•^ 
 
 wfnnHiirrfTri 
 
 HOME UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 

 LIBRARY 
 
 Gift of 
 
 President 
 
 Nicholas Murray Butler 
 
HOME UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 OF MODERN KNOWLEDGE 
 
 No. 46 
 
 Editors: 
 
 HERBERT FISHER, M.A., F.B.A. 
 
 Prof. GILBERT MURRAY, Litt.D., 
 
 LL.D., F.B.A. 
 Prof. J. ARTHUR THOMSON, M.A. 
 Prof. WILLIAM T. BREWSTER, M.A. 
 
THE HOME UI^IYEESITY LIBEAKYi 
 OE MODERE" KNOWLEDGE 
 
 i6mo cloth, 50 cents net, by mail 56 cents 
 
 PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION 
 
 Just Published 
 PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY . By Bertrand Russell 
 
 Future Issues 
 THE OLD TESTAMENT .... By George Moore 
 BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW 
 
 TESTAMENTS By R. H. Charles 
 
 THE MAKING OF THE NEW 
 
 TESTAMENT » By B. W. Bacon 
 
 ETHICS By G. E. Moore 
 
 COMPARATIVE RELIGION . . By J, Estlin Carpenter 
 A HISTORY OF FREEDOM OF 
 
 THOUGHT By J. B. Bury 
 
 BUDDHISM By Mrs. Rhys Davids 
 
 NONCONFORMITY AND THE 
 
 FREE CHURCHES By Principal Selbie 
 
ENGLISH SECTS 
 
 A HISTORY OF 
 
 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 BY 
 
 W. B. SELBIE, M.A., D.D. 
 
 PRINCIPAL OF MANSFIELD COLLEGE 
 OXFORD 
 
 NEW YORK 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 > _ : ' i,gn:<)0'w J /A 
 
 WILLIAMS AND NORGATE 
 

 ?5'4r 
 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. PAGB 
 
 I The Beginnings 7 
 
 II The Anglican Settlement and the Puritan 
 
 Reaction 24 
 
 III The Separatists 43 
 
 IV Laud and the Puritans . . . .60 
 V Presbyterians and Independents . , 76 
 
 VI The Quakers 95 
 
 VII The Restoration 114 
 
 VIII The Revolution 134 
 
 IX Reaction and Decline .... 152 
 
 X The Revival 171 
 
 XI Progress and Consolidation . , . 198 
 
 XII The Present Time 225 
 
 Bibliography 252 
 
 Index 254 
 
NONCONFOEMITY : 
 ITS OEIGIN AND PE0GEES8 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 THE BEGINNINGS 
 
 The rise of Nonconformity in England was 
 due to a great variety of causes. Some of 
 these were local and occasional in their opera- 
 tion, while others of them may be said to be 
 universal and permanent. These have to do 
 with the very nature of the Christian religion, 
 and with the special genius of the British 
 people. As early as the beginning of the 
 fourteenth century, when the people of this 
 country were nominally all of one faith, there 
 were many signs that the uniformity was by 
 no means so complete as it seemed. Saxon 
 and Norman were not yet fused into one race. 
 The Normans loved the ornate and splendid 
 ritual of the Roman Church, but the Saxons 
 were a plainer folk and preferred a simpler 
 worship. The distinction between the two 
 
8 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 peoples corresponded roughly to the dis- 
 tinction between aristocrats and democrats. 
 The average monk or priest was an aristocrat 
 by birth, training and association. He was 
 not of the common people, nor was he on 
 their side in the hour of their need. - This 
 helps to explain what happened at the Coming 
 of the Friars. The people responded eagerly 
 to the call of these priests, who were ready 
 to share their lot and to speak in their tongue. 
 The Friars had the Pope's licence to preach 
 either in sacred buildings or in the open air, 
 and they freely availed themselves of the 
 privilege. Their coming wrought something 
 » like a religious revolution. With their coarse 
 wit and homely speech they brought religion 
 ^home to the men in the street, and created 
 an ideal of religious service which did not 
 increase the popularity of those idle shepherds 
 who devoured their flocks instead of feeding 
 them. The Friars were, of course, loyal sons 
 of Rome, and there is no trace of heresy or 
 , disaffection in their preaching. But, for all 
 that, they prepared the way for Wyclif and 
 the Lollards, and for that temper of mind 
 which will not always yield to authority, but 
 loves to exercise an independent judgment 
 in matters of religion. 
 
 It is not surprising, therefore, that even 
 before Wyclif's day signs of revolt against 
 the dominant Church should be not infre- 
 quently forthcoming. They were confined at 
 first to a few obscure people, and were easily 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 9 
 
 and quickly suppressed by the iron hand of 
 authority ; but they show that the temper 
 of the people was not unprepared for change. 
 It was at least a hundred and fifty years 
 before the Reformation that the process 
 which culminated in that great movement 
 began. The reign of Edward III marked a 
 real step forward in the history of the English 
 people. It was the age of Chaucer and Lang- 
 land, and it saw the rise of all those intel- 
 lectual, spiritual and political forces which 
 make for religious revival and revolt. The 
 Reformation in England and Scotland was 
 no sudden thing, still less was it a mere 
 political movement. It had long been pre- 
 pared for, and the form it took was the result 
 of the peculiar temper and special circum- 
 stances of the people of these islands. Among 
 the greatest Reformers before the Reforma- 
 tion was John Wyclif (1320-1384), a man 
 who, in almost every respect, was in advance) 
 of his age, and who stands out as one who has 
 left his impress not only on his own genera- 
 tion, but on the whole life of our people. After 
 having been Master of Balliol College, Oxford, 
 he became vicar, first of Fillingham in Lin- 
 colnshire, and afterwards of Ludgershall 
 in Buckinghamshire, and of Lutterworth in 
 Leicestershire. During his whole life his 
 energies were directed against the corruptions 
 of the Church, its moral failures and its 
 usurpation of the temporal power. Though 
 he aimed at Reformation he was no mere 
 
10 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 idealist. His practical mind would not suffer 
 him to be contented with pointing out the 
 better way ; he sought to walk in it himself 
 and to train others to follow him. He was not 
 concerned to write and speak only for scholars, 
 but appealed to the common people, and did 
 so in terms which they could understand. 
 
 Wyclif's doctrine was for the age in which 
 he lived revolutionary. He taught the sole 
 and supreme authority of Scripture, and 
 upheld it as against either the Church or 
 tradition. He recognised the right of private 
 judgment, and made men hold themselves 
 responsible for their own religious beliefs. 
 By his doctrine of " dominion founded in 
 grace " he sought to defend the rights of 
 God over the human conscience against those of 
 priest and Pope. He appealed to the primitive 
 Church as the source of the true doctrine of 
 the ministry and the sacraments, and strongly 
 condemned the use of irnages, relics, etc., and 
 the celibacy of the clergy. Over against the 
 elaborate worship and organisation of the 
 Roman Church he set the simplicity of Christ. 
 In all these respects he was a pioneer, and 
 his work lived after him. Though his life 
 was one long controversy he had many sym- 
 pathisers. Both in the University of Oxford 
 and in the country at large, there were men 
 who only needed the kind of impulse Wyclif 
 gave, in order to set themselves in revolt 
 against the existing Church system. He 
 found no difficulty, therefore, in committing 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 11 
 
 his doctrine to companies of faithful men, 
 who made it their business to preach it up 
 and down the land. They followed the 
 example of the Friars and, clad in long 
 russet gowns, barefooted, and staff in hand, 
 wandered about teaching the people wher- 
 ever they could obtain a hearing. It was by 
 the work of these Lollards, as they came to 
 be called, and by his rendering of the Bible 
 into English, that Wyclif prepared the way 
 for the real and fuller Reformation of later 
 days. His followers were met with bitter 
 persecution from the authorities, and, not 
 long after Wyclif's death, the whole move- 
 ment seemed to have been stamped out. In 
 reality it was only driven underground — the 
 seed was not killed, but only waited for its 
 due season to germinate. Like Wesley in 
 later times, Wyclif never separated himself 
 from the Church of his fathers. After his 
 death, however, his followers carried his 
 teaching to its logical conclusion, and began 
 to set up a new form of Church for themselves. 
 It is in the year 1382 that we find the first use 
 of the name " Lollard," and it was probably no 
 more than a nickname, as was the term 
 "Methodist," when it first began to be em- 
 ployed. The time was one of social distress 
 and economic change. The Peasant Rising 
 which culminated in 1381 was due to the 
 ravages of the Black Death, to the im- 
 position of the Poll tax, to the poverty 
 caused by the French Wars, and the conse- 
 
12 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 quent harsh measures adopted to regulate 
 the price of food and the rate of wages. There 
 is but little evidence to show that the 
 social discontent was directly fostered by the 
 teaching of the " poor priests," though it is 
 not improbable that they sympathised .with 
 the victims of oppression and poverty, and 
 denounced the evils of the time. In any 
 case, the excesses of the revolt brought them 
 no little unpopularity, and their supposed 
 complicity with it formed a good excuse for 
 those who were only too willing to persecute 
 them. Recent researches have shown that in 
 spite of the strong measures taken against 
 them, the Lollards continued to grow, and 
 traces of their teaching and of communities 
 called by their name are to be found in many 
 parts of the country. The fact that they took 
 upon themselves to ordain others to the 
 ministry of the word and sacraments excited 
 the utmost horror, and goes to show how far 
 they had become independent of the ordinary 
 channels of religion. For more than a century 
 and a half the persecution was continued. 
 Acts of Parliament against Lollardy were 
 frequent, and even when they were finally 
 repealed under Elizabeth, the oath against 
 it was exacted from magistrates until as 
 late as the year 1625. 
 
 In the closing years of the reign of 
 Richard II certain of the Lollard leaders 
 presented to Parliament a memorial in which 
 they denounced those practices of the Church 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 13 
 
 to which they objected. Among them were en- 
 dowment, transubstantiation, vows of chastity, 
 the blessing of inanimate things, exorcism, 
 prayers for the dead, auricular confession, 
 the worship of images, the holding of secular 
 offices by priests, and the practice of un- 
 necessary arts leading to luxury. This 
 memorial was bitterly opposed by the clergy, 
 led by the Archbishop of York and the 
 Bishop of London, who persuaded the King 
 to call on the leaders of the movement to 
 recant. This proved the beginning of a long 
 period of persecution, which culminated in 
 1401 in the Act for the Burning of Heretics. 
 From this time onwards one and another 
 of the Lollards suffered death by fire, 
 but the main effect of such a policy was 
 only to swell their ranks. They held 
 their meetings in woods, lonely fields and 
 secret places ; they scattered tracts among 
 the people, and were diligent in denouncing 
 the evils of the Church and State. In 1414 
 took place the famous gathering in St. Giles 
 Fields, London, where a large body of 
 Lollards came together, partly in order to 
 hear the preaching of one John Beverley, 
 but partly also with some wild and unformed 
 notions of protest and revolt, against the 
 house of Lancaster. The movement was 
 quite abortive, but it was enough to stamp 
 Lollardy as treason, and it led to fresh Acts 
 of Parliament against " heresies, errors and 
 loUardies " as being dangerous to public 
 
14 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 order. The leaders were killed or scattered, 
 and the whole movement was once more 
 driven underground But it still lived; 
 and though our records of the period are 
 extremely scanty, they are full enough to 
 show that throughout the whole kingdom, 
 and especially in Buckinghamshire and the 
 home counties, there were multitudes of 
 devout men and women who were only 
 waiting the time when they might openly 
 show their dissent from the teaching and 
 work of the Church. They were " Bible 
 men," who sought to build up Christianity 
 again from the foundations. Some of the 
 books and tracts written by and against 
 them show that they by no means belonged 
 only to the poor and illiterate classes. They 
 had their friends in both Universities, and 
 they could command the services of men of 
 intelligence and learning. 
 
 It was natural that men such as these 
 should very quickly feel the influence of 
 the work and teaching of Luther. They 
 became a ready channel for the spread of 
 his ideas in England, and they were pro- 
 foundly influenced by his spirit. But it 
 is important to keep in mind that, long 
 before Luther's day, there was in this country 
 a genuine anticipation of his work and aims 
 on the part of men and women who had 
 come to feel for themselves the need of a 
 deeper and more spiritual religion than that 
 of the Church of their time. They worked 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 15 
 
 under the direct guidance and inspiration of 
 the New Testament, and they reached a 
 position which has well been described as 
 at once evangelical and free. Negatively 
 they were Nonconformists, quite as much 
 as those of a later day to whom the 
 name was first given, but their attitude was 
 more than a mere negative one. They 
 built on the word of God as they found it in 
 the Scriptures, and they claimed the right to 
 put their own interpretation upon it. In 
 this respect they have close affinities with 
 those Continental heretics called Publicans, 
 Paterines and Weavers, some of whom had 
 penetrated to England as early as the twelfth 
 century. These are now generally regarded 
 as representing a widespread revolt against 
 the corruptions of the Roman Church, and 
 in favour of a simpler and more spiritual 
 form of faith. It is significant that John 
 Foxe, writing in the reign of Elizabeth, was 
 able to look back to a time when men of 
 this temper were more numerous and more 
 zealous than in his own day. He says : 
 " Altho public authority then lacked to 
 maintain the open preaching of the Gospel, 
 yet the secret multitude of true professors 
 was not much unequal : certes the fervent zeal 
 of those Christian days seemed much superior 
 to these our days and times : as manifestly 
 may appear by their sitting up all night in 
 reading and hearing : also by their expenses 
 and charges in buying of book? in English, 
 
16 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of whom some gave five marks, some more, 
 some less for a book : some gave a load of 
 hay for a few chapters of St. James or of 
 St. Paul in English. In which variety of 
 books and want of teachers this one thing 
 I greatly marvel and muse at ; to note in 
 the Registers and to consider how the word 
 of truth, notwithstanding, did multiply so 
 exceedingly as it did amongst them." 
 
 It must not be supposed, however, that, 
 in the time of which we are speaking, there 
 v/ere any organised Churches side by side 
 with the established Church of the land. 
 Men and women met together, as we have 
 seen, to give expression to their religious 
 needs and to worship God according to the 
 light of their own consciences. But the 
 meetings were secret and sporadic, and there 
 was probably no uniformity among them 
 either of ritual or method. But it may 
 certainly be taken for granted that the 
 number of them was greater than used to 
 be supposed, and that they stood for a 
 remarkable and widespread religious move- 
 ment. Apart from this, it would be very 
 difficult to account for the rapid advance 
 of Protestant and Free Church doctrines 
 in later times. The fact is that, for centuries, 
 the ground had been prepared. In every 
 class of the community there were men of 
 devout life and stern spirit who were already 
 in love with religious freedom, and sought 
 for a higher ideal both of conduct and worship 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 17 
 
 than they were able to find in the Church as 
 they knew it. No account of English Non- 
 conformity can be regarded as complete, or 
 intelligible, which does not reckon with such 
 men as these and with the work they did. 
 
 In the reign of Henry VIII began the long 
 quarrel which ended in the severance between 
 the English Crown and the Papacy. With the 
 purely political aspect of this struggle we 
 are not here concerned, save in so far as it 
 gave an impetus to the revolt against Rome 
 on scriptural and religious grounds, the 
 beginnings of which we have already traced. 
 Both under Henry, Edward VI, and Mary 
 there was a considerable increase in the 
 number of the malcontents, and traces of 
 their meetings and influence are found in 
 most of the memorials of the period. It was 
 in 1550 that Strype notes in regard to certain 
 sectaries in Kent and Essex that, " These 
 were the first that made separation from 
 the Reformed Church of England, having 
 gathered congregations of their own." They 
 are described as " mean people " who met 
 together "to talk of the Scriptures"; and 
 mention is made of the fact that the meetings 
 in different places held communications 
 with each other, and even exchanged their 
 teachers. It may be easily understood that 
 the men who were responsible for these 
 gatherings were not greatly affected by the 
 fact of the substitution of the King for the 
 Pope as the Supreme Head of the Church of 
 
18 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 England. Certainly they would be far more 
 keenly interested in the setting up of the 
 first Prayer Book of Edward VI, and in the 
 two Acts for Uniformity of Service and Worship 
 passed in his reign (1549 and 1552). They 
 were also profoundly affected by the change 
 which took place under Mary; and by the 
 persecutions which culminated in the burning 
 of Hooper, Ridley, Latimer and Cranmer 
 they were able to measure the condemnation 
 in which they stood themselves. But during 
 the whole of this period, as always, the blood 
 of the martyrs became the seed of the Church. 
 The revolt against Rome grew in volume 
 and power, and found for itself complete 
 justification, not so much in the actions of 
 men as in the word of God. 
 
 For the turning-point in the struggle we 
 have to look to the Continent of Europe 
 where Luther had already done his work. 
 As the results of this filtered into England, 
 they gave a new aspect to the existing 
 movement towards Reformation there. It 
 had already received fresh intellectual im- 
 petus from the work of men like Colet and 
 Erasmus, and in the Universities, and among 
 the better sort of clergy, the ground was 
 being prepared for the new harvest that 
 was to come. The people were still, in the 
 vast majority, strictly Catholic, and the 
 difficulties of Henry VIII, who had to 
 reconcile a Catholic population to an anti- 
 Papal government, wexe by no means 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 19 
 
 lessened by the fact that there was growing 
 up a large body of opinion favourable to a 
 revolt from Rome, that was religious and 
 theological rather than merely political or 
 of expediency. This tendency was greatly 
 furthered, especially in cultured circles, by 
 the publication of the New Testament in 
 the original tongues. The great work of the 
 sixteenth century was the issue of Erasmus' 
 New Testament in Greek with a Latin 
 translation — the raising of a spiritual temple 
 in desolated Christendom. When its author 
 wrote, " Perhaps it may be necessary to 
 conceal the secrets of kings, but we must 
 publish the mysteries of Christ. The Holy 
 Scriptures, translated into all languages, 
 should be read not only by the Scotch and 
 Irish, but even by Turks and Saracens. 
 The husbandman should sing them as he 
 holds the handle of the plough, the weaver 
 repeat them as he plies his shuttle, and the 
 wearied traveller, halting on his journey, 
 refresh him under some shady tree by these 
 godly narratives," he was buOding better 
 than he knew. The work was well done, 
 and it received a splendid welcome. It was 
 condemned in the confessional as the source 
 of all heresies, but in the homes of the clergy 
 and of the more cultm-ed laity, as well as 
 in the Universities, it was eagerly read and 
 canvassed. Men like Bilney and Tyndale 
 made it their business to spread the know- 
 ledge of it, and in due time the latter pub- 
 
20 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 lished his English translation of the New 
 Testament, with the issue of which the 
 Reformation in this country may be said 
 to have really begun. Tyndale's version of 
 the New Testament appeared in 1525. Ten 
 years later Miles Coverdale gave to the 
 world the whole Bible in English. And 
 the great English Bible was authorised to be 
 read in churches in 1539. The seed was 
 now sown, and the story of its growing and 
 of the fruit which it bore is the story that 
 we have to tell. 
 
 Meanwhile Scotland too was beginning to 
 feel the effect of the new life and was pre- 
 paring for the great part which she was 
 afterwards to play in the work of reforma- 
 tion. The country was poor and sparsely 
 peopled, and had been slower to emerge 
 from the darkness of the Middle Ages than 
 her sister in the south. But her Church 
 was rich, and the clergy numerous and 
 inefficient. With wealth went corruption, 
 and many of the rulers of the Church de- 
 served the names of " dumb dogs," and 
 " idle bellies," with which they were freely 
 greeted. It was a soil ripe for revolution 
 in religion. LoUardy had made itself felt, 
 and in spite of persecution had never been 
 quite put an end to. And after 1528 
 Lutheran influences were at work among 
 the people, while humanism and new theology 
 affected the Universities. The result was 
 a certain measure of Protestantism which 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 21 
 
 captured a number of leading families, and 
 had within it the elements of permanence. 
 But it was Protestantism of a Calvinistic 
 sort, and John Knox was its prophet. In 
 the end of 1557 the first Covenant was 
 signed and the first " Congregation of Jesus 
 Christ " was set up in avowed opposition 
 to the " Congregation of Satan," another 
 name for Rome. The change in religion 
 had much to do with the new attitude of 
 England to Scotland. The old claim to 
 suzerainty gradually ceased to be asserted, 
 and the time was not far distant when it 
 was to be seen how " earnest embracing 
 of religion " could join two countries " straitly 
 together." 
 
 Thus far we have seen but the dim begin- 
 nings of the movement out of which English 
 Nonconformity ultimately grew. The embers 
 were being kindled which were afterwards 
 to burst into a great conflagration. The 
 ideas were coming to birth which were one 
 day to break forth into startling action. 
 But the process was an exceedingly slow 
 one, and it is only too easy to overestimate 
 the importance of the various factors that 
 were at work. For example, the debt of 
 England and Scotland to Continental Pro- 
 testantism is often exaggerated. No doubt 
 the same causes were at work in both cases, 
 but they worked side by side. And it was 
 not, as we have seen, until things were well 
 advanced in this country that the influence 
 
22 ' NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of the German Reformation began to make 
 itself felt. Then, again, merely political con- 
 siderations played but a very small part at 
 first in determining the minds of men towards 
 reform, though they had much to do- with 
 shaping the form which the movement after- 
 wards assumed. Among the chief factors 
 in the situation were the corruption of the 
 clergy and the tyranny of the Church on the 
 one hand, and, on the other, the new know- 
 ledge of the Bible, which gave men what they 
 believed to be a divine standard by which 
 they could judge the ecclesiastical system 
 and persons of their day. From the writings 
 of Langland and Chaucer we can understand 
 something of the condition of the Church and 
 of the feelings of the laity towards it in the 
 earliest days when the new spirit made itself 
 felt. This feeling was greatly intensified by 
 persecution, and, by the time of Elizabeth, 
 had become with many people an obsession. 
 But it must not be forgotten that the Church 
 was never wholly corrupt. There were great 
 and crying abuses, but even among monks 
 and nuns many holy men and women were 
 to be found, and the old religion died very 
 hard. Had it not been for the fear of Spain 
 in later times. Protestantism in England 
 would have been far more difficult to establish ; 
 and the partial failure of Puritanism shows 
 how deeply Catholicism was rooted in the 
 affections of Englishmen. But with all their 
 love for the ancient Church they were not 
 
THE BEGINNINGS 23 
 
 able to withstand the appeal of the Scriptures. 
 The contrast between the religion of the New 
 Testament and that of the Church was too 
 violent. To the hard common sense of 
 Englishmen and the logical acuteness of 
 Scotchmen these two ideals seemed im- 
 possible of reconciliation. It was this feeling 
 which gave sting and force to the preaching 
 of Knox, and when for a time Englishmen 
 became, as they were called, the people of 
 the Book, the fate of Romanism in this 
 country was sealed. 
 
 For the moment, however, the conflict was 
 between the Roman Church and the new 
 spirit. The first result of this was to substi- 
 tute only an Anglican Church for the Roman, 
 and the Supremacy of the Crown for that of 
 the Pope. In Scotland, indeed, something 
 was being heard of the Crown rights of 
 Jesus, but in England there was as yet little 
 or no objection to the new order. But the 
 very principles that produced Protestantism 
 were capable of a wider and more logical 
 application. We have yet to see how Pro- 
 testantism in its turn produced Puritanism, 
 and how out of Puritanism grew that Separat- 
 ism which is the root and parent of Noncon- 
 formity in the strict and modern sense of the 
 term. The Nonconformist spirit was, as we 
 have seen, directly anticipated in Wyclif's 
 doctrine of Divine dominion, which gave 
 paramount importance to man's individual 
 relations with God and made them regulative 
 
24 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of all else. In stating this as he did, 
 Wyclif was in advance of his day, and it 
 is not surprising that the ideal he held up 
 never really took shape in fact. But the 
 spirit which animated him and his followers, 
 the Lollards, was never quite crushed even 
 by the organisations through which it sought 
 to find utterance. Vv^hile for a time the 
 religious struggle seems to be that of Church 
 against Church it is really more. The 
 importance of these early days for the 
 history of Nonconformity lies in the fact 
 that we can see there writ large, and in 
 crude and simple form, the principles which 
 afterwards became so potent. They are 
 thrown into bold relief over against the 
 elaborate organisation which they were to 
 combat, and they stand as representing the 
 very life and soul of religion, which requires 
 to grow its own body, rather than fit itself 
 into one ready made. 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT AND THE PURITAN 
 REACTION 
 
 It is not without just pride that Englishmen 
 look back to the " spacious days " of Queen 
 Elizabeth as the most formative period in 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 25 
 
 their national history. The time was again 
 one of extraordinary awakening — political, 
 intellectual and religious. It saw the begin- 
 ning of our modern world, and, both in 
 controversy and in constructive statesman- 
 ship, it laid down lines which were to be 
 followed for many a long day. The discovery 
 of the New World, the expansion of com- 
 mercial relations, and the successful war with 
 Spain, were all epoch-making events. Add 
 to these the intellectual revolution represented 
 by the names of Shakespeare and Bacon, and 
 the religious revolution marked by the 
 Anglican settlement and the rise of Puritanism 
 and Separatism, and we have a series of 
 achievements unmatched in any other period 
 of our island story. It is, of course, with the 
 religious and ecclesiastical situation that we 
 are here chiefly concerned, and we have 
 to take note of other features of the time only 
 as they bear on our main subject. 
 
 Elizabeth came to the throne in the full 
 tide of the reaction against Roman claims 
 and policy. The Marian persecutions on the 
 one hand, and the threatening attitude of 
 Spain on the other, had thoroughly alarmed 
 the English people, and the Queen, knowing 
 the uncertainty of her own position, shared 
 their fears. She v/as herself an opportunist, 
 having no real religious convictions and but 
 little regard for truth. But she had a genuine 
 love for her country, and the sole aim of her 
 policy was to maintain her throne and 
 
26 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 strengthen and consolidate the power of 
 England. She could assume many parts 
 herself, and was an adept at playing off her 
 opponents one against another. But she never 
 lost sight of her main purpose, and it -must 
 be admitted that, through all the tortuous 
 paths of her policy, it was steadily advanced. 
 Among the earliest efforts of her reign the 
 Anglican settlement must be reckoned as 
 the most successful and the most important. 
 The word settlement, however, can only be 
 justly used by those who look back on the 
 obscure and almost fortuitous happenings 
 of the time in the light of their results. But 
 the fact remains that the Queen and her 
 Parliament secured a really durable arrange- 
 ment, against the will of the ecclesiastics, 
 and over the heads of the people. Elizabeth 
 had astutely declined to assume her father's 
 position as head of the Church, knowing it to 
 be as offensive to the Calvinists as to the 
 Bomans themselves. But Parliament com- 
 promised for her on the phrase, that she was 
 the only Supreme Governor of the realm as 
 well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things 
 or causes as in temporal, and that no foreign 
 prince or prelate had any ecclesiastical or 
 spiritual authority within her dominions. 
 At the same time they revived a statute of 
 Plenry VIII proclaiming the King as head of 
 the Church, and declaring that by the word 
 of God all ecclesiastical jurisdiction flows from 
 him. This famous Act of Supremacy was only 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 27 
 
 secured after long debate, and was followed, 
 in the same year (1559), by the first of a suc- 
 cession of Acts of Uniformity, the effect of N[ 
 which has been to produce strife and division ' 
 in English Christendom from those days 
 until now. The basis of these measures was 
 the Prayer Book of 1552, which was but 
 slightly altered to meet the needs of the 
 moment. The use of it was made compulsory 
 in order to secure uniformity of prayer and 
 service, and of the administration of the 
 sacraments. To make use of any other form 
 of worship was made a penal offence. At the 
 same time the Act required that every man 
 should be present every Sunday at the legal 
 services thus set up. All this was distinctly 
 the work of the Queen and Parliament, and 
 was accomplished in defiance of the Church 
 and her representatives. Neither the bishops 
 nor the clergy consented to it, but they 
 were powerless in the matter. The Bishop 
 of Chester voiced their feelings when he 
 said, "As to religion, I humbly conceive that 
 it is a subject altogether foreign to the business 
 of Parliament." "The body of Parliament 
 consists mostly of the temporal nobility, and 
 the commons, which, tho persons of great 
 judgment and learning in civil matters, yet 
 divinity is none of their profession. The 
 exposition of the Scriptures, the reading 
 of the ancients, has been none of their em- 
 ployment. These things considered, they 
 cgjinot be supposed to be rightly qualijQed 
 
28 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 to pronounce upon the doctrines and practice 
 of the Church. Neither, indeed, do these 
 things belong to their function or lie within 
 their character." This bold protest was 
 quite unavailing. All the bishops who re- 
 fused the oath were deprived, and with them 
 over two hundred of the clergy. But for a 
 long time neither the Act of Supremacy nor 
 the Act of Uniformity were at all generally 
 observed. It was part of the clever policy 
 of the Queen and her advisers to be lenient 
 with the Roman Catholics and not to press 
 the Protestant position too strongly at first. 
 It was not until 1571 that subscription to the 
 Thirty-nine Articles was enforced. This re- 
 quired a renunciation of the Romish creed, 
 and was a point strongly in favour of the 
 Puritans. It had the effect of rounding off 
 the revolution in religion, by requiring the 
 English clergy to renounce not only the 
 jurisdiction of the Pope, but the creed of 
 the Roman Church. 
 
 But, during the whole time that this was 
 going on, feeling among the people was 
 developing more rapidly than either at the 
 Court or in Parliament. Many of the livings 
 made vacant under the Act of Uniformity had 
 been filled by men who desired a more 
 drastic reformation than the Queen was 
 ready to allow, and men of this temper also 
 secured a much larger representation in the 
 Houses of Convocation than their strength 
 in the country warranted. By this time 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 29 
 
 the name Puritan was in general use to 
 designate those within the Anglican com- 
 munion who sought a simpler faith and 
 service than was allowed for in the new 
 regulations. Many of these took the law into 
 their own hands, and, in the general disorder 
 of the times, thought themselves justified in 
 arranging matters of ritual to suit themselves. 
 Among the irregularities noted at the time 
 were, saying the prayers in the chancel or 
 in the pulpit ; preaching and administering 
 the communion without a surplice ; placing 
 the communion table in the body of the 
 church or in the middle of the chancel ; 
 allowing the communion to be received 
 standing or sitting, and baptizing without the 
 sign of the cross. The prevalence of such 
 practices led to increased efforts to enforce 
 the Act of Uniformity, and these in their 
 turn to a more open disregard of it. In 
 consequence, many more clergy were deprived, 
 and not a few churches, especially in London, 
 were left without pastors. It was in this way 
 that Puritanism led inevitably to Separatism. 
 The great body of the Puritans had no wish 
 to sever themselves from the national Church. 
 They were merely concerned to carry out the 
 Protestant settlement to its logical con- 
 clusions. 
 
