular, (1716,) he considers the words, 1 Tim. vi, 12. " hast professed 
 a good profession before manij witnesses," as referring to the profession made by 
 Timothy, either at his baptism or at his ordination, more probably at the latter, 
 " since 'tis more likely the apostle was present at his ordination than his baptism." 
 He adds, " I the rather mention this, that you may see how very probable 'tis the 
 apostles used pretty much the same method we do. However, 'tis not bare pro- 
 babilities we ground our practice upon ; but somewhat of this nature is requisite, in 
 order to our trying and forming a judgment concerning persons, when we commit 
 the ofRce to them." He proceeds to explain the import of the expression, com- 
 mit thou these things, v/h'ich, he says, imports, 1. An authorizing and impowering 
 persons, as ministers of the gospel, to teach these things, or the giving them a 
 warrant to do so. 2. A laying it upon them as a solemn charge and trust, a 
 binding and engaging them to teach these things. So that the very committing 
 the things to them makes a great alteration in their circumstances, and leaves 
 them under a strict obligation to do the work, as ever they would approve them- 
 selves faithful to God, and true to the vows and promises _^they made. — Fifteen 
 Sermons, pp. 86, 87. 
 
 * Substance of Speech, p. 24. 
 
excited by them." And was not their indignation excited by 
 them? When Dr. Williams and his Presbyterian brethren 
 were accused, not of maintaining the peculiar tenets of Socinus, 
 but merely of holding some opinions on the mode of justifica- 
 tion, in which the keen penetration of a bitter opponent, eager 
 to detect erroneous doctrine, pretended to discover remote 
 and latent tendencies to that dangerous and fatal system — a 
 system which, though far from proceeding in the career of 
 aberration from orthodoxy to the length of modern Unita- 
 rianism, was then accounted the worst and most pestilent of 
 heresies — so that the name of its founder was considered a 
 term of the highest reproach, being itself the type and 
 symbol of all that is malignant and virulent in doctrinal 
 pravity ; — in what manner, I ask, did they meet this foul and 
 slanderous charge ? In what terms did they speak of its 
 author ? In repudiating and rejecting his accusation, did they 
 exhibit nothing like indignation ? did they manifest no emo- 
 tion of becoming resentment or just offence? The reader has 
 already seen how explicitly they disavowed Pelagian and 
 Arminian errors ; I will now, by a few extracts, enable him to 
 see how they met the charge of holding opinions tending 
 toward Socinianism. Mr. Mather, their principal opponent, 
 had the hardihood and temerity to allege, that they "held 
 soul-destroying errors." Dr. Williams thus repels this foul 
 imputation: "Mr. Mather's criminations of his brethren 
 are intolerable. More wicked malice and falsehood, hardly 
 any man can be guilty of." " Nay, his malignant spirit 
 riseth so high, as to call them oft semi-Socbiicms^ and he 
 studiously brands them with that name, as well as with that 
 of Socinians ; and adds, that the Gospel of our salvation 
 is craftily and insolently assaulted by them in the very vitals 
 and fundamentals of it." Let us now hear their defence 
 against the " nickname" the " scandalous word," fastened upon 
 them by this 'fiery man,' — * 
 
 " He quits all truth and modesty, in giving us the name of 
 Socinians or semi-Socinians. He saith, our opinions are the 
 ofispring of Socinianism : but what meaneth he by offspring ? 
 
 • Dr. Williams's Works, Vol. iv. pp. 268, 269. 
 Q 
 
226 
 
 Is it only, I, Tliat Socinianism was the occasion thereof; or, 2, 
 That they are of the same genuine nature with Socmiatiism ? 
 The last is an abominable Slander, hatcht by no good spirit. 
 1. The former may be pretended, but then an immediate 
 descent must be denied. Socinianism tempted weak men 
 to the opposite extreme of profane Antinomianism. This 
 extreme was perceived equally fatal to the Vitals of practical 
 Christianity as Socinianism ; and also to give advantage to the 
 Socinians, by its wild positions and weak arguments conso- 
 nant thereto. 2. Our principles are far from being the off- 
 spring of Socinianism, as being of the same nature tvith it, 
 which he meaneth. They are nothing which is properly 
 Soci7iia7i, or condemned as such, either by Synod or by men 
 of learning. So far are we from being half- Socinians. The 
 Socituan principles are summarily reduced to that of the Trin- 
 ity, and that of Christ's Satisfaction. They deny the Deity 
 of Christ, as the Son of God by eternal generation ; we affirm 
 it. They deny the Personality of the Holy Ghost ; we affirm 
 it. The malice of our author cannot pretend to touch us 
 there. The Socinians deny that Christ died a proper Sacri- 
 fice for sin ; we affirm it. They deny that Ciirist's sufferings 
 were the punishment of our sins ; we affirm it. They deny 
 that Christ satisfied divine justice, or died in our place ; we 
 affirm he satisfied justice, and that Christ died in our place, 
 and in our stead ; he died, that we might not die, who 
 were liable to die ; he gave his life for ours,"* &c. He after- 
 wards retorts the charge against Mr. Mather himself, who 
 appears to have been a very crude theologian, of holding 
 opinions by which the Socinian cause, in reference to the 
 Eternal Deity and proper Satisfaction of Christ, was favoured 
 and supported. 
 
 Yet these men, we are told, viewed with perfect indiffer- 
 ence, all diversities of opinion, and refused to interfere with 
 religious doctrine. Nor is this all. To declare that "no bar- 
 rier against manifest heresy was raised, no protection framed 
 to exclude the offensive creed, and no separation attempted 
 from those who publicly and openly were known to advance 
 
 t Dr. Williams's Woiks, vol. v. pp. 270, 1271. 
 
•2-27 
 
 criminal doctrines," had been a sufficient demand upon the cre- 
 dulity of the most uninformed; but the English Presbyterian 
 Association, venture to proceed yet farther, and, as if desirous 
 of shewing « to what lengths assurance may be carried in the 
 way of assertion," are not content with stating that " the 
 Presbyterian never looked with disfavour upon those who 
 differed from him ; but affirm, moreover, that the ministry of 
 those who propagated doctrines then accounted erroneous and 
 heretical, was positively encouraged among their early prede- 
 cessors. « Were," they ask, " the guilty parties pointed out 
 for rebuke ? They were eminent, and learned, and pious, and 
 their ministry was encouraged."* The very reverse shall 
 now be proved by sufficient evidence. The Presbyterian 
 churches of England retained, till the very end of the period 
 in question, and for many years after, (with a few individual 
 exceptions,) that strong attachment and firm adherence to the 
 orthodox faith concerning the Trinity, redemption by the Son 
 of God, and sanctification by the Holy Spirit, which distin- 
 guished their illustrious founders and most distinguished 
 early ministers. Their Divine Master might, indeed, " have 
 somewhat against them." Toward the end of the period now 
 under review, the ardour of their love to his person and his 
 cause had undergone abatement, the fervour of their zeal in 
 vindication and defence of the peculiar doctrines of his gospel 
 had suffered a considerable declension, but they had not yet 
 forsaken the faith of his first disciples and of their own 
 forefathers, in his proper essential Deity, or the vicarious 
 nature, expiatory character, and piacular design of his suf- 
 ferings and death. They could not, in this respect, " bear 
 those that were evil;" and they accounted as " evil men and 
 seducers," such as denied either of these great vital truths of 
 genuine Christianity, and excluded from their pulpits those 
 whom they even suspected of a design to " teach men so." 
 
 • Hist. p. 51. The reader will observe that I am speaking (as, for the purpose 
 of his argument, it must be presumed this writer also does,) of ministers who 
 were contemporary with Presbyterian founders, or the original authors of trusts 
 created for preaching or carrying on public worship, chiefly during the reign of 
 William and Mary, and the earlier years of Queen Anne. 
 
 q2 
 
•228 
 
 Preachers of Socinian doctrine there were none in England 
 during the period in question. There was, indeed, in the 
 early part of the last century, a Presbyterian minister (Mr. 
 Thomas Emlyn,)* who, having been educated, in part, at the 
 academy kept by Mr. Doolittle, near London, settled in 
 Dubhn, and, after having preached there several years with 
 much acceptance, was abruptly dismissed by the ministers of 
 that city, on its being discovered that he was not " a believer 
 in the supreme deity of Jesus Christ." His denial of the 
 doctrine of the Trinity had rendered him " obnoxious" and 
 " offensive" to the other Presbyterian ministers of Dublin, 
 most of whom acted toward him in a very harsh and unbro- 
 therly manner. He was, at the instigation of some " zealous 
 Dissenters," — particularly two, " one a Presbyterian and the 
 other a Baptist church officer" f — indicted, in 1703, for blas- 
 phemy; and although that alleged offence was not proved 
 against him by sufficient legal evidence, was found guilty, and 
 sentenced to severe and ignominious punishment. Far be it 
 from me to become the advocate or apologist for the civil pro- 
 secution of the propagators of erroneous doctrine, even on the 
 most vital points of our holy religion. As a firm believer, not 
 only in the external revelation of Christianity, but in what 
 are generally considered, and what I sincerely regard, as its 
 great leading truths, I always feel disposed to exclaim, in 
 reference to such proceedings — 
 
 " Non tali auxilio, nee defensoribus istis, 
 " Opus eget." 
 