 From this time forward, therefore, the 
 Protestant movement in this country followed 
 a double course, and developed along two 
 parallel lines. On the one hand we have 
 
30 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 to note the rise and growth of Puritanism 
 within the National Church, and on the other 
 is to be found the beginning of Nonconformity 
 proper, in the setting up of Httle communities 
 of "separated" Christians outside of and in 
 direct opposition to the Church of England. 
 As regards the former of these, we must note 
 that the term Puritan did not come into 
 general use until about the year 1564, and that 
 it was a vague popular name, or even nick- 
 name, for a moral and religious temper of 
 mind, rather than for a definite organisation. 
 It was not until a much later period that it 
 came to stand for the political party which 
 attempted to assert the rights and liberties of 
 the people against the usurpations of the 
 Crown. For a long time the work and 
 character of the Puritans were chiefly known 
 through the writings of their opponents, and 
 were seen in caricature rather than in the 
 light of facts. This has led to no little 
 prejudice against them, a prejudice for which 
 history does not give any real justification. 
 Their leaders, in the period with which we 
 are dealing, were men who believed pro- 
 foundly in the sovereignty of God and in the 
 authority of Scripture, who practised a severe 
 morality, and were deeply attached to the 
 cause of civil and religious liberty. Some 
 of them were among the most learned and 
 enlightened men of their day. They were 
 to be found in both the Universities, and were 
 by no means antagonistic to culture and 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 31 
 
 refinement of life. The strictness of their 
 morals and the preciseness of their manners 
 and dress became a laughing-stock to the 
 men of a dissolute and luxurious Court, but 
 these things represented a healthy reaction 
 against certain vicious tendencies of the time, 
 and, if they were sometimes carried to an 
 extreme of fanaticism, in their inception, at 
 least, they had no little justification. If the 
 Puritans seemed sometimes to lay undue 
 stress on minor matters of ritual and ceremony, 
 this was only because they saw that these 
 things involved principles the maintenance of 
 which was to them a matter of life and death. 
 The first definite assertion of the Puritan 
 position was brought about by the efforts 
 of the Court to enforce the Act of Uniformity. 
 In the meeting of Convocation summoned ~ 
 during Elizabeth's second Parliament in 1563, 
 the question of vestments at once came to the ■ 
 front. A Petition was presented by a number 
 of leading Church dignitaries pleading that 
 the posture of kneeling at the Lord's Supper 
 should not be insisted upon, that the sign 
 of the cross in baptism should be disused, 
 that the wearing of surplices and copes 
 should cease, and that a " comely side 
 garment " should take the place of all other 
 vestments. By a majority of only one. 
 Convocation decided to make no alteration 
 in the existing order, and the Puritans were 
 defeated. Many of them, however, declined *n 
 to be bound by the action of Convocation, \ 
 
i 
 
 32 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 and irregularities in the matter of dress and 
 ritual became more and more common. 
 But the Queen '' was unable to endure the 
 least alteration in the matter of religion," 
 and ordered Archbishop Parker rigorously 
 to enforce the law. Parker carried out his 
 orders by issuing, on his own authority, a 
 series of " Advertisements " commanding 
 the use of the cope at the communion in 
 cathedrals and collegiate churches, and the 
 surplice with sleeves in parish churches. 
 These " Advertisements " the Puritans, led by 
 the President of Magdalen College, Oxford, 
 and the Dean of Christchurch, stoutly re- 
 sisted. Their action indicated a growing 
 aversion to Romish habits and practices 
 both among the clergy and laity, and, as the 
 result of it, both at Oxford and Cambridge, 
 many men were deprived of their livings and 
 jsome were imprisoned. Matters reached a 
 f crisis in London in the year 1566, when 
 f Parker and the Bishop of London cited the 
 I clergy of the city to appear before them 
 *^at Lambeth. About a hundred and ten 
 presented themselves, and were confronted 
 with a minister properly attired in the 
 prescribed vestments. The Chancellor of 
 
 >the diocese then spoke : " My masters and 
 the ministers of London, the Council's pleasure 
 is that ye strictly keep the unity of apparel like 
 to this man as ye see him : that is, a square 
 cap, a scholar's gown priestlike, or tippet, 
 and in the Church a linen surplice ; and 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 33 
 
 inviolably observe the Book of Common 
 Prayer, and the Queen's Majesty's injunctions 
 and the Book of Convocation. Ye that will 
 presently subscribe write volo. Those that 
 will not subscribe write nolo. Be brief, 
 make no words." When the names were 
 called, thirty-seven refused to conform, " of 
 which number were the best and some 
 preachers," says Parker. But their good 
 qualities did not save them, for they were 
 summarily suspended. They suffered with 
 a clear conscience, and a full recognition of the 
 consequences. Some of them left the ministry 
 for various scholastic pursuits, some became 
 chaplains in the families of Puritan gentry, 
 some joined the Presbyterians in Scotland, 
 and some emigrated. Five persisted in preach- 
 ing, and were committed by the Queen' r. 
 Council as prisoners in the private custody 
 of various bishops. 
 
 When it became evident that there was to 
 be no relaxation of the Act of Uniformity, 
 certain of the deprived ministers and other 
 Puritans held a conference in London on the 
 question of the lawfulness and necessity of 
 separation from the Established Church. 
 After much debate, an agreement was arrived 
 at in the following terms : " That since they 
 could not have the word of God preached, 
 nor the Sacraments administered, without 
 idolatrous gear : and since there had been 
 a separate congregation in London and 
 another in Geneva in Mary's time, using a 
 
 B 
 
84 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 book and order of Service approved by 
 Calvin, which was free from the supersti- 
 tions of the English service : therefore it 
 was their duty in their present circumstances 
 to break off from the public Churches and 
 to assemble as they had opportunity in 
 private houses, or elsewhere, to worship 
 God in a manner that might not offend 
 against the light of their consciences." This 
 statement marks a parting of the ways. It 
 was the beginning of the Separatist move- 
 ment, which henceforth advanced along 
 the lines thus laid down. There was still a 
 large leaven of Puritanism within the Church 
 of England, and many who remained Non- 
 conforming members of the Church. But along- 
 side of them, there were others who at once 
 carried their convictions to a logical issue, 
 and began to form Churches on another model 
 than that of the old Church of Rome. One 
 of the earliest of these " gathered Churches " 
 was formed in June 1567, and met at Plum- 
 bers Hall in the city of London. Its meetings 
 were broken up by the authorities, and when 
 its leaders were summoned before Grindal, 
 who was then Archbishop, they defended 
 themselves in the following memorable 
 words : "So long as we might have the 
 word freely preached and the sacraments 
 administered without the preferring of idola- 
 trous gear about it, we never assembled 
 together in houses. But when it came to this, 
 that all our preachers were displaced by your 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 35 
 
 law, so that we could hear none of them in 
 any Church by the space of seven or eight 
 weeks, and were troubled and commanded 
 by your courts from day to day for not 
 coming to our parish Churches, then we be- 
 thought us what were best to do. And now 
 if from the word of God, you can prove we 
 are wrong we will yield to you and do open 
 penance at St. Paul's Cross : if not, we will 
 stand to it by the grace of God." These 
 words show very clearly that the Noncon- 
 formity of the early Puritans was altogether 
 against the grain. There is no trace in them 
 of the dissidence of dissent. They take 
 their stand reluctantly and under the pressure 
 of conscience. They can do no other. Their 
 estrangement from the Church was brought 
 about very gradually, and was the result of 
 the intolerance of the authorities, and especi- 
 ally of the Queen, rather than of their own 
 contumacy. They would have remained 
 within the Church had it been made at all 
 possible for them to do so with a clear con- 
 science. 
 
 The next act in the drama now unfolding 
 itself was the publication of the Puritan *1 # 
 manifesto called the "First Admonition." This >^ 
 was the result of a Conference in London j 
 in the year 1572, and it still further defines 
 the Puritan position at this period. The 
 Admonition presents for the godly considera- 
 tion of Parliament the changes which are 
 necessary in order to secure a right ministry 
 
 B 2 
 
36 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 and a right government of the Church. It is 
 contended that the old Romanist ministry 
 of Henry and Mary should be removed, and 
 should give place to a ministry elected by 
 the elders, and with the consent of the whole 
 
 /v Church. The minister should be called, and 
 not thrust on a congregation from without. 
 
 A^The only true officers of a Church are ministers 
 or pastors, elders and deacons, and these 
 should take the place of the existing hier- 
 archy. Election by the congregation should 
 take the place of the Bishop's authority, and 
 the Church should be purged of Roman 
 
 I practices and be remodelled on the basis of 
 \i the Reformed Churches of Scotland and the 
 
 r Continent. This Admonition produced con- 
 siderable stir, and at once passed through 
 several editions. Its authors were com- 
 mitted to Newgate, and the task of answering 
 them was entrusted to Whit gift. He, in 
 conjunction with two Bishops, produced a 
 defence of the Church of England based on 
 the contention that what is Apostolic is not 
 necessarily binding, and that what is Roman 
 is not necessarily to be excluded from 
 Anglicanism. The answer brought forth a 
 second Admonition from the pen of Thomas 
 Cartwright, which contained an elaborate 
 plan of the Reformed Church as he would 
 have it. There was to be an elected ministry 
 in which all were equal, and government of 
 the Church by conferences, synods and local 
 consistories, which latter should have the 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 87 
 
 power of excommunication and super- 
 vision of morals, and should be able to send 
 representatives to provincial synods or 
 councils. The plan of the Church sketched 
 in these Admonitions was heartily con- 
 demned by the authorities, but found no 
 little favour both among the clergy of the better 
 sort and the laity. There is evidence that, 
 in not a few counties, voluntary associations 
 of the kind here indicated were established 
 for the reformation of manners and religion. 
 At the same time, the religious exercises 
 called Prophesyings were becoming com- 
 mon, and went some way to meet the need 
 for preaching and religious instruction which 
 was everywhere felt. In spite of all efforts 
 to suppress them, these innovations were 
 in great favour w^ith the people, and did 
 much to bring Puritanism into popularity. 
 
 Under the influence of Cartwright, whose 
 lectures and sermons at Cambridge had 
 given him great weight in their counsels, 
 the Puritans within the Church now made 
 it their policy to attempt to substitute 
 Presbytery for Episcopacy. The idea was 
 not so quixotic as it might seem, for it must 
 be remembered that, once the severance from 
 Rome had taken place, the whole system 
 of the English Church was in the melting- 
 pot. The retention of the Episcopate was 
 the result of following the line of least re- 
 sistance. There was no divine right about 
 their position at all, and we find Dr. Ham- 
 
38 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 mond, the Chancellor of the diocese of London, 
 writing to Lord Burleigh in the year 1588 as 
 follows : " The Bishops of our realm do not 
 (so far as I ever yet heard), nor may not, 
 claim to themselves any other authority 
 than is given them by the statute of the 
 25th of King Henry VIII, recited in the first 
 year of Her Majesty's reign, neither is it 
 reasonable they should make other claim, 
 for if it had pleased Her Majesty with the 
 wisdom of the realm to have used no bishops 
 at all, we could not have complained justly 
 of any defect in our Church." With such 
 ideas as these in vogue, it is not to be wondered 
 at if many of the Puritans dreamed of a 
 Reformed Church in England, after the 
 model of the non-Episcopalian Churches of 
 the Continent and the Presbyterian Churches 
 of Scotland. In 1572 a Church after the 
 Presbyterian model was established at Wands- 
 worth, and a few years later Presbyterianism 
 was definitely set up in the Channel Islands 
 to meet the needs of the numerous French 
 Protestant refugees to be found there. These 
 years may be said to mark the birth of the 
 Presbyterian Church in this country, although 
 there was as yet no very definite severance 
 from the Church of England. We have to 
 note, however, the rise of a Presbyterian 
 wing of the Puritans, a movement which was 
 very fruitful in results at a later period. 
 
 Meanwhile, in the country at large, Puri- 
 tanism was increasing and consolidating its 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 39 
 
 forces. Many of the men whose voices had 
 been silenced continued to preach by means of 
 the pen. It was the age of the pamphleteer, 
 and there appeared from printing presses in 
 various places large numbers of fugitive 
 writings, which exposed, in no measured 
 terms, the condition of things within the 
 Church, and advocated a return to a simpler 
 and more scriptural order. But such a 
 propaganda was only carried out with very 
 great difficulty and danger. The government 
 had all printing presses under observation and 
 limited their number. None were to be 
 set up outside London, Oxford and Cambridge, 
 and all books were to be censored by the 
 Archbishop and the Bishop of London, or 
 some one whom they appointed. In spite of 
 these regulations, however, the Puritans 
 succeeded in setting up printing presses of 
 their own, and often evaded the authorities 
 by moving them rapidly from place to place. 
 Their writings were eagerly bought and 
 read, and were of undoubted influence in 
 spreading the movement. Among the most 
 important of these tracts for the times were 
 Diotrephes, or The State of the Church of 
 England laid open in a Conference, by John 
 Udall, vicar of Kingston-on-Thames, and 
 the famous Martin Marprelate letters, the 
 authorship of which will probably always 
 remain a mystery. These were issued by the 
 same printer, one Waldegrave, and created 
 an immense sensation. They ridiculed the 
 
40 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 pretensions of the clergy, and attacked the 
 whole hierarchical system with bitter satire 
 and burning invective. They were coarse 
 and popular writings, but never quite 
 descended to the scurrility of some of the 
 / opponents of Puritanism. Those chiefly con- 
 I cerned in issuing the Marprelate series were 
 H^Job Throckmorton, a Puritan squire of 
 ' Warwickshire ; John Penry, the Welshman ; 
 and Waldegrave and his successor, John 
 Hodgkins. The work of these men roused 
 the clerical party to keen resentment and 
 reprisals. By the order of Whitgift, Udall 
 was imprisoned until he died, the printing 
 presses were seized, and a ban was put on 
 every kind of Puritan writing. These measures 
 only served to stir to greater activity and to 
 drive still further away from the Church of 
 England the men who could not subscribe 
 to the terms of her rulers. To an increasing 
 number of these it became manifest that no 
 terms were possible with the Church under the 
 existing regime. The longer Elizabeth lived 
 the more insistent became her claims to 
 absolute authority in things ecclesiastical ; 
 and, in urging these claims, she found in 
 Whitgift a fit tool for her purpose. So far as 
 outward appearance went, she won the 
 fight against the Puritans all along the line. 
 Their leaders were deprived of their livings, 
 and great multitudes of them were imprisoned. 
 They had to carry on their propaganda in 
 secret ; their books were confiscated ; and 
 
THE ANGLICAN SETTLEMENT 41 
 
 many of them went in peril of their lives. 
 Here and there men and women were burned 
 for their faith, and in Essex alone some fifty 
 preachers were silenced or deprived. Among 
 those suspended was the excellent George 
 Gifford of Maiden, and his case may be cited 
 as a typical one. Strype, who was certainly 
 no friend of the Puritans in general, says 
 of him : " He was valued much for the good 
 reformation he had made in that market 
 town by his preaching : whereby notorious 
 sins reigned before his coming ; and others 
 had been by his diligence nourished and 
 strengthened in grace and virtue (as the 
 inhabitants in a petition to the Bishop in 
 his behalf had set forth at large), and that in 
 his life he was modest, discreet and unre- 
 provable : that he never used conventicle but 
 ever preached and catechised in the Church." 
 Nothing could be more contrary to the fact 
 than the too common assumption that these 
 early Puritans were vulgar and turbulent 
 men who resisted authority from mere love of 
 strife. They were, on the other hand, the 
 best of the clergy, the men who preached 
 and were at pains to teach the people and 
 carry out the duties of their sacred office. 
 It is among their opponents and persecutors 
 that we have to look for unlearned and 
 ignorant clergy, who neglected their cures, 
 and preyed on the flock instead of feeding it. 
 All the available testimony goes to show 
 that the deprivations and persecutions of 
 
42 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Elizabeth's time really injured the Church by- 
 stripping her of her best workers, and sub- 
 stituting for them men who were a ready 
 prey for the wit and scorn of writers like 
 Marprelate. The fact was abundantly re- 
 cognised at the time and w^ent far to confirm 
 the Puritans in their convictions, and to drive 
 many of them to carry out their position to 
 its logical conclusions by definitely separating 
 themselves from a Church with which they had 
 so little in common. Even at this early period 
 their main object in doing so was to secure 
 freedom to exercise their religion according 
 to their consciences and to purify the Church of 
 abuses. For the most part these men were with- 
 in the Church at the period we have reached, 
 being either Puritans proper who accepted 
 Episcopacy but would reform it, or Presby- 
 terians who saw no hope of reform under 
 an Episcopal system. Outside the Church, 
 Puritanism tended to some form of In- 
 dependency, the development of which we 
 have yet to trace. As to their general attitude, 
 the Puritans are often blamed for being too 
 scrupulous about small matters, such as 
 vestments. In their eyes, however, these 
 were important enough because they involved 
 principles. When principles were at stake 
 they had a very keen sense of duty, and the 
 courage to act up to it. 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 43 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 THE SEPARATISTS 
 
 Puritanism, as we have known it so far, 
 was rather a spirit or temper of mind 
 than a definite movement or organisation. 
 It represented the Protestant tendency within 
 the Church of England, and it was only a 
 few of its extreme advocates who contem- 
 plated the setting up of Churches outside the 
 Anglican pale. For many years to come the" 
 great majority of the Puritans protested 
 against being regarded either as Separatists 
 or Anabaptists. They were nonconforming^ 
 members of the Church of England, in the 
 sense that they accepted the ordinances of 
 the Church, and only separated themselves 
 from what they regarded as its corruptions 
 and disorders. When, however, it became 
 only too apparent that the Court and the 
 Bishops were not of their mind in regard to 
 these corruptions, and were prepared to 
 enforce them upon all alike, an increasing 
 number of the Puritans found themselves 
 driven to reconsider their position, and sought 
 a purer form of Church government and 
 worship, some across the seas in Holland 
 and afterwards in America, and others by 
 setting up separated Churches at home. 
 These Churches took naturally what is known 
 -as a congregational way, and became the 
 
44 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 forerunners of the Baptist and Congregational 
 denominations of modern times. 
 
 The first, and in some respects the greatest, 
 of the Separatists was Robert Browne, a 
 Cambridge man of good family, who, along 
 with his friend and fellow-student Robert 
 
 C Harrison, founded at Norwich what may be 
 regarded as the first Congregational Church 
 outside London in 1580 or 1581. Browne 
 has been the subject of much controversy. 
 He was certainly no hero. When an old 
 man he recanted under pressure, and took 
 office in the Church of England. His fol- 
 lowers naturally enough repudiated the name 
 Brownist, which was often flung at them 
 almost as a term of reproach. But the man 
 was, in every sense, a pioneer. He saw 
 clearly what he wanted, and said clearly 
 what he meant. His books laid the founda- 
 tions of the Congregational system, and he 
 deserves all credit for the work he did. No 
 doubt he owed a good deal to the Anabaptists 
 of Holland, for it is now proved that he had 
 visited them before he began to write. But 
 he was no slavish imitator of them, and he 
 altogether repudiated their excesses and 
 their doctrine of the sacraments. Browne 
 was a genius, and had all the defects of his 
 qualities as such. Therefore, while we re- 
 cognise his limitations, we must not judge 
 him too harshly. 
 
 His teaching is to be found in two books. 
 The first and most important of them was 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 45 
 
 entitled, A Book which showeth the Life and 
 Manners of all true Christians ; and the second, 
 A Treatise of Reformation without tarrying 
 for Anie. Browne here lays down the funda- 
 mental Congregational principle that the 
 members of a Christian Church must be 
 Christians, and that the one and only ruler 
 of the Church is Jesus Christ Himself. " The 
 Church planted or gathered is a company or 
 number of Christians or believers, which, by 
 a willing covenant made with their God, are 
 under the government of God and Christ, and 
 keep his laws in one holy communion : 
 because Christ hath redeemed them unto 
 holiness and happiness for ever, from v/hich 
 they were fallen by the sin of Adam." " The 
 Church Government is the Lordship of Christ 
 in the communion of his offices : whereby his 
 people obey to his will, and have mutual use 
 of their graces and callings, to further their 
 godliness and welfare." ("A book which 
 showeth," § 35.) Under this headship of Christ, ! 
 Churches were to be self-governing; but, | 
 where an individual Church had difficulty, I V 
 matters were to be referred to a Synod, ? 
 consisting, not of delegates, but of all the! 
 Churches meeting together. The officers of'^ , 
 the Church — pastors, teachers and elders-H V 
 were to form a permanent Church Council, ' 
 for matters of advice and discipline. Their 
 authority, however, was not derived from 
 the people but from " the office and message of 
 God," and it was the function of the Church 
 
46 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 to decide to whom this office and message 
 was entrusted, and to set them apart for 
 their special work. Thus it will be seen 
 that Browne's system was not pure Congre- 
 gationalism, but contained an element of 
 Presbyterianism, though he had no sympathy 
 whatever with those who, like Cartwright, 
 sought to set up Presbyterianism within 
 Episcopacy. His importance lies in the 
 fact that he first gave ordered and articulate 
 expression to those more democratic and 
 spiritual ideas of Churchmanship which re- 
 sulted from the study of the New Testament 
 model, and from comparison between the 
 Churches there described and the Church as 
 it was then known in England. 
 
 That these ideas were not confined to one 
 part of the country is indicated by the 
 records which have been preserved of a 
 Separatist Church which met in London as 
 early as the year 1571. Its members describe 
 themselves as "a poor congregation whom 
 God hath separated from the Church of 
 England and from the mingled and false 
 worshipping therein." They mention one, 
 Richard Fitz, as their minister, and Thomas 
 Rowland, deacon, both of whom, they say, 
 pined to death in prison. This little com- 
 munity was soon broken up by the authorities, 
 but the ideas it represented were not to be 
 easily suppressed. It had successors in 
 different parts of London, sporadic gatherings 
 of faithful men and women who met together 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 47 
 
 to worship God in accordance with conscience 
 and in defiance of the law. 
 
 It is in connection with one of these 
 gatherings in Islington (1586) that we meet 
 with the names of Greenwood and Barrow, 
 two of the most famous of the early Separatist 
 leaders. These men, like Browne, had both 
 been trained at Cambridge. Barrow was a 
 young barrister of dissolute life who had 
 been converted by the chance hearing of a 
 sermon and became a Puritan. As his kins- 
 man, Lord Bacon, says, " He made a leap 
 from a vain and libertine youth to a precise- 
 ness in the highest degree." His new de- 
 parture brought him into close intimacy with 
 Greenwood, who had imbibed Puritan 
 opinions under Cartwright at Cambridge, 
 but had afterwards resigned his orders 
 in the Church of England and become a 
 Separatist. He was a leader in the London 
 congregation, and was arrested by the order 
 of Whitgift. Barrow went to visit him in 
 the Clink prison in 1586, and was himself 
 illegally detained. The two men were com- 
 mitted to the Fleet in the following year and 
 remained there until their execution at 
 Tyburn in 1593. They were indicted under 
 the Act of 1581, which was really directed 
 against Roman Catholics, but became now a 
 very convenient instrument for dealing with 
 Nonconformists of all kinds. 
 
 Again and again during their imprisonment 
 Barrow and Greenwood were examined as to 
 
48 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 their views, sometimes before the Arch- 
 bishop's Court of High Commission at 
 Lambeth and sometimes before the Council 
 at Whitehall, under Burghley, the Lord 
 Treasurer. The records of these examina- 
 tions are extant, and form one of the most 
 moving recitals of this period of persecution. 
 It is significant of the temper of the times 
 that even the saintly Bishop Andrewes took 
 part in the work of baiting these poor men, 
 though it seems to have been very little to 
 his taste. The appearance of the culprits 
 was not altogether creditable. They spoke 
 harshly, and often unadvisedly, and were 
 easily set down by authority as foolish 
 fanatics. But it must be remembered that 
 their spirit was broken by their long and 
 miserable confinement, and their pitiful 
 appeals for considerate treatment met with 
 no response. They were bullied and brow- 
 beaten, but throughout it all their convictions 
 remained unshaken, and they gave no ground 
 for any charge of treason or disloyalty. In 
 the end they were subjected to the torture 
 of being twice taken to the place of execution, 
 and, when the rope was round their necks, re- 
 prieved amid the plaudits of the crowd. The 
 third time no reprieve came. They made an 
 excellent end and prayed for the Queen's 
 Majesty. 
 
 These men were only two out of some three- 
 score and twelve persons who were imprisoned 
 in the later years of Elizabeth for holding 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 49 
 
 Separatist opinions. In 1592 a petition was 
 presented to Parliament from some fifty- 
 six of these. It is said to have been written 
 by Barrow, and is a trenchant indictment 
 of '' the prelates of this land and their 
 complices." " These godless men have put 
 the blood of war about them in the day of the 
 peace and truce which this whole land pro- 
 fesseth to hold with Jesus Christ and his 
 servants. Bishops Bonner, Story, Weston 
 dealt not after this sort. For those whom 
 they committed close they would also either 
 feed or permit to be fed by others : and they 
 brought them in short space openly into 
 Smithfield to end their misery and to begin 
 their never-ending joy. Whereas Bishop 
 Elmar, Dr. Stanhope, and Mr. Justice Young, 
 with the rest of that persecuting and blood- 
 thirsty faculty, will do neither of these. No 
 felons, no murderers, no traitors in this land 
 are thus dealt with. There are many of us, 
 by the mercies of God, still out of their 
 hands. The former holy exercise and pro- 
 fession we purpose not to leave by the assist- 
 ance of God. We have as good warrant to 
 reject the ordinances of Antichrist, and labour 
 for the recovery of Christ's holy institutions 
 as our fathers and brethren in Queen Mary's 
 days had to do the like. And we doubt not 
 if our cause were truly known unto Her 
 Majesty and your wisdoms, but we should 
 find greater favour than they did, whereas 
 our estate now is far more lamentable. And, 
 
50 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 therefore, we humbly and earnestly crave 
 of Her Majesty and your Lordships — both 
 for ourselves abroade and for our brethren 
 now in miserable captivity — but just and 
 equal trial according unto Her Majesty's laws. 
 If we prove not our adversaries to be in a 
 most pestilent and godless course, both in 
 regard of their offices and their proceedings 
 in them, and ourselves to be in the right way, 
 we desire- not to have the benefit of Her 
 Majesty's true and faithful subjects, which of 
 all earthly favours we account to be one of the 
 greatest. Are we malefactors ? Are we any- 
 wise undutiful unto our Prince ? Maintain 
 we any errors ? Let us then be judicially 
 convicted thereof and delivered to the civil 
 authority. But let not these bloody men 
 both accuse, condemn, and closely murther 
 after this sort, contrary to all law, equity, 
 and conscience, where they alone are the 
 plaintiffs, the accusers, the judges, and the 
 executioners of their most fearful and barbar- 
 ous tyranny. They should not by the laws 
 of this land go any farther in cases of religion 
 than their own ecclesiastical censure, and 
 then refer us to the civil power." 
 
 A little more than a month after the exe- 
 cution of Barrow and Greenwood, the Bishops 
 found another victim in John Penry. This 
 was a young Welshman who had renounced 
 Romanism while at the University, but had 
 become a Separatist only a short time before. 
 He was specially marked for trial as the 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 51 
 
 reputed author of the Marprelate tracts, 
 whose biting satires on the hierarchy had 
 become inconveniently popular. Though 
 Penry was probably not their author, he had 
 much to do with their publication, and 
 suffered accordingly. 
 
 The chief effect of these persecutions was 
 to scatter the seeds of Separatism yet more 
 widely. There now began that series of 
 emigrations which culminated in the sailing 
 of the Pilgrim Fathers to the New World 
 and reacted in many ways on the Independent 
 Churches at home. The Conventicle Act of 
 1592 drove the Separatists abroad and 
 threatened them with death if they returned. 
 Some of them took the risk of remaining, but 
 many of them found a home in Amsterdam 
 and set up an Independent Church there under 
 the leadership of Henry Ainsworth and 
 Francis Johnson. Holland was a welcome 
 place of refuge for the persecuted in these 
 troubled times. The Reformed Evangelical 
 Church had full liberty there, and the sym- 
 pathies of the people were with the Noncon- 
 formists of England. Considerable com- 
 panies of them from some twenty-nine 
 English counties went over during the 
 years from 1595 to 1620. It was a band of 
 exiles from Gainsborough and Scrooby that 
 ultimately formed the Church at Leyden 
 under John Robinson, and it was from that 
 Church that the founders of New England 
 sailed in the Mayflower, 
 
52 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 But the story of the Church in Holland is 
 not altogether an edifying one. The In- 
 dependent or Congregational system is one 
 that requires a truly Christian standard of 
 conduct if it is to be successfully maintained. 
 Where this is absent it invariably breaks 
 down. In the old days, as is often the case 
 still, the. system was too fine for the weak 
 men and women who were called upon to 
 administer it. Jealousies of a petty personal 
 kind broke out. There were unseemly wrangles 
 and factions, and the spirit shown was narrow 
 and censorious to a degree. For all that, 
 however, the movement was not really re- 
 tarded. It was too great a thing to be injured 
 permanently by the personal defection of a 
 few. In the free air of a new country men had 
 time to mature their ideas and to put them 
 into shape. Books and pamphlets were 
 written which carried the seed of the new 
 doctrine far afield, and the exile nourished 
 a freer and more vigorous type of religion, 
 which speedily reacted on the Separatist 
 communities of the mother-land. 
 
 It is in connection with the Amsterdam 
 Church that we come across the beginnings 
 of the Baptist denomination as distinguished 
 from the Independent. There had come 
 over with the Gainsborough exiles one, John 
 Smyth, who had been lecturer or preacher 
 to the City of Lincoln, but had been deposed 
 from his office for holding Separatist views. 
 He was a man of singular but erratic genius 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 53 
 
 and of an excellent Christian temper. He 
 had a bold and open mind, and did not 
 hesitate to follow wherever he thought the 
 truth led him. At Amsterdam he, at first, 
 practised as a physician, but very soon 
 became the leader of what was known as the 
 Second Church there. There is some doubt 
 indeed whether he ever belonged to the Church 
 of Johnson and Ainsworth. Smyth was not 
 a man who could easily range himself with 
 others. He had already published several 
 small books and pamphlets maintaining the 
 Brownist theory of Church government and 
 defending the apostolic and primitive 
 character of the new order. In 1609 he I 
 advanced upon these by issuing The Char- \ 
 acter of the Beast, in which he definitely ^ 
 set forth his Baptist views. His position, / 
 briefly, was that infants ought not to be/\ 
 baptized, because it is not enjoined in the . 
 New Testament, nor are there any examples \/ 
 of the practice, and because Christ com- /\ 
 manded to make disciples by teaching, and 
 that only afterwards were they to be baptized, y/ 
 Smyth immediately proceeded to put his J\ 
 theory into practice by baptizing first him- 
 self, then one of his most prominent ad- 
 herents, Mr. Helwys, and then the rest of his 
 friends, all on their individual confessions. 
 Later he came to doubt whether he had 
 done right, and had himself and his friends 
 rebaptized by the Memnonite Church in 
 Amsterdam. 
 

 54 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 At this time the conflict between Calvinism 
 and Arminianism was at its height. The 
 Independents were strongly- Calvinistic, but 
 Smyth as strongly asserted the Arminian 
 position. He maintained that " infants are 
 conceived and born in innocency without 
 sin, and so dying are undoubtedly saved," . 
 and that " God doth not predestinate any | 
 man to destruction." In these bold opinions 
 he was followed by Helwys ; and when, 
 after his death, Helwys transferred the 
 Baptist Congregation to Newgate Street, 
 London, this little church, under his leader- 
 ship, had the honour of being the first place 
 in England where absolute liberty of religion 
 and conscience was proclaimed. It was 
 by the Baptists, in the first instance, that 
 toleration was practised and that the full 
 doctrine of religious freedom was maintained. 
 ^John Smyth's confession of 1612 contained 
 the words : " The magistrate is not by virtue 
 of his ofhce to meddle with religion, or matters 
 of conscience, to force or compel men to this 
 or that form of religion or doctrine." And 
 the reason given for this was, that " Christ 
 only is the King and lawgiver of the Church 
 and Conscience." This position followed 
 directly from the stress laid by the Baptists 
 on conversion as something entirely between 
 a man and his God. It could not in any 
 way be forced by outside authority, and so 
 no outside authority had any right over a 
 man's conscience and faith. At the same 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 55 
 
 time men must respect the religious views 
 of others, as being at least equally sincere 
 with their own. It was a long time before 
 this spirit of tolerance and freedom was 
 accepted by any section of the Church, but 
 the Baptists have the credit of being the 
 first to state and recommend it. 
 
 In this early period, as in all their later 
 history, Baptists and Independents accepted 
 the same system of Church government. 
 There was a good deal of elasticity in organisa- 
 tion, but on the main principles writers on 
 both sides were agreed. That Christ was ,,>^ 
 the sole Head of the Church, that all the -K 
 members of the Church must be Christians, \^ 
 that the government of the Church should 
 be in the hands of its members, and that the \X 
 State had no right of interference — these '«A 
 were elementary points on which the Separa- 
 tists of both sections were at one. Hostile 
 writers of later date were not content with 
 these simplicities, but ascribed to the 
 Churches in Holland, and to their friends in 
 this country, the most extraordinary excesses 
 both of doctrine and conduct. Doubtless 
 there were many connected with these 
 Churches who gave some colour to the 
 charge. The time was one of great mental 
 unrest, and of the breaking of many old 
 bonds, and the Separatists shared to the full 
 the spirit of their age. Nor is the atmosphere 
 of persecution generally productive of 
 sobriety and common-sense views. It is 
 
56 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 therefore much to the credit of these early 
 Nonconformists that, so far as their extant 
 writings are concerned, there should be so 
 little in them that is merely extravagant. 
 They stated their position in a sober and 
 judicial fashion, and in its main essentials 
 it is the position which their representatives 
 and successors have maintained ever since. 
 The difficulty about it, then as now, was 
 that the position represented an ideal which 
 required something more than ordinary 
 human nature to work it. It must be ad- 
 mitted that the Separatists did not always 
 live up to their professions, and that in their 
 ideal of the Church and of Christian life 
 there is something almost " too great and 
 good for human nature's daily food." For 
 all that, however, the movement they repre- 
 sent was a very great one, and must be given 
 its due place among all the wonderful 
 activities of the Elizabethan age. Its great- 
 ness, as well as its limitations, may be seen 
 in the history of those emigrants who tried 
 to found a Church and State after their own 
 hearts across the Atlantic. In their zeal for 
 pure religion, their love for education, and 
 their high standard of civilisation, the 
 Puritans of New England showed what their 
 system was capable of when it had free 
 play. If it was marred by much intolerance 
 and a certain theological narrowness, this 
 only serves as an indication that it was not 
 altogether emancipated from the spirit of 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 57 
 
 the time. The Separatists were no worse in 
 these respects than their contemporaries, 
 w^hile in others they were so far superior that 
 the truths for which they stood have gradually 
 won their way to almost universal recognition 
 and respect. Their representative men were 
 not, as is so often suggested, common and 
 unlearned. Let it be repeated again that 
 they were men of culture and almost in- 
 variably of University education. They had 
 reached their position through thought and 
 study, and they were able to hold it in- 
 telligently against all comers. And, what 
 was perhaps more important, they had 
 behind them a living Christian experience 
 which fortified them against persecution 
 and ridicule alike. , 
 
 The finest example of early Nonconformity! 
 is undoubtedly the Church at Ley den in| 
 Holland. Under the guidance of John' 
 Robinson, himself the noblest of the Separa- 
 tists, this Church became a striking object- 
 lesson as to what Nonconformist principles 
 could accomplish when fairly translated into 
 action. Governor Bradford writes of them : 
 " They lived together in love and peace 
 all their days without any considerable 
 difference or any disturbance that grew 
 thereby, but such as was easily healed in 
 love, and so they continued until with mutual 
 consent they removed into New England." 
 There is abundant testimony to the same 
 effect from other writers, and the history 
 
58 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of this Church is- one that every Noncon- 
 formist may look back to with pride and satis- 
 faction. Robinson was a vokiminous writer 
 and a keen controversiaHst. But of all the 
 religious writers of his time he is distinguished 
 for breadth of spirit and charity of speech. He 
 was firm in his own convictions and sure of 
 his own mind, but he was willing to allow 
 the same liberty to others that he claimed 
 himself, and could realise the spiritual brother- 
 hood of those who were widely divided from 
 him in opinion. Robinson was largely re- 
 sponsible for drawing up the covenant of 
 the Mayflower, the first real charter of civil 
 and religious liberty, and his broad outlook 
 and generous temper are illustrated by the 
 oft-quoted words in his final address to the 
 Pilgrims on their departure from Leyden : 
 " I am very confident that the Lord hath 
 more truth and light yet to break forth out 
 of his Holy word." 
 
 Very similar in temper to Robinson was 
 Henry Jacob, who returned from Holland in 
 1616 and founded a Congregational Church 
 at Southwark. Jacob was an Oxford man, 
 who had played some part in the Puritan 
 controversy and had become a Separatist 
 by sheer force of circumstances. The Church 
 he founded was the first of the kind to take 
 root on English soil. After Jacob's death in 
 1624 it had famous pastors in John Lathrop, 
 Praise -God Barbon or Barebones, Henry 
 Jessey and Hanserd Knollys, both Cambridge 
 
THE SEPARATISTS 59 
 
 graduates. It has special importance also 
 for the history of the Baptists, for out of it at 
 least five Baptist churches sprang, and the 
 IMother Church itself became Baptist in 
 principle, first with an open, and afterwards 
 with a strict membership. Though the 
 Church practised believers' baptism, the 
 method was not that of immersion, which 
 only became general among the strict Baptists 
 about 1638. The history of this Church 
 illustrates the close relation between Baptists 
 and Independents in these early daj^s, and 
 shows how the question of Baptism, though 
 the subject of acute controversy, was dealt 
 with at first in such a way as to cause no 
 more than a friendly separation of Churches. 
 The Baptists formally adopted immersion in a 
 series of articles drawn up in 1644, and from 
 that time onwards have been a separate 
 denomination. At the time of which we are 
 speaking the differences between them and 
 the Independents were not such as to preclude 
 friendly relations. In his controversy with 
 Helwys, Robinson maintained that true 
 baptism is that which is administered in a 
 congregation of believers with the outward 
 baptism of water and the inward baptism of 
 the spirit. But he allowed at the same time 
 that even in an apostate Church baptism 
 was a spiritual ordinance. Helwys, too, 
 held that infants could be saved by the 
 redemptive work of Christ though they were 
 incapable of baptism. Their views were 
 
i 
 
 60 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 by no means mutually exclusive, and might 
 very well form a basis of reunion between 
 the two Churches concerned. 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 LAUD AND THE PURITANS 
 
 During the closing years of Elizabeth's 
 reign, while the Separatists and Pres- 
 byterians were banished or silenced, the 
 Puritans within the Church enjoyed a period 
 of comparative repose. There is evidence 
 that they grew rapidly both in numbers and 
 influence, and when James I came to the 
 throne in 1603 they evidently hoped to 
 obtain some redress of their grievances. 
 The new King, on his arrival in London, 
 was presented with a petition signed by 
 some eight hundred ministers, which set 
 forth their demands in the most moderate 
 terms. This Millenary Petition, as it was 
 called, asked for some relaxation of the 
 laws enforcing objectionable ceremonies ; for 
 the suppression of Popish doctrines ; for 
 the guarding of the ministry against 
 unworthy men ; and for reform of the 
 ecclesiastical courts. At the same time, the 
 petitioners expressly disclaimed any desire 
 to tamper with Episcopacy, or to introduce 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 61 
 
 a Presbyterian system of Church govern- 
 ment. This petition was followed by others, 
 notably by one from the Congregational 
 exiles in Amsterdam. James felt their signi- 
 ficance, and it was quite in accordance with 
 his character that he should call a Conference 
 to consider whether there was anything in 
 the settlement of the Church which " might 
 deserve a review and an amendment." This 
 Hampton Court Conference met in January 
 1604, with the King as President. The 
 Bishops and the Puritans were both vvell 
 represented, and the latter were allowed to 
 state their case. They obtained little for 
 their pains, however, save a succession of 
 tirades from the King. His summary dealing 
 with them greatly pleased the Bishops, who 
 declared that he spoke with the special 
 assistance of the Holy Ghost, and that there 
 had been no such king since Christ's day. 
 The only practical outcome of the Confer- 
 ence was some slight alterations in the Prayer 
 Book and the preparation of the Authorised 
 Version of the Bible. 
 
 It soon became evident that James would 
 be a ready tool in the hands of the Bishops. 
 He w^as easily flattered, and found it quite 
 appropriate that he should claim divine 
 rights. In consequence all w^ho refused to 
 conform to the order which he represented 
 must suffer. In 1604 the Convocation of 
 Canterbury adopted certain canons ecclesias- 
 tical which greatly increased the stringency 
 
62 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of subscription and imposed fresh penalties 
 against nonconformity and schism. Though 
 the Puritans contended that these could not 
 be enforced save by an Act of Parliament, 
 enforced they were, and some three hundred 
 clergy were deprived or silenced. There 
 followed a period of stagnation, when the 
 King and his ecclesiastics had things all 
 their own way. Puritanism was on the 
 decline, and there grew up v/ithin the Church 
 a new party which began to insist on the 
 divine right of Episcopacy, to revive Roman 
 ceremonial, and to invest the clergy with the 
 powers of a priesthood. The Lord's table 
 became an altar, and the full doctrine of 
 transubstantiation was taught. This move- 
 ment began during the archbishopric of 
 Bancroft. In 1610 he was succeeded by 
 Abbot, and for a time the measures against 
 the Puritans were relaxed, and Separatism 
 began once more to hold up its head. Henry 
 Jacob came over from Leyden and organised 
 a Congregational Church in London. At the 
 same time there arose a better feeling between 
 Separatists and Puritans, and a tendency to 
 make common cause under the pressure of 
 persecution. Puritanism began to revive 
 and spread rapidly once more, largely owing 
 to the growth of the belief in the Romanising 
 temper of the King. 
 
 With the death of James and the accession 
 of Charles in 1625 the situation again changed. 
 Charles was determined to be head of the 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 63 
 
 Church in deed as well as in name and to put 
 down all irregularities with a heav}^ hand. 
 He found in Laud an instrument suited to 
 the occasion, and the two together entered 
 upon a policy that could only end in their 
 entire undoing. Laud was a true son of 
 the Catholic revival, and his aim was to 
 carry it to its logical conclusion. He was a 
 devout man to whom his religion was the 
 greatest of realities, and he had the kind of 
 ruthless sincerity that comes very near to 
 fanaticism. In all he did he thought he 
 was doing God service, and even his cruelties 
 could be covered by the motive that prompted 
 them. He fought Puritanism to the death 
 both on doctrinal and political grounds. Him- 
 self an Arminian, he detested the Calvinistic 
 theology of the Puritan clergy, and e.s a 
 believer in the divine right of kings he found 
 natural enemies in all those who stood for 
 religious and civil liberty. He soon made 
 it evident that there was no room for Puritan- 
 ism in the English Church as he conceived 
 it. The Puritans themselves agreed with 
 him, and began in greater numbers to make 
 common cause with the Separatists. In 1629 
 and 1630 there were large emigrations of 
 Puritans to the Western world, where they 
 founded settlements in Massachusetts Bay 
 and along the Connecticut River. But that 
 the spirit which led them was not quite that 
 of the earlier Nonconformists they always 
 maintained. This is evidenced by the well- 
 
64 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 known farewell words of Francis Higginson : 
 " We will not say, as the Separatists were 
 wont to say at their leaving of England, 
 ' Farewell Babylon, farewell Rome,' but we 
 will say, ' Farewell dear England, farewell 
 the Church of God in England and all the 
 Christian friends there.' We do not go to 
 New England as Separatists from the Church 
 of England, though we cannot but separate 
 from the corruptions in it." 
 
 Laud became Archbishop of Canterbury 
 in 1633, and at once set about preparing a 
 scheme of Church reform. There was no 
 question as to the need for it, and the in- 
 tentions of the new Archbishop were ex- 
 cellent, if his mode of carrying them out 
 left something to be desired. We read 
 of drunken, immoral and absentee clergy, 
 of churches that were used for fairs and 
 cockfights, of slovenly services and the 
 neglect of preaching. All this Laud very 
 speedily put an end to, and introduced a 
 decency and order into the public services 
 of religion such as had hardly been known 
 before. At the same time, however, he went 
 further, and aimed at a uniformity of Catholic 
 ritual that was intensely abhorrent to the 
 whole Puritan section of the Church. Tlie 
 ^ wearing of the surplice, the railing in of the 
 /communion table, and the use of the sign 
 ^ of the cross at baptism were demanded 
 of all ministers, and the least irregularity 
 in the observance of the rubric caused the 
 
 K 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 65 
 
 offender to be arraigned before the Bishop 
 or the Court of High Commission. A regular 
 service of espionage was established through- 
 out the whole country, and contumacy was 
 punished in some cases with fearful severity. 
 The result was, as we have seen, that the 
 best of the Puritan clergy were driven out 
 of the country, and the whole movement 
 for the time was crushed. Laud had his 
 way and obtained the outward uniformity X 
 he sought, but it was at a great cost. He 
 made a wilderness and called it peace. 
 
 His activities, however, were not confined 
 to the Church. Along with Strafford and 
 Buckingham, he supported the King in the 
 assertion of his divine rights and in his 
 effort to rule and raise taxes without the aid 
 of Parliament. For eleven years a Parlia- 
 ment was dispensed with, and when, in the 
 stress of the agitation against the Ship-money, 
 the King was forced to summon one, he 
 found it to be of a very stubborn temper. 
 The fact is that Laud's religious policy had 
 by this time reacted sharply on the political 
 situation. The Puritan temper was not 
 altogether to be suppressed, and was by no 
 means confined to the clergy. When the 
 latter were silenced or banished their work 
 was carried on by the laity, and naturally 
 enough took a political complexion. At 
 the same time Laud's treatment of the 
 Puritans within the Church had served to 
 revive Separatism once more. Puritans and 
 
66 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Separatists made common cause under per- 
 secution, and not a few of the former 
 passed over into the ranks of the latter, and 
 their action was but the logical result of their 
 protest against Laud. Others of them, though 
 they did not go so far as this, showed in their 
 writings a new sympathy with, and under- 
 standing of, the Separatist position. The 
 Puritans within the Church were in an ano- 
 malous position, and when Laud's policy in 
 Scotland drove them into the arms of the 
 Presbyterians, as we shall see later, they 
 were easily absorbed by them. Meanwhile 
 the Independents grew stronger and more 
 determined, and were preparing themselves 
 for the great part which they were shortly 
 to play. In spite of the vigilance of Laud, 
 new Separatist churches were continually 
 springing up, and formed a training-ground 
 for the men who became the backbone of 
 the Revolution, men like Hampden who 
 raised the revolt against the Ship-money, 
 and Pym and Cromwell in the Long Parlia- 
 ment. Both Puritans and Independents 
 have been blamed for so easily turning their 
 activities into political channels. But the 
 fact is that they had no alternative. They 
 must either abandon their principles alto- 
 gether, or use the weapons which the folly 
 of the King and his advisers put into their 
 hands. And, in a very real sense, the political 
 struggle was also a religious one. It was for 
 freedom of conscience that men had now to 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 67 
 
 fight, and the cause is sacred. Like all 
 earthly things, it was mingled with much 
 that was evil, but the best men on the Parlia- 
 ment side in the Civil War never quite lest the 
 sense of the spiritual issues that were at stake. 
 It may be convenient here to attempt 
 some brief estimate of the Puritans in 
 England — of the work they did and the 
 spirit they represented. Until comparatively 
 recent times we knew little of them save 
 through hostile channels, and it is certain 
 that they are more easily caricatured than 
 understood. But if we judge of them at 
 their best, rather than in the period of their 
 decline, we may say, without fear of con- 
 tradiction, that they represented the salt of 
 English society in their day, and that the 
 protest they raised against moral and 
 political corruption on the one hand, and 
 religious formalism on the other, was alto- 
 gether timely. It is a mistake to imagine 
 that they were common and boorish men. 
 Their leaders, as we have seen, were nearly 
 all members of one or other of the Uni- 
 versities, and some of them belonged to the 
 best families in the land. They had a real 
 zeal for education, as witness the broad 
 foundations of the educational system they 
 laid in America, and they were not without 
 appreciation of the fine arts. If proof of 
 these things is required, it can be found in 
 the study of the life of Milton, in the exquisite 
 picture of Colonel Hutchinson drawn by his 
 c 2 
 
68 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 wife, and in the family life of John Winthrop 
 as revealed in his letters. Whatever may 
 have been the case at a later period, the 
 Puritans of the early days of the seventeenth 
 century were by no means averse to sport, 
 or to any of the innocent amenities of life. 
 So far from being sour fanatics, they were 
 often skilled in music, and entered with zest 
 into the amusements of country life. If they 
 refused to read the book of sports on Sundays, 
 it was because they believed that it tended 
 directly to contravene the commands of 
 God. For they took their religion seriously 
 and believed in the personal rule of God 
 in human things. They were at once mystics 
 and men of affairs. They practised the 
 habit of prayer and of communion with the 
 unseen, and they derived from it a strength 
 and a wisdom which they were not slow to 
 use. They had a high moral standard, and 
 the abuse of it led, no doubt, to overcensori- 
 ousness and a self - righteous spirit. But 
 this was not until they had lost something 
 of the freshness of their faith, and until their 
 spirit had become hardened into a system. 
 It must be remembered that they were 
 fighters all the time. The spirit of protest 
 entered into their blood. Many of them 
 suffered grievously from persecution, and it 
 w^as almost inevitable that they should 
 become soured and hardened. This, how- 
 ever, was their misfortune rather than their 
 fault. The wonder is that they kept for so 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 69 
 
 long the purity of their ideals, and that 
 they were ever able to carry them out into 
 action. It is commonly said that they failed, 
 but this is only half the truth. They were in 
 advance of their age, and they moved too 
 quickly and too thoroughly, and in the flood 
 of the reaction that was bound to come, 
 much of their work was destroyed. But 
 their spirit has never been quite lost from 
 English life. The movement they repre- 
 sented, like all such movements, suffered 
 from success. This brought into prominence 
 numbers of self-seeking and interested men 
 who were quite insincere and caused the 
 whole system to fall into discredit. It was 
 a case of corruptio optimi pessima. In the 
 time of which we are speaking it was im- 
 possible to separate religion from politics, 
 and the Puritans stood for the religious view 
 of a man's political relations and duties. 
 They were the champions of the rights of 
 the people, of religious and civil liberties, 
 and, the best of them, of toleration. They 
 drew both their ideals and their inspiration 
 from the Bible, and they had drunk deep 
 of its spirit. But in thinking that they could 
 retain their position and remain within the 
 Church of England they made a great mis- 
 take. Their attitude was utterly uncongenial 
 to the atmosphere of Anglican Catholicism 
 and those of them who had the courage of 
 their convictions and became Separatists 
 were at least logical. In the political 
 
70 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 troubles that gathered during the reign of 
 Charles some of them may have found a brief 
 respite, but the ultimate severance from the 
 Church was bound to come. Of the Puritans 
 as a whole we may say with Carlyle, that 
 they represent " the last of all our heroisms. 
 No nobler heroism ever transacted itself 
 on this earth." 
 
 The Long Parliament met in November 
 1640. It was called in order to supply the 
 King with money, the need for which, owing 
 to the Scotch War, had become pressing. 
 But it met in no complaisant mood, and at 
 once set about the business of dealing with 
 grievances. The early debates showed 
 clearly enough the kind of bitter fruit which 
 Laud's policy was beginning to bear. Earlier 
 in the year Convocation had adopted the 
 notorious Book of Canons, and these were at 
 once made the subject of attack. The battle 
 was fought mainly round Canon VI, which 
 imposed what came to be known as 
 the " Et Cetera " oath. It enacted that all 
 clergy, masters of arts, graduates in divinity, 
 law or medicine, all registrars, proctors, 
 actuaries and schoolmasters should swear 
 that they would never consent to alter the 
 government of the Church by archbishops, 
 bishops, deans and archdeacons et cetera 
 " as it now stands established and as by right 
 it ought to stand." This " et cetera*^" was 
 held to be an attempt to commit men un- 
 wittingly to anything which the extreme 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 71 
 
 Anglicans might wish, and was strongly 
 resented b}^ the Puritans. The debate led 
 to the appointment of a Committee of 
 Twenty-four to prepare a declaration on 
 the state of the kingdom, and the Canons 
 were referred to the Grand Committee on 
 Religion. 
 
 Meanwhile, the release and return to London 
 of some of Laud's Puritan prisoners had 
 greatly inflamed religious animosities. As 
 an expression of this, the Root and Branch )/x 
 Petition was drawn up and presented to ^^^ 
 Parliament in December 1640. It demanded 
 the total abolition of Episcopacy, and was 
 widely supported in London and the home 
 counties. It gave rise to other petitions 
 asking for reform rather than abolition, and 
 the debates in the House showed pretty 
 clearly the widespread objection against the 
 existing ecclesiastical system due to the 
 political power of the Bishops, the Arminian 
 theology, innovations tending to Popery, and 
 the persecution of the Puritans and Non- 
 conformists. This was followed in January ^ 
 by the Ministers' Petition and Remonstrance, 
 setting forth the grievances of the Puritan ^^V^ 
 clergy, and in May by the Root and Branch /V^ 
 Bill, described as "an Act for the utter 
 abolishing and taking away of all archbishops, 
 bishops, their chancellors, commissaries, deans, 
 deans and chapters, archdeacons, prebend- 
 aries, chanters and canons and all other their 
 under officers." The Bill was read a second 
 
72 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 time and referred to a Committee of the 
 whole House, where, after long debate, it 
 remained, being obscured by more pressing 
 political matters. The debates showed, 
 however, the great desire for reform of the 
 Church which now seemed to possess men of 
 all parties, and the strength both in numbers 
 and influence of those who wished this 
 reform to proceed along scriptural and 
 apostolic lines. 
 
 It was in the spring of this same year that 
 the King's most trusted adviser, Strafford, was 
 executed. Laud had also been committed 
 to the Tower and was awaiting the same 
 fate. The Scotch War and the rebellion in 
 Ireland had both served to stimulate the 
 distrust of the King which was now very 
 generally felt. While ecclesiastical questions 
 had reached a kind of deadlock political 
 passions were rising, and the divisions which 
 were soon to turn the country into two armed 
 camps were making themselves felt. 
 
 In the autumn the House of Commons 
 Jy» resolved to draw up a grand Remonstrance 
 on the state of the kingdom, which was 
 intended to be at once a warning to the 
 King and his advisers, and an appeal to the 
 people. The Remonstrance began with an 
 exhaustive review of events during the 
 King's reign. It attributed the grievances 
 of which complaint was made to Papists, 
 Bishops and other evil counsellors of the 
 King. It detailed the hasty dissolution of the 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 73 
 
 early Parliaments of the reign, the breaches 
 of privilege, the forced loans, the tyranny 
 of the Star Chamber and High Commission, 
 the deeds of Strafford and Laud, and the 
 irregular ways of raising money, as chief 
 causes of the grievance so widely felt. 
 Against these evil deeds of the Court it set 
 the good deeds of Parliament, and referred to 
 the execution of Strafford, the abolition 
 of arbitrary Courts, and of illegal ways of 
 raising funds, the Triennial Act and other 
 reforms. For the future it outlined a pro- 
 gramme which included a curtailment of the 
 temporal and political power of the Bishops, 
 the removing of oppressions in religion and 
 the prohibition of " unnecessary ceremonies." 
 It provided for calling a synod of divines 
 to settle these matters, and charged the King 
 to remove from his councils all who would 
 not carry out the wishes of Parliament as 
 thus defined. The debates on the Remon- 
 strance were long and fierce, but it was 
 eventually carried by a small majority. 
 Had it not been carried, Cromwell said " he 
 would have sold all that he had, and never 
 have seen England any more." The Re- 
 monstrance was presented to the King, and 
 shortly afterwards was published. It con- 
 stituted an appeal against the King to the 
 nation. The effect of it was undoubtedly to 
 strengthen the hands of the Puritans. The 
 King as usual temporised, and showed no 
 sign of complying with the terms of Parlia- 
 
74 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 ment. His real answer was the decision 
 to impeach the five members, Pym, Hampden, 
 Holies, Haselrige and Strode. While the 
 Lords were debating the legality of the 
 impeachment the King took the law into his 
 own hands. On January 4, 1642, he went to 
 the House of Commons with an armed 
 force to arrest the five members. Pym, 
 who was always well informed about Court 
 affairs, had received warning, and Charles 
 found that his birds had flown. He had 
 committed a fatal blunder, and its failure 
 spelt his ruin. From that time forward, 
 as even Clarendon admits, many of Charles' 
 friends turned against him. War was now 
 inevitable, and the few months that inter- 
 vened were spent by both parties in trying 
 to find points of advantage. In some respects 
 Parliament was as unscrupulous and uncon- 
 stitutional in its action as ever the King 
 had been. But it had the excuse of being 
 compelled to carry on the government of 
 the country, and it was hampered by the 
 fear of internal dissensions, which often 
 made bold and high-handed action the best 
 course. It is doubtful, however, whether 
 any other and milder policy would have 
 had the effect of delaying the war for more 
 than a few months. Feeling on both sides 
 had now reached the breaking-point, and when 
 the King set up his standard at Nottingham 
 on August 22, 1642, the Civil War formally 
 began. 
 
LAUD AND THE PURITANS 75 
 
 The meeting of the Long Parliament 
 marked the opening of a new era in our 
 national history. In the early years of the 
 Parliament political and religious ideals were 
 so inextricably bound up together that it is 
 very difficult to distinguish them. It may 
 be said, indeed, that Pym and his friends had 
 no definite religious and ecclesiastical policy, 
 but that they let themselves be guided by 
 the course of events. Certain it is that 
 many of them, including Cromwell and 
 Milton, were reluctantly driven into their 
 Independency. Opposition to Laud and his 
 policy on the one hand, and dislike for the 
 Presbyterian domination on the other, made 
 it comparatively easy for men of clear vision 
 and spiritual zeal to take their stand with 
 the Separatists. But it would be a mistake 
 to suppose that at the period we have reached 
 there was any organised attempt to change 
 the religion of the country. There was 
 great dislike of Laud's innovations and great 
 resentment against his manner of enforcing 
 them Both Laud and the King must be 
 acquitted of any intention to restore the 
 power of the Papacy, but their political 
 alliance tended to increase the distrust 
 caused by their ecclesiastical policy. The 
 old fear of Roman Catholicism was by no 
 means dead, and this helped to embitter 
 feeling which was already acute enough. 
 There was exaggeration and intolerance on 
 both sides, and while on both sides, too, 
 
76 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 there were men of deep religious feeling and 
 pure patriotism, the rough-and-tumble work 
 of the Revolution tended to give both power 
 and place to those of the more unscrupulous 
 and shallow sort. In an atmosphere of 
 wire-pulling and policy Nonconformists stand 
 to suffer most because of the very height of 
 their ideals. They have the defects of their 
 qualities, and we shall see how in the turmoil 
 of the Civil War and the controversies over 
 the religious settlement of the country these 
 made themselves manifest. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 PRESBYTERIANS AND INDEPENDENTS 
 
 It was the boast of King James that he 
 " knew the stomach " of the Scotch people. 
 Though he made himself supreme both in 
 Church and State, and succeeded in changing 
 Presbytery into Episcopacy, he did so with- 
 out any open rupture, and he would prob- 
 ably have altered his policy rather than 
 press matters to an extreme. Charles was 
 very different. In religion he was fanati- 
 cally insistent on his own point of view, and 
 he had no advisers round him in England 
 who could tell him when he had gone too 
 far. His marriage with a Roman Catholic 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 77 
 
 made him suspect in the eyes of all good 
 Protestants, and the first acts of his reign in 
 Scotland did not reassure them. He alien- 
 ated the people by insisting on the five 
 Articles of Perth being enforced, viz., kneel- 
 ing at communion, private communion 
 and baptism in cases of need, the observance 
 of Church festivals and confirmation by 
 Bishops. He alienated the nobles by insist- 
 ing on the inclusion and precedence of the 
 Bishops and Archbishops in the Privy 
 Council. This bad impression was deepened 
 by the use of the Anglican liturgy at his 
 Coronation in Edinburgh, and the feeling 
 was brought to a head by the attempt to 
 impose the new liturgy on the Scotch 
 Churches. They would have nothing to do 
 with a "Popish-English-Scottish-Mass-Service- 
 Book," reputed to be the work of Laud, and 
 the historic riot in St. Giles', Edinburgh, on 
 the occasion of its first introduction, showed 
 the temper of the people and gave them the 
 signal they desired. With the liturgy went 
 the Book of Canons, which was hated as 
 much for its English as for its Popish tone, 
 and against the two, petitions and protests 
 from all over the country poured in to the 
 Privy Council. Charles refused to with- 
 draw the liturgy, and ordered that all petitions 
 against it were to be regarded as illegal and 
 to be visited with the punishment of treason. 
 The popular answer to this was the renewal 
 of the Covenant made under James. The 
 
78 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 basis of it was the so-called "King's Con- 
 fession," which was a repudiation of the 
 doctrines and forms of Rome, with a list of 
 the confirmatory Acts of Parliament. This 
 was followed by an indictment of the recent 
 innovations and a solemn pledge to defend 
 the Crown and the true faith of the Word of 
 God, and to resist the setting up of Bishops 
 over the Kirk of Scotland. The signing of 
 this Covenant in the Greyfriars' Churchyard 
 at Edinburgh is one of the landmarks of 
 Scottish history. This was in the year 1638, 
 and the General Assembly of the same year 
 roundly condemned the liturgy and deposed 
 the whole bench of Bishops. Two years 
 later the Scottish Parliament ordered every 
 one to sign the Covenant under pain of civil 
 penalties. This amounted to a declaration 
 of war against the King. Charles, however, 
 was not ready, and sent the Marquis of 
 Hamilton as Commissioner to Scotland with 
 orders to gain time, writing to him in the 
 following terms : "I give you leave to 
 flatter them with what hopes you please, 
 so you engage not me against my grounds, 
 and in particular, that you consent neither 
 to the calling of Parliament nor General 
 Assembly till the Covenant be given up : 
 your chief end being now to save time that 
 they may not commit public follies until 
 I be ready to suppress them." There was 
 not much to be done with a King who could 
 write thus, and the Covenanters quite under- 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 79 
 
 stood the situation. The indictment of the 
 Bishops by the General Assembly was their 
 answer, and meanwhile they, as well as 
 Charles, m^ade preparations for the inevitable 
 resort to force. 
 