 The divine Founder of Christianity, the sole Head, Law- 
 giver, and King of that spiritual community, the Church, has, 
 I submit, determined this question, by a distinct interposition 
 of his supreme authority. He surely understood the real 
 nature of his own kingdom, and could best explain the 
 proper manner in which the administration of his govern- 
 ment should be conducted. His own solemn and reiterated 
 
 •• Mr. Emlyn, it appears, was not a real Presbyterian, for he asks, " who 
 ever heard, in the primitive church, of such a strange creature as a presbytery 
 made up of the presbyters of several different churches ?" — Narrative, p. 20 
 
 t Narrative prefixed to Collection' of Tracts, p. 23. 8vo. 1719. 
 
229 
 
 aiiuouncenieiit, inade at a time and under circumstances of 
 peculiar interest, is, in my view, decisive—" Put up thy 
 sword into the sheath. My kingdom is not of this world ; if 
 my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants 
 fight; but now is my kingdom not from hence."* To the 
 same effect is the declaration of his inspired apostle, con- 
 cerning himself and his brethren—" The weapons of our war- 
 fare are not carnal, but spiritual, and mighty through God."f 
 Happy will be the day, speedily may it arrive, when the 
 whole Christian church shall act in the spirit of these Divine 
 Oracles, and disarm infidehty (already vanquished in argu- 
 ment) of its only remaining weapon, by ceasing to employ 
 force for the support and propagation of a religion, whose 
 pervading genius and animating soul is love. Then will 
 Christianity, relying solely on the arm of her almighty 
 defender, by means of one united effort of prayers, labours, 
 and free contributions for her diffusion, mw, and he glorified. 
 She will rise from the dust, shake off those earthly adhesions 
 and secular encumbrances which now obstruct her progress ; 
 extend her blessings like the light of heaven, and march for- 
 ward on her destined career of triumph through the earth. 
 Rival parties and mutual jealousies will cease, the voice of 
 discord will be hushed ; and the Christian church, no longer 
 rent into factions and torn by intestine divisions, will present 
 the inviting aspect of a peaceful asylum. So long as the 
 sword of civil authority is employed to extort reluctant con- 
 tributions for the support even of a purer faith, from those 
 who adopt a different creed, the victim of such a system will 
 continue deaf to the voice of truth, and exclaim— 
 
 Quodcunque mihi sic oatendis, incredulus odi.f 
 
 Mr. Emlyn, after suffering several months' imprisonment, 
 • John xviii. 11, 36. t 2 Cor.x. 4, 
 
 t The reader will pardon this digression, when he is informed that the above 
 remarks were written on the memorable day, (April 4, 1835), on the morning 
 of which, a full House of Commons, by a majority of 33, decided (in effect) 
 that the attempt, which the experience of centuries has proved ineffectual of 
 " enforcing the Reformation" in Ireland, should be speedily abandoned.— See 
 speech of Rt. Hon. E. J. Littleton. 
 
230 
 
 was liberated in July, 1705. It will be important to inquire 
 whether any encouragement was given in England to this 
 rejected and persecuted Irish minister, who, upon quitting the 
 scene of his former labours and recent sufferings, came to 
 London, where he afterwards lived many years. What favour 
 or acceptance did he find in the eyes of the Presbyterian 
 ministers of the metropolis ? What kind of reception and 
 treatment did he obtain at their hands ? Did they admit 
 him into their pulpits? Did they receive him into their 
 houses, or bid him God speed? The inquiries just proposed 
 shall be answered in the words of the late Dr. Kippis, a 
 candid and moderate Unitarian — 
 
 " Soon after his release, Mr. Emlyn returned to London, 
 where a small congregation was found for him, consisting of a 
 few friends, to whom he preached once every Sunday. This 
 he did without salary or stipend, although his fortune was 
 now reduced to a narrow income. 
 
 " After a few years, his congregation was dissolved by the 
 death of the principal persons who had attended upon his 
 ministry, and he retired into a silent obscurity. 
 
 " It was a great satisfaction to Mr. Emlyn to perceive, 
 that the doctrine for which he had written, and suffered so 
 much, gradually gained ground both in England and Ireland. 
 Nevertheless, he still continued to be so- obnoxious, that none 
 of the divines among the Dissenters in London dared to ask 
 him to preach for them, excepting the ministers of the two 
 congregations at Barbican, Mr. Burroughs and Mr. (afterwards 
 Dr.) James Foster, who, to shew their catholic temper, and 
 truly Christian spirit, invited him more than once to that 
 office ; and, notwithstanding the reflections of the censorious, 
 were not ashamed publicly to own him for a brother. Though 
 he lived in private retirement, he was honoured with the 
 esteem and friendship of divers persons of distinguished 
 learning and in eminent stations. He was particularly inti- 
 mate with the truly excellent Dr. Samuel Clarke. Another 
 of his friends was Mr. Whiston."* 
 
 Thus it appears, that into only one pulpit in the metropolis 
 * Kipi>iss I?io^i-aphia Britiinnica, vol. v. pp. 5'J4 .'>W>. 
 
•231 
 
 was he admitted, and that was occupied by General Baptist 
 ministers. All the rest, particularly the Presbyterians, refused 
 to associate with him on friendly terms, or to acknowledge 
 him as a brother minister. 
 
 A distinguished individual, the Rev. Matthew Henry, then 
 minister at Chester, made the following entries in his 
 diary : — 
 
 " 1705, September 1st. Mr. Emlyn was with me to-day. 
 After two years' imprisonment, he got his fine compounded — 
 paid £90. He adheres to the Arian heresy. I had a deal 
 of talk with him, and endeavoured to shew him, that even 
 his own principles were nearer to the Orthodox, than the 
 Socinian, which yet he was inclined to speak favourably of. 
 The Lord keep me in the way of truth." 
 
 " 1705, October 5. Had a letter from Mr. Emlyn, who 
 seems rooted in his error — the Lord undeceive him." 
 
 " 1707, April 26. — Mr. Emlyn called upon me ; who, I per- 
 ceive, not only retains his corrupt opinions, but seems to 
 me to speak favourably of Deism : tells me there are many 
 Deists, as he finds in conversation ; that they triumph in this — 
 that when they meet with such as condemn them, they cannot 
 get them to enter into a fair argument with them."* 
 
 Thus it appears, that in the estimation of a distinguished 
 Presbyterian divine, the propagation of " corrupt opinions" 
 concerning the Trinity, far short of modern Unitarianism, 
 met with any thing but encouragement.f Yet, in defiance of 
 facts like these, we are told, " that if the Presbyterians were 
 at any time generally Trinitarian, it was not from abhorrence 
 of other doctrines. Their preference was accompanied by no 
 such feeling.:]: « The early Presbyterian," even before " he 
 deviated from the beaten track of doctrine," would have 
 expressed no feeling of offence at a deviation from the 
 orthodox faith, as expressed in the Articles of the Church of 
 
 * Mr. Emlyn, it appears from the Memoirs of Whiston, was on terms of 
 friendly intercourse with Mr. Chubb, who, after writing in favourof Arianism, 
 renounced Christianity. P. 237. 
 
 t Dr. Kippis states, that Mr. Emlyn was "what is now (1777) called an high 
 Arian ; believing our blessed Saviour to be the first of derived beings, the 
 creator of the world, and an object of worship." ^ Hist. p. 53. 
 
232 
 
 England or the Assembly's Catechism, to which he himself 
 assented, or denounced " other than Trinitarian doctrines, as 
 unchristian and blasphemous."* I will now introduce some 
 extracts from a book of practical divinity, pubUshed in 1 709, by 
 an eminent Presbyterian minister, in which, if he does not 
 apply to them these particular epithets, he repeatedly employs 
 another, which sufficiently proves the strong feeling of repro- 
 bation and abhorrence with which both Arian and Socinian 
 tenets were then regarded by the whole body — I feel author- 
 ised to say, by the whole body ; for that the writer does not 
 merely express his own sentiments, appears from the fact, 
 that, subjoined to the preface, is an attestation that the work 
 needs not any explicit recommendation, signed by four eminent 
 Presbyterian ministers of the metropolis, Drs. Wilhams and 
 Oldfield, Messrs. Robinson and Rosewell. The 'author, Mr. 
 Simon Browne, was at this time (1709) minister of the Pres- 
 byterian (now Unitarian) congregation in Portsmouth; and 
 removed, in 1716, to London, where he became minister of 
 the Presbyterian church in the Old JewTy, " one of the most 
 respectableand considerable in the kingdom." He objected to 
 the principle involved in subscription to human articles, was 
 a zealous opposer of all invasions of the rights of conscience, 
 and utterly disapproved of the narrow views of those who 
 were for confining the hopes of salvation within the limits of 
 their own party.f This eminent person became afterwards 
 the subject of an extraordinary mental hallucination, of which 
 some curious particulars appeared in the Adventurer.^ 
 
 The book is entitled, " The true Character of the real 
 Christian, or sincere good Man : from Psal. cxix. 1 13, wherein 
 the Nature of a religious Hatred to vain Thoughts, and a 
 Love to the Law of God is explained, and these Passions are 
 proved to be the real and distinguishing property of the true 
 Christian." He undertakes to shew " what thoughts are to 
 be accounted wicked, as against God the Jtedeemer ;" among 
 which he mentions the following : — 
 
 " Thoughts against the Deiti/ of the Redeemer are wicked 
 • Hist. p. 4G. 
 t Wilson's Diss. Churches, vol. iii. pp. 3»8, 310. } No. S,S. 
 