 The two Bishops' Wars, as they were called, 
 ended in Charles' buying off the Scots with a 
 sum of £200,000 that he might have the 
 more leisure to attend to the pressing affairs 
 in England. But the outbreak of the Civil 
 War in 1642 inevitably involved the fortunes 
 of the Covenanters, and for a time both 
 Charles and the Parliament bid for their 
 help. Popular feeling in Scotland, however, 
 was entirely on the side of the Parliament, 
 and resulted in the formation of " the Solemn 
 League and Covenant " of 1643, by which 
 the Parliament secured the help of the Scotch, 
 and the Scotch thought that they had 
 secured the imposition of Presbyterianism 
 on England. The Scotch army was in 
 England for three years and contributed 
 largely to the victory of the Parliamentarians. 
 They captured the King's person and handed 
 him over to leaders of the English army, on 
 the understanding that no injury should be 
 done to him. 
 
 Meanwhile the Scottish Commissioners in 
 London had been using all their influence to 
 obtain favour for the Presbyterian system, 
 and not without success. When Bishop Hall 
 published a reply to their arguments in 
 defence of Episcopacy he was answered by 
 
80 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 five English clergy — Stephen Marshall, 
 Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew 
 Newcomen and William Spurstow. Under 
 the pseudonym " Smectymnus " these men 
 published a defence of Presbyterianism which 
 showed how greatly the cause had advanced 
 in England. Some seven hundred other 
 ministers endorsed the work and petitioned 
 Parliament for reform of the Church in a 
 Presbyterian direction. There were not a few 
 sympathisers in the Long Parliament, and 
 V sjf when, in July 1643, the Westminster Assembly 
 \/\ of Divines was constituted, it contained a 
 'X very large Presbyterian element. Of the 
 hundred and twenty divines in the Assembly 
 only five were Independents, and a few Epis- 
 copalian, the rest being Calvinists or Presby- 
 terians. The appointing ordinance directs 
 that these divines, together with ten peers 
 and twenty commoners, shall " confer and 
 treat among themselves of such matters and 
 things touching and concerning the Liturgy 
 and discipline and government of the Church 
 of England, or the vindicating and clearing 
 of the doctrine of the same from all false 
 aspersions and misconstructions as shall be 
 proposed to them by both or either of the 
 said Houses of Parliament and no other ; 
 and to deliver their opinions or advices of or 
 touching the matters aforesaid, as shall be 
 most agreeable to the word of God to both 
 or either of the said Houses from time to 
 time, in such manner and sort as by either 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 81 
 
 or both of the said Houses of Parliament 
 shall be required." The same ordinance 
 appointed William Twisse to be Prolocutor 
 of the Assembly, and directed the time and 
 place of its meetings. This is important as 
 showing that the Assembly was never intended 
 to be an independent body, but merely a 
 register of the wishes and opinions of the 
 Parliament. The House of Commons decided 
 from time to time what questions were to be 
 discussed, and thus kept its hand on the whole 
 conduct of the debates. Parliament was not 
 disposed to give up the high function of 
 ruling and reforming the Church, and the 
 Assembly, therefore, was merely a deliberative 
 and advisory body. At an early stage in the 
 proceedings the Episcopalian members with- 
 drew, and the Assembly became more and 
 more a register of Presbyterian opinion. 
 The five Independents who belonged to 
 it were men of force and learning, and they 
 took an effective part in the debates ; but 
 they were powerless to do more than state 
 their own opinions. Their names were 
 Thomas Goodwin, Philip Nye, Sidrach Simp- 
 son, Jeremiah Burroughes and William 
 Bridge, and they exercised an influence much 
 greater than their numbers would seem to 
 warrant. On joining the Assembly they made 
 their own position clear in an " Apologetical 
 Narration " addressed as much to the nation 
 at large as to Parliament, and in some senses 
 an appeal from the Assembly itself. They 
 
82 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 informed the Houses of Parliament that 
 they had been driven into exile by the 
 sinful evils and corruptions of the Church, 
 and that, during their exile, they had en- 
 deavoured to search out the Apostolic 
 direction and example as to the Primitive 
 Church order. They therefore laid down 
 three principles: (1) that Primitive practice 
 in the Church should be the supreme rule ; 
 (2) that present judgment and practice should 
 not be made a binding law for the future, i.e. 
 they wished to allow for toleration ; (3) that 
 in matters of controversy the safe course 
 was to adopt those practices which the greater 
 part of the Reformed Churches acknowledged 
 to be warrantable, e.g. that communion 
 should be restricted to the " faithful " and 
 that extempore prayer should be allowed. 
 The general effect of this was that the In- 
 dependents claimed to be right as far as their 
 position went, but they were willing to admit 
 that it might be expedient to go farther. 
 In the Assembly itself they had strong allies 
 in Oliver St. John, Sir Harry Vane and Lord 
 Saye and Sele. Of the Presbyterians the 
 leading spirits were the five men who were 
 responsible for " Smectymnus," while there 
 was a third party, who might be called 
 Erastians, led by Coleman and Lightfoot 
 among the divines, and by Selden and 
 Whitelock among laymen. These took the 
 position of Hooker, asserting that every 
 Englishman is necessarily a member of the 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 83 
 
 Church of England, and that the magistrate is 
 supreme in the Church as in the nation. In 
 addition to these various parties there were 
 the Scottish Commissioners to be reckoned 
 with, and they, of course, took a strongly 
 Presbyterian attitude. They had no votes, 
 but were able to take part in the discussions. 
 They had brought with them from Scotland 
 the text of the Solemn League and Covenant. 
 It was discussed in the Assembly and, after 
 some debate, was sworn to by both Houses of 
 Parliament, and in the following year was 
 imposed on all persons over eighteen years 
 of age. Those who refused it were to be 
 counted malignants. There is no doubt 
 as to the reluctance with which the In- 
 dependents took this course. For the time 
 being they acquiesced ; but it was altogether 
 against their ideas of liberty, and the en- 
 forcing of the Covenant became one of their 
 grievances. They discovered in time, as 
 Milton said, that " new presbyter " was 
 but " old priest writ large." 
 
 The work of the Assembly began with the 
 revision of the first fifteen Articles of the 
 Church of England and the introduction into 
 them of certain changes in a Calvinistic 
 direction. Instead of completing the work 
 on the Articles, Parliament, in consequence 
 of the agreement with the Scots, then directed 
 the Assembly to deal with the question of 
 Church government and to bring the English 
 system into closer conformity with the 
 
84 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Scottish. In dealing with this matter the 
 Scottish Commissioners claimed the right to 
 be regarded as an independent body, and the 
 Assembly dealt with the points which they 
 suggested after private discussion among 
 themselves. In the debates that follov/ed 
 the bitter antagonism between Independents 
 and Presbyterians became manifest. The 
 Independents were hopelessly outnumbered, 
 and the Assembly reported to Parliament 
 in favour of the Presbyterian system. On 
 questions of discipline Parliament insisted 
 on retaining the final appeal in its own 
 hands, and it became evident that whatever 
 form of Church government might be set 
 up, it would not be allowed to be independent 
 of the State. This was undoubtedly a dis- 
 appointment to the divines in the Assembly, 
 whether Presbyterian or Independent. In 
 the same way Parliament retained in its own 
 hands the nomination of those who, under 
 the new system, were to be authorised to 
 exercise the power of ordination. 
 
 In its Directory for Public Worship the 
 
 Assembly abolished the Book of Common 
 
 .Prayer and made copious suggestions as to 
 
 V the proper topics of prayer to take its place. 
 
 When the Directory came to be enforced 
 
 yinore than a thousand ministers refused to 
 
 V^ accept it, and were deprived of their cures. 
 
 / /The doctrinal work of the Assembly was 
 
 \/ comprised in the Longer and Shorter Cate- 
 
 ./\ chisms, and the Westminster Confession. 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 85 
 
 On these both Independents and Presby- ^ 
 terians were fairly agreed. They set forth ^ 
 the moderate form of Calvinism which, until ^ 
 comparatively recently, was generally ac- \/ 
 cepted among the Nonconformist Churches. 
 They enforce the Puritan view of the Sabbath 
 and give to the magistrate power to suppress > 
 blasphemies and heresies. The chief tangible ■>^ 
 result of the Assembly was the gift to the 
 Scotch Churches of the Shorter Catechism and 
 the Confession. The attempt to set up 
 Presby terianism in England was a failure, 
 and indeed was never carried out at all save 
 in one or two counties. The work of the / 
 Assembly was too much under the hand of 
 the Parliament, and its deliberations were 
 too largely influenced by political considera- 
 tions. Milton puts it strongly when he 
 speaks of " Plots and packing worse than / 
 those of Trent," but there was no doubt X 
 justification for such words. 
 
 As the debates in the Assembly proceeded, 
 and as the Presbyterian ascendancy in 
 Parliament grew more pronounced, the 
 dominant party became increasingly in- 
 tolerant. The time was one of great religious 
 ferment, and gatherings of Anabaptists and 
 other sectaries became frequent. These 
 were regarded by the Scotch with horror and 
 detestation, and their English allies came 
 to share their feelings. In their passion for 
 system and order, and in their desire to 
 impose the Covenant on all and sundry, they 
 
86 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 were led to condemn, and to seek to prohibit, 
 all other systems. It was probably as a 
 concession to the temper of the Scotch that 
 in 1645 Parliament ordered the execution of 
 Laud, now an old man and worn by long 
 imprisonment. It was a cruel and unneces- 
 sary act of vengeance. 
 
 We must now turn to the course of events 
 outside. While Presbyterianism had been 
 gathering strength in the Parliament, Inde- 
 pendency was growing in the army, and to 
 some extent in the country at large. The 
 languid prosecution of the war under Essex 
 was put an end to by Cromwell ; and his 
 new model army began to encourage the 
 Parliamentarians with the hope of a victory 
 at last. Cromwell, though he signed the 
 solemn League and Covenant, had never 
 been whole hearted in its support, and had 
 followed with the utmost sympathy the 
 struggles and protests of the Independent 
 members in the Westminster Assembly. 
 Indeed, it may be said that the course of 
 the debates there, along with events in 
 Parliament, were responsible for the final 
 conversion of both Cromwell and Milton to 
 Independency of a very pronounced type. 
 In making up his " lovely company " of 
 troopers too, Cromwell discovered that the 
 men on whom he could rely for zeal and 
 morals were, generally speaking, neither 
 Episcopalians nor Presbyterians, but Inde- 
 pendents and sectaries of various kinds. 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 87 
 
 He soon learnt to be indifferent to their 
 religious persuasion, if only they showed 
 themselves honest men and good soldiers. 
 Milton, at the same time, was largely in- 
 fluenced by the parliamentary attitude 
 towards the press, and, in his condemnation 
 of it, took up the position of Independency 
 and toleration in its strongest form. As the 
 new army went from victory to victory, 
 from Marston Moor to Newbury, and from 
 Newbury to Naseby, the opinions it repre- 
 sented assumed a greater importance, and 
 its leader became more and more a man of 
 account. 
 
 It was no doubt in the army first that the 
 new spiritual force that had long been gather- 
 ing among the people made itself felt. Crom- 
 well focussed it, and gave expression to it 
 in the councils of the nation, but the thing 
 was not of his doing, nor of any man's. The 
 new spirit showed itself in some very un- 
 couth forms, but it belongs to the movement 
 of the times, and was the needed reaction 
 against a rehgion of formalism. What it 
 meant to the milder and more orthodox is 
 well described by Baxter: "We that lived 
 quietly at Coventry did keep to our old 
 principles : we were unfeignedly for King 
 and Parliament ; we believed the war was 
 only to save the Parliament and Kingdom 
 from Papists and delinquents and to remove 
 the dividers, that the King might return 
 again to his Parliament, and that no changes 
 
88 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 might be made in religion but with his con- 
 sent. But when I came to the army among 
 CromweH's soldiers, I found a new face of 
 things which I never dreamt of. The plotting 
 heads were very hot upon that which inti- 
 mated their intentions to subvert Church 
 and State. Independency and Anabaptistry 
 were most prevalent. Antinomianism and 
 Arminianism were equally distributed." But 
 the men thus described were not mere 
 destructives. If they were bent on puUing 
 down, it was but that they might plant and 
 build. Cromwell, at least, had far-seeing 
 and practical aims. He was what Lord 
 Rosebery has called "that most dangerous 
 combination," a practical man and a mystic. 
 He had no selfish ends to serve, but he did 
 not scruple to advance himself when he 
 thought that in that way he could best 
 advance his cause. He and his army were 
 an instrument in the hands of God. He 
 believed this sincerely, and yet he never 
 yielded to the practical dangers of such a 
 belief. He did not turn the army into an 
 exclusive religious sect, but, as Baxter again 
 testifies, "was for the equal liberty of all." 
 It was in this spirit that he viewed with 
 great misgiving the growing intolerance 
 of the Presbyterian majority. After the 
 storming of Bristol, he wrote to the Speaker 
 of the House of Commons in the following 
 memorable terms : " Sir, they that have 
 been employed in this service know that 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 89 
 
 faith and prayer obtained this city for you. 
 I do not say ours only, but of the people of 
 God with you and all England over, who 
 have wrestled with God for a blessing in this 
 very thing. Our desires are that God may 
 be glorified by the same spirit of faith by 
 which we ask all our sufficiency and have 
 received it. It is meet that He have all the 
 praise. Presbyterians and Independents, all 
 have the same spirit of faith and prayer ; 
 the same presence and answer ; they agree 
 here, have no names of difference ; pity it is 
 it should be otherwise anywhere ! All that 
 believe have the real unity which is most 
 glorious : because inward and spiritual in 
 the body and to the head. For being united 
 in forms, commonly called uniformity, every 
 Christian will for peace-sake study and do 
 as far as conscience will permit. And for 
 brethren, in things of the mind, we look for 
 no compulsion but that of Hght and reason." 
 By this time the army had put the Parlia- 
 ment into a fairly secure position. The 
 King was in the hands of the Scotch, and 
 his cause for the time being was lost. Now 
 began the weary struggle between the Pres- 
 byterian majority in Parliament and the 
 Independents in the army for the chief place 
 in the councils of the nation. The Presby- 
 terians were all for the maintenance of the 
 monarchy, and were generally on the side of 
 the gentry and the established order. They 
 looked on the army as representing sec- 
 
90 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 tarianism and democracy in the most objec- 
 tionable form. But, though this was true 
 enough, there were men in the army who 
 "knew what they had fought for and loved 
 what they knew," and who refused to be 
 coerced or cajoled into accepting any- 
 thing less than full religious liberty. Of 
 their leaders Marten alone was a convinced 
 Republican, but he influenced others, and 
 the conduct of the King made them easy 
 converts. The withdrawal of the Scotch 
 and the transference of the King to the 
 custody of Parliament gave the Presbyterians 
 a momentary advantage. They now began 
 to seek a reconciliation with Charles and to 
 concert measures for disbanding the army. 
 If Charles had been wise enough to close 
 with the Presbyterians in anything like a 
 sincere spirit, the war might have had a 
 very different issue, and the monarchy 
 might have been saved. But he was hardly 
 capable of straightforward action. He pre- 
 ferred the subtler method of playing off his 
 opponents the one against the other, with 
 the result that neither could trust him any 
 longer. One cannot here trace out the long 
 and tangled story of the negotiations. Suffice 
 it to say that the army became more and 
 more impatient, and ended by taking com- 
 mand of the situation. It had the advantage 
 of knowing its own mind and being ready to 
 act decisively when the occasion arose. The 
 various regiments had elected representatives 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 91 
 
 to a General Army Council which became prac- 
 tically a second Parliament, far more demo- 
 cratic and even revolutionary than the one 
 which sat at Westminster. Their military 
 strength was their warrant, and they used 
 it to get possession of the King, and, with 
 him in their hands, to dictate their terms. 
 They were prepared for a religious settle- 
 ment which would allow the continued use 
 of the Book of Common Prayer, but would 
 not suffer compulsory imposition of the 
 Covenant. Charles played with them until 
 they were driven to give up all hope of him. 
 The negotiations were conducted by Cromwell 
 and Ireton, and it has been generally sup- 
 posed that the former was all the time work- 
 ing for his own hand. When the King 
 escaped from Hampton Court to the Isle of 
 Wight it is believed that Cromwell connived 
 at the escape for his own purposes. There 
 is really no evidence for this at all, though 
 it is probably true that Cromwell took steps 
 to intercept the King's correspondence, so as 
 to prove without doubt the full measure of 
 his double-dealing. But meanwhile feeling 
 in the army was getting out of hand. The 
 religious spirit there, which found vent in 
 prayer-meetings and field-preachings, became 
 more and more intolerant of the royal delays 
 and deceits on the one hand, and the mild 
 measures proposed by the Presbyterian 
 majority in Parliament on the other. Certain 
 regiments broke out into open mutiny. 
 
92 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 demanding the arrears of their pay and an 
 indemnity, and the calHng of a new Parlia- 
 ment. Cromwell and Fairfax put down the 
 mutiny with an iron hand, but it was at the 
 price of promising that they would not go 
 any farther in " carnal conferences " with 
 the King. The Parliament, in which Inde- 
 pendency now became for the moment 
 predominant, sent an ultimatum to the King 
 which should secure the entire supremacy of 
 the commons. He replied by an agreement 
 with the Scotch in which he promised to 
 establish Presbyterianism, and they to 
 set him free from the sectaries and restore 
 him to London. This practically sealed his 
 fate. The army turned to put down scattered 
 royalist risings and to prevent the incursion 
 of the Scotch. Colonel Pride purged the 
 Parliament of royalist sympathisers, and a 
 military republic was established whose first 
 act was necessarily the trial of the King for 
 treason against his people. That he should 
 be condemned was one of the bitter fruits of 
 circumstances, and the times were such that 
 his condemnation could only be followed by 
 his execution. 
 
 The Independents were now supreme, and 
 had an irresistible force at their command. 
 They used it with great moderation. Fifteen 
 nobles were banished and had their property 
 confiscated. A few were imprisoned, and 
 only four were put to death. Parliament 
 constituted itself the ruling power in the 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 93 
 
 State, and England became a commonwealth. 
 But in spite of everything, the reaction im- 
 mediately began. The army was soon hard 
 at work suppressing scattered royalist risings, 
 and Cromwell himself had to take the field 
 in Scotland. The Scotch repudiated the 
 execution of the King with horror, and were 
 ready at once to avenge him. Cromwell's 
 military genius saved the situation for the 
 time being, but neither he nor any other 
 man could save the Parliament from the 
 legitimate consequences of a hasty and pre- 
 matm'e policy. In the name of liberty they 
 had acted in a fashion which the most care- 
 less observer could not fail to perceive was 
 both arbitrary and despotic. The few men 
 of strong feeling and clear opinions had 
 dominated the majority, and these had been 
 brought to acquiesce in their action by force. 
 That the leaders in the main were con- 
 scientious and high-minded men there is no 
 reason to doubt, but they were before their 
 time and their logic was too strictly applied. 
 The Puritan spirit belonged to the elect 
 among the people, and the commons at 
 large would have none of it. Nor was the 
 Puritan spirit altogether unharmed by 
 success. It soon become censorious, and in 
 its efforts to bring about a better state of 
 things denied the very liberty by which it 
 professed to live. The English people were 
 in no sense ready to become Republicans. As 
 Milton says of them, " With a besotted and 
 
94 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 degenerate baseness of spirit, except some 
 few who yet retain in them the old English 
 fortitude and love of freedom, imbastardised 
 from the ancient nobleness of their ancestors, 
 (they) are ready to fall flat and give adoration 
 to the image and memory of this man, who 
 hath more put tyranny into an act than any 
 British king before him." However regrettable 
 this may have been, it was perfectly true, and 
 it goes far to explain the fact that the work 
 of the Independents was never more than half 
 .done and that the reaction followed so swiftly. 
 y/ An important landmark in the history of the 
 ^Free Churches is the Conference of Inde- 
 X, pendents which was held at the Savoy in 
 1658 with the express purpose of framing 
 an authoritative declaration of their faith 
 and order. The Conference was attended 
 by two hundred delegates, most of whom 
 were laymen, and their agreement was so 
 marked that they regarded it as the special 
 work of the Holy Ghost. True to their 
 historic principles, however, they made it 
 quite plain that they did not intend their 
 confession to be regarded as a binding creed. 
 " Whatever is of force or constraint in matters 
 of this nature, causeth them to degenerate 
 from the name and nature of Confessions ; 
 and turns them from being Confessions of 
 Faith into Exactions and Impositions of 
 faith." The doctrinal clauses of the Con- 
 fession differ little from those of the West- 
 minster Assembly. They show that the 
 
PRESBYTERIANS 95 
 
 Congregational Churches of the period were 
 thoroughly Calvinistic, and the position is 
 laid down in language of unmistakable strength 
 and clearness. The ecclesiastical clauses give 
 a full and considered statement of the Con- 
 gregational position as laid down by- 
 Browne and Barrow, maintaining the sole 
 rule of Christ over His Church ; its independ- 
 ence of the secular power ; the purity of its 
 membership, and the spiritual autonomy of 
 each individual community. The work of 
 this Conference is a good illustration of the 
 vigorous life of Independency even in times 
 of great political distraction. 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE QUAKERS 
 
 The Civil War in England resulted in large 
 measure from the religious enlightenment 
 that had been slowly spreading among the 
 people. To use the familiar phrase of J. R. 
 Green, the English people had become the 
 people of a book, and that book the Bible. 
 They had learnt from it to attach a new 
 importance to the individual, and to revolt 
 against the claim of either Church or ruler 
 to supreme authority over the soul of man. 
 But they had learnt also to judge and measure 
 
96 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 things almost too exclusively from the stand- 
 point of religion. The result was not merely 
 a great religious awakening, but a political and 
 social revolution in which religion played 
 a very conspicuous part. The issue was not 
 without serious results for religion itself. 
 The political action that was forced both 
 upon Presbyterians and Independents could 
 not but interfere with their religious 
 witness. Each party in turn set itself up 
 as supreme, and each condescended to use 
 weapons which were far from spiritual in their 
 nature. At the same time the controversies 
 of the hour drove them to make statements 
 of their theological position which tended to 
 assume an ever-increasing degree of rigidity. 
 The Presbyterian would have nothing to do 
 with tolerance. It was " a city of refuge in 
 men's consciences for the devil to fly to." 
 Baxter held that " unlimited toleration was 
 to be abhorred," and Edwards, the great 
 Presbyterian apologist, wrote in his Gangrcena : 
 " A toleration is the grand design of the devil 
 — it is the most transcendent, catholic and 
 fundamental evil for this kingdom — as original 
 sin is the most fundamental sin." Even the 
 Independents who pleaded for toleration 
 most eloquently, and practised it in very 
 large measure, were not prepared to carry 
 it out in the case of all those v/ho differed 
 from them. It was this stiffening both in 
 doctrine and practice, forced upon some 
 of the best men of the time by the circum- 
 
THE QUAKERS 97 
 
 stances in which they found themselves, that 
 led to a second type of religious revolt that 
 has had very important results for the history 
 of Nonconformity. 
 
 All over the country men of the Puritan 
 temper were to be found who deplored and 
 resented what they believed to be the depar- 
 ture from the pure doctrine of the Word on the 
 part of many of their leaders. At the same 
 time they sought for themselves an expression 
 of their religious needs and feelings which 
 should be more in accordance with revealed 
 truth as they conceived it than what they 
 found in many of the formal and stilted 
 services of the Puritans. For it must be 
 admitted that Puritanism itself cannot escape 
 the charge of formality. There is abundant 
 contemporary evidence to show that the 
 Puritan forms of worship often tended to be 
 as stereotyped and hard as anything that was 
 to be found in the Anghcan Church. The 
 Puritans themselves also became very in- 
 tolerant of departures from the recognised 
 order whether in theology or worship, and, 
 as the sequel will show, used their opportunity 
 to crush them with cruel severity. Neverthe- 
 less, the new spirit that was abroad in the land 
 would not be crushed, and when the official 
 and leading sections of Nonconformity made 
 concessions to the spirit of order and discipUne 
 there were many left in Israel who did not 
 bow the knee to Baal. We read of Seekers, 
 Ranters, Anabaptists, Fifth Monarchy men 
 
98 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 and the like, all of whom were openly dis- 
 contented with the average religious ex- 
 pression of their time, and all of whom were 
 more or less inclined to fanaticism. They 
 gave way to the greatest extravagances, and 
 most of them never reached any other 
 position than that of rather barren protest. 
 
 The revolt which they represented, how- 
 ever, was a real thing, and found for itself 
 some lasting forms of expression. It was 
 just at the time that Puritanism was becoming 
 official and more formal that Quakerism began 
 to be. It is a mistake to think that it arose 
 in any way from the sects just mentioned, or 
 that it was in any sense affiliated with them. 
 It did, however, spring from the same spirit 
 of revolt and resentment. It was a fresh 
 protest in favour of the genuine Nonconformist 
 ideal and gave a very clear witness on its 
 behalf. 
 
 Like other religious movements, Quakerism 
 was the work of one man. But if we regard 
 George Fox as its founder, it is only in the sense 
 that his vivid rehgious experience enabled 
 him to focus and give expression to ideas and 
 aspirations which were common to many 
 in his day. No man was ever less conscious 
 than he was of becoming the leader in a 
 great movement. He obeyed the impulses 
 of his own spirit or of the inward light given 
 to him, and if he found many who were 
 ready to receive the word from him and to 
 follow where he led, this he would attribute 
 
THE QUAKERS 99 
 
 as much to the preparedness of the time as 
 to anything which he said or did. He met 
 the prevaiHng rehgious temper among the 
 more serious, who were weary of the formaUsm 
 around them, and sought something deeper 
 and more real than the theological disputations 
 with which the pulpits of the time resounded. 
 The appeal of Fox — a man of keen mother-wit 
 rather than learning — to the witness of God 
 in their souls was what many had been 
 waiting to hear, and they responded to it 
 with eagerness. 
 
 Fox was born of a middle-class Puritan 
 family in Leicestershire. He was known as 
 a clean-minded, conscientious young man 
 who when he said a thing meant it. His 
 religious awakening came through being 
 invited to join in a drinking bout by some 
 friends who were " professors," i.e. Puritan. 
 The incongruity of the thing struck him, and 
 he spent long hours praying for a better way 
 than that of this religion which was no 
 religion at all. *'Then," he says, *' at the 
 command of God, on the ninth day of the 
 seventh month 1643 I left my relations and 
 broke off all familiarity of fellowship with 
 old or young." He became a wanderer on 
 the face of the earth, till gradually light broke 
 upon him, and he began to hear the voice of 
 God for himself. He learnt that " to be 
 bred at Oxford or Cambridge was not enough 
 to fit and qualify men to be ministers of 
 Jesus Christ," that God did not dwell in 
 
 D 2 
 
100 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 temples made with hands, and that Christ 
 would Himself speak directly to the con- 
 dition of the troubled soul. He became 
 conscious of the inward presence of the Spirit 
 of God leading him in the way of light and 
 truth. He found here a " secret anchor " 
 of the soul which sustained him amid all 
 temptations and trials and gave him a deep 
 sense of assurance. 
 
 To bear witness to these truths and to 
 the peace which they brought with them, 
 became now Fox's life-work. He began the 
 long itinerating ministry which ended only 
 with his death, and in the course of which 
 he endured hardship and persecution with a 
 faith and a confidence that nothing could 
 daunt. He found audiences in meetings of 
 Independents and Baptists, and sometimes 
 even in the parish churches, where it was 
 no unusual thing to allow a stranger to have 
 his say at the close of the regular sermon. As 
 may be supposed, he met with a very mixed 
 reception. One of his earliest experiences 
 was in Manchester, where, he says, " Some 
 were convinced who received the Lord's 
 teaching by which they were confirmed and 
 stood in the truth. But the professors were 
 in a rage, all pleading for sin and imperfection, 
 and could not endure to hear talk of per- 
 fection and of a holy and sinless life." It 
 was generally thus. Wherever he went 
 there were those to whom his teaching was 
 like seed falling on prepared ground, while 
 
THE QUAKERS 101 
 
 others found it something entirely subversive 
 of the Christianity they knew and professed. 
 Fox himself was keenly sensitive to the mis- 
 chief of a religion which, with all its excessive 
 sense of sin and harshness of judgment 
 against sinners, could yet allow so deep 
 a gulf between profession and practice 
 as he had found. In this respect he raised 
 a needed and healthy protest. There is no 
 doubt, however, that the effect of it was 
 marred by certain extravagances. The early 
 Quakers were nothing if not logical and 
 thorough. They believed in the brotherhood 
 of man and in the equality of men before 
 God. They must therefore witness to their 
 belief by refusing to take off their hats to 
 high or low, or to " bow or scrape with the 
 leg " to any one. " Oh the blows, punchings, 
 beatings and imprisonments we underwent 
 for not putting off our hats to men. The 
 bad language and evil usage we received on 
 this account are hard to be expressed, be- 
 sides the danger we were sometimes in of 
 losing our lives for this matter, and that by 
 the great professors of Christianity, who 
 thereby evinced that they were not true 
 believers." This tendency to judge by the 
 fruits was by no means acceptable in Churches 
 where religion had become formal and had 
 lost much of its savour. 
 
 But it was not only in the Churches that 
 Fox made himself felt. As he went up and 
 down the country he dealt fearlessly with the 
 
102 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 many social evils he saw around him. He 
 would raise his voice for temperance and 
 moderation in inns and hostels. He pleaded 
 for justice and mercy in courts of law, for 
 fair dealing and honesty in shops and 
 markets. He had all the Puritan dislike of 
 stage plays and dances. In this period both 
 alike were made ministers of evil passions^ 
 and though his protest was quite undis- 
 criminating it was certainly not uncalled for. 
 Nothing gave him more distress than the low 
 moral and spiritual condition of the Churches 
 and ministers. Probably his judgment of 
 them was influenced by his own high standard, 
 but there is no doubt that their formality and 
 worldliness left much to be desired. In many 
 cases, too, in spite of the efforts of Cromwell's 
 Major-Generals and Triers, both drunkenness 
 and immorality were to be found among 
 those entrusted with the cure of souls. 
 