233 
 
 thoughts ; for nothing is more evident ti-om Scripture, (if men 
 are willing to understand truths spoken in the most plain 
 and intelligible manner,) than that the great Saviour of the 
 world is, by nature, God, and not merely by office, as some 
 erroneous men have of late pretended. I will only refer you 
 to one Scripture here, that is home and full to the purpose ; 
 Col. i. 16, 17 ; ' For by him were all things created,' &c. It 
 is plain, that he is here asserted to be the great, efficient, and 
 final cause of all things. By him and for him all things were 
 made. And he that was before all things that were made, 
 must exist from eternity, and therefore must be the Ever- 
 lasting God," p. 17. 
 
 Noticing the " shift to which the enemies of this truth have 
 recourse, that by creation is to be understood the restitution 
 of all things in the Gospel state," which he calls an evasion, 
 he says — " No expressions could more fully signify the crea- 
 tion of all things by God the Father, than those which are 
 here made use of." He adds, " But if this be a true account 
 of things, then great wrong is done to our Saviour by doubting 
 or denying his Godhead, and therefore such doubts and denials 
 (though formed only in the thoughts) must be exceedingly 
 wicked, because they do so directly take away all the honour 
 and homage that must be due to him as God," pp. 17, 18. 
 
 In shewing that thoughts against the mediatorial office of 
 Christ must be wicked, he mentions, " 1. Thoughts against 
 the Incarnation of the Eternal Son of God. 2. Against the 
 Design of his Incarnation and Sufferings, which (he says) we 
 are plainly told was to become a sacrifice for sin, bear punish- 
 ment instead of the sinner, and make reconciliation and atone- 
 ment for the transgressions of the people. It must be wicked 
 to entertain and yield to any doubt of this nature, and more 
 wicked to deny or disbeUeve his purpose of offering, in our 
 flesh, a sacrifice of atonement, expiating the sins of, and 
 meriting the greatest blessings for, believers." Under a sepa- 
 rate head, he mentions " such thoughts as detract from the 
 value and merit of his Death and Sacrifice, from whatever 
 original they proceed, whether from a disbelief of his Deity, 
 and what the Scripture reveals about his nature and office, &c. 
 
234 
 
 are also to be esteemed wicked. Wlien persons have such 
 light thoughts of the evil of sin, as to think the justice of God 
 needs no satisfaction at all, or, at least, no such valuable one 
 as the death of Christ, must be owned to be, by all that 
 believe the doctrine of the Scriptures concerning him, and 
 consider who he is, but that a few good words or wishes of 
 theirs, a little grief for sin, would have atoned the justice of 
 God, and that, therefore, he might have spared the inestimably 
 precious blood of his Son. 1 Pet. i. 18. such thoughts as 
 these are wicked. For if their penitential tears, followed with 
 a more exact behaviour, could deserve pardon and the favour 
 of God, how great a disparagement was it to his wisdom, to 
 pour forth his oivn life and blood as a propitiation for sin. 
 Acts xvi. 20." In shewing how thoughts that share the work 
 of intercession between Christ and others are wicked, he 
 says — " to use the intercession of any other, must imply that 
 some other besides him hath made propitiation for sin; 
 which is plainly to renounce dependence upon him, and over- 
 throw the Gospel constitution, founded on this blood and 
 atonement," pp. 19, 20. 27—32. 
 
 He proceeds to shew what thoughts are to be accounted 
 wicked as against God the Sanctifier. These he ranks under 
 two heads — against his Person and against his ojice — 
 
 " First. Thoughts against the Deity of the Holy Ghost are 
 wicked. For if he be indeed God, to doubt or deny this 
 must be a great dishonour to him ; seeing the denial of this 
 is doing as much as in us lies, to wigod him, if I may so speak. 
 And that the Holy Spirit is God equal with the Father and 
 the Son, though proceeding from both, must be evident to 
 such as read the Scriptures with any due attention. For not 
 to take notice of that doubted text, 1 John v. a, yet there are 
 many texts of scripture that do evidently establish this truth. 
 'Tis plain that our Saviour himself did command his disciples 
 to baptize in the 7iame of the Holy Ghost, as well as in his o\to 
 name and that of his Father, Matt, xxviii. 1 9. So that plainly 
 the same authority over and interest in the persons baptized, 
 is assigned to him as to the Father and the Son, which could 
 not be, unless he were equally God. So, in the usual vale<lic- 
 
235 
 
 tion of the apostle Paul, the communion and fellowship of the 
 Holy Ghost is as commonly requested for the Christians to whom 
 he wrote, as the grace of Christ, and love of God the Father, 
 2 Cor. xiii. 13., which plainly implies his having an equal 
 interest in them. And besides all this, the most peculiar 
 instance of divine worship and adoration is in scripture attri- 
 buted to him, inasmuch as a living temple is required to be 
 dedicated to him, 1 Cor. iii. 16. chap. vi. 19. Now the dedi- 
 cation of a temple hath ever been esteemed an honour pecu- 
 liar to the Deity ; and Austin's argument from this text seems 
 very just — If we had been commanded, saith he, to build a 
 temple for the Holy Ghost of wood and stones, we should 
 readily have concluded thence, that the Holy Ghost is God, 
 because this worship is due to none but God. But how 
 much more strongly doth this appear, when we ourselves 
 must be his temple, which plainly signifies that we must be 
 devoted to his service ? But if the Holy Ghost be God equal 
 with the Father and the Son, then 'tis a plain case, that to 
 doubt of his Divinity must be wicked, because during the con- 
 tinuance of this doubt he must be denied that honour which 
 the acknowledgment of his being God would imply; and the 
 denial of this truth, though in our thoughts only, must for the 
 same reason be a greater wickedness." pp. 34 — 36. 
 
 If such thoughts conceived in the heart are thus designated, 
 in what terms would the writer and his Presbyterian brethren 
 have spoken of the denial of these truths in a direct manner, 
 expressed in words and uttered by the lips of their suc- 
 cessors in the very pulpits which they themselves at this time 
 occupied ! 
 
 A few years after this book was published, the Dissenters 
 and their academies were vehemently attacked by Sacheverell 
 and other furious high-church bigots. Dr. Theophilus Lobb, 
 afterwards a well-known physician and F. R. S., then minister 
 of the Presbyterian congregation at Yeovil, pubhshed in 1712, 
 " A Discourse on Ministerial Instruction, wherein the Being 
 of a God, against the Atheists ; the Divine authority of the 
 Scriptures, against the Deists; the doctrine of the Trinity, 
 against the Socinians, are briefly discussed; the method of 
 
236 
 
 salvation stated ; and the loyalty, the academies, and noncon- 
 formity of the Dissenters vindicated : part of vi^hich was preach- 
 ed before the Assembly of Ministers at Taunton, June 11 th ;" in 
 which, addressing his " reverend brethren," the author says — 
 
 " God would have them [our people] believe the doctrine of 
 the ever-blessed and glorious Trinity. We know St. Paul 
 believed and preached this pure article of revealed religion, 
 from several passages in his epistles. That this doctrine is 
 revealed in the holy scriptures, I shall evince by shewing : 
 1. That the scriptures reveal to us three names, viz. Father, 
 Son, and Holy Ghost, neither of which can denote any finite 
 created person. 2. That the sacred revelation informs us, that 
 the Divine Essence belongs to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 
 3. That each of these is distinct from the other." In support 
 of the first position, he produces the form of baptism. Matt, 
 xxviii. 19. and explains the phrase, in the name, as meaning 
 either in virtue of the authority of, or as an act of religious 
 dedication to, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and the 
 apostolical benediction, 2 Cor. xiii. 14, in which, he says, 
 blessings are supplicated which no created being can bestow. 
 pp. 62—64. 
 
 Among the proofs of the second position, one is, " Because 
 the scriptures afl&rm the Son to be the Creator of all things. 
 This is unquestionably evident from John i. 1, 2, 3, 14. 
 Therefore he is God, if he is the Creator, the Divine essence 
 certainly belongs to him. It is in vain for any to plead that he 
 was so only by office, when the evangelist assures us that he 
 is the maker of all things, in as full and significant terms as 
 Moses informs us, in the beginning of Genesis, that God made 
 the heavens and the earth. He is God, as creator, which 
 may sufficiently convince us of his Deity, pp. 66 — 68. 
 
 " There are many other arguments which might be brought 
 to evince this Grand Truth ; as, that religious worship must be 
 given only to the most high God, as appears from Deut. vi. 13. 
 Matt. iv. 1 0. ; and yet, by positive commands, we are obliged 
 to pay it to Jesus, the Son of God, as is evident from John 
 V. 23. Col. iii. 24., and many other places ; whence it will fol- 
 low, that the Divine Essence belongs to the Son, which only 
 
237 
 
 can free us from the guilt of idolatry in performing religious 
 adorations to him," p. 70. 
 
 He exclaims, " How barbarous and horrid is it to traduce 
 and represent our academies as seminaries, where Atheism, 
 Deism, Tritheism, Socinianism, [&c.] are openly professed 
 and taught !" We challenge the whole world to prove the 
 least tittle of this Mack charge against us. What evidences 
 of orthodoxy have, or can any give, which the Dissenters have 
 not given ? Do our conforming brethren plead their subscrib- 
 ing the doctrinal Articles of the Church ; — we boldly plead the 
 same." pp. 88, 89. Even a zealous divine of the Established 
 Church, who severely attacked Dissenters, though not sparing 
 of his accusations against them, acquits them of the black 
 charge of abetting Socinianism. Dr. Nichols, as quoted by 
 Peirce, objecting to the posture used by Dissenters in celebrat- 
 ing the Lord's supper, says — "Indeed, the Socinians, who own 
 nothing in this sacrament but a commemoration, do, agreeably 
 enough to their principles, sit at the receiving of it ; but for 
 our adversaries to imitate these men, ivhose ojnnions in other 
 things they detest, shews a genius not disposed to weigh 
 things impartially," &c. " We fear not (says Peirce) to call this 
 an odious calumny, since we herein imitate the conduct of 
 Christ and his apostles, and not the Socinians."* 
 
 Can the reader now believe that the principle of " free 
 inquiry without limit or restriction," ascribed to the Presby- 
 terians, in distinction from other classes of Dissenters, led 
 them to grant unrestrained " indulgence to all opinions," or to 
 regard it as a virtuous practice " to view with equal charity 
 all conscientious differences of doctrine." 
 
 Before concluding this inquiry, (already, I fear, protracted 
 to a wearisome length,) I will advert briefly to the state of the 
 Trinitarian controversy in England during the period in 
 question. 
 
 The Socinians, during the interval between the Restora- 
 tion and the Revolution, though not few, scarcely ventured 
 to defend their tenets from the press. The writings of 
 Dr. Manton and other eminent Presbyterians, contain pas- 
 
 • Vindic. Diss. p. 496. 
 
238 
 
 sages which speak of their erroneous tenets in the strongest 
 terms of ahhorrence. I will quote some sentences from a 
 paper written in 1680, by Mr. James Owen, one of the most 
 learned of the early Presbyterian tutors, in which he ably 
 exposes the absurdity of what may be called the Socinian 
 principle, that reason is the test and criterion to which all 
 supernatural facts and doctrines, though attested by sufficient 
 evidence, are to be subjected — a principle which led many in 
 those licentious times to reject Revelation altogether.* 
 
 There are two sorts of persons that oppose Revelation, the 
 Socinians and Deists. The former, by making Reason the 
 measure and rule of Revelation, do in effect explode it, 
 especially in those supernatural verities that are above Rea- 
 son : the latter, by setting up the dictates of natural Reason, 
 as the only rule and measure of all Religion, do, with unpa- 
 ralleled confidence, exclude all Revelation. The Socinians 
 prefer the oracles of Reason, (as they call them,) to the 
 oracles of God; for they receive not the Divine Oracles 
 any further than they may be comprehended by those 
 of Reason, and so, by one impious dash of their pen, they 
 expunge all the sublime Doctrines of our holy Rehgion that 
 are of supernatural Revelation, and not suited to those 
 ideas they have framed to themselves, by conversing with 
 sensible objects. They advance a new sort of Christianity, 
 divested of all its Mysteries, which are the vital principles 
 that animate its moral precepts. I would ask these pretended 
 monopolists of Reason, why should it seem absurd to admit 
 Mysteries in Religion which the Scriptures assert ; when the 
 more sober and wiser Heathens have unanimously acknow- 
 ledged, and the imperfections of our intellectual attainments 
 render [them] necessary? 
 
 Are not the very works of nature mysterious and unac- 
 countable ?" He then mentions some " inexplicable difficul- 
 ties" attending the facts of physical Science and mental Philo- 
 sophy. "As the PyrrJwnian modesty, which pretended to 
 
 • The earliest Unitarians among the Presbyterians, about half a century ago, 
 assumed the title of Rational Dissenters, which has been wisely dropped by their 
 successors. 
 
239 
 
 know nothing, was destructive of Natural Religion; so is the 
 Socinian confidence, which undertakes to comprehend all 
 things, even the deep things of God, destructive of Super- 
 natural Revelation. The Academics confessed their igno- 
 rance, even of those things that might be known; the 
 Socinians arrogate to themselves the knowledge of the most 
 unintelligible, [incomprehensible ?] verities ; and because their 
 Reason stands upon the same level with the rest of mankind, 
 and can't ascend the heights of Divine Mysteries, they dis- 
 parage, debase, and pervert them to the absurdest meanings. 
 
 I know not a more convincing instance of Original 
 Corruption, than to attempt an accommodation of the tran- 
 scendent Mysteries of Christianity to our shallow and depraved 
 reasonings. 
 
 Can any thing be more absurd than to measure an Infinite 
 Being by such maxims and propositions as ve&^ect finite 
 beings ? This is to make a point run parallel with an infinite 
 line, to contain the ocean in the hollow of an hand, and to 
 measure the vast spaces of heaven with a span. Yet this is 
 the strength of the Socinians' Reason. ' There can be no 
 instance given, (say they,) of Three Persons in One Nature, 
 among finite beings ;' therefore there can be no such thing in 
 an Infinite Being ; as if an Infinite Being were to be mea- 
 sured by those that are finite. To reject the Sacred Trinity, 
 is to renounce our Baptismal Covenant ; for we are baptized 
 in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and he that 
 denieth the Son hath not the Father, 1 John ii. 23. 
 
 He then exposes the inconsistency of the old Socinians, in 
 denying Christ to be God by Nature, and yet giving him a 
 Divine adoration, and thus " deifying a mere creature." 
 
 It is evident that our Lord Jesus, in his discourses with the 
 Jews, afiirmed himself to be the Son of God, to be God by 
 Nature, equal with the Father. John v. 18, and viii. 5a 
 Thus the Jews understood him, and charged him with 
 Blasphemy, because, being a mere man as they supposed, he 
 made himself God. John x. 33. Christ vindicates himself fi-om 
 the imputation of Blasphemy in making himself the Son of 
 God, V. 36. He asserted this great Truth to the last, and 
 
240 
 
 sealed it with his blood. His confession, that he was the 
 Christ the Son of God, was the reputed Blasphemy for which 
 the great Council of the Jews condemned him. The Socijiians, 
 therefore, in disowning Christ to be God, equal with the 
 Father, which is the same with being the Son of God, do, in 
 effect, consent to the unrighteous sentence which the Jewish 
 Sanhedrim passed upon the Lord of Life. Not to own him God 
 equal with the Father, is to condemn him for a Blasphemer. 
 
 After tracing, by a [shght historical sketch, the rise and 
 progress of the Heresy to the time of Arius, he says — This 
 Gangrene infected all the Eastern Churches, and ruined the 
 Vitals of Christianity; provoked the Lord to remove their 
 candlestick out of its place, as he had threatened; and to 
 subject them to the Mahometan yoke, under which they groan 
 to this day. And 'tis remarkable that the several streams of 
 Arianism did at last disembogue themselves in the Dead Sea 
 of Mahometism. The Mahometans own Jesus Christ to be 
 a great Projihet, but a mere man ; and the Socinians make no 
 more of him ; so that you may call Mahometism the dregs of 
 Arianism, and Socinianism the dregs of Mahometism. 
 
 The next section begins thus, " Deism is a corrupt stream 
 that flows from the impure fountain of Socinianism."* 
 
 Mr. Cooper states, that during the period in question 
 " there was much controversy, as well amongst those who 
 conformed to the EstabUshed Church, as those who seceded 
 from it, respecting the doctrine of three persons in the God- 
 head : and that opinions, commonly known by the terms of 
 Arian, Socinian, and Unitarian, in all their different shades 
 and varieties, discernible only by theological vision, were pro- 
 pounded and discussed."! But what part did the Dissenters 
 take ? Can one book, or pamphlet, written by a Presbyterian, 
 be produced in which any one of those opinions, in any of 
 their numerous shades and varieties, was advanced or de- 
 fended? He has, indeed, favoured the public, as in his 
 speech he favoured the court of chancery, with a long list 
 
 ' • Some Account of the Life and Writings of Mr. James Owen, 12mo. 1709, 
 by Rev. Charles Owen, of Warrington, pp. 137 — MS. See p. 145, ante, 
 t Substance of Speech, pp. 33, 34. 
 