 The peace principles for which the Quakers 
 have ever been famous were first inculcated 
 by Fox. He refused to enlist in the Common- 
 wealth army, on the ground that no man 
 was justified in taking the oath of obedience, 
 ii'urther, he says, " I told them I knew from 
 /whence all wars arose, even from the lust, 
 / according to James' doctrine : and that I 
 / lived in the virtue of that life and power that 
 V took away the occasion of all wars." It was 
 also his view of the authority of Christ within 
 which led him utterly to repudiate the rule 
 of the State or its representatives in religious 
 
THE QUAKERS 103 
 
 things. In this respect, as in others, the 
 Quakers carried the Nonconformist principles 
 to logical conclusions from which many of 
 their contemporaries shrank. 
 
 The story of Fox and his friends is a long 
 record of labours and persecutions. They 
 were essentially a missionary people. The 
 light of Christ which they knew was, they 
 believed, for all men and they were compelled 
 to make it known. They had against them 
 the whole weight of public opinion backed 
 by the authorities both of Church and State, 
 yet they did not hesitate to give their testi- 
 mony. They were whipped and imprisoned 
 and many of them were killed, but they perse- 
 vered. In America they were persecuted 
 with horrible cruelty by Independents and 
 Presbyterians alike. No doubt they were not 
 easy to understand, and the externals of 
 their conduct and worship might readily be 
 assumed to cover all manner of abuses. But 
 this was no excuse for the treatment to which 
 they were subjected. It shows how very far 
 even the Reformed Churches were from the 
 practice of true Christian charity, and how 
 little understanding they had of the funda- 
 mental distinction between letter and spirit. 
 
 It was their keen sense of this distinction 
 and of the infinitely greater importance of the 
 things of the Spirit which led the Quakers to 
 abandon the sacraments as being needless to a 
 spiritual Christianity. They claimed to have 
 that for which the sacraments stand, in so 
 
104 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 real and effective a manner that the outward 
 form was but a useless encumbrance. The 
 assurance of their communion with God 
 was evidenced to them by an inward ex- 
 perience which no ceremony could possibly 
 strengthen. They claimed that Scripture 
 itself supported them in this belief and ap- 
 pealed directly to the teaching of Jesus Christ. 
 This was very high ground to take, and it 
 represents an ideal the influence of which 
 has been felt in all the Churches. But it 
 probably also explains why the tenets of the 
 Friends have not spread more rapidly and 
 have not been more popular. The position 
 is too exalted for average human nature. 
 Men need some mediation of the things of 
 the Spirit, and they find in the outward and 
 visible signs just what they need. It may 
 be said also that the Quakers were not 
 altogether consistent in the statement of their 
 position. Carried to its logical conclusion 
 it would lead to a neglect of Scripture as well 
 as of the sacraments. The inward light 
 to which they appealed was their ultimate 
 authority and was regarded by them as 
 infallible, and yet they made it lead up to an 
 acceptance of the traditional view of the 
 infallibility of Scripture, and used this, in 
 its turn, as an evidence for it. Thus the 
 Spirit was the witness to Scripture, and the 
 Scripture the witness to the Spirit. As 
 Robert Barclay writes : " We do look upon 
 them {i.e. the Scriptures) as the only fit out- 
 
THE QUAKERS 105 
 
 ward judge of controversies among Christians : 
 and that whatsoever doctrine is contrary unto 
 their testimony may therefore justly be 
 regarded as false." On the other hand, in 
 defending the Boston martyrs against the 
 charge of heresy, Isaac Pennington wrote: "The 
 Quakers believe that Christ is the eternal life, 
 light, wisdom and power of God which was 
 manifested in that body of flesh which he 
 took of the Virgin, that he is the king, priest 
 and prophet of his people and saveth them 
 from their sins by laying down his life for them 
 and imputing his righteousness to them : 
 yet not without revealing and bringing 
 forth the same righteousness in them which 
 he wrought for them. And by experience 
 they know that there is no being saved by a 
 belief of his death for them, and of his re- 
 surrection, ascension, intercession, etc., without 
 being brought into true fellowship with him 
 in his death and without feeling his immortal 
 seed of life raised and living in them. And so 
 they disown the faith in Christ's death which 
 is only received and entertained from the 
 relation of the letter of the Scriptures, and 
 stands not in the divine power, and sensible 
 experience of the begotten of God in the 
 heart." These words exactly describe the 
 position of the earlier Quakers, and though it 
 has been somewhat modified in the course of 
 their history, they have never departed from 
 the main principle of an inward light leading 
 to and expressing an inward life and experience 
 
106 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 which was the all-sufficient ground of their 
 assurance. They held that the light and 
 life were for all men, and this stirred them 
 to an unusual missionary zeal. They learnt 
 from it the true dignity of human nature, 
 and this drove them to help the poor and 
 degraded and to set free the slave. 
 
 But this very principle was also the source 
 of their weakness. They were not always 
 able to meet its lofty claims. Trust in 
 the inward light was sometimes so interpreted 
 as to lead to grave excesses on the one hand, 
 and to a depreciation of the work of the 
 intellect on the other. Fox himself was 
 occasionally betrayed into violence of action 
 and speech, as for instance when he de- 
 nounced the " bloody city of Lichfield," and 
 more than one of his followers gave way at 
 times to the same spirit. But there was a 
 saving common sense among the Friends 
 which led to a speedy condemnation of action 
 of this kind, and prevented it from ever 
 becoming general, as it did among the Ana- 
 baptists. The other defect was more serious, 
 and accounts largely for the stagnation of the 
 Society of Friends during the whole of the 
 eighteenth century. Depreciation of the 
 part which the intellect plays in religion has 
 always been characteristic of mysticism. 
 The inner experience of religion does un- 
 doubtedly result in a new illumination, but 
 that illumination is not the whole of know- 
 ledge. An interpretation of religion which 
 
THE QUAKERS 107 
 
 may seem to justify men in putting a premium 
 on ignorance can never hold the field for 
 long. That this does not necessarily belong 
 to the Quaker position is evidenced by their 
 recent history. The combination of spiritual 
 insight with intellectual and social passion 
 which they present in modern times is a 
 remarkable and powerful contribution to the 
 religious life of our time. 
 
 Fox and the Quakers were pioneers also 
 in respect of their attitude to Church Estab- 
 lishment and to the relation of the Church 
 with the civil power. They carried their 
 protest so far as to object altogether to a paid 
 ministry. That in asserting the general 
 principle of non-interference on the part 
 of the State they were not altogether in 
 advance of their time may be judged from 
 Milton's letter to Cromwell, in which he says : 
 " If you leave the Church to the Church and 
 discreetly rid yourself and the magistracy of 
 that burden, actually half of the whole and 
 at the same time most incompatible with the 
 rest, not allowing two powers of utterly 
 diverse natures, the civil and the ecclesiastical^ 
 to commit fornication together, and by their 
 promiscuous and delusive helps apparently 
 to strengthen but in reality to weaken and 
 finally subvert each other : if also you take 
 away all persecuting power from the Church — 
 for persecuting power will never be absent, 
 so long as money, the poison of the Church, 
 the strangler of the truth, shall be extorted 
 
108 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 by force from the unwilling as a pay for 
 preaching the gospel — then you will have 
 cast out of the Church those money changers, 
 that truckle not with doves, but with the 
 Dove itself, the Holy Ghost.'* This is among 
 the earliest and clearest statements of what 
 afterwards became the traditional Noncon- 
 formist attitude towards the connection of 
 the Church with the state. 
 
 At an early period in his ministry, if it 
 may so be called, Fox found it necessary to 
 gather his followers into " meetings." The 
 first of these was at Sedbergh in Yorkshire 
 in the year 1653, and it was followed by 
 others in other parts of the country. In 
 some cases whole congregations of Inde- 
 pendents came over and joined these new 
 Christians who were " gathered in the name 
 of Jesus." In 1656 a General Meeting was 
 established in London to manage the affairs 
 of the new communities, for the supply of 
 preachers and Bibles, the establishment of 
 meetings, and the support of the poor. For 
 the reasons already mentioned the movement, 
 though it began with great enthusiasm, did 
 not maintain this level for long. The 
 Quakers have never attracted the multitude 
 and probably never will, but they have been 
 a most wholesome leaven in the Free Church 
 life of this country, and their influence has 
 been felt far beyond their own borders. Their 
 testimony to religious liberty, and to the 
 spirituality and simplicity of the gospel, has 
 
THE QUAKERS 109 
 
 been more steadily consistent than that of 
 any other rehgious body. 
 
 The story of George Fox carries us some 
 way beyond the period in EngUsh history 
 which we had reached in the last chapter, and 
 we must now retrace our steps. The military 
 Republic est abUshed on the death of Charles was 
 but short-lived. The situation was eminently 
 one which called for a strong man, and only 
 one man was possible. Cromwell's assump- 
 tion of power was not the result of a deep- 
 laid plan of his own, but was one of those 
 things which it is now the fashion to call 
 inevitable. We are only concerned here 
 with the general history of the time so far 
 as it affected religion and the Churches. The 
 battle of Dunbar was the end of political 
 Presbyterianism. But the Independents used 
 their triumph mercifully. Presbyterians were 
 allowed their part in the settlement of 
 religion. Some were to be found among the 
 Triers appointed to purge the Churches of 
 unworthy ministers, and the places of these 
 men were filled by Presbyterians and Baptists 
 as well as by Independents. Episcopalians 
 were ejected in large numbers, but, on the 
 whole, they were treated tenderly, and many 
 of them were still allowed to preach. For 
 the first time in the history of this country 
 religious toleration was accepted as a definite 
 policy. The Council of State in 1653 de- 
 clared that " such as profess faith in God 
 by Jesus Christ, though differing in judgment 
 
110 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 from the doctrine, worship or discipline pub- 
 licly held forth, shall not be restrained from, 
 but shall be protected in, the profession of 
 their faith and exercise of their religion, so 
 as they abuse not this liberty to the civil in- 
 jury of others and to the actual disturbance 
 of the public peace on their part, provided 
 this liberty be not extended to Popery or 
 Prelacy, or to such as under a profession of 
 Christianity hold forth and practise licentious- 
 ness." It will be seen that this was but a 
 very limited form of toleration after all. But 
 the exceptions to it were not, as we have seen, 
 rigidly enforced, and were further covered by 
 another article in the declaration which 
 provided that " none be compelled to con- 
 form to the public religion by penalties or 
 otherwise." Cromwell himself was all for 
 toleration, and protected even the Quakers. 
 In this respect he was in advance of his 
 contemporaries, and though his Govern- 
 ment took his view, there is no doubt that 
 the people at large were not prepared for any 
 real measure of religious liberty. Very few 
 probably agreed with Vane that " the pro- 
 vince of the magistrate is this world and 
 man's body : not his conscience or the 
 concerns of eternity." 
 
 The religious condition of England during 
 the Commonwealth was one of extreme 
 confusion. Presbyterianism was still the 
 only form of Church government legally 
 recognised, and there were still many Pres- 
 
THE QUAKERS 111 
 
 byterians in Parliament. These were alto- 
 gether against Cromwell's policy of toleration 
 and were continually trying to force his hand 
 in the direction of closer definitions of 
 Christian belief. It was the necessity of 
 conciliating these men, and at the same 
 time of maintaining his own exalted con- 
 ception of religious Uberty, which caused 
 the Protector to refrain from any final 
 settlement of religion. His second Parlia- 
 ment was even more intolerant than the first, 
 and he had difiiculty in holding them back 
 from persecution, as in the case of James 
 Naylor. Meanwhile, in the country at large 
 things were in a state of chaos. Each sect 
 did that which was right in its own eyes, and 
 no one of them seemed to have a more legal 
 position than any other. The civil power 
 kept a watchful eye on them all, especially 
 on the Episcopalians and Papists, but inter- 
 fered as Httle as possible. The question 
 of tithes was constantly under discussion 
 but never settled, and nothing effective was 
 done in the way of providing support for the 
 ministry. There is no doubt that in many 
 parishes things were in a most unsatisfactory 
 condition, and sometimes the people were 
 left without any regular spiritual provision 
 at all. Certainly it is true that ministers 
 of scandalous Ufe were summarily dealt with, 
 and there was also a good deal of inquisition 
 into the private lives of individual members 
 of the Churches. It was in connection with 
 
112 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 this that the more disagreeable side of 
 Puritanism was seen. The time was favour- 
 able to the precisian and the moralist, and 
 they did their work so thoroughly as to 
 create disgust and weariness in many quarters. 
 But these men were the smaller fry of the 
 party and they did not always represent 
 either the policy or the mind of their leaders. 
 Cromwell himself, as we have seen, was 
 always on the side of toleration and was by 
 no means averse to the innocent gaieties of 
 life. In this he was warmly supported by 
 Milton, who was certainly no fanatic, and by 
 his famous chaplain, John Owen. Owen, 
 who along with Goodwin and Howe repre- 
 sented the Independent rule at Oxford, was 
 very far removed from those extreme Puritans 
 who regarded all learning as unspiritual and 
 could describe it as the " smoke from the 
 bottomless pit." When Cromwell was Chan- 
 cellor he entrusted to Owen the task of 
 reforming the University, where both study 
 and manners had been sadly dissipated by 
 the war. Even Clarendon, with all his 
 hatred of the Puritan regime, admits that he 
 was successful in his task, and that, under 
 his rule, the University reaped a " harvest of 
 extraordinarily good and sound knowledge 
 in all parts of learning." Owen tempered 
 zeal with a wise toleration. He allowed 
 some of the Anglican chaplains to remain 
 undisturbed, and was tender to ancient 
 ceremonies and institutions. Evelyn, in his 
 
THE QUAKERS 113 
 
 Diary, speaks of chapels which were permitted 
 to retain their "ancient garb notwithstand- 
 ing the scrupulositie of the times." Owen also 
 defended the University against the hostiUty 
 of some of the more fanatical sectaries, and 
 though he maintained a high standard of 
 morals, showed himself an example of wise 
 latitude both in dress and deportment. He 
 stands out among the finest of the Puritan 
 theologians. He was logical, thorough and 
 definite. But at the same time he had a 
 rare spiritual insight, and a rehgious experi- 
 ence which gives fire and meaning to some of 
 his driest argumentation. In his personal 
 passion for Jesus Christ he stands apart 
 from and above most of his contemporaries. 
 Owen was also largely responsible for Crom- 
 well's efforts at Church settlement and 
 reform, with regard to which Dr. Gardiner 
 says : "With the exception of the condemna- 
 tion of the use of the Common Prayer, the 
 scheme was in the highest sense good and 
 generous : and it is well to remember that 
 those who strove to reserve the use of the 
 Common Prayer were a political as well as 
 an ecclesiastical party, and that the weight 
 and activity of that party, except so far 
 as it appealed to the indifferent in religion, 
 were out of all proportion to its numbers." 
 
114 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 THE RESTORATION 
 
 The return of the Stuarts was due to 
 something more than a mere Royalist re- 
 action. Cromwell's work had never been 
 really finished, and the country had not had 
 time to understand and appreciate either his 
 methods or his ideals. Nor had the English 
 people as a whole ever accepted the position 
 of the Independents. The majority of them 
 were still either Anglicans or Presbyterians, 
 and these only waited for the opportunity 
 to assert themselves. After the death of 
 Cromwell their opportunity soon came. 
 There was no one to take the Protector's 
 place. The majority in Parliament was 
 soon dissipated by jealousies and divided 
 counsels. By 1 660 the Presbyterians were once 
 again in the ascendancy and began to take 
 their part in the negotiations which ended 
 in the return of Charles. They had no great 
 fear of restoring the monarchy, for the re- 
 publican sentiment had never taken much 
 hold save among the Independents, Baptists, 
 and minor sects ; but they were very anxious 
 that the King should not bring back Episco- 
 pacy with him. In order to prevent such a 
 catastrophe they set about completing the 
 establishment of Presbyterianism. But it 
 was to be Presbyterianism of a moderate 
 
THE RESTORATION 115 
 
 sort with some consideration for tender 
 consciences. The Westminster Confession 
 was once more circulated by authority, and 
 the Solemn League and Covenant was ordered 
 to be read in all churches once a year. The 
 policy of the majority as reflected in the 
 remains of the Long Parliament now sitting 
 was to see that, if the King was brought 
 back, it should be under due securities for 
 the maintenance of religion and the public 
 cause as they understood them. 
 
 We cannot here detail the long course of 
 intrigue which led to the re -establishment 
 of the monarchy by the new " Convention " 
 Parliament. Suffice it to say that the 
 Presbyterians joined hands with Royalists 
 and Anglicans in the work. They were 
 living in a fool's paradise if they believed 
 that Charles would ever accept their position, 
 and perhaps some of them were willingly 
 deceived. What they could not and would 
 not see, Milton saw clearly enough. He did 
 what he could to stop " the epidemic mad- 
 ness " which had seized on many of his friends, 
 and in his " Ready and Easy Way to Establish 
 a Free Commonwealth " he tried to bring 
 them to a better mind. But he was fighting 
 against influences which were too strong for 
 him. People were tired of the Puritan 
 regime, of the excessive strictness with 
 which it had been forced, and of the disputes 
 and differences among those who enforced 
 it. Then, on the other side, Charles was 
 
116 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 pliant and plausible. He was ready to 
 grant a free pardon to all who had been 
 against him, save those whom Parlia- 
 ment might wish to punish ; and he finally 
 came back under the cover of declarations 
 which were well calculated to satisfy the 
 most timid, if only they could have been 
 believed. " We declare," he wrote, " a 
 liberty to tender consciences, and that no 
 man shall be disquieted or called in question 
 for differences of opinion in matters of 
 religion which do not disturb the peace of 
 the Kingdom : and we shall be ready to 
 consent to such an Act of Parliament as upon 
 mature deliberation shall be offered to us 
 for the full granting that indulgence." He 
 declared Parliaments to be " so vital a part 
 of the constitution of the Kingdom, and so 
 necessary for the government of it, that we 
 well know neither prince nor people can be 
 in any tolerable degree happy without them : 
 ... we shall always be as tender of their 
 privileges, and as careful to preserve and 
 protect them as of that which is most near 
 to ourself and most necessary for our own 
 preservation." If Charles had meant these 
 words and had stood by them; the course 
 of English history would have been very 
 different. His failure to do so led, among 
 many other consequences, to the rise of 
 modern Nonconformity. 
 
 For the time being England believed 
 Charles' words, and the Breda Declaration 
 
THE RESTORATION 117 
 
 quoted above secured his return. He landed 
 on May 25, and proceeded to London amid 
 a whirl of popular excitement and rejoicing. 
 Receiving the gift of a Bible from the Mayor 
 of Dover the King declared that " it was 
 the thing he loved above all things in the 
 world." At all the early ceremonials and 
 receptions Presbyterian ministers were to 
 the fore, and bishops were kept studiously 
 in the background. Several Presbyterians 
 were appointed Court chaplains, and when 
 they addressed Charles and told him of their 
 desire to tolerate Episcopacy, he spoke them 
 fair and promised his co-operation in secur- 
 ing a religious settlement. It soon became 
 manifest, however, that all this was mere 
 policy. The court chaplains were simply 
 for show. Only four of them ever preached, 
 and none of them for a second time, and, 
 as Baxter somewhat ruefully remarks, none 
 of them ever received a penny of salary. 
 
 Meanwhile, however, the Presbyterians 
 took it all seriously enough and went on with 
 their schemes of reconciliation. Though they 
 came to nothing; they are very interesting as 
 showing what the two positions stood for at 
 the period. They asked for measures to 
 secure godly and learned men as ministers, 
 and for some assiu^ance that no persons 
 should be admitted to the Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper unless they had understanding 
 of what they did, and had made profession 
 of Christian faith and obedience. Also they 
 
118 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 asked for the better sanctification of the 
 Lord's Day. As to Church government, 
 they are quite wilHng to accept a modified 
 Episcopacy and a revised Prayer Book, so 
 long as this latter is not made compulsory 
 upon all, and allows the minister to offer 
 free prayer sometimes. They are not sure 
 of the advantages of Ceremonial, and they 
 would at least like to avoid kneeling at the 
 Lord's Supper, bowing at the name of Jesus 
 and towards the altar, the keeping of holy 
 days, the wearing of the surplice, and the 
 making of the sign of the cross in baptism. 
 But the bishops were not in the least dis- 
 posed to make concessions on points like 
 these. They refused a conference, and 
 returned an evasive reply to the representa- 
 tions of the Presbyterians. They knew that 
 they had only to bide their time. The King, 
 however, recognised that it was still needful 
 to walk warily, and as he was anxious to 
 secure some form of religious settlement 
 which might yet be made to include Roman 
 Catholics, he made proposals for a Declaration 
 of Indulgence. A memorable conference 
 was held at the house of Lord Clarendon, at 
 which six bishops and the leading Presby- 
 terians were present. In the course of the 
 debate, it appeared that the King wished 
 to include Independents and Anabaptists in 
 the Indulgence, and any others whose 
 worship would not disturb the peace. It 
 Was at once perceived that this would mean 
 
THE RESTORATION 119 
 
 the toleration of Roman Catholics ; and the 
 temper of the meeting showed quite plainly 
 that such a suggestion would not be received 
 with favour. A few days later, on October 25, 
 the Declaration was issued in such form as 
 merely to comprehend Presbyterians who 
 were in favour of a moderate Episcopacy. 
 It accepted the terms which the Presbyterians 
 had originally offered, and added a Commission 
 for the revision of the Liturgy. To show 
 his sincerity the King offered Baxter a 
 bishopric, and other Presbyterian ministers 
 were offered deaneries, while Reynolds 
 actually accepted the see of Norwich. All 
 this, however, v/as premature. The " Con- 
 vention " Parliament, though mainly Presby- 
 terian in its leanings, refused to give the 
 Declaration the force of law, and, in doing 
 so, there is evidence that it had the goodwill 
 of the King. There is no doubt, indeed, 
 that he was anxious to conciliate the Puritan 
 party, but he was more anxious to make 
 things easy for the Roman Catholics. Prob- 
 ably, also, he was not unmindful of the fact 
 that when Parliament rejected a measure 
 which he had himself seemed willing to 
 grant, their action would win a certain 
 popularity for him by contrast. 
 
 Parliament, however, was preparing to go a 
 great deal further and to throw off the mask 
 of tolerance once for all. The " Convention " 
 Parliament had already restored to their 
 benefices all the clergy ejected during the 
 
120 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Civil War, including those who had been 
 dismissed for incompetency or scandalous 
 living. This was the last Act of Charles' 
 first Parliament. The Cavalier Parliament 
 was far more Royalist in temper, and by it 
 Clarendon was able to carry out his full anti- 
 Puritan policy. It had been excited, too, by 
 an outbreak of Fifth Monarchy men under 
 Venner, for whose extravagances all the 
 non-Episcopalians were made to suffer, how- 
 ever sincerely they repudiated them. Parlia- 
 ment met in May 1661, and the majority lost 
 no time in restoring all its old privileges 
 to the Anglican Church. They repealed the 
 Act of Charles I, which excluded the Bishops 
 from the House of Lords. They passed the 
 Corporations Act, which excluded Noncon- 
 formists from all municipal offices, and as the 
 members of Parliament for some boroughs 
 were elected by the Corporations, thus put the 
 election in those cases solely in the hands of 
 members of the Church of England. They 
 restored the ecclesiastical courts, and finally, 
 in May 1662, they passed "An Act for the 
 Uniformity of public prayers and Adminis- 
 tration of Sacraments and other Rites and 
 Ceremonies : and for establishing the form of 
 Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating Bishops, 
 Priests, and Deacons in the Church of England. ' ' 
 The Act begins with a reference to the efforts 
 after Uniformity made in Elizabeth's reign, 
 and then goes on to give the following interest- 
 ing description of Nonconformists : " And 
 
THE RESTORATION 121 
 
 yet this notwithstanding, a great number of 
 people in divers parts of this realm following 
 their own Sensuality, and living without 
 knowledge and due fear of God, do wilfully 
 and schismatically abstain and refuse to 
 come to their Parish Churches and other 
 public places where Common Prayer, ad- 
 ministration of the Sacraments, and Preaching 
 of the Word of God is used upon the Sundays 
 and other days ordained and appointed 
 to be kept and observed as Holy days." As 
 Dr. Dale observes, this definition of Noncon- 
 formity still remains unchanged on the Statute 
 book of England. 
 
 The Act was drawn with the utmost rigour. 
 It provided that on or before the Feast of 
 St. Bartholomew (August 24) every parson, 
 vicar, or other minister whatsoever should 
 make the following declaration in presence 
 of his congregation : " I do here declare 
 my unfeigned Assent and Consent to all and 
 everything contained and prescribed in and 
 by the book entitled The book of Common 
 Prayer." Further, all holders of ecclesiastical 
 positions and all Professors and tutors in 
 Universities were required to subscribe a 
 declaration that they would not take arms 
 against the King or any one commissioned 
 by him, that they would conform to the 
 Liturgy of the Church of England, and that 
 they regarded the Solemn League and Cove- 
 nant as an unlawful oath. Failure to comply 
 with the Act meant in every case deprivation. 
 
122 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 No minister who was not episcopally ordained 
 could be presented to any living, and any 
 minister not so ordained administering the 
 Lord's Supper in a private house or conventicle 
 was liable to a fine of one hundred pounds. 
 It was the passing of this Act that made Non- 
 conformity in this country and that set up 
 the religious cleavage in English society that 
 remains until this day. It pressed as hardly 
 on Presbyterians as on Independents and 
 Baptists. It drove out of the Church of 
 England some two thousand clergy, among 
 whom were many of the best and wisest in 
 the land, such as Baxter and Calamy, Bates, 
 Owen and Howe. By their ejectment the 
 Church was spiritually impoverished, and her 
 position was finally determined in the sacer- 
 dotal and sacramental direction. As J. R. 
 Green says: "The Church of England stood 
 from that moment isolated and alone among all 
 the Churches of the Christian world. The 
 Reformation had severed it irretrievably from 
 those which still clung to the obedience of the 
 Papacy. By its rejection of all but Episcopal 
 orders the Act of Uniformity severed it as 
 irretrievably from the general body of the 
 Protestant Churches, whether Lutheran or 
 Reformed. And while thus cut off from all 
 healthy religious communion with the world 
 without, it sank into immobility within. With 
 the expulsion of the Puritan clergy all change; 
 all efforts after reform, all national develop- 
 ment, suddenly stopped. From that time to 
 
THE RESTORATION 123 
 
 this the Episcopal Church has been unable to 
 meet the varying spiritual needs of its ad- 
 herents by any modification of its government 
 or of its worship. It stands alone among all 
 the religious bodies of Western Christendom 
 in its failure through two hundred years to 
 devise a single new service of prayer or of 
 praise." 
 
 On the other hand, the expulsion of the 
 Puritans proved a great step in the direction 
 of religious liberty. It drove the Presbyterians 
 into the ranks of Nonconformity and created 
 a great and influential body of men who were 
 pledged to the ideal of seeking a free Church in 
 a free State. It also preserved the evangelical 
 spirit to a degree that would have been 
 impossible in a State Church, and it kept 
 alive the fire of a true religious zeal during 
 the dead and difficult times that were to follow. 
 
 It is sometimes said that the Puritans had 
 no reason to complain, because they wxre only 
 treated as they had themselves treated 
 Anglicans in the days of Cromwell. But 
 there was a difference. The ejection during 
 the Civil War was largely a political measure. 
 The clergy who were deprived then were 
 deprived as " malignant s," and in some 
 cases as incompetent or vicious. And, even 
 then, they were allowed by the law a fifth 
 part of the value of their benefices for main- 
 tenance. The Act of Uniformity, on the 
 other hand, was a measure of religious perse- 
 cution. It was carried out in direct violation 
 
124 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of the honourable understanding into which 
 the King had entered on his Restoration, and 
 it was enforced with cruel severity. Though 
 it was proposed in Parliament that the ejected 
 clergy should be allowed to retain the fifth 
 part of their benefices, the proposal was 
 rejected by the Commons, and they were 
 turned out into the world to starve. Many 
 of them suffered cruelly, though some were 
 well cared for in the homes of wealthy Puritan 
 families or by the generosity of their con- 
 gregations. During the next twenty-five 
 years — save, as we shall see, for short periods 
 of indulgence — all forms of Nonconformity 
 were illegal and under the ban. But in spite 
 of this, preaching and worship went on all 
 over the country. In some places the 
 magistrates were not willing to put the law 
 into operation. In others the vigilance of 
 the authorities was more or less easily 
 evaded. It soon became manifest that 
 coercion only served to increase the faith 
 and zeal of the Nonconformists, and the 
 Government was seriously disturbed by the 
 evidence given of their numerical strength 
 by the founding of meetings and churches all 
 over the country. It was in the fear which 
 these facts inspired that there began a long 
 and miserable period of persecution. 
 
 At the same time the King still showed 
 himself anxious to use the Nonconformists 
 as an excuse for obtaining some larger 
 measure of religious liberty, such as he might 
 
THE RESTORATION 125 
 
 use in order to secure terms for the Papists. 
 Though he disavowed any such intention, 
 it is now clear that it was only with this 
 end in view that, soon after the passing 
 of the Act of Uniformity, he issued a declara- 
 tion to the effect that though he was zealous 
 to maintain uniformity, he intended to 
 apply to ParUament for an Act enabhng 
 him to exercise his dispensing power on 
 behalf of tender consciences. But neither 
 Parliament nor Church were disposed for 
 any measures of relaxation. This was no 
 doubt partly due to the fear of Popery, 
 which from this time forward became a 
 constant and very potent factor in English 
 politics. But it was also due to the pas- 
 sionate desire of Churchmen to retain the 
 ascendancy which they had won, and to the 
 dread and hatred with which Puritanism 
 was regarded by the court party. The 
 pages of Pepys' Diary make it very clear 
 that the moral licence of the Restoration 
 was only too often condoned by the obse- 
 quious preachers of the State Church, and 
 this was in marked contrast to the habitual 
 and recognised attitude of the Puritans. 
 
 In 1664 the Conventicle Act was passed. 
 It provided that any person over sixteen 
 years of age who attended a Nonconformist 
 service, at which more than five persons 
 were present, should be liable to a fine of 
 five pounds or three months' imprisonment 
 for the first offence. For the second offence 
 
126 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 the penalty was doubled. For the third 
 offence the fine was to be one hundred pounds, 
 or, in default, transportation to one of His 
 Majesty's foreign plantations for a period 
 of seven years. The vindictive character 
 of the measure is shown by the fact that 
 Virginia and New England were especially 
 exempted from the list of foreign planta- 
 tions contemplated, because in them banished 
 Nonconformists might easily have found 
 friends, and further by the fact that the 
 cost of transportation was to be met by 
 distraint on the goods of the criminal. In 
 the following year the Five Mile Act was 
 passed. It provided that all persons in 
 holy orders, or " pretending to be in holy 
 orders," who had not submitted to the 
 provisions of the Act of Uniformity should 
 swear that they would not take up arms 
 against the King, or attempt any alteration 
 in the government either of Church or State. 
 FaiUng this they were not allowed to come, 
 except on a journey; within five miles of 
 any city, town, or borough, or any place 
 where they had held cures or conducted 
 services. The penalty for disobedience was 
 forty pounds. The effect of this Act was 
 not only to prevent Nonconformist ministers 
 from influencing others, even by private 
 social intercourse, it deprived them also 
 of almost all means of livelihood, especially 
 by keeping schools and academies. By this 
 time the cup of their bitterness was full. 
 