241 
 
 of tracts published chiefly between 1690 and 1695, during 
 which years this controversy raged. Many of these were 
 written by eminent divines of the Church of England, in 
 vindication of the doctrine of the Trinity, against a series of 
 anonymous tracts printed at the expence of Mr. Thomas 
 Firmin, a wealthy and charitable merchant of London, who 
 disclaimed being a Dissenter, and disapproved of a secession 
 from the worship of the Established Church, which he himself 
 attended. He was also on terms of friendly intercourse with 
 Tillotson, and other dignitaries of the church, who, from 
 this circumstance, incurred the imputation of being secretly 
 favourable to his erroneous opinions. The only one of the 
 tracts mentioned by Mr. Cooper, known to be written by a Dis- 
 senter, is Mr. Howe's "Calm and Sober Inquiry concern- 
 ing the Possibihty of a Trinity in the Godhead, 12mo. 1694," 
 in which that eminent divine, " one of the first founders of the 
 Presbyterian body,"* speaking of the arts used by Unitarians 
 to distort the genuine sense of the word of God, and " studi- 
 ously to wiredraw many passages to quite other meanings," 
 describes them in these words, — " torturing wit, and racking 
 invention to the uttermost, to do a laboured and artificial 
 violence, (by, I know not what screws and engines,) to so 
 numerous plain texts of Scripture, only to undeify our glo- 
 rious Redeemer^ and do the utmost despite to the Spirit of 
 grace"\ 
 
 An important fact occurred, in relation to this controversy, 
 which shall be related in the words of Mr.Emlyn — "I remember 
 well, (speaking of the Dissenters,) in their Address to King 
 William on his accession to the throne, they desired the Rule 
 of Christianity might he the Rule of Conformity : but in 
 their Address in 1697, (when a Toleration was settled,) pre- 
 sented by the same hand, (Dr. Bates,) they desire earnestly a 
 restraint of the Ucentiousness of the press, in relation to the 
 Unitarians' books." ^ And the biographer of Firaiin, who 
 calls that gentleman " Curator of the Unitarian Religion," 
 says — "The malice of any whomsoever against the English 
 
 * Hist. p. 40. t Pp- 59—62. 
 
 i Appendix to Narrative prefixed to Collection of Tracts, 1719. p. Hi. 
 
 R 
 
'24'2 
 
 Unitarians, comes now too late. They less dissent from the 
 Church (if they are at all Dissenters) than any other deno- 
 mination of Dissenters ; therefore let those Dissenters look to 
 it, who have promoted a bill, in name and pretext against 
 immorality and blasphemy — in truth and real design, against 
 the U)ntarians"^ 
 
 Thus it appears, that so far from the least degree of con- 
 nivance, encouragement, or participation, the Presbyterian min- 
 isters used their influence at court, or atleast availed themselves 
 of their privilege of access to the royal presence, to solicit the 
 imposing of restraints on this obnoxious class of religionists. 
 The Act for the more effectual suppressing of blasphemy and 
 profaneness, 8 & 9 William & Mary, was, it appears, passed, 
 if not at their suggestion, with their full approbation. So far 
 were they fi'om being advocates of unhmited freedom of 
 inquiry, or of the toleration by the State of all opinions.f 
 
 Dr. Bates, who seems to have taken a leading part in the 
 communications of the Dissenting ministers with the court, 
 and took a prominent part in this aifair, published a practical 
 work in 1699, entitled, "Spiritual Perfection Unfolded and 
 Enforced, from 2 Cor. vii. 1," in which he speaks in the 
 strongest terms of execration and abhorrence, of the Unitarian 
 tenets. I will insert a few passages. 
 
 " 'Tis our duty to admire the mysterious Doctrines of the 
 Gospel, which we do understand, and to adore those we do 
 not. We may observe the same connexion in errors as in 
 Divine Truths ; for they who rob our Saviour of his Natural 
 Glory, his Eternal Deity, vilify and disbelieve the value and 
 virtue of his Priestly Office, by which our pardon is obtained. 
 In short, the fabric of our salvation is built on the contrivance 
 and consent of the Divine Persons, and the concurrence and 
 concord of the Divine Attributes. 'Tis certainly much more 
 suitable to the reasonable mind to acknowledge that things 
 may be true which we are not able to conceive and compre- 
 hend, than to deny the natural and proper sense of many 
 clear and express texts of Scripture that declare those things. 
 And by this may we judge of the glosses of Socinus and his 
 
 * Life, I2mo. 1C98, p. 26. f See Toulmin's Historical View, pp. 120—126. 
 
243 
 
 followers, who, without reverence of the majesty of God, and 
 the sincerity of his word, rack the Scriptures to make them 
 speak what they do not, and use all arts to silence them in 
 what they do reveal. Unhappy men ! that affect to be 
 esteemed ingenious and subtle, to the extreme hazard of their 
 own salvation. How much safer and more easy is it to believe 
 the plain sense of the Scriptures, than the turns and shifts 
 that are invented to elude it, and extricate heretical 
 persons out of the difficulties that attend their opinions. I 
 shall add, the doctrine of the Trinity is so expressly set down 
 in the Gospel of Christ, that 'tis impossible the Son of God, 
 who is Infinite and Eternal Love, who gave himself for our 
 Redemption, should have declared it, and engaged his dis- 
 ciples in all ages and places in an error of such dreadful con- 
 sequence as the worshipping those who are not God."* 
 
 The Presbyterians, it is confidently asserted, held as one 
 of their principles "the innocence of involuntary error."f 
 Dr. Bates, one of their leading divines at this time, thus 
 expresses his views on that subject. 
 
 " 'Tis alleged, that if a person sincerely searches into the 
 Scripture, and cannot be convinced that the supernatural 
 doctrines of the Trinity, and others depending upon it, are 
 contained in them, he shall not be condemned by the righteous 
 Judge of the world for involuntary and speculative errors. 
 To this I answer, this pretence has deceived many who were 
 guilty of damnable Heresies, and there is great reason to fear 
 deceives men still. The heart is deceit/id above all things, 
 and most deceitful to itself. Who can say that neither 
 interest nor passion, neither hope nor fear, neither anger nor 
 ambition, have intervened in his inquiry after Truth, but he 
 has preferred the knowledge of Divine Truths before all tem- 
 poral respects, and yet he cannot believe what the Scripture 
 reveals of the Nature of God, and the oeconomy of our salvation: 
 let this imaginary man produce his plea, for I believe there 
 was never any such. There are many that make reason the 
 sovereign rule of Faith, and determine such things cannot be 
 true, because they cannot understand how they can be true. 
 
 » pp. IGO, 1C2. t Hist. p. ici. 
 
 r2 
 
244 
 
 Prodigious inference ! the most absurd of all errors, that 
 makes the narrow mind of man the measure of all things. 
 This is the proper principle of that horrible Composition of 
 Heresies and execrable Impieties, which so many that are 
 Christians in profession, but Antichristians in behef, boldly 
 pubUsh. They will choose to err in matters of infinite im- 
 portance, rather than confess their ignorance. And which is 
 astonishing, they will readily acknowledge the defectiveness 
 of reason with respect to the understanding of themselves ; 
 but insolently arrogate a right to determine things in the 
 Nature of God. — 'Tis alleged, that speculative errors cannot 
 be damnable. To this I answer, 1. The understanding of man 
 is now dark and disordered ; and in the points of rehgion that 
 are revealed, any error induces guilt, and, if obstinately 
 defended, exposes to judgment. Some truths are written 
 because necessary to be beUeved ; others are to be beUeved, 
 because written. 2. According to the quality of the truths 
 revealed in the Scripture, such is the hurtfulness of the 
 errors that are opposite to them. Some truths are necessary, 
 others profitable : some errors are directly opposite to the 
 saving truths of the Gospel, others by consequence undermine 
 them. Those who deny the Lord that bought them, are 
 guilty of damnable Heresies, capital errors, not holding the 
 head. Col. ii. 19. 
 
 " 3. The doctrine of the Trinity is not a mere speculative 
 truth, nor the denial of it a speculative error. The Trinity 
 is not only an object of Faith, but of Worship. In baptism, we 
 are dedicated to the sacred Trinity, in the name of the Father, 
 Son, and Holy Ghost, which clearly proves they are of the 
 same authority and power, and, consequently, of the same 
 nature : for 'tis impossible to conceive of three infinite Beings, 
 for by necessity one would limit another. The apostle de- 
 clares, without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness, 
 God was manifest in the Jlesh. The nature and end of this 
 Divine mystery, is to form the spirits of men to believe, and 
 love, and obey God. — Briefly, God commands us to believe in 
 his Son. Without faith in him we are uncapable of redemption 
 by him. 'Tis a high contempt of the truth and goodness of 
 
245 
 
 God not to yield a firm assent to what he has revealed con- 
 cerning our salvation by his incarnate Son. He that believes 
 not the record that God hath given of his Son, makes God a 
 liar, 1 Johnv. 10. This infinitely provokes him, and inflames 
 his indignation. To disbelieve the testimony that Jesus 
 Christ has given of the Divinity of his Person and Doctrine, is 
 to despise him. It robs him of his essential and his acquired 
 glory by the work of our redemption," pp. 163 — 166. 
 
 In 1700, Mr. Nathaniel Taylor, then minister and one of 
 the lecturers at Salter's Hall, published " A Discourse of the 
 Nature and Necessity of Faith in Jesus Christ : with an An- 
 swer to the Pleas of our Modern Unitarians, for the sufficiency 
 of bare Morality or mere Charity to Salvation." In the epistle 
 to the reader, after referring to the law of gravitation, which 
 causes heavy bodies to move more swiftly as they descend, he 
 says, " Something like this there is in Heresy; for when once 
 men have taken one step over the fatal precipice, what 
 through the weight of the innate principle of corruption, and 
 what through the secret influence of the invisible powers of 
 darkness, down they tumble apace with greater speed every day 
 than other, till they drop into the lake of open Infidelity, 
 which lies at the bottom ; and whither their next fall will be, 
 is easy to determine. We have a proof of this in some of the 
 foreign Unitarians. They began with denying the Deity and 
 Satisfaction of Christ. Thence Franciscus Davidis, and others, 
 proceeded to deny the lawfulness of giving religious worship to 
 him ; with whom, in this, our English Unitarians, who are their 
 spawn, do generally fall in. Smalcius reproaches this tribe 
 as persons of little understanding, and puffed up with a 
 Jewish spirit. And Socinus himself every where thunders 
 against them as Jetvs and Mahometans more than Heretics, 
 unworthy of the Christian name, who did in reality and in 
 their hearts altogether deny Jesus to be the Messiah ; that 
 nothing more wicked could have been invented for depraving 
 our religion ; that they can't be saved," and says, ' this 
 opinion does by a short cut lead to Epicureism and Atheism.' 
 
 "Notwithstanding all this heat, it will be impossible to main- 
 tain the giving religious worship to Christ, when his Deity, 
 
•246 
 
 the foundation thereof, is denied. For religiously to pray to 
 a mere creature, is vile Idolatry." After some farther extracts, 
 he adds — " But I leave them to squabble and fight it out 
 among themselves, as well as they can. For these zealous 
 sticklers for unlimited Toleration did formerly, by their own 
 confession, very bitterly persecute one another about this point; 
 though now their followers among us are for compounding the 
 matter. I proceed to shew, in a few instances, the effects of 
 these principles, which we shall find to be agreeable to their 
 natural tendency, as their great patriarch (Socinus) hath fore- 
 warned us." He then mentions some individuals, who 
 virtually rejected either the whole Scripture or the New 
 Testament. "The same accursed weed of Socinianism, being 
 transplanted into our English soil, hath brought forth the 
 same fruit. My main business is with the Vindicator, [of Mr. 
 Firmin's memory,] whose design is to subvert the Gospel of 
 my blessed Lord and Saviour. Downright infidehty is the 
 thing he drives at. Who or what he is, I have not been 
 solicitous to enquire. I know no more of him than what he 
 tells us of himself, viz. that he is the son of a citizen, and 
 a small dealer among them, &c. And, saith he ' I WTite in 
 haste.' Indeed he is so much in haste, that he has dropt all 
 his Christianity by the way, if ever he had any." 
 
 In explaining the nature of faith in Christ, he says, " It 
 supposes a stedfast persuasion of his Deity, p. 38. Declining to 
 discuss the question of " the possibility of the salvation of the 
 heathen," he says, " All that I assert is, that it is impossible 
 for any among us, who live ivhen and ivhere the Gospel is 
 published, to be saved, if they do not believe our Lord Jesus 
 Christ," p. 96. He then shews, "the heinous nature of unbe- 
 lief, which," he says, " reflects the greatest dishonour on God 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost," p. 98. This he particularly 
 explains, and adds — " Now, how can that man be saved, who 
 lives and dies under the prevailing, reigning guilt of this sin, 
 which does in so heinous a manner oppose the whole Trinity ?" 
 p. 101. 
 
 In 1697 was printed a tract, now exceedingly rare, by 
 Richard Frankland, the celebrated Nonconformist tutor, 
 
247 
 
 w hose academy was " the gi-eat institution for the North ;" of 
 which, according to Mr. Hunter, the college at York is the 
 present representative,* entitled, " Reflections on a Letter 
 writ by a nameless Author, to the Reverend Clergy of both 
 Universities, and on his bold Reflections on the Trinity, 
 ^c" There is a Preface to the Reader, subscribed O. H., 
 March 11, the writer of which was the Rev. Oliver Hey- 
 wood, a very eminent Presbyterian minister in Yorkshire, 
 in which he speaks of the various attempts made to " pull 
 down the Son of God from the throne of his glory, and 
 degrade him of his Deity, the most orient pearl in his 
 crown." After briefly noticing several ancient Anti-Trini- 
 tarian heretics, and mentioning that "the errors settled in 
 Faustus Socinus, A.D. 1565," &c. he says — " One thing is 
 observable; several in that confused company denying reli- 
 gious worship to Christ, Socinus contended with them, but 
 was silenced and baffled by his own principles, who held 
 that Christ was mere man, therefore, by consequence, it 
 would be idolatry to worship him. There were also several 
 errors broached by Socinus ; [among these he mentions, that 
 there's no original sin ; that Christ made no satisfaction for 
 sin ; that we are not justified by his righteousness, but our 
 own.] These he contended for in their synods, and prevailed 
 so far, by the help of Smalcius and other artificers, that in 
 twenty-four years he got his opinions enthroned in Poland, 
 which are not rooted out to this day. 
 
 " Surely 'tis a thousand pities, that in England, a Goshen^ 
 a land of light, where the Gospel sun hath shined in its meri- 
 dian splendor, such black fogs should rise out of the bottom- 
 less pit, as to darken our horizon. * Trinitas,' saith one, ' est 
 verce Theologice Fundamentum, qu(B consequentes omnes fere 
 Doctrhias quasi animat.^ Wlioso denies the Trinity, denies 
 his baptism; for we are baptized in, or into the name of 
 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 
 
 " The other dangerous and damnable doctrine is, that of 
 denying the Lord that bought us, (2 Peter, ii. 1,) revived out 
 of the rubbish of ancient heresies. Who could imagine that 
 
 • Hist. Def. pp. 12, 13. 
 
248 
 
 Jeivs and Turks should be bred in England ? Denying 
 Christ's Divinity, doth cut the very sinews of our hopes of 
 redemption and consolation. Neither angels nor men could 
 have pacified God's wrath, or satisfied justice, or brought in 
 everlasting righteousness. Such doctrines undermine and 
 pluck up the pillars of our Christian Religion; and yet, in 
 these licentious days, such Heresies are publicly broached, 
 &c. Methinks the question of our blessed Lord, that non- 
 plust the Pharisees, (Matt. xxii. 45,) should puzzle these 
 anti-Christian spirits that deny Christ's Divinity. [If David then 
 call him Lord, how is he his Son ?] Is the son greater than 
 the father? Surely the Godhead of the Messiah advanceth 
 him above king David. It's true the plumbline of reason is 
 too short to fathom this Mystery ; but where reason cannot 
 wade, faith must swim, having so good a card and guide as 
 the Holy Ghost. The Trinity of Persons, and Hypostatical 
 Union of Godhead and Manhood in Christ, having been so 
 fully revealed in Scripture, let us hold them fast, and contend 
 for them as our freehold." 
 
 Referring to the author, Mr. Heywood, who speaks of him 
 terms of high commendation, says he had been prompted into 
 this undertaking " purely by a zeal for God, his cause, truth, 
 and glory, and the preventing of young persons being poisoned 
 by soul-destructive errors."* 
 
 The following is a specimen of Mr. Frankland's mode of 
 reasoning, out of the Scripture, on this doctrine — " Does not 
 that Scripture (John i. 1 — 3, 14,) expressly affirm that the 
 Word, styled the only begotten of the Father, was in the 
 beginning, was with God, was God, the creator and maker of 
 all things, &c. It's a wonder this author, when he reads such 
 a Scripture as this, can forbear to cast forth reproaches on the 
 
 * That Mr. Oliver Heywood was the author of the Treface, appears by 
 an original letter from Mr. Frankland to him, dated Rathmell, March 1, 
 1696-7, in the British Museum, in which he says — "I now send you 
 my manuscript. I wholly commit it to you, and to the honest stationer, your 
 neighbour ; yet humbly requesting of you (which you freely promised) that 
 you will add a preface. That this work of mine, as designed in defence of 
 the glory of our great God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, against a scoflSng 
 adversary, may find acceptance, shall be the earnest prayer," &c. 
 