THE RESTORATION 127 
 
 As Baxter says : " Many of the ministers 
 being afraid to lay down their ministry 
 after they had been ordained to ib, preached 
 to such as would hear them in fields and 
 private houses, till they were apprehended 
 and cast into jail, where many of them 
 perished." During the plague and after 
 the great fire, when Parliament was meeting 
 at Oxford and passing measures against 
 them, many of the Nonconformist ministers 
 returned to London and took the place of 
 State ministers who had fled from the post 
 of duty, in succouring the sick and homeless 
 people. It was at this time that Baxter 
 was imprisoned, and that Bunyan spent 
 twelve years in Bedford Jail. Milton, now 
 old and blind, had influence enough to 
 escape the storm, and Paradise Lost and 
 Samson Agonistes remain as monuments of 
 his mental suffering and disappointment. 
 While the Pilgrim''s Progress has given im- 
 mortality to the spiritual side of Puritanism, 
 there remain also other books of the period, 
 which witness to its religious fervour and 
 reality, and to the hold it had over the 
 minds of the people. Such are Joseph 
 Alleine's Call to the Unconverted, Baxter's 
 Saints^ Everlasting Rest and Now or Never, 
 John Howe's The Living Tem.ple, and 
 Bunyan's Grace Abounding to the Chief of 
 Sinners. It is often said that the Puritans 
 had no definite or formulated theology, but 
 they had what was perhaps better, a religious 
 
128 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 insight and experience which found vivid 
 expression for itself under very varied, if 
 sometimes very uncouth, forms. So far from 
 hindering this expression, suffering and per- 
 secution but gave to it edge and point. 
 
 With the fall of Clarendon in 1667, further 
 efforts were made to comprehend the Presby- 
 terians in the Estabhshed Church by relaxing 
 the terms of conformity, but nothing came 
 of them. In the following year the first 
 Conventicle Act expired, and, for a time, 
 the Nonconformists breathed more freely. 
 They used their brief respite to good purpose, 
 and their activity caused no little alarm to 
 the Church party. In consequence of it, 
 Sheldon, the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 persuaded the King to issue a proclamation 
 enforcing the various Acts against Noncon- 
 formity. Parliament thanked the King for 
 his proclamation, and proceeded to pass the 
 second Conventicle Act (1670), which, though 
 less severe in its penalties, was framed so as 
 to be much more effective than the first. It 
 contained a remarkable clause, providing 
 that " if any doubt should arise concerning 
 the meaning of any part of this Act, it was 
 to be determined in the sense that was the 
 most contrary to Conventicles, it being 
 the intention of the House to repress them 
 in the most effectual manner possible." 
 For the moment, however, this intention 
 was frustrated. Charles was occupied with 
 the Dutch War, and had become a pensioner 
 
THE RESTORATION 129 
 
 of the King of France. His foreign policy- 
 was highly unpopular, and he felt that he 
 could not afford to alienate any large section 
 of his people. He resolved, therefore, to 
 suspend the penal laws against the Non- 
 conformists, and in 1671-72 issued his 
 Declaration of Indulgence. The effect of 
 this was that a certain number of places and 
 persons might be licensed for the carrying 
 on of worship in other than the Anglican 
 way. Even Roman Catholics were exempted 
 from penalties, though licences for places 
 of worship were not granted to them. Some 
 of the Presbyterians scrupled to accept this 
 favour, believing that they had by right a 
 place in the National Church. Others of them 
 had no hesitation in applying for licences, 
 and in this they were joined by large numbers 
 of Independents, or Congregationalists, — 
 as they now began to be called, — Baptists, 
 and Quakers. Within the first ten months 
 of the Indulgence some two thousand five 
 hundred licences were granted. Full infor- 
 mation in regard to them has recently been 
 supplied by the industry of the Rev. G. Lyon 
 Turner in his Original Records of Early 
 Nonconformity under Persecution and In- 
 dulgence. The records consist of the 
 Episcopal returns for the years 1665, 1669, 
 and 1676, showing the number of conventicles 
 in the various dioceses, the numbers of their 
 adherents, and the names of their leaders, 
 and also of a large number of documents 
 
130 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 connected with the issue of Hcences under 
 the Declaration of Indulgences in 1672. 
 These most interesting volumes throw a flood 
 of light on the condition of Nonconformity 
 in England at the period indicated. The 
 sects mentioned are Presbyterians, Inde- 
 pendents, Anabaptists or Catabaptists 
 or Antipaedobaptists, and Quakers. The 
 numbers given are surprisingly large, and 
 entries like " numerous " or " very numer- 
 ous " are more common, where no figures 
 are given, than " small " or " very small." 
 The meetings are mostly held in private 
 houses or rooms, and the status of the congre- 
 gations is variously described as " mean," 
 " mostly women," " excommunicate persons," 
 " vulgar," " the middle sort," " farmers and 
 tradesmen," " of good estates and quality," 
 and " all sorts." From these returns, and 
 from those of the applications for licences, 
 we may conclude that in most parishes 
 were to be found a number of Nonconformists 
 fairly representative of the general popula- 
 tion, and often led by men of ability and 
 force, many of these being ejected clergy. 
 For example, in the Diocese of Exeter, 
 we have the following report : " Mr. Robert 
 Collins, some tymes Rector of Tallaton, 
 and eiected for inconformity, lives now in 
 Ottery St. Mary in his owne house neare the 
 Church, where he keeps conventicles fre- 
 quently but especially upon Sundayes in 
 tyme of divine Service to the Scandall of 
 
THE RESTORATION 131 
 
 many : but for want of a Justice of Peace, 
 the Churchwardens or Constables dare not 
 enter the house to take them, and their 
 privacy is such that they cannot yet prove 
 enough ag^' them to convict them by 
 Lawe : I am told he was never at Church 
 in ye time of Common prayer since the act 
 of Conformity and is a very pertinacious 
 Nonconformist. ' ' 
 
 The following letter is a typical application 
 for a licence addressed to the commissioner 
 for licences, Sir Joseph Williamson : — 
 
 " Worthy Sir, — I formerly have been a 
 preacher of the Word but afterwards my 
 ministry was laid aside partly by reason of 
 some sicknesse that then lay upon me and 
 ptly by reason of some things in use wh I 
 cold not with peace of conscience unto. 
 As for my judgement it is only Scripturall 
 and I doe accord with Ministers either 
 episcopall presbiteriall or independant so 
 farre as Scripture and Scriptm-all sense goeth 
 and as the lord hath enlightened my under- 
 standing. I have not preached either in 
 publicke or in private since the nonconforming 
 ministers were laid aside yet have heard 
 altogether in publicke : I haveing read his 
 Majesties gracious declaration humbly crave 
 that according to it I may be alowed to preach 
 the gospel of Christ in the pish (parish) of 
 Thaxted in the County of Essex in a certaine 
 place or house open and free for all commers 
 
 E 2 
 
132 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 where I shall endeavour to my utmost power 
 to dispence ye word of grace faithfully to the 
 peoples soules without medling with anye State 
 affaires and shall be thankful to his Majesty 
 and to those that shall alow me to be im- 
 ployed in so good a worke. So subscribes 
 
 "Henry Coleman, M'^ of Arts of the Uni- 
 versitye of Cambridge, and an ancient preacher 
 of the gospell of Christ. Dwelling in the pish of 
 Much Eiston in the County of Essex, May 14th 
 in the yeare of or Lord 1672." 
 
 The Indulgence, however, was but short- 
 lived. Parliament counted it no part of the 
 King's Prerogative to make such a declara- 
 tion, and resolved " That Penal statutes, in 
 matters ecclesiastical, cannot be suspended 
 but by Act of Parliament." Even some 
 Presbyterians, to their great honour, were 
 against the King in this matter, and as one 
 of their spokesmen said, " They had rather 
 still go without their desired liberty than 
 have it in a way that would prove so detri- 
 mental to the nation." Charles fought hard 
 for his prerogative, but when the Commons 
 held up a money bill he was compelled to yield, 
 and the licences were called in. 
 
 During the remaining years of the reign 
 of Charles various other schemes were set on 
 foot for comprehending Nonconformists within 
 the Church, but without any success. The 
 discovery of the supposed Popish plot under 
 Titus Gates in 1678 greatly embittered feel- 
 
THE RESTORATION 133 
 
 ing and made the Commons more jealous 
 of doing anything to further the poHcy of 
 the King. An Act to exclude the Duke of 
 York, as a Roman Catholic, from the suc- 
 cession was only defeated by the House of 
 Lords and with the help of the Bishops. 
 The Nonconformists were in an evil case and 
 became the ready prey of any one who cared 
 to put the law in force against them. The 
 prisons were full of them, and the Quakers 
 especially suffered. It was at this time that 
 William Penn founded the colony of Penn- 
 sylvania for his distressed co-religionists. 
 Dark and evil as the reign of Charles II was, 
 however, it showed a real advance in the 
 direction of civil and religious Hberty. The 
 two historic parties. Whig and Tory, began 
 then to be distinguished, and the former was 
 identified with the policy of freedom and 
 toleration. The Nonconformists did not suffer 
 in vain. Though most of them had no wish 
 to meddle in State affairs, but simply to 
 preach the gospel without let or hindrance, 
 their protest had poUtical consequences which 
 neither they nor the country could avoid. 
 
134 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 THE REVOLUTION 
 
 It is reported that Charles II once said to 
 his brother, James, Duke of York, " They 
 will never get rid of me in order to make you 
 King " ; and probably no EngHsh king ever 
 came to the throne with less goodwill among 
 his subjects than James II. Charles had 
 died a Roman Catholic, and James was deter- 
 mined to hve as one. Though the Commons 
 accepted his promise to maintain the Govern- 
 ment, both in Church and State, as by law 
 established, and regarded him as more reliable 
 than his brother, there were grave mis- 
 givings in the country which were soon to 
 be justified. No doubt the opportunity for 
 Catholic reaction was less than it had been. 
 The closing years of Charles' reign had 
 brought forth the Habeas Corpus Act, which 
 for ever put an end to arbitrary imprison- 
 ments in this country. Something Uke free- 
 dom of the Press was now established, and 
 this has always acted as a curb on tyranny. 
 James, however, made the best of such 
 opportunities as he had. The Protestant 
 rebellions under Argyll in Scotland and under 
 Monmouth in the South played into his hands. 
 They were made a reason for enforcing the 
 penal laws against Nonconformists. James 
 was cruel by nature, and in Judge Jeffreys he 
 
THE REVOLUTION 135 
 
 found a fit instrument for his work. His 
 Bloody Assize in the West Country has left 
 a bitter memory behind it. One hundred 
 and fifty rebels were hanged, seven hundred 
 were sold into slavery, and many more vrere 
 whipped and imprisoned. Even women 
 were among those put to death, and their 
 trial was in many cases but a travesty of 
 justice. The quality of Jeffreys is illustrated 
 by the fact that he meted out much the 
 same treatment to Titus Oates and to Richard 
 Baxter. Baxter's trial has often been de- 
 scribed, and was typical of what went on 
 in Jeffreys' court. " This is an old rogue, 
 a schismatical knave, a hypocritical villain," 
 shouted the judge. " He hates the Liturgy : 
 he would have nothing but long-winded cant 
 without the book." The judge was all the 
 while more abusive than any prosecuting 
 counsel, and an obsequious jury found the 
 prisoner guilty after the briefest consultation. 
 Baxter was fined and imprisoned, and Jeffreys 
 was with difficulty prevented from having 
 him whipped at the cart's tail. All this 
 created an immense revulsion of feeling in 
 the country. It was known that Jeffreys had 
 his orders direct from the King and that the 
 latter was resolved on a policy of stern re- 
 pression. But the wiser among his counsel- 
 lors knew by this time that Nonconformity 
 was not to be repressed by persecution, 
 and James himself learnt the lesson when it 
 was too late. 
 
136 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Scotland, meanwhile, was suffering even 
 more than the South. The Covenanters 
 were not Nonconformists in the sense 
 that the English were. They represented 
 a State Church and believed in it, but 
 they believed also in religious liberty, and 
 they fought and died for liberty to worship 
 God in their own fashion, in a way that 
 has won them an everlasting name. Under 
 Graham of Claverhouse they were subjected 
 to the crudest treatment. They were 
 harried by his dragoons like wild beasts, 
 and compelled to take refuge in the 
 hills, and carry on their worship in dens 
 and caves of the earth. Men, women and 
 children alike were tortured and put to 
 death, and again it was all carried on at the 
 express orders of the King. 
 
 There can be little doubt that while indi- 
 viduals suffered grievously under this perse- 
 cution, the general cause of Protestantism, 
 and especially of Nonconformity, stood to 
 gain. The constancy of the sufferers made 
 its impression, and we read of ministers who 
 left the Establishment because it was a perse- 
 cuting Church, and of soldiers who threw up 
 their commissions to join the ranks of the 
 Nonconformists. Though the land was full 
 of informers, and the conventicles were re- 
 garded as retreats of criminals, worship was 
 carried on, and the cause prospered. Fear 
 of Romanism had something to do with 
 it, and the outbreak of persecution against 
 
THE REVOLUTION 137 
 
 the Huguenots in France showed England 
 that there was still worse in store for her 
 under a Roman regime. At the same 
 time the thousands of French refugees 
 who came over to this country swelled the 
 ranks and stiffened the resolution of the 
 English Protestants. 
 
 But James soon showed his hand in other 
 ways than by urging persecution. In spite 
 of the Test Act and in defiance of Parlia- 
 ment, he had Roman Catholics appointed 
 to all the high offices of State. He estab- 
 lished them in the Universities by force and 
 in the teeth of public opinion. In order 
 the more effectually to deal with refractory 
 Churchmen he set up again the Court of 
 High Commission, and that he might over- 
 awe the people he greatly increased the 
 standing army. But even Churchmen and 
 Tories were made of sterner stuff than he 
 had thought. Though Royalist to the core, 
 they would not brook tyranny, and they 
 were in no mood to risk the ascendancy of 
 Protestantism. The Churches rang with de- 
 nunciations of Rome, and pamphlets and 
 books on Protestantism poured from the 
 Press. James could not but see that he 
 had undertaken more than he could carry 
 out, and, for a time at least, he turned from 
 the policy of repression and violence to one 
 of indulgence. His first act of indulgence 
 was to liberate some fifteen hundred Quakers 
 from prison. This enabled him to grant 
 
138 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 a similar boon to some hundreds of Roman 
 Catholics, but it had other reasons. The 
 Quakers were very numerous, and they were 
 also a peaceable folk who were free of all 
 complicity in the actions of the Common- 
 wealth against the Stuarts. They were, 
 therefore, considered safe subjects for in- 
 dulgence, and would be likely to gain the 
 King some sort of popularity. Then, again, 
 William Penn had returned from America 
 and had considerable influence at Court. 
 This has not been counted to him for right- 
 eousness, but that he should use his influence 
 to obtain help for his own people is at least 
 to his credit. But the indulgence was not 
 to stop here. Two j^ears later, in 1687, the 
 King issued a Declaration of Indulgence in 
 which he pledged himself to protect and 
 maintain the clergy of the Church of England 
 in the free exercise of their religion, and to 
 suspend all laws inflicting penalties for 
 Nonconformity. At the same time he pro- 
 mised to abolish the Test Acts, and to give 
 a free pardon to all Nonconformists and 
 recusants. This again was a double-edged 
 boon, and it is greatly to the credit of the 
 leading Nonconformists that they were not 
 taken in by it. Some few addresses of 
 thanks were presented to the King, but the 
 London ministers, under the guidance of 
 John Howe and Daniel Williams, refused to 
 support a policy which approved the dis- 
 pensing power of the King and threatened 
 
THE REVOLUTION 189 
 
 the foundations of public liberty. There 
 was much discussion of the subject all over 
 the country, and leading Churchmen like the 
 Marquis of Halifax urged Nonconformists 
 to stand by the side of the Church in defend- 
 ing the Protestant faith, and not to be 
 led astray by specious promises of relief. 
 They hardly needed such admonitions, and 
 none rejoiced more than the Nonconformists 
 to find that there were many Churchmen 
 who were as little favourable to the King's 
 policy as they were themselves. When the 
 Declaration was ordered to be read in the 
 churches seven of the bishops refused. This 
 was, they said, not from any want of duty 
 or obedience to the King, not from any 
 want of tenderness to Dissenters, but because 
 the Declaration was founded upon such a 
 dispensing power as hath been often de- 
 clared illegal in Parliament. The King sent 
 the bishops to the Tower and put them on 
 trial for a seditious libel against himself and 
 his government. But the jury acquitted 
 them amid the most rapturous rejoicings of 
 the whole country. For the moment Church- 
 men and Nonconformists were drawn very 
 closely together, and once more proposals 
 were made for reconciling the more moderate 
 Nonconformists with the Establishment. 
 There was to be a revision of the liturgy 
 with omission of some " ceremonies," and 
 the enforcement of discipline, and Arch- 
 bishop Bancroft urged on his clergy " a very 
 
140 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 tender regard to our brethren the Protestant 
 Dissenters." 
 
 All this time certain of the Protestant 
 notables had been carrying on negotiations 
 with William of Orange, and in 1688 a 
 formal invitation was sent to him to avert 
 by force of arms the dangers which threatened 
 the religion and liberties of the nation. 
 William responded by setting sail for England 
 with a large Dutch force, having inscribed 
 on his banners, " The Protestant religion 
 and liberties of England." James tried to 
 forestall his coming by going back on all his 
 demands and promising full freedom and 
 security to the Protestant faith. But it was 
 too late. After some days of hesitation the 
 country rose to meet William and acclaimed 
 him King and deliverer. Just at the end 
 of the year he entered London in state amid 
 every sign of popular enthusiasm. A week 
 later James fled from the country and so 
 relieved the new government of the only 
 obstacle to a peaceful settlement. 
 
 The task that confronted William III was 
 an extremely difficult one. He was a Pro- 
 testant and a Calvinist with a deep hatred 
 for Roman Catholicism, and as deep a dis- 
 trust of the ecclesiastical leanings of the 
 High Churchmen. His sympathies were all 
 with the Nonconformists, especially with 
 the Presbyterians. He was " never of that 
 mind that violence was suited to the advanc- 
 ing of true religion," Yet he came to be 
 
THE REVOLUTION 141 
 
 head of a Church which had Httle or no 
 sympathy with his own position. Born 
 statesman that he was, he soon discovered 
 that he must maintain good relations with 
 the heads of the AngHcan Church however 
 much he might differ from them, and he 
 was content that his poHcy should be shaped 
 by the general interests of the country rather 
 than by his private religious views. He 
 firmly resisted the suggestion that he should 
 be Regent, and refused to play the lacquey 
 to his wife. When he and Mary were 
 acknowledged as joint sovereigns, the sole 
 administration lay with him. At the same 
 time he willingly accepted the Declaration 
 of Rights which established the position of 
 Parliament and denied the right of the King 
 to suspend laws or raise money without its 
 consent. It also secured the right of the 
 subject to petition, to the free choice of 
 Parliamentary representatives and to a pure 
 administration of justice. It bound the 
 King to maintain the Protestant faith and 
 liberty of religion for all Protestants. This 
 was the beginning of constitutional monarchy 
 as we know it to-day. The King became 
 the creature of an Act of Parliament. Parlia- 
 ment secured now the absolute control of 
 finance, and the King's grant of revenue 
 became a matter of annual supply. In the 
 same way Parliament secured control of 
 the army, by making the powers of discipline 
 and the granting of supplies matter of an 
 
142 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 annual Act. Thus the regular assembly of 
 Parliament became necessary in order to 
 carry on the King's government. Much 
 of this was not at all to William's taste, 
 but after a single outbreak of anger he had 
 the grace to acquiesce, and his far-sighted 
 complaisance helped to lay the foundations 
 of the new order strong and deep. 
 
 The first measure of William's reign affecting 
 religion was the Toleration Act. Noncon- 
 formists and Churchmen, no longer united 
 by opposition to a common foe, soon fell 
 apart, and measures for comprehension came 
 to nothing. The Toleration Act of 1689 showed 
 very clearly the relations in which the two 
 parties were to stand towards each other. 
 It was really an act of condescension towards 
 Nonconformity on the part of the dominant 
 Church. It stereotyped the position of in- 
 feriority and sufferance which the Noncon- 
 formists were henceforth expected to maintain; 
 But at the same time it established freedom 
 of worship, and by denying to the Noncon- 
 formists any part or lot in the Establishment, 
 it left them free to work out their own 
 salvation, and to play their part in their own 
 way in the religious life of the country. It 
 also threw Nonconformists into the arms of 
 the political party which stood for freedom 
 and progress, just as it tended to stereotype 
 the Church and identify it with the forces 
 of conservatism. For the moment, too, the 
 Church of England had difficulties of her 
 
THE REVOLUTION 143 
 
 own to face. Many of the clergy had given 
 only a haK-hearted assent to the Revolution. 
 They still believed in the doctrine of the 
 divine right of kings, and regarded it as an 
 outrage that the oath of allegiance to the 
 new sovereigns should be exacted from them. 
 Sancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury, with 
 certain other bishops and a large number of 
 clergy, refused altogether to take the oath and 
 regarded those who took it as schismatics. 
 They were deprived by Act of ParHament, 
 but they looked upon themselves and those 
 who acted with them as the only members 
 of the true Church of England, and behaved 
 accordingly. There is no doubt that these 
 Nonjurors, as they were called, had the 
 sympathy of the whole of the High Church 
 party, even of those among them who took 
 the oath. Their attitude compelled WilHam 
 to find Church leaders among the Whigs 
 and Latitudinarians, and these again were 
 alienated from the great body of the clergy. 
 Such a severance greatly weakened the 
 Church and was the cause of internal strife 
 which lasted for many years. It has to be 
 reckoned with in estimating the causes of the 
 growth of Nonconformity. 
 
 The Toleration Act was a very restricted 
 boon. It suffered Nonconformists to meet 
 and worship, but they were still compelled 
 to subscribe to the doctrinal Articles of the 
 Church of England, and to pay tithe and 
 Church rates. It was accepted not without 
 
144 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 misgivings. Baxter, for one, scrupled at 
 signing the Athanasian Creed, declaring that 
 he only believed in its positive teaching and 
 not in the damnatory clauses. At the same 
 time he put his own interpretation on the 
 Articles and would only accept them as he 
 was allowed to do so. He was not without 
 sympathisers ; and from this time forward 
 we can trace the groAvth of the movement 
 towards complete intellectual freedom in 
 matters of faith. Soon after the passing 
 of the Act appeared John Locke's letters on 
 Toleration, in which the true Nonconformist 
 attitude on the relations of Church and State 
 was set forth in most complete and masterly 
 fashion. Locke had been trained among 
 Independents and had imbibed much of their 
 spirit. To him " all the Hfe and power 
 of rehgion consist in the inward persuasion 
 of the mind : and faith is not faith without 
 believing. The civil magistrate's power con- 
 sists only in outward force, and it is impossible 
 for the understanding to be compelled to the 
 behef of anything by such a force. Even if 
 the rigour of the law could change men's 
 opinions it would not help to the salvation of 
 their souls." 
 
 Inadequate as it was, the Toleration Act 
 produced immediate results. Nonconformity 
 began to breathe freely and spread with 
 great rapidity. In the tAvelve closing years 
 of the seventeenth century two thousand 
 four hundred and eighteen Dissenting meeting- 
 
THE REVOLUTION 145 
 
 houses were licensed for public worship. 
 These were attended by people of all classes 
 and, in the towns at least, the Noncon- 
 formists were among the most substantial 
 members of the community. They began 
 to open academies for the education of their 
 ministers, and schools for the education of 
 the children of the poor. Even in the reign 
 of James, one such school was founded in 
 Southwark " for the instruction of children 
 in reading, writing, and arithmetic, and the 
 girls in sewing and knitting and furnishing 
 them with books for their instruction in 
 these arts, and with Testaments, catechisms, 
 and Bibles." This school has had many 
 imitators, and is a standing witness to the 
 interest in things educational which has 
 always been a characteristic of Noncon- 
 formists. 
 
 They were not, however, altogether free 
 from disabilities. The Test and Corporation 
 Acts were still in force, and it was impossible 
 to hold any civil office without first taking 
 the sacrament according to the rites of the 
 Church of England. This led to the practice 
 of occasional conformity on the part of some 
 Dissenters. Of these not a few, including 
 some leading ministers Hke Howe, conformed 
 at stated times in order that they might 
 still keep up some connection with the Church 
 of their Fathers. But others regarded the 
 rite as a mere form necessary to the main- 
 tenance of their position as English citizens. 
 
146 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 It became to them " an office key, a picklock 
 to a place." By many Nonconformists this 
 practice was roundly condemned, and the 
 subject was a matter of sharp controversy. 
 It brought forth Daniel Defoe's pamphlet 
 on The Practice of Occasional Conformity^ 
 in which it was argued that if occasional 
 conformity was allowable, then Dissent was a 
 sin ; but if Dissent was right, then conformity, 
 occasional or otherwise, was the sin. The 
 sharpness with which this dilemma is stated 
 illustrates the temper of the times, and the 
 spirit of a toleration which was equally stiff 
 on both sides and had no room for the 
 charity that thinketh no evil. 
 
 It will be convenient at this point to sum up 
 briefly and in general terms the position of 
 the various Nonconformist bodies under the 
 first few years of the Toleration Act, and to 
 discover how much truth there was in the 
 opinion expressed by Bishop Burnet that 
 Dissent was likely to die out within the 
 generation then existing. The statement 
 was only warranted by the fact that Noncon- 
 formists had flourished under persecution, 
 and that many of the men who had led them 
 in the days of trial were now old or dead. 
 The Congregationalists especially had suffered 
 in this way. Their leading ministers were 
 Matthew Mead of Stepney, a mild and 
 laborious man, Isaac Chauncey of Mark 
 Lane, and Stephen Lobb, a Jacobite Dissenter, 
 of Fetter Lane. The Presbyterians, on the 
 
THE REVOLUTION 147 
 
 other hand, had nearly all their old leaders 
 
 living. Baxter was drawing near the end of 
 
 his pilgrimage, but he still counted. Howe 
 
 was in his sixtieth year, a most moderate 
 
 Presbyterian and the friend of all the sects 
 
 as well as of the Established Church. With 
 
 him stood the silver-tongued Bates, and 
 
 Samuel Annesley, Matthew Sylvester, and 
 
 Dr. Daniel Williams. These represented the 
 
 great preachers of London, and they had 
 
 brethren in other parts of the country who 
 
 were not unworthy of them. Under the 
 
 influence of Baxter and Howe on the one 
 
 side, and of Mead on the other, proposals 
 
 were now made for union betv/een the 
 
 Congregational and Presbyterian bodies. 
 
 Certain articles of agreement were drawn 
 
 up and assented to by the ministers in and 
 
 about London. The articles provide an 
 
 interesting amalgam of the two polities. 
 
 The right of each congregation to choose 
 
 its own officers is recognised, as also is the 
 
 right of ministers and elders to rule and 
 
 govern with the consent of the brotherhood. 
 
 The ministry is to be elected by the Churches, 
 
 and it is " ordinarily requisite " that the 
 
 pastors of the neighbouring Churches shall 
 
 concur in the election. Synods are to be called 
 
 for advice and consultation, and Churches 
 
 should take note of their decisions. The 
 
 question of ruling elders is left open, and 
 
 so far as theology is concerned the Divine 
 
 origin of the Scriptures, and the doctrinal 
 
148 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 parts of the Articles, or of the Westminster 
 or Savoy Confessions, are all that need be 
 required of any Church. Though the Churches 
 were not consulted in the negotiations, this 
 scheme appears to have been accepted 
 without question in many parts of the 
 country. But the reconciliation was as 
 premature as it was incomplete. Some Con- 
 gregational ministers never accepted it, and 
 disputes on doctrinal points soon broke out. 
 There was no real theological unity between 
 Independents and Presbyterians. The former 
 were Calvinists of a much sterner type than 
 the latter, and the two bodies were not pre- 
 pared as yet to dwell together in peace. 
 The scheme came to nothing, though the 
 long-drawn-out controversy was not allowed 
 to hinder friendly relations. The denomina- 
 tional distinctions tended from this time 
 forward to become more fixed, and each of 
 these great bodies had its own history and 
 played its part in the religious life of the 
 country. 
 
 The Baptists were considerably weaker 
 than either the Presbyterians or the Con- 
 gregationalists. They suffered from internal 
 divisions, the Particular Baptists being ex- 
 treme Calvinists, while the General Baptists 
 were much more liberal in their views. As 
 might be expected from their history the 
 Baptists were strongly opposed to a State 
 Church and to the use of the secular power 
 to support or antagonise religion. They 
 
THE REVOLUTION 149 
 
 believed that Christ's " spiritual Kingdom, 
 which is His Church here on earth, ought 
 not to be set up or forced either by the sword 
 or any civil law whatsoever, but by the 
 preaching of the Gospel, which is the sword 
 of the Spirit and the word of God." At the 
 period with which we are dealing, the Baptists 
 did not make very rapid progress. They held 
 more than one Assembly in order to discuss 
 the condition of their denomination, which 
 even they themselves could not regard as 
 satisfactory. 
 
 The Quakers, on the other hand, were still 
 active and progressive. In some respects 
 they were the most important of the Non- 
 conformist bodies, and were the subjects 
 of special legislation, as, e.g., in regard to the 
 taking of the oath, on more than one occasion. 
 George Fox and Barclay were still living. 
 Penn had as great a political influence as any 
 man of his time, and George Whitehead was 
 one of the most effective preachers of the 
 day. Many new Quaker meeting-places 
 were opened after the passing of the Toleration 
 Act, and those who attended them were the 
 salt of Nonconformity. 
 
 This same period also saw the beginnings 
 of a definite movement towards Socinianism. 
 Attacks on Trinitarian doctrine were not 
 infrequent both inside the Established Church 
 and from without it. They gave rise to a 
 wordy warfare in sermons and pamphlets, and 
 Tillotson was driven to admit of the Socinians 
 
150 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 that " They are a pattern of the fair way of 
 disputing : they argue without passion, with 
 decency, dignity, clearness, and gravity." 
 As much could hardly be said of those on 
 the other side. There was no toleration 
 for Socinians. To clergy and ministers alike 
 they were no better than " impious blas- 
 phemers," and the House of Commons readily 
 passed an Act prohibiting the publication of 
 attacks on the doctrine of the Trinity, and 
 visiting those who offended in this matter 
 with a kind of outlawry. 
 