249 
 
 divinely inspired Evangelist himself; for could any Trinitarian 
 have with greater evidence set forth, 1. That this Word was 
 from the beginning, and before the beginning of all created 
 beings, and therefore from eternity. 2. That in this begin- 
 ning he was with God, and therefore a distinct person from 
 God the Father. 3. That he was God, viz. the same blessed 
 God with the Father, as to essence. 4. That all things were 
 made by him, and that without him was not any thing made 
 that was made — that, therefore, the Father did make nothing 
 but in conjunction with the Word, or Son, not in separation 
 from him, as this author would have it. And as nothing that 
 was made, was made without this Word, so this Word himself 
 was not made, except he make himself, but is the eternal, 
 increated Being. Let this author shew now, if he can, what 
 he hath to charge Trinitarians with, which he may not as 
 well charge on this blessed Apostle." — p. 40. 
 
 Mr. Frankland does not hesitate to charge this writer, who 
 had represented the Trinitarians as idolaters, with blasphemy : 
 "Is it these [Trinitarians] only who pay the same Divine wor- 
 ship to the Son, become our Redeemer, which they pay to the 
 Father in conjunction with him ; and do not the innumerable 
 companies of blessed angels and saints pay the very same ? Let 
 him consult Rev. v. 11 — 13, and he'll find they do ; and must 
 all these therefore be idolaters ? Oh, Blasphemy ! And as 
 to the blessed Spirit, is it only the late Trinitarians who 
 acknowledge his infinity and omniscience; did not the royal 
 prophet David do the same? Psa. cxxxix. 7, 8. Is it only 
 these that declare him to be the true God, the great searcher 
 of hearts; and did not the apostle Peter declare as much 
 when he told Ananias, Acts v. 3, 4. Thou hast not lied unto 
 men, hut unto God ? And did not Ananias to his cost find it 
 so ? The author might do well to consider who it is he casts 
 his blasphemous reproaches on." He adds, " This is 
 dreadful. Before he had gone thus far, he might well have 
 considered what our Lord saith, Matt. xii. 31. 'All manner of 
 sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blas- 
 phemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto 
 men ;' or if it be not too late, I wish he might yet consider it, 
 
250 
 
 and repent," pp. 50, 51. The learned author, stating his rea- 
 son for examining the allegations against Trinitarians by this 
 wTiter, speaks of, "having raked into the filthy dunghill of his 
 blasphemies," — Can these, I ask, be the men, who viewed with 
 no feelings akin to indignation, disgust, and abhorrence, the 
 tenets of their Unitarian contemporaries, who would there- 
 fore, it may be presumed, have been conscious of no emotion 
 amounting to " pious horror" at the thought of religious 
 trusts, founded by them, being appropriated for the benefit of 
 their Ultra-Unitarian successors? Both Mr. Frankland and 
 Mr. Oliver Heywood were personally acquainted with a 
 venerable and excellent matron, whose name I have hitherto 
 purposely concealed, preferring, on several grounds, to discuss 
 the various points involved in this inquiry as pertaining to a 
 general question. Mr Heywood was her intimate friend, and, 
 occasionally at least, her spiritual adviser. With his feelings 
 and views, I have no doubt, she entirely sympathised ; and his 
 writings prove him to have been a decided and zealous Cal- 
 vinist. This elect lady (Dame Sarah Hewley) was one of the 
 chief members of an illustrious band of truly Noble men and 
 truly Honourable women (not a few) — the nursing fathers and 
 nursing mothers of the infant Nonconformist churches, by 
 whom they were cherished and fostered, and their pastors 
 nourished and protected, during the raging of that violent 
 storm of persecution, which preceded the Revolution in 
 1688. The intentions of such parties should, to the end of 
 time, be held inviolably sacred, and, so far as possible, lite- 
 rally fulfilled and executed through all future generations. 
 
 This distinguished person, after having hberally contributed 
 during her life to the support of Nonconformity in Yorkshire 
 and other northern counties, founded, in 1704 and 1707, 
 munificent trusts for the promotion of the preaching of 
 Christ's Holy Gospel. Whether she could then have con- 
 templated the application of any portion of the proceeds to 
 the support of Unitarian preachers and students, I leave every 
 candid impartial reader to decide. Whether it came within 
 the scope of her intention, that such preachers and students 
 should be allowed to participate of her bounty, is the one and 
 
i>5l 
 
 the only question which the parties, by whom proceedings 
 have been instituted in the Court of Chancery, are desirous of 
 having determined by legal adjudication. Their motives have 
 been impugned, and the denomination to which they belong 
 attacked with no little severity by some of the writers now 
 under review. Those personal allegations and general impu- 
 tations I have not deemed worthy of particular notice, as they 
 belong not either to the argumentative or the historical 
 branch of this inquiry. Lady Hewley died at a very advanced 
 age, in 1710, before Arianism had insinuated itself into the 
 pulpits occupied by the Presbyterian denomination, to which, 
 it is admitted, that the chapel at which she attended in the 
 city of York belonged. 
 
 The question, I repeat, to be determined by judicial deci- 
 sion, is simply and singly, What was the mind, will, and pur- 
 pose of the founder ? or, in other words, what class of religious 
 teachers did this excellent lady, (an orthodox Presbyterian, 
 beyond all question) — what class of religious teachers did 
 she intend to designate and describe, by the terms carefully 
 selected and repeatedly used to denote and specify the objects 
 of her bounty — preachers of Christ's Holy Gospel? The 
 sole object sought is, that to such, the whole proceeds may 
 hereafter be exclusively applied. If, instead of viewing with 
 equal charity all conscientious differences of opinion, it has 
 been proved that the Presbyterians of her time held the tenets 
 of their Unitarian contemporaries in ahhorreiice, as " unchris- 
 tian and blasphemous" — so far from being an unreasonable or 
 unfair supposition, it is, I apprehend, the inevitable legal pre- 
 sumption, that she would herself have contemplated the appli- 
 cation of any portion of her charitable funds to the support of 
 modern Unitarianism with emotions of "pious horror." 
 
 This work having extended so much beyond my original 
 intention, I forbear to pursue farther the Trinitarian con- 
 troversy, or to enter at length into the memorable debate at 
 Salter's Hall, in 1719, especially as that took place several 
 years after the close of the period to which the preceding 
 pages chiefly refer. A few observations, however, may pro- 
 perly be made upon that important event. 
 
252 
 
 I will first introduce a single sentence from a charge deli- 
 vered in December, 1716, by Dr. Calamy, at the ordination 
 of several ministers : — " If you have any thing to do with 
 Deists, Sochnans, Arians, or Papists, carry it to them with 
 humanity ; and let them see that you bear no ill-will to their 
 persons, how much soever you dislike their principles or 
 practices," p. 30. In the Brief Account of the Protestant 
 Dissenters in England, already quoted, annexed to the tract 
 containing this passage, he says — " After the Revolution, under 
 king William of glorious memory, the parliament gave liberty 
 to all that were not satisfied to fall in with the Church of 
 England, (provided they owned the doctrine of the Trinity, 
 as they of whom I am giving here an account, did and 
 do universally,) to act according to their consciences in 
 matters of rehgion ; the benefits of which law they still 
 enjoy," p. 42. 
 
 After this decisive testimony of a witness, whose competency 
 is admitted on all hands, it is not necessary for me distinctly 
 and positively to deny the truth of an assertion, that about the 
 time of the Salter's Hall meeting Arian sentiments M'ere noto- 
 riously prevalent ; and a similar assertion, — " it is plain, that 
 what were [are] now called orthodox doctrines, were relished 
 neither in the pulpit nor by the great body of Presbyterians," 
 has been already sufficiently disproved. 
 
 Mr. Hunter, who assigns the " affair" which caused this 
 meeting to the very beginning of the [eighteenth] century, 
 says, " Anti-Trinitarian opinions had prevailed to a great 
 extent among the Presbyterians of Devonshire." This I con- 
 sider far from a correct statement of the fact. The discussion 
 did not arise till 1718; at which time it does not appear that 
 more than tivo ministers, Messrs. Pierce and Hallet, had im- 
 bibed Arian tenets. These gentlemen were abruptly dis- 
 missed, or, to use their own expression, " ejected," by the 
 committee who managed the concerns of the three united 
 congregations in Exeter. Debates arising among the United 
 Ministers of Devonshire and Cornwall on this occasion, 
 the London ministers were consulted, and a meeting of 
 those belonging to the three denominations, Presbyterian, 
 Independent, and Baptist, was called at Salter's Hall, 
 