 As regards the relations between the various 
 denominations there is not much to be said. 
 The Quakers and Baptists stood aloof from 
 all intercourse, either with one another or with 
 the other Churches. The Congregationalists 
 and Presbyterians, as we have seen, were 
 accustomed to act together, and without any 
 formal union easily combined when their 
 common interests required it. As regards 
 the Church of England, the Presbyterians 
 were the most friendly, and hesitated to take 
 up any attitude which should emphasise 
 their separation from the national Church. 
 It was among them that the practice of 
 occasional conformity was most prevalent. 
 On the other hand, neither Quakers nor 
 Baptists held any religious communion with 
 members of the Established Church, and 
 some of the Baptists went so far as to prohibit 
 attendance at Anglican places of worship, 
 and to forbid social intercourse and inter- 
 
THE REVOLUTION 151 
 
 marriage with Anglicans. The attitude of 
 the Congregationalists was between these 
 two extremes. They succeeded in distinguish- 
 ing more clearly than some of their con- 
 temporaries between the Church as a religous 
 institution and as a State establishment — a 
 distinction which later on became of vital 
 importance. 
 
 As the separation between Whigs and 
 Tories in politics became more marked the 
 Nonconformists naturally identified them- 
 selves with the former, and, as naturally, 
 they suffered from the Tory reaction in the 
 latter days of William's reign. At this 
 period there was a very real division between 
 the bishops and the great body of the clergy. 
 The bishops were, generally speaking. Whig, 
 and prepared to accept the revolution and 
 all its consequences. They were favourable 
 to Nonconformists and not disposed to make 
 too much of the divisions which separated 
 these from the Church. To a man like 
 Bishop Burnet, with his masculine common 
 sense, the causes of division were very small 
 things indeed, beside the great points in 
 which he regarded all Christians as agreed. 
 The great bulk of the clergy, on the other hand, 
 had more sympathy with the nonjurors 
 than with the bishops. They made no 
 secret of their Jacobite leanings on the one 
 hand, and of their hatred of Dissenters on the 
 other. It was under the guidance of such 
 men that Convocation began to assert 
 
152 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 itself and that the Episcopal and sacerdotal 
 positions were pressed to the extremes with 
 which we are familiar to-day. High Church- 
 men of this type were sworn enemies of 
 the toleration policy, and received the news 
 of William's death in 1702 with every sign 
 of exultation. 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 REACTION AND DECLINE 
 
 When Anne came to the throne in 1702 
 the Tory reaction was in full flood. The 
 Queen herself avowed the strongest High 
 Church principles and had no love for Dis- 
 senters. When the three denominations, Pres- 
 byterians, Congregationalists, and Baptists, 
 united to present her with a loyal address 
 on her accession she received them in silence, 
 and, in her first speeches from the throne, 
 while promising to maintain the Act of 
 Toleration, she spoke of her interest in the 
 rehgion of the Church of England, and of 
 her determination to countenance those who 
 were zealous to support it. She speedily rid 
 herself of the Whig leaders of Wilham's time, 
 and supplied their places with men of Tory 
 sympathies like Marlborough, Godolphin, 
 and Harley. In all this the High Church 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 153 
 
 party saw their opportunity and set about 
 an agitation, first for the suppression of the 
 Dissenting Academies, and secondly for the 
 repeal of the Occasional Conformity Act. 
 They found a ready tool in Henry Sach- 
 everell, a bigoted and unscrupulous clergy- 
 man, who was past master in the arts of 
 the demagogue, and, by the violence of 
 his preaching, easily able to inflame the 
 popular feehng against the Nonconformists. 
 He denounced the Academies as being a 
 danger to Church and State, "fountains of 
 lewdness from which were spawned all 
 descriptions of heterodox, lewd, and athe- 
 istical books." In this campaign he was well 
 seconded by Samuel Wesley, the father of 
 John Wesley, who wrote a "Letter from a 
 country Divine concerning the education of 
 Dissenters in their private Academies in 
 several parts of the nation." Wesley almost 
 outdid Sacheverell in the violence of his 
 abuse, and the controversy to which his 
 writings gave rise shows clearly enough that 
 these hated Academies had reached such a 
 position of influence and usefulness as to 
 be feared with some reason by those who 
 objected to Dissent. It was even urged that 
 they " endangered the success of the two 
 ancient Universities," in that they inter- 
 cepted many who would otherwise have 
 sought their education there. Such re- 
 proaches came well from those who at the 
 same time taunted Dissenters with their 
 
154 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 ignorance. As one of the replies to Wesley 
 said, " He excludes them from the fountain 
 of learning, nor will he allow them to drink 
 water out of their own cisterns. He would 
 have them punished for using the means of 
 knowledge and yet damns them for the 
 prejudices of ignorance." The controversy 
 is interesting as opening up the question of 
 the relation of Nonconformists to the Uni- 
 versities, the source of a grievance which 
 remained unredressed for many years. 
 
 Among the host of writers which these 
 disputes brought forth one of the most 
 vigorous and effective was Defoe, though he 
 was by no means regarded with favour by 
 those whose cause he espoused. It was in 
 answer to Sacheverell that he wrote his 
 Shortest Way with Dissenters, a satire on the 
 Sacheverell manner, in which he suggested 
 that lay Nonconformists should be banished 
 and their ministers hanged. This was taken 
 quite seriously by the High Church party 
 with whose desires it was altogether in 
 agreement, and when they discovered the 
 hoax they were furious. Defoe was fined, 
 pilloried, and imprisoned, and his book burnt 
 by the common hangman, but not before it 
 had done its work. The curious thing is 
 that the Dissenters themselves failed to see 
 through it, or refused to believe that it 
 was not meant seriously, and the unfortunate 
 author thus fell between two stools. 
 
 The Bill for the prevention of Occasional 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 155 
 
 Conformity was introduced at the instance 
 of the University members in ParUament, 
 and passed the Commons by a large majority. 
 It was intended to exclude Dissenters alto- 
 gether from the public life of the country, and 
 from civil, mihtary, and naval offices. The 
 Lords, however, who still retained something of 
 their old Whig feeling, amended the Bill in 
 important particulars, and returned it to the 
 Commons. It was then considered for some 
 time in conference between the two Houses 
 and was finally rejected in the Lords, fourteen 
 Bishops voting in the majority. The excite- 
 ment which this struggle caused was intense, 
 and the whole country seemed to share in 
 the resentment which the rejection of the 
 Bill created. Swift, in one of his letters to 
 Stella, writes: "I wish you had been here 
 for ten days, during the highest and warmest 
 reign of party and faction that I ever knew 
 or read of upon the Bill against occasional 
 conformity which two days ago was, upon 
 the first reading, rejected by the Lords. It 
 was so universal that I observed the dogs in 
 the streets were much more contumeHous and 
 quarrelsome than usual, and the very night 
 before the Bill went up, a committee of 
 Whig and Tory cats had a very warm and 
 loud debate upon the roof of our house. 
 But why should we wonder at that, when the 
 very ladies are split asunder into High Church 
 and Low, and out of zeal for rehgion have 
 hardly time to say their prayers. For the 
 
156 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 rest, the whole body of the clergy with a great 
 majority of the House of Commons were very 
 violent for this Bill." 
 
 The failure of this attack only served to 
 increase the hatred of Dissenters felt by the 
 clergy and by a very large section of the 
 populace. Sacheverell continued his cam- 
 paign of calumny, and brought matters to a 
 head in a famous sermon before the Lord 
 Mayor and Corporation of London on " Perils 
 from False Brethren." In it he asserted 
 in the strongest terms the High Church 
 doctrine of non-resistance, and charged with 
 rebellion and high treason all who did not 
 agree with him. The Dissenters came in 
 for the usual measure of abuse. They were 
 " monsters and vipers," " filthy dreamers 
 and despisers of dominion," " miscreants 
 begat in rebellion, born in sedition and nursed 
 in faction," and much more of the same kind. 
 Forty thousand copies of this " sweet dis- 
 course " were circulated. But it was too 
 strong meat for the Government, especially 
 as it contained some contemptuous references 
 to Godolphin, the first minister of the Crown. 
 Sacheverell was impeached and sentenced 
 to deprivation for three years and to have 
 his offending sermons burnt by the hangman. 
 He at once became a popular hero. After his 
 suspension he made a kind of triumphal 
 progress through the country, and was every- 
 where received with the wildest enthusiasm. 
 "High Church and Dr. Sacheverell" became 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 157 
 
 the popular cry. There were dangerous 
 riots in many places in which the Dissenters 
 suffered from the fury of the mob, and many 
 meeting-houses were burnt down. The whole 
 agitation was used to the utmost by the 
 Church party and the Tories to bring the 
 Whigs into unpopularity and to show them up 
 as enemies of religion and of the Crown. It 
 succeeded only too well. In 1711 another 
 Bill against occasional conformity was 
 brought in and passed both Houses without 
 difficulty. It provided that all persons 
 holding any public office, if they attended 
 any meeting for divine worship where the 
 Book of Common Prayer was not used, should 
 forfeit their office and pay a fine of £40, 
 the money to go to the informer. Such 
 persons were to be held incapable of office 
 until they could prove that they had attended 
 no conventicle for a year. It was clearly seen 
 by the Whigs that the exclusion of all Dis- 
 senters from public offices would probably 
 imperil the Hanoverian succession. The 
 leading Dissenters were therefore begged to 
 retain their public positions, and were pro- 
 mised relief in a new reign. Most of them 
 seem to have yielded to this political pressure. 
 They ceased to attend conventicles and had 
 services with private chaplains in their own 
 houses. 
 
 The next blow was a much more serious 
 one. It was the result of the agitation set 
 on foot by Sacheverell and Wesley against 
 
158 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 the Academies, and it took the shape of a 
 Bill " to prevent the growth of Schism, and 
 for the further security of the Church of 
 England as by law established," which was 
 introduced in 1714. This enacted that no 
 person should teach or instruct youth either 
 privately, or in a school or college, without 
 conforming to the Church of England and 
 obtaining a licence from a bishop. The 
 penalty attached was three months' im- 
 prisonment. It further provided that no 
 licensed teacher was to teach any catechism 
 but that of the Church of England. Any 
 person, however, who lost his licence for 
 teaching an unauthorised catechism might 
 recover it on swearing that he had not 
 attended a conventicle for a year and, during 
 the year, had three times received the sacra- 
 ment in the Church of England. The Bill 
 was passed with certain amendments ex- 
 empting from its provisions teachers in 
 elementary secular subjects and tutors in 
 noble families. Before it came into opera- 
 tion, however, the Queen died, and it was 
 repealed early in the new reign. 
 
 For the moment, however, the outlook 
 for Nonconformists was very dark. On the 
 Sunday morning that the Schism Act was 
 to be enforced, Thomas Bradbury, Inde- 
 pendent minister of the church in Fetter 
 Lane, met Bishop Burnet, who rallied him 
 on his desponding looks. " I am thinking," 
 said Bradbury, " whether I shall have the 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 159 
 
 constancy and resolution of that noble 
 company of martyrs whose ashes are de- 
 posited in this place, for I most assuredly 
 expect to see similar times of persecution 
 and violence and that I shall be called to 
 suffer in a like cause." The Bishop then 
 told him that the Queen was dying, and 
 promised to send a messenger to Bradbury's 
 chui'ch if the end came during the morning. 
 While Bradbury was preaching the expected 
 tidings were brought. He finished his sermon, 
 and in his closing prayer spoke of George, 
 King of Great Britain and Ireland. As Dr. 
 Dale says, it was not unfitting that the first 
 public announcement of the accession of the 
 house of Hanover should be made in a 
 Nonconformist meeting-house. 
 
 At the time of the death of Queen Anne, 
 the spiritual condition of the Nonconformists 
 was by no means satisfactory. They had 
 suffered from Indulgence and the promise 
 of Indulgence more than they did from 
 persecution. No really trustworthy statistics 
 are available, but such as there are seem to 
 point to the fact that their numbers did not 
 grow during Anne's reign, and there are 
 complaints of secession on the part of younger 
 members to the Established Church. Though 
 the Nonconformists stood for liberty and 
 progress, they were really very conservative 
 in many respects. Theologically they had 
 changed little, and they still indulged in 
 sermons and prayers of inordinate length. 
 
160 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Their public services, which had lost much 
 of the old fervour, were often dull and lifeless. 
 They were suffering from the spirit of com- 
 promise, which had not only crept into their 
 church life but had affected all their conduct. 
 Burnet, who was no unfriendly critic, charges 
 them with having forfeited much of their 
 reputation for strictness. The decline con- 
 tinued during the reign of the first two 
 Georges, and it is said that in this time 
 more than fifty Nonconformist ministers 
 joined the State Church. 
 
 On the accession of George I in 1714, the 
 Dissenting ministers of London presented 
 him with a loyal address. As they ap- 
 proached the King in their Geneva gowns, 
 a nobleman of the Court said to Bradbury, 
 " Is this a funeral ? " " No, my lord," he 
 replied, "it is a resurrection." The words 
 exactly express the spirit with which the 
 Nonconformists viewed the new reign. The 
 first months of it were very much disturbed. 
 The Jacobite outbreaks had to be dealt 
 with, and the Church and Tory partisans 
 showed their hostility to the house of 
 Hanover by burning meeting-houses in many 
 parts of the country. Through all these 
 troubles the Dissenters gave repeated tokens 
 of their loyalty, and among the first legis- 
 lative measures of the reign was the repeal 
 of the Occasional Conformity and Schism 
 Acts. When George II came to the throne 
 in 1727, the first Annual Bill of Indemnity 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 161 
 
 was passed for relieving Dissenters from the 
 penalties incurred by violating the Test and 
 Corporation Acts. This, however, was a 
 very inadequate form of relief, and agitation 
 was at once begun for obtaining the repeal 
 of the obnoxious measm-e. This led to the 
 definite organisation of the Dissenting 
 Deputies representing the three great de- 
 nominations. It was the first attempt to 
 band Nonconformists together for the pro- 
 tection of their civil rights, and the society, 
 which is still in existence, performed yeoman 
 service in all the struggles for religious 
 liberty which were yet in store. Their first 
 efforts met with very little sympathy from 
 Walpole. He had burnt his fingers in trying 
 to obtain some relief for Quakers in the 
 matter of Church rates, and he was very 
 loath to face the cry, " The Church in danger." 
 All attempts to secure the repeal of the Acts 
 through independent Members of Parlia- 
 ment failed, and the matter was left to rest 
 till 1787. But Walpole knew a better way. 
 It was a favourite doctrine with him that 
 every man had his price. When, therefore, 
 it was suggested that the King should make 
 a grant from the Royal purse for the relief 
 of Dissenters he welcomed the idea eagerly. 
 Thus the Regium Bonum was established. 
 At first five hundred a year, and later on a 
 thousand a year, was given to certain ministers 
 to be distributed at their discretion among 
 the widows of ministers and poor ministers. 
 
 F 
 
162 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 There can be no doubt that this did much 
 harm. It acted, as Walpole intended that 
 it should, as a sop, and is very likely re- 
 sponsible for the delay in the agitation for 
 repeal of the Test Acts, and for the lethargic 
 condition of Nonconformity at this period. 
 
 But there was yet another cause which 
 contributed to the same result. In 1712 one 
 Thomas Emlyn, a minister in Dublin, wrote 
 a book confessing a very mild type of 
 Unitarianism. He was prosecuted, fined a 
 thousand pounds, and imprisoned till the 
 fine should be paid. The case excited some 
 attention and was the beginning of the 
 renewal of the Unitarian controversy. The 
 trouble began in Exeter, where one James 
 Pierce, a man of great ability and influence, 
 with two or three other Presbyterian ministers, 
 was suspected of Arianism. After discus- 
 sions in the Assembly of Devon and Cornwall, 
 the matter was referred to seven ministers 
 who, on the advice of some of their brethren 
 in London, drew up a kind of ultimatum 
 for the direction of the managers of the 
 Exeter churches. These managers, after 
 interviews with the erring ministers, dis- 
 missed two of them. Pierce and Hallet, from 
 their churches. Meanwhile the question was 
 being discussed in London. A meeting of 
 the general body of Dissenters was held in 
 Salter's Hall, at which it appeared that there 
 were many London ministers who were in 
 sympathy with the Exeter heretics. When 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 163 
 
 at a further meeting, an attempt was made 
 to obtain the assent of those present to a 
 declaration of beUef in the Doctrines of the 
 Trinity and of the Divinity of our Lord, 
 the company at once divided into sub- 
 scribers and non-subscribers. Each then 
 constituted their own assembly, the large 
 majority of the non-subscribers being Presby- 
 terians, while the subscribing assembly con- 
 sisted mainly of Congregationalists and 
 Baptists under the leadership of Thomas 
 Bradbury. This division marked a real 
 doctrinal rupture between Congregationalists 
 and Presbyterians The non-subscribers re- 
 pudiated Arianism, but many of them later 
 became Unitarians and were the founders 
 of the Unitarian denomination, while eighteen 
 or twenty of them, under some curious 
 process of reaction, signed the thirty-nine 
 Articles and joined the Church of England. 
 
 The Salter's Hall controversy had thus 
 very important results. It meant almost 
 the temporary extinction of Presbyterianism 
 and a great strengthening of Congrega- 
 tionalism. Many of the subscribing Presby- 
 terians joined Congregational Churches, and 
 some subscribing Churches were obliged to 
 obtain their ministers from Congregational 
 Academies. A few Independent ministers 
 went over, the most notable among them 
 being James Foster, the minister of the 
 Pinner's Hall Church. Many others of them, 
 however, were profoundly influenced by the 
 
 F 2, 
 
164 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 rationalising spirit of the time, and it must 
 be confessed that the spread of Deism was 
 felt in Nonconformist pulpits and contributed 
 powerfully to the barrenness of the churches 
 in this period. The older Independent 
 theologians had written and spoken more 
 as prophets than as philosophers. They 
 were entrusted with a word of the Lord 
 and they gave utterance to it in no uncertain 
 fashion. But in the period we have now 
 reached preachers attempted to rationalise 
 their message and to argue for its accept- 
 ance on philosophical grounds. Conspicuous 
 among such men were Philip Doddridge and 
 Isaac Watts. The former was a devout and 
 earnest soul whose own religious experience 
 saved him from any serious theological 
 extravagances. He was eager, however, to 
 soften down the asperities of the current 
 Calvinism, and, so far as he could, to disarm 
 criticism by making faith reasonable. Watts 
 laid all the Churches under obligation by 
 his hymns. Some of them, no doubt, are 
 now entirely obsolete, but there are others 
 which will live as long as sacred song does. 
 And it may be said of all of them that they 
 were so great an improvement on anything 
 that had gone before as to amount to a 
 revolution. Though he never inclined to 
 Arianism, Watts showed some curious theo- 
 logical aberrations. He was a man of keen 
 and speculative intellect and was very 
 much under the influence of the rationalising 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 165 
 
 tendency. Along with these may be men- 
 tioned Matthew Henry, who died in 1714, 
 with his great commentary on the Scrip- 
 tures unfinished. This monumental work re- 
 mained the standard of scripture exposition 
 for many generations and is even used 
 to-day. It was a work of immense industry, 
 and fertile in illustration and suggestion. 
 Its influence on preachers was very great, 
 and it helped to keep the pulpit true to the 
 Bible in an age when the danger of mere 
 speculation was very real. 
 
 One good effect of the Salter's Hall con- 
 troversy was the impetus it gave to the 
 feeling against subscription to creeds. This 
 was shared equally by subscribers and non- 
 subscribers, and was fostered also by the 
 rationalistic movement. It led, however, to 
 a spirit of indifferentism in the churches 
 and to a low conception of Christian obliga- 
 tion in life as well as in creed. Noncon- 
 formity is always the fruit of deep con- 
 viction and the expression of a vigorous 
 religious life. Where these are not it has 
 little or no reason to exist, and remains but 
 an empty shell. It was no wonder, therefore, 
 that at this time " the decay of the Dis- 
 senting interest " seemed to many close 
 observers to be imminent. None were more 
 conscious of this decline than the Noncon- 
 formist leaders themselves, and it may at 
 least be said for them that they did their 
 best to diagnose the mischief and to suggest 
 
166 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 remedies. From this period date a number 
 of most interesting pamphlets dealing with 
 the decay of dissent and with the need for 
 religious revival, which throw much light 
 on the spiritual condition both of the churches 
 and of the people generally. Among the 
 causes alleged for the decline among Dis- 
 senters the most important is stated as 
 " Ignorance of their own principles." The 
 fundamental principle of Nonconformity is 
 said to be liberty, and the times were such 
 that men tended to lose the good old Puritan 
 conception of the value of liberty in religion. 
 They were too ready to make terms with 
 the Established Church, and to entrust the 
 education of their children to institutions 
 managed by that Church. So among them- 
 selves also there was some danger of for- 
 getting the freedom of the spirit in the 
 desire to secure uniformity of doctrine if not 
 of worship. The ministers are not allowed 
 sufficient freedom in preaching, and the 
 people are not willing "to be instructed by 
 those who have the courage to teach them 
 even disagreeable truths, rather than flat- 
 tered into what may possibly be false, and 
 if it be true, is of the least importance in 
 religion." It is complained that congrega- 
 tions are too jealous of heresy in their 
 younger ministers, and that the form in 
 which truth is stated is held to be almost 
 more important than the substance. Then 
 again, the ministry is not held in sufficient 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 167 
 
 estimation. It is badly paid and no induce- 
 ment is provided for men of good family 
 and education to enter its ranks. The 
 academies are not doing all that they should. 
 The education given in them needs to be 
 of a higher standard, with a clear distinction 
 between the courses in Arts and Theology. 
 There should be more attention paid to 
 homiletics and deportment, and one writer 
 quoted by Dr. Dale says, " It may seem odd 
 and whimsical to propose a dancing-master 
 for one tutor at an academy : but if some- 
 thing equivalent to it w^as contrived to give 
 the students a gracefulness and gentility of 
 address, and prune off all clumsiness and 
 awkwardness that is disagreeable to people 
 of fashion, and which gives learning the air 
 of pedantry, it would do them a most eminent 
 service." 
 
 In another anonymous pamphlet published 
 in 1731 the subject is dealt with still more 
 broadly and thoroughly. The writer sees that 
 Nonconformity is suffering, as all religion 
 is suffering, not only from a general decay of 
 earnestness and moral power, but also from 
 causes peculiar to itself. Its strength lies 
 among the trading sections of the com- 
 munity, and trade has been very bad, hence 
 a decline both in numbers and in wealth. 
 At the same time there is no doubt that 
 Nonconformists are not as keen about their 
 principles as they were. This is seen in their 
 lack of care as to the education of their 
 
168 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 children under Nonconformist auspices. 
 " We thought it a very unnatural hardship 
 laid upon us by the Schism Act which took 
 away from us our privilege of educating our 
 children : and methinks we should not 
 tamely and foolishly do almost the same 
 thing that Act aimed at, by voluntarily 
 putting our children under such sort of 
 tuition. Though the contrivers of that Act 
 did it to their eternal infamy, yet in this 
 they acted a wise and consistent part, taking 
 thereby the hkehest step to suppress our 
 interest. And shall we, who are sensible 
 of their view in it, by taking much the same 
 steps be contributing towards the accomplish- 
 ment of it ? I would not, therefore, where 
 there is any opportunity of avoiding it, send 
 a child to a Tory school so much as to learn 
 his A.B.C." 
 
 In a similar pamphlet Isaac Watts deals 
 with the more general aspects of the situation. 
 The decay of vital religion is universal, and 
 has had its influence on the Nonconformists 
 especially because it is essential to the main- 
 tenance of their position that they should 
 be in earnest. They share in the general 
 tendency to neglect the Lord's Day, and are 
 too often content with worshipping once 
 only thereon. They have declined from the 
 high moral standard of their fathers. They 
 do not talk about religion as readily as they 
 used to do, and they are much given to 
 scandal. Their life has become less regular 
 
REACTION AND DECLINE 169 
 
 and disciplined, they are more prone to the 
 pursuit of pleasure and to extravagant 
 living, nor are they so particular as they 
 should be as to the character of the amuse- 
 ments in which they take part. Add to 
 these things a similar carelessness in theology, 
 and a lack of reverence for some of the 
 fundamentals of the faith, and we have a 
 very dark picture indeed and one curiously 
 modern in many of its features. 
 
 But the story is not altogether so black 
 as it seems. Many of these pamphlets 
 brought forth replies, and one of the most 
 interesting of them is written by Doddridge. 
 He is especially insistent on the point that 
 there is no real falling off in numbers, decline 
 in one part of the country being more than 
 met by advance in another. Speaking of 
 the Midland counties, he says : " I know that 
 in many of them, the number of Dissenters is 
 greatly increased within these twenty years : 
 and the interest continues so to flourish, that 
 I am confident some of our honest people who 
 converse only with their own neighbourhood, 
 will be surprised to hear of an Enquiry 
 into the causes of its decay." At the same 
 time he admits much that is said as to the 
 other signs of decay. There were not want- 
 ing, however, attempts to arrest the decline. 
 We have records of meetings both of ministers 
 and laymen held in London and elsewhere in 
 order to concert measures for reviving the 
 thi-eatened "interest." Books and lectures 
 
170 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 defending the older theological positions 
 were published, and new academies for 
 training ministers were founded. The 
 " Northern Education Society " was estab- 
 lished, principally in order to attack the 
 Socinianism which was spreading among 
 the Northern Churches. In connection with 
 it appeared the Heckmondwike Academy 
 in Yorkshire, of which there is a modern 
 survival in the Heckmondwike Lecture. 
 Attempts were made to hold lectures of 
 an apologetic kind in many of the larger 
 churches, and to improve the evening services 
 with the view of attracting audiences from 
 the outside. 
 
 As we shall see later, the normal Noncon- 
 formist Churches and ministers looked with 
 great disfavour at first on the revival under 
 Wesley and Whitefield which broke out at 
 this time. Considering their traditions, this 
 is not altogether to be wondered at. But it 
 does not argue by any means a complete 
 indifference to vital religion on their part. 
 Enough has been said to show that the very 
 opposite was the case. The men of these 
 Churches were deeply concerned about the 
 low moral condition of the age, and about 
 the failure of the organised Churches to cope 
 with it. They recognised the need for 
 some new breath from God to breathe life 
 into the dry bones. They were doing what 
 they could to prepare the way and to supply 
 the" needed conditions for the change. If 
 
THE REVIVAL 171 
 
 when the new life came, it came in ways which 
 were altogether unexpected and unwelcome, 
 this was but in fulfilment of the principle, 
 " The wind bloweth where it hsteth." That 
 the Nonconformists of the day should have 
 been slow to hear the sound of it was their 
 misfortune as much as their fault. The time 
 came when they shared to the full in the new 
 life which the revival brought. 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 THE REVIVAL 
 
 The earher half of the eighteenth century 
 in England was a period of moral decay and 
 religious indifference. Bishop Butler, in the 
 preface to his Analogy, declared that " it 
 had come to be taken for granted that 
 Christianity is not so much as a subject for 
 inquiry : but that it is now at length dis- 
 covered to be fictitious," and Addison testified 
 that " there was less appearance of religion 
 in England than in any neighbouring state or 
 kingdom." We have seen hov/ the Non- 
 conformists had lost their first enthusiasm, 
 and were at a low ebb. In the Church of 
 England matters were no better. There 
 were to be found there the practical material- 
 ism and hard rationalism characteristic of 
 
172 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 the age. Such rehgion as there was had 
 become above all things formal, decent and 
 dull. Enthusiasm was strongly deprecated, 
 and religion as well as the State Establish- 
 ment were regarded both by politicians and 
 clergy as but an excellent means of preserving 
 the obedience of the vulgar to the powers 
 that were. The common clergy were worldly 
 and ignorant and too often dominated by 
 political considerations in their whole pre- 
 sentation of their message. It is true that 
 the age possessed the virtue of toleration in a 
 larger measure than ever before, but it was 
 the toleration of indifference rather than of an 
 intelligent charity or breadth of mind. The 
 neglect of religion had reacted on the con- 
 dition of the people. The lower classes were 
 sunk in ignorance and vice, and, in many 
 parts of the country, lived an almost pagan 
 existence. Drunkenness was extremely pre- 
 valent and almost unrebuked. The life of 
 the industrial populations was miserable in 
 the extreme. Their pleasures were coarse 
 and animal, and breaches of the law were 
 punished with brutalising inhumanity. 
 
 It was when the darkness was at its deepest 
 that signs of the dawn began to appear. 
 The general uneasiness of the religious world 
 was shown by the rise of Societies for the 
 Reformation of Manners, in which Churchmen 
 and Dissenters united to mitigate in some 
 way the more palpable evils of the town 
 life. But something more radical than this 
 
THE REVIVAL 173 
 
 was needed. Among the heralds of the better 
 time was WilHam Law, a Non-juring clergy- 
 man, who lived in the first sixty years of the 
 century. He published, among many con- 
 troversial works, two books which served to 
 awaken the minds of men to the need for a 
 new life, and had considerable influence in 
 preparing John Wesley for his work. These 
 were A ^ Treatise on Christian Perfection and 
 The Serious Call to a Devout Life. To the 
 latter both Dr. Johnson and Gibbon have 
 paid their tribute. 
 
 The first real stirrings of the revival were 
 felt in Wales. In the PrincipaHty the con- 
 dition of religion and morals was even worse 
 than in England. The Church was practically 
 dead and had little or no hold of the people. 
 Dissent too was very weak, though there 
 were some active Churches in the South. 
 The first of the Welsh revivaUsts was Griffith 
 Jones, an Established Church clergyman who 
 in many striking ways anticipated the work 
 of Whitefield and Wesley. He was an earnest 
 and enthusiastic preacher, whole-hearted in 
 his devotion to his work, and altogether 
 disinterested. He had, too, the same kind 
 of practical sagacity and organising power 
 as Wesley. He may be called the first 
 of the field preachers, and his work up and 
 down the country produced an abiding 
 reUgious impression. He founded a system 
 of " circulating schools " which lasted for 
 more than a generation, and did much for 
 
174 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 popular education and the spread of knowledge 
 of the Bible. He was aided and followed 
 by Howell Harris, a half -educated AngUcan 
 layman, who devoted his Hfe to the rehgious 
 instruction of his fellow-countrymen. Harris 
 was a bold and effective preacher who per- 
 severed in his work amid the most relentless 
 opposition and persecution, and by his alliance 
 with Whitefield became the founder of 
 Methodism in Wales. Along with him must 
 be mentioned Daniel Rowlands, an AngHcan 
 curate, who also obtained great popularity as 
 a preacher. It was the withdrawal of his hcence 
 by the Bishop of St. David's that first led to 
 the separation from the Church of England. 
 The new Evangehcal preaching gradually de- 
 tached the vast majority of the population of 
 Wales from the Established Church, and it has 
 remained so detached until the present time. 
 
 The Evangelical Revival in England was 
 the result, in the first instance, of the preaching 
 of Wesley and Whitefield. John Wesley 
 was the son of that Samuel Wesley who, 
 having once been a Nonconformist, had 
 become one of their bitterest opponents. His 
 mother was the daughter of Samuel Annesley, 
 one of the ejected of 1662, and a woman of 
 remarkable powers and strength of character. 
 Their famous son was brought up under 
 strongly Anglican influences, and was easily 
 subject to rehgious emotionaUsm. He made 
 himself notorious when at xf ord by the severity 
 of his self-imposed penances, and by founding, 
 
THE REVIVAL 175 
 
 along with his brother Charles, a Society of 
 like-minded men called the Holy Club. He 
 was ordained while still at Oxford, where he 
 remained until the death of his father in 
 1735. Up to this time he was merely an 
 unusually earnest clergyman with strong 
 High Church proclivities, an Arminian 
 theology, and a passion for personal holiness. 
 The first crisis in his life came from association 
 with the Moravians with whom he was 
 brought into contact on his voyage to Georgia, 
 whither he went w4th Charles on a mission 
 to convert the heathen. On his return to 
 England, after a by no means successful 
 mission, he made it his business to see more 
 of the Moravians, and learnt from them that 
 form of justification by faith and that view of 
 experimental religion which became the 
 foundation of all his later teaching. It was in 
 the year 1738, as he tells in his Journal, that 
 the light came to himself. " In the evening 
 I went very unwillingly to a Society in 
 Aldersgate Street where one was reading 
 Luther's preface to the Epistle to the Romans. 
 About a quarter before nine, while he was 
 describing the change which God works in 
 the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my 
 heart strangely warmed, I felt I did trust in 
 Christ, Christ alone, for salvation, and an 
 assurance was given me that he had taken 
 away my sins, even mine, and saved me from 
 the law of sin and death. I began to pray with 
 all my might for those who had in a more 
 
176 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 especial manner despitefully used me and 
 persecuted me. I then testified openly to 
 all what I now first felt in my heart." It is 
 generally admitted that the meeting thus 
 described marks an epoch in English history. 
 For it is from this time and place that the 
 Methodist movement must be dated. Charles 
 Wesley had already had a somewhat similar 
 experience, and for some time Whitefield had 
 been preaching the new birth and justification 
 by faith. 
 
 At first the work was carried on strictly 
 within the Established Church. Wesley him- 
 self, it must be remembered, was always 
 an Anglican in spirit, and would never have 
 set up a separate Church had he not been 
 compelled to do so. He formed societies on 
 the model of the Moravian societies, and of the 
 Holy Club at Oxford, consisting of men and 
 women whose hearts had been touched and 
 who sought a closer spiritual communion 
 and experience than the ordinary services of 
 the Church could give them. He revived the 
 old Christian love feasts, and invented that 
 most potent engine of the Methodist system, the 
 class meeting. These formed a Church within 
 the Church, and, whatever may have been 
 Wesley's original intention, contained within 
 them, from the first, the elements of dissent. 
 The Methodists were the new Puritans, and 
 by the same combination of forces that we 
 saw at work in an earlier age were driven 
 to become separatists. 
 
THE REVIVAL 177 
 
 But the Methodist leaders were nothing if 
 not missionary. They carried on an active 
 and tireless propaganda wherever they could 
 obtain a hearing. The whole world was 
 their parish. At first the Wesley s confined 
 themselves to speaking in Anglican pulpits 
 or in those parishes where they could obtain 
 the goodwill of the incumbent. But they 
 were soon compelled to go farther. They 
 had a new gospel to proclaim, and they could 
 not proclaim it without suggesting that the 
 ordinary preaching of the Church was some- 
 thing less than Christian. It was no pleasant 
 thing, therefore, for a clergyman to open 
 his pulpit to men who addressed his con- 
 gregation as pagans and assumed that they 
 were receiving Christian teaching for the 
 first time. Then, again, the manner of the 
 preachers was very different from that to 
 which the English Church was accustomed. 
 Instead of the polished periods of a read 
 sermon, there were to be heard fervid ex- 
 tempore declamations and intense personal 
 appeals. The congregations, too, tended to 
 be larger than the buildings could hold, and 
 decorous church-goers were scandalised at 
 being crowded out of their accustomed seats 
 by a rabble. All this speedily produced a 
 great deal of bitter feeling. The churches 
 in many places were closed against the 
 Methodist preachers, and the preachers tended, 
 in spite of themselves, to create feeling 
 against the Church. Meanwhile^ Whitefield, 
 
178 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 who had never been so scrupulous as the 
 Wesleys, had won great success by preaching 
 in the open air, especially among the Kings- 
 wood miners near Bristol. It was White- 
 field, aided by the circumstances we have 
 mentioned, who reconciled Wesley to " this 
 strange way of preaching in the fields." 
 Then began that wonderful itinerary which 
 lasted as long as Wesley lived, and changed 
 the face of religion in England. 
 
 Wesley himself was a most remarkable 
 man, and admirably fitted for the work he 
 was called to do. In personal appearance 
 he was " rather below the middle size, but 
 beautifully proportioned, without an ounce 
 of superfluous flesh, yet muscular and strong, 
 with a forehead clear and smooth, a bright, 
 penetrating eye, and a lovely face, which 
 retained the freshness of its complexion to 
 the last period of his life." As Sir Leslie 
 Stephen says, he was a human gamecock ; 
 a born fighter, who never knew when he was 
 beaten. At the same time, he was absolutely 
 master of himself, and, though highly emo- 
 tional, he never let his emotions get beyond 
 his control. He spoke clearly, quietly and 
 logically, yet with a passion and an intensity 
 that carried all before it. He was a keen 
 observer, and had a wide knowledge of 
 human nature. His courage was magnificent, 
 and he subdued raging mobs by the sheer 
 force of his eye and mind. With all this 
 he was a born leader and organiser ; he 
 
THE REVIVAL 179 
 
 could not only kindle passion, but could do 
 that far more difficult thing — harness it for 
 effective service. Mentally he v/as simply a 
 man of his day. He shared all the popular 
 superstitions of the time, and was credulous 
 to a degree. He was quite unable to ap- 
 preciate the value of science and scientific 
 discovery, and was a little afraid of the 
 intellectual side of religion, as he was also 
 of the mystical. His bent was above all 
 things practical, and to him Christianity 
 was not founded on argument, but on the 
 actual life of God in the soul of man through 
 Jesus Christ. In reading the Journal, in 
 which he has left a detailed account of his 
 wanderings and work, one is struck with the 
 saving common sense of the man, with his 
 splendid vitality and tireless endurance, and 
 with the atmosphere of faith in which he 
 lived, moved and had his being. 
 
 Whitefield was a man of very different 
 stamp, though equally powerful in his own 
 way. He was a supreme orator ; judged by 
 the effects which he produced, perhaps among 
 the greatest that the world has seen. He 
 had all the qualities of the emotional tempera- 
 ment, and was without either the logic or 
 the self-control that distinguished Wesley. 
 At the same time, he was a man of broader 
 mind and wider sympathies. As a preacher 
 he was highly rhetorical and impassioned, 
 and appealed to the feelings rather than to 
 the minds or consciences of his audience. 
 
180 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Yet he never appealed in vain. He could 
 move his hearers in the most extraordinary- 
 way, making them weep with penitence, 
 tremble with terror, and laugh aloud with 
 excess of joy. He seldom preached without 
 bursting into tears himself, and yet he kept 
 his hold over men like Bolingbroke and Lord 
 Chesterfield. Much of his power was due 
 to the fact that he was absolutely sincere. 
 His passion for souls was genuine, and he 
 often spent the greater part of the night 
 in prayer for the success of his work. Yet 
 his published sermons give little or no indica- 
 tion of any special merit. Here and there 
 are to be found fine passages and apt illustra- 
 tions, but in general they are verbose and 
 extravagant, and often seem more calculated 
 to excite ridicule than reverence. They 
 show very clearly that they must have 
 depended for their effect on the man's per- 
 sonality and oratorical skill. It is the uni- 
 versal testimony of his hearers that when 
 preaching Whitefield seemed like a man 
 inspired, and that he carried all before him 
 with the rush and fervour of his eloquence. 
 
 It is impossible here to tell in any detail 
 the story of the labours of these two men. 
 They travelled from end to end of this 
 country as well as in Scotland, Ireland, 
 and Wales. They preached to tens of 
 thousands of people, in the pulpits of churches 
 where it was allowed, but more often on 
 the hillside, in jails, or the back streets 
 
THE REVIVAL 181 
 
 of towns. As time went on they were 
 bitterly opposed by the clergy, who often 
 incited the mob against them. Their followers 
 were treated with the utmost cruelty, and 
 they themselves were continually in peril of 
 their lives. But such was their zeal for 
 the cause, and such their pity for lost and 
 fallen men, that no threats could deter 
 them, and no violence make them afraid. 
 They bore down opposition by the sheer 
 weight of then' enthusiasm, and often those 
 who came to stone and to scoff remained 
 to pray. The most extraordinary physical 
 and mental effects followed from their 
 preaching. It was no uncommon thing for 
 men and women to be seized with violent 
 convulsions and to fall down roaring and 
 foaming at the mouth. Others believed 
 themselves to be possessed with devils, and 
 Wesley, who quite shared the belief, regarded 
 himself as able to cast the demons out. 
 Neither he nor Whitefield sought in any way 
 to check these unhealthy manifestations. 
 They looked upon them as acceptable signs 
 of the working of the Spirit of God, and 
 their preaching was often carefully calculated 
 so as to produce them. It is not surprising 
 that such extravagances not infrequently 
 led to religious mania of a very distressing 
 kind. This, however, was no more than a 
 by-product of the work. It is a phenomenon 
 common to all religious revivals, and it 
 would be an entire mistake to imagine that 
 
182 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 it was specially characteristic of the Methodist 
 movement. The remarkable thing about 
 Methodism is that, despite the atmosphere 
 of emotionalism in which it was cradled, it 
 yet remained so entirely sober and produced 
 such lasting practical results. This was 
 altogether due to the statesmanlike qualities 
 which Wesley possessed in such abundance. 
 He was the last man in the world to lose 
 his head, and he seized every opportunity as 
 it arose, and turned it to account with 
 masterly skill. Wherever he went he left 
 behind him memorials in the shape of 
 societies, meeting-houses, schools and chari- 
 ties. He founded a vast organisation of lay 
 preachers, which is generally recognised to be 
 a model of its kind. 
 
 It was on the practical side of his work that 
 Wesley came into definite collision with the 
 Established Church. He did so altogether 
 against his will, and under the stress of 
 circumstances which he could not control. 
 It became necessary for him to establish 
 separate meeting-places for his societies 
 wherever they were excluded from the 
 parish church, and in time he was obliged to 
 ordain his preachers so that they might be 
 able to administer the sacraments. At the 
 same time it should be understood that there 
 was never any organised opposition to him 
 in the Anglican Church. The Church lost 
 a great opportunity, as much through in- 
 difference as through any other fault. Wesley 
 
THE REVIVAL 183 
 
 himself never willingly worked with the 
 Dissenters, and never wished to be reckoned 
 among them, while they, on their part, 
 generally left him severel}^ alone. After his 
 death, his followers, very few of whom had 
 ever felt with him in this matter, found that 
 they were Dissenters whether they wished 
 it or not. 
 
 The position of Whitefield was altogether 
 different. He was a Calvinist, while Wesley 
 was an Arminian, and he had therefore 
 some theological sympathy with Dissenters 
 from the first. Then, too, his long absences 
 in America tended to broaden his ecclesiastical 
 outlook. Thus he was often welcomed b}^ 
 Dissenters who kept aloof from Wesley, and 
 in some places their chapels were opened to 
 him when he was refused the use of the 
 Anglican church. He had none of Wes- 
 ley's ecclesiastical temper, and was altogether 
 scornful of conventions. This made it com- 
 paratively easy for him to follow his own 
 line and to separate from the Church of his 
 fathers. 
 
 The contribution of Charles Wesley to 
 the movement was a very important one. 
 He was a man of much smaller calibre than 
 either his brother or Whitefield. Though 
 he could preach sometimes with great 
 unction and effect, he was very unequal in 
 the pulpit, and was himself precise and 
 narrow to a degree. But he was not with- 
 out imagination, and he had a real gift 
 
184 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 for writing hymns. These contributed im- 
 mensely to the success and popularity of the 
 early Methodist meetings. Though there is 
 some sad doggerel among them, many of 
 them, like " Jesu, Lover of my soul," are 
 among the classics of hymnody. 
 
 The theological differences between Wesley 
 and Whitefield were fundamental, and soon 
 led to divisions within the Methodist camp. 
 There was much controversy, carried on with 
 indecent abusiveness by Toplady, and with 
 philosophical restraint by Fletcher of 
 Madeley. But the two leaders never allowed 
 their differences to estrange them personally. 
 They still spoke of each other with love and 
 respect, though each went his own way. 
 Whitefield eventually attached himself to 
 that masterful woman Selina, Countess of 
 Huntingdon, and through the services held 
 in her house made Methodism for a time 
 popular among the elite of London society. 
 Herself a strong Calvinist, Lady Huntingdon 
 recognised, as Wesley did, that organisation 
 was necessary to the permanence of the 
 new Faith, and was instrumental in founding 
 two denominations — the Calvinistic Metho- 
 dists in Wales, with the help of Howell Harris, 
 and the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion 
 in England. At first both these societies 
 were set up as within the Church of England, 
 and the Countess had no intention of severing 
 herself from it. But she built places of 
 worship, and a legal decision compelled her to 
 
THE REVIVAL 185 
 
 register them under the Toleration Act, i.e. as 
 Dissenting chapels. " So," she complained, 
 " I am to be cast out of the Church now, only 
 for what I have been doing these forty years — 
 speaking and living for Jesus Christ." The 
 Countess also established Colleges for the 
 ministry at Trevecca and Cheshunt. The 
 Calvinistic Methodists of Wales are now a 
 large and flourishing denomination. The 
 Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion is small 
 and dwindling, and has practically been 
 absorbed into Congregationalism. 
 
 With regard to the organisation of Method- 
 ism during his hfetime, Wesley was an 
 opportunist. He took the occasion as it 
 arose and did not care to make any clearly 
 defined plans. This was partly due to his 
 desire not to make too complete a breach 
 with Anghcanism, and partly to his auto- 
 cratic temper, which made him retain control 
 of things in his own hands as long as possible. 
 Even as late as 1790 he wrote : " The Church- 
 man might go to Church still, the Presby- 
 terian, Anabaptist, Quaker, might retain 
 their own opinions, and attend their own 
 congregations. The having a real desire to 
 flee from the wrath to come was the only 
 condition required of them. Whoever, there- 
 fore, feared God and worked righteousness 
 was qualified for this society." This, how- 
 ever, was a counsel of perfection. Many years 
 earher, in 1744, Wesley had recognised the 
 fact that Methodist Churches were in existence, 
 
186 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 and had invited his preachers to meet him in 
 conference. These conferences became an- 
 nual, but were at first confined to spiritupJ 
 matters and attempted no legislation. That, 
 however, came later. The one principle 
 Avhich Wesley laid down was that of his own 
 power to rule. He retained entirely in his 
 own hands the " power of admitting into 
 and excluding from the societies under my 
 care : of choosing and removing stewards : 
 of receiving or not receiving helpers : of 
 appointing them when, where and how to 
 help me, and of desiring any of them to confer 
 v/ith me when I see good." "None needs 
 submit to it unless he will. Every preacher 
 and every member may leave when he 
 pleases." There is no doubt that Wesley 
 never contemplated anything like self- 
 government in his Churches or in the denom- 
 ination. He seemed to expect that some 
 individual would succeed him, and is said 
 to have mentioned Fletcher of Madeley for 
 the post. In 1784 he took legal steps to 
 perpetuate the constitution of the new 
 body in the shape in which it had grown 
 up. The Legal Hundred vv^as constituted, 
 and in it was vested all authority in matters 
 of discipUne and administration. This be- 
 came the basis of Conference, and it is 
 noteworthy that it made Conference a purely 
 clerical body. Wesley retained his ecclesi- 
 astical and sacerdotal spirit to the last, as 
 witness a letter which he wrote in 1790. 
 
THE REVIVAL 187 
 
 " As long as I live, the people shall have no 
 share in choosing either stewards or leaders 
 among the Methodists. We have not and 
 never had any such custom. We are no 
 republicans and never intend to be. It 
 would be better for those who are so minded 
 to go quietly away." 
 
 It was impossible that this position should 
 be maintained without opposition. Wesley's 
 followers had none of his reluctance to set 
 up Methodist Churches or an organisation 
 outside the establishment. And while they 
 reverenced Wesley himself and were willing 
 to accept his persona] rule, they were not 
 anxious to transfer their allegiance to any 
 other. After his death and before the 
 period of mourning was over a circular was 
 issued from a Conference held in Yorkshire, 
 declaring that no successor to him ought to be 
 appointed, and suggesting an annual President. 
 This was a declaration not only against 
 the personal rule of one man, but also against 
 the idea of having bishops in Methodism. 
 Wesley had sanctioned this in America, and 
 was thought to have favoured the idea for 
 England also. In this there were many of his 
 followers who agreed with him, but the general 
 sense of the preachers was against it, and, 
 after some time and discussion, the suggestions 
 of the Yorkshire Conference were adopted. 
 
 The question of the relation to the Estab- 
 lishment then came up in an acute form 
 over the administration of the sacraments. 
 
188 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Up to the time of his death Wesley insisted 
 that the sacrament should never be received 
 by his followers except from Episcopally 
 ordained hands. In certain cases he had 
 himself ordained preachers, but, generally 
 speaking, his followers received the sacrament 
 in their parish churches or did not receive 
 it at all. In London they went so far as to 
 bail out a clergyman from the Fleet Prison 
 for the purpose. Most of the lay trustees 
 and many of the older preachers were 
 willing that this state of things should 
 continue. They were really Anglicans and 
 held the Anghcan view of the priesthood. On 
 the other hand, the great body of Methodists 
 had been brought into the societies from a 
 condition of indifference to all rehgion, and 
 had received nothing from the Anghcan 
 Church but hatred and persecution. Many 
 of them also had come to have strong con- 
 victions on the subject of the priesthood of 
 all believers. As might be expected, such a 
 situation led to long and bitter controversy. 
 But in the end the will of the majority pre- 
 vailed, and Conference permitted the sacra- 
 ment to be administered in churches where a 
 majority required it, subject always to the 
 consent of Conference. It was thirty years 
 before the sacrament could be administered 
 in every Methodist chapel as a matter of 
 course. In this way complete separation 
 from the Estabhshed Church came . about, 
 but only reluctantly and by degrees. 
 
THE REVIVAL 189 
 
 The next question in dispute was that 
 of the representation of the laity in Conference. 
 Here the Conservatives won the day, and it 
 was decided that Conference should consist 
 of preachers only, though certain powers 
 were delegated to local bodies of laymen. 
 This, however, was not enough for many of 
 the more ardent spirits in Methodism. The 
 time was one in which democratic principles, 
 were coming very much to the front, and the 
 autocratic and exclusive system which Wesley 
 had favoured was very galhng to some of 
 the best men among his successors. In 
 1797 the first secession from the general body 
 of Methodists took place on the question 
 of lay representation, and the Methodist New 
 Connexion was formed. Some five thousand 
 members withdrev/, under the leadership 
 of William Thom and Alexander Kiiham. 
 The new body was organised on Presbyterian 
 lines so as to secure the independence of the 
 circuit and the representative character of 
 the Conference. Its unit was the individual 
 Church meeting which had power to sanction 
 the admission of members, to elect stewards, 
 to recommend candidates for the ministry, 
 and to appoint representatives to the Leaders' 
 Meetings. The Leaders' Meeting consisted 
 of circuit ministers, class leaders, officers, and 
 representatives. The circuit Quarterly Meet- 
 ing was elected by it to transact the business 
 of the circuit and to appoint representatives 
 to Conference, which was the sovereign 
 
190 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 power in the denomination. The Connexion 
 grew steadily and doubled its membership 
 in the first twenty-five years of its existence. 
 At the time of its amalgamation into the 
 United Methodist Church it had nearly 
 forty thousand members and some flourishing 
 missions. 
 
 A further secession, that of the Primitive 
 Methodists, took place in the year 1807. 
 For some time previously to this date Camp 
 Meetings after the American revivalist 
 model had been held at Mow Cop, a hill on 
 the border line of Staffordshire and Cheshire. 
 Under the leadership of Hugh Bourne the 
 Camp Meeting system greatly extended and 
 produced remarkable revivals, which were 
 often accompanied by scenes of excitement 
 similar to those caused by the early preaching 
 of Wesley and Whitefield. Conference, how- 
 ever, seemed to think that the time for such 
 things had passed away, and resolved that 
 Camp Meetings should not be held. Bourne 
 ignored the resolution, and went on with 
 his work, until he was expelled from the 
 Society along with certain others who acted 
 with him. These men, with about two 
 hundred of their followers, formed the Primi- 
 tive Methodist denomination. They did so 
 gradually and without any very definite plan. 
 Beginning in a single circuit they followed 
 the method of village preaching and gradually 
 established societies of their own converts. 
 They were full of earnestness and apostolic 
 
THE REVIVAL 191 
 
 passion for souls, and they worked largely 
 among the poorest and most illiterate of the 
 population. Their first Conference was not 
 held until 1820, and their polity came to be 
 based on the District Meeting and District 
 Representation. Stewards were appointed by 
 the District Leaders, and Conference was made 
 a representative body, containing two laymen 
 to every one minister. Primitive Methodism 
 has done a magnificent work, especially in 
 the villages and small towns, and to-day its 
 membership stands at over 210,000. 
 
 Very similar was the origin of the Bible 
 Christians in Devonshire and Cornwall. Its 
 leaders, F. W. Bourne and William O'Bryan, 
 were expelled from Methodism for irregular 
 preaching, and started a new denomination 
 in 1815. They came to be called Bible 
 Christians from their habit of carrying the 
 Bible with them openly in all their preaching 
 work. Though a small denomination, they 
 have had a remarkable history, having 
 produced some striking religious personalities 
 and done a great deal of missionary work. 
 They, too, are now absorbed in the United 
 Methodist Church. 
 
 These various secessions produced no 
 change whatever in the temper of the 
 Wesleyan Conference. Indeed it seemed to 
 grow more conservative and autocratic as 
 time went on. For many years its policy 
 was largely shaped by the Rev. Jabez 
 Bunting, an able and sincere man, but a 
 
192 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 thorough ecclesiastical despot. About the 
 middle of the nineteenth century disputes 
 which had long been carried on came to a 
 head, and resulted in further secessions 
 of about one hundred thousand members to 
 form the United Methodist Free Churches. 
 It is pleasant, however, to record that these 
 disputes and divisions have left little bitter- 
 ness behind them, and that the tendency to- 
 day within Methodism is all in the direction 
 of reunion. Methodism as a whole has 
 grown by leaps and bounds all over the world. 
 As we shall see later on its traditional con- 
 servatism is breaking down in many direc- 
 tions, and it is adapting itself with more 
 versatility than any other Church to the 
 needs of the populations in large towns at 
 the present time. It is still thoroughly 
 Evangelical in spirit, while using to the 
 full the advantages which its splendid 
 organisation affords. On the whole the 
 dlivisions have been a gain rather than a loss. 
 They have given to Methodism an elasticity 
 and a power of adaptation which it would 
 not otherwise have possessed, and they set 
 an example of unity amid diversity which 
 other Churches are sure in time to follow. 
 
 The Revival of the eighteenth century was 
 not confined to Methodism. It was strongly 
 felt in the Church of England where it is 
 marked by the rise of the Evangelical party. 
 Towards the end of his career Wesley quite 
 regained favour with Anglicans, and was 
 
THE REVIVAL 193 
 
 constantly invited to preach in their pulpits. 
 He had many sympathisers at Cambridge, 
 where the University was more tolerant 
 towards his followers than was Oxford. It 
 was there that Rowland Hill began his work, 
 and although he was obliged to remain 
 outside the Church, for no bishop would 
 ordain him, he made Cambridge a great 
 centre of Evangelical teaching, and gave 
 the first impulse to the work of Simeon. 
 Wesley was also responsible for starting 
 an itinerant movement within the Church 
 through two clergymen, Berridge in Bedford- 
 shire, and Grimshaw in Yorkshire. These 
 were both eccentrics, but they had the real 
 Evangelistic passion, and in the extent of 
 their wanderings and power over the common 
 people, proved themselves true disciples of 
 their master. Grimshaw was vicar of the 
 parish of Haworth afterwards made famous 
 by the Brontes. When he went to it he had 
 not a dozen communicants, but before his 
 work was done they numbered more than 
 twelve hundred. Other leading Evangelicals 
 in the Church were John Newton the friend 
 of Cowper, Wm. Romaine, and Venn of 
 Huddersfield. These men had all the 
 defects which became so conspicuous in the 
 Evangelical party in later years. They 
 were narrow and fanatical, they had an 
 unreasoning hatred of Romanism, and, w^hile 
 they neglected the intellectual side of religion 
 altogether, they yet subjected every one to 
 
 G 
 
194 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 rigorous theological tests. But they did 
 their appointed work. They made religion 
 real in the Church of England, they raised 
 the standard of clerical morals, and infused 
 a new fire both into worship and preaching. 
 At the same time they kindled a spirit of 
 genuine philanthropy and missionary zeal. 
 
 The influence of the revival on the Non- 
 conformist Churches was more gradual and 
 less revolutionary. With them it was not a 
 case of the sudden outbreak of new life but 
 of a warming and quickening of the life that 
 was already there. Preaching became less 
 formal and more evangelistic, and a new 
 missionary and philanthropic impulse began 
 to be felt. One can trace this in men like 
 Watts and Doddridge, but the full force of 
 it was not manifested until the early years 
 of the nineteenth century. It was seen, 
 however, in the beginnings of the movement 
 for the abolition of the slave trade, in the 
 prison reforms of John Howard and Elizabeth 
 Fry, in the commencement of the Sunday 
 School under Robert Raikes, and in the 
 foundation of the Baptist Missionary Society 
 under Carey, Marshman and Ward. If 
 Evangelicalism involved a certain set-back 
 towards asceticism, Sabbatarianism and in- 
 tolerance, it has at least this to its credit, that 
 it gave rise to a new and broader humani- 
 tarianism. In this respect it need have no 
 fear of the test " by their fruits ye shall 
 know them." 
 
THE REVIVAL 195 
 
 In the latter half of the eighteenth century 
 we can trace a slow but steady growth of 
 public opinion in favour of religious liberty 
 and equality. In the Jacobite rebellion of 
 1745 the Dissenters had made great exertions 
 on behalf of the Government, and it was 
 recognised as an anomaly that an Act of 
 Indemnity should need to be passed in order 
 to save them from the penalties incurred by 
 taking up arms in defence of the Govern- 
 ment. Public opinion was further instructed 
 by a case brought against the Corporation 
 of London by three Dissenters, Messrs. 
 Sharpe, Streatfield and Evans, who had 
 been elected to the office of Sheriff and then 
 fined because they could not serve. It was 
 the pleasing habit of the Corporation to 
 nominate known Dissenters for this office, 
 and when they refused to qualify themselves 
 by taking the sacrament in the Church of 
 England, to fine them roundly. It is reckoned 
 that the Corporation obtained in this way 
 no less a sum than fifteen thousand pounds, 
 which it devoted to the building of the new 
 Mansion House. The three men above men- 
 tioned, at the instigation of the Dissenting 
 deputies, determined to resist the fine. 
 The matter was carried to the House of 
 Lords, where it was decided in their favour. 
 In giving judgment Lord Mansfield announced 
 that it was now no crime for a man to be a 
 Dissenter, or to refuse to take the sacrament 
 in the Church of England. 
 
 G 2^ 
 
196 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 From this victory dates the beginning of 
 a new movement in the direction of civil 
 and rehgious Hberty. At first the leaders 
 in it were mainly Unitarians, and to them, 
 and especially to Dr. Joseph Priestley, the 
 Nonconformity of the period owed a very 
 great debt. The struggle began with an 
 attempt to widen the Toleration Act by 
 relieving Nonconformists from subscription 
 to the greater number of the Thirty-nine 
 Articles. This was not carried till 1779, 
 when a declaration of adherence to Christi- 
 anity and of behef in the Scriptures was 
 substituted for the Articles. But the dis- 
 cussion of the subject did great good. It 
 brought out the fundamental evil of sub- 
 scription and crystallised the Nonconformist 
 position in regard to the relation of the 
 Church to the civil power. It was in the 
 course of one of the debates in the House 
 of Lords on this measure that the Earl of 
 Chatham made his memorable defence of 
 Nonconformists. " The Dissenting ministers 
 are represented as men of close ambition : 
 they are so, my Lords : and their ambition 
 is to keep close to the college of fishermen 
 not of cardinals ; and to the doctrines of 
 inspired apostles not to the decrees of 
 interested and aspiring bishops. They con- 
 tend for a scriptural and spiritual worship : 
 we have a Calvinistic creed, a Popish liturgy, 
 an Arminian clergy. The Reformation has 
 laid open the Scriptures to all : let not the 
 
THE REVIVAL 197 
 
 Bishops shut them again. Laws in support 
 of ecclesiastical power are pleaded which it 
 would shock humanity to execute." 
 
 The next attack was directed against the 
 Test and Corporation Acts, and repeated 
 efforts, in which all sections of Nonconformity 
 united, were made for their repeal. In this 
 campaign the Dissenters found a magnificent 
 ally in Charles James Fox, whose speeches 
 contain the best possible refutation of 
 Established Church theory. But the cry 
 of the " Church in danger " was raised, and 
 Pitt sedulously fostered it. Public opinion 
 was not yet ripe for the change, and for a 
 time the hope of it was abandoned. But 
 the agitation had at least called attention 
 to Dissent and its grievances, and that in 
 a way not altogether to be desired. The 
 French Revolution had greatly excited the 
 popular mind, and the sympathy with it 
 which had been expressed by many leading 
 Nonconformists caused them to be regarded 
 as enemies of law and order. A violent and 
 most unreasoning agitation against Noncon- 
 formists broke out, and the Unitarians felt 
 the full fury of it. Dr. Priestley's house in 
 Birmingham was burnt to the ground, to 
 the cry of " Church and King ! " and the 
 Tories everywhere denounced Dissenters as 
 Republicans and dangerous to society. But, 
 once more. Nonconformity gained by per- 
 secution. There was a strong revival of the 
 Free Church spirit, and it is pleasant to 
 
198 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 record that while George III expressed his 
 approval of the treatment meted out to 
 Priestley, Nonconformists from all over the 
 country sent to him addresses of sympathy. 
 From the time of this agitation dates a form 
 of persecution which has since become very 
 common. While in some places in the 
 country Nonconformists were obliged to arm 
 themselves in order to defend their homes 
 against the mob, we read of others in which 
 farmers and others refused to employ those 
 who would not attend the Established Church, 
 and of the boycotting of Nonconformist 
 tradesmen. For the moment it was impos- 
 sible to go any farther in the direction of 
 seeking the removal of disabilities, and 
 Nonconformists could do nothing but bide 
 their time. 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 
 
 The condition