253 
 
 February 19th, 1719, to consider of "Advices for Peace," 
 to be sent to their brethren in the West A division took 
 place on the 24th, after warm debates, on the question, 
 whether those Advices should be accompanied by a declara- 
 tion of their own firm belief in the doctrine of the Trinity, as 
 expressed in the first article of the Church of England, and 
 the Assembly's Shorter Catechism. A small majority decided 
 in the negative. The English Presbyterian Association state, 
 that the " chief question debated was. Whether those who 
 presented themselves for ordination, should subscribe their 
 belief in the doctrine of the Trinity."* No such question, so 
 far as I can find, came under discussion. Candidates for the 
 ministry had not previously been required to subscribe their 
 belief in this or any other doctrine. But they had invariably 
 been required to make a public declaration and profession of 
 the orthodox faith, in regard to all the great distinguishing 
 truths of the Christian system. Mr. Hunter calls this a " so- 
 lemn determination of the ministers, that they would not re- 
 fuse to admit to the ministry persons who had not subscribed 
 their beUef in the doctrine of the Trinity ;"t and states that 
 Dr. Oldfield, the moderator, " consented to admit into the 
 ministry those who did not profess to receive it."| Of any 
 such fact I can find no evidence ; and the conclusion which 
 Mr. Hunter draws from the result of the whole debate, is not 
 sustained by the subsequent history of the Presbyterian body. 
 A tract was published in 1721, by " this very Dr. Oldfield," 
 whom, Mr. Hunter calls " one of the most influential of the 
 Presbyterian ministers," entitled, "A brief, practical, and pacific 
 Discourse of God : and of the Father, Son, and Spirit, and of 
 our concern with them." He says, " By the New Testament 
 we are most expressly taught, that there is a Father, Son, 
 and Spirit, with whom we are concerned in like manner as 
 with God. Nor is this the voice of a single text, but runs, 
 in a manner, through the whole New Testament, as the sum 
 and substance of the Christian Institution." p. 17. He also 
 speaks of " the Uncreated Being, and Creating Power, with 
 other Divine Perfections of the Sacred Three, whom he calls 
 one JEHOVAH." pp. 65, 69. 
 
 * Hist. p. 22. t Hist. Def. p. 45. t Ibid. p. 43. 
 
254 
 
 In the minority were many Presbyterians ; among these four 
 of the most eminent pastors of churches in the metropolis, all I 
 believe Salter's Hall lecturers, Messrs. Tong, Robinson, Jere- 
 miah Smith, and Reynolds, published in the same year a book, 
 entitled " The Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity stated and 
 defended." From this I will insert a concluding extract : — 
 
 " That there may be Truths, both of great evidence and of great 
 importance, which yet some men of good sense and learning do not 
 discern, is generally acknowledged ; such are the matters in contro- 
 versy between Protestants and Papists, and between Christians and 
 Jews. The truths controverted are sufficiently evident, and of the 
 greatest consequence ; and yet many learned, sober, and inquisitive 
 men, not only doubt of them, but deny them. Of this their igno- 
 ranee and error, there must be a cause, and a culpable one, which is 
 not to be sought for in the doctrines themselves, or in the revelations 
 we have of them ; but in the minds of those that do not receive them. 
 It may, indeed, be difficult for them to discern where it lies ; but it is 
 known to God to be such as will justify him, though he should leave 
 them to all the evil consequences of their criminal mistakes. 
 
 " The real importance of any doctrine does not depend upon sub- 
 jective evidence, that is, upon the certain persuasion I have of it in 
 my own mind. It is neither less true nor less important because I 
 am in doubt concerning it. The importance of it is an intrinsic thing ; 
 it arises out of its own nature, and the place it naturally holds in the 
 chain of Scrijiture princijiles, and the direct influence it has upon the 
 Vitals of our Religion as Christian. And though I should not discern 
 this, another may ; and if he does, it will not only be lawful for him, 
 but kind in him, to convince me how essential a truth that is which I 
 reject ; and how destructive the rejection of it would be, in its own 
 nature, to my soul. 
 
 " As to this particular Doctrine that lies before us, concerning the 
 Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, we wonder, 
 indeed, there should be any doubt raised among us at this time of 
 day, as to the Truth of it ; but we wonder much more, any question 
 should be made about the Importance of it. Surely it must be either a 
 very important truth or a very important error. For either side to 
 mistake created nature for uncreated, finite for infinite, necessary for 
 contingent, supreme for subordinate, must unavoidably introduce the 
 greatest confusion and falsehood into all our conceptions, affections, 
 and devotions. 
 
 If our Lord Jesus Christ be really God by Nature, of the same 
 Substance with the Father and the Spirit, it must be highly dis- 
 pleasing to him to have that supreme glory of his despised and 
 
255 
 
 denied by tliose that yet call him their Lord and Saviour; and though 
 they may say a thousand honourable things of him in other respects, 
 yet, while they deny him that wliich is his liighest excellence, they 
 have little reason to think he will accept any offering at their hands. 
 
 " But if he be not God by Nature, it must be a great provocation 
 to him that is so, to see us, both in private and public acts of adora- 
 tion, giving away his Glory to another. This surely must be in danger 
 of turning our religious assemblies into sacrilegious confederacies 
 against the One living and true God. 
 
 " And while those that are yet called Christians are thus divided 
 about the Object of Divine Worship, there must needs be great confu- 
 sion and jealousies among the worshippers ; each party being afraid, 
 lest they should have fellowship with idols. And it will hardly be 
 possible for them to worship God together, in the same places and 
 under the same administration, with a good conscience, or to their 
 mutual comfort and edification. 
 
 " For, whatever may be pretended, that is not a Controversy about 
 some metaphysical, abstract notions of personality, subsistence, modal 
 distinctions in the divine Nature; in these there will be always room 
 left for different sjieculations and sentiments. It is not a controversy 
 about forms of church government, or degrees of order and office 
 there ; nor about rites and ceremonies in external worship, like that 
 depending between us and the National Church; nor about the sub- 
 ject, time, and manner of administering a particular ordinance, as that 
 between us and the Antipaidobaptists ; but it is a controversy about 
 the very Object of Religious AVorship, — whether that be the only one 
 living and true God ; which has been ever acknowledged to be a 
 point of the greatest moment, both in natural and revealed religion. 
 We really think the Godhead of Christ and the Holy Spirit to be 
 the primary article of revealed religion, and the Unity of the God- 
 head the primary article of natural religion ; and when these are 
 called in question, we think we are called up to defend them."* 
 
 The majority, a considerable portion of whom were Independ- 
 ents and Baptists, not only professed an " agreement with the 
 sentiments of their brethren, concerning the Doctrine of the 
 Trinity," but say " We believe with our brethren, that the 
 Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity lies at the Foundation of 
 
 * Introduction (by Mr. Tong,) pp. 9 — 14. They say, " This Article of the 
 Trinity, hatli been no point of difference between the Church of England, and the 
 chief bodies of Dissenting Protestants in the nation ;" and quote the Confession of 
 the VVestminster Assembly, and the Savoy declaration, as " the PRESBYTERIAN 
 and CONGREGATIONAL CONFESSION." Pp. 82,83. 
 
256 
 
 Christianity, and runs through the whole of it, and is the 
 proper //-awie and scheme of the Christian Religion."* 
 
 Thus it appears that both sides agreed in esteeming this 
 a Fundamental Doctrine, oji which the entire scheme of 
 Christian Truth was erected, and consequently that a denial 
 or rejection of it was an error destructive of the whole " doc- 
 trine of life and salvation," and therefore of all well-grounded 
 hope toward God, or in the words of Baxter, who calls the 
 doctrine " the very sum of all Christian Religion," " damnable, 
 as plainly subverting the Foundation of our Faith." 
 
 * Second Part of a Reply to the Vindication of the Subscribing Ministers, 
 1719, p. 51. 
 
 It was not only for his rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity, that the 
 Presbyterians held the tenets of Socinus in abhorrence — as the following strong 
 language of Baxter will prove. — The Heathenish Socinians that deny the immor- 
 tality of the soul, (yea, worse than heathenish, for most heathens do maintain it,) 
 must deny it to Christ himself, as well as to his members. For if ' Lord Jesus, 
 receive my spirit,' be words that prove not the surviving of the spirit of Stephen; 
 then ' Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,' will not prove the surviving 
 of the spirit of Christ. And then what do these Infidels make of Christ, who 
 also deny his Deity?" Practical Works, Vol. iv. p. 865. — Mr. Nathaniel Taylor, in 
 reference to the Unitarians of 1700, thus writes, " Our modern Infidels fight against 
 our Blessed Saviour with his own sword ; and turn the Scriptures themselves, as 
 they manage them, into an engine to batter down the necessity of Faith in Him ; 
 and openly contend that mere Morality, or bare Charity to the poor, is sufficient 
 to any man's Salvation. Several texts they bring, (and we know their Father 
 could quote Scripture long before them,) to this purpose out of the Old Testament, 
 and several out of the New ; and by that time the reader sees all their objections, 
 he will not think I have called them out of their name, when I term them Infidels, 
 though, in the New Style, they affect to pass for Unifariatis." Discourse of Faith 
 in Jesus Christ, pp. Ill, 112. — So remote from truth is the assertion, that "it was 
 their principle to admit the reception or rejection of any religious doctrine," and 
 in reference to all disputed points, to " approve of the decisions of each, though 
 they may be contradictory." 
 
 THE END. 
 
 London: II. Fisher, K. Fisher, & P. Jackson, Printers. 
 

 ^m 
 
 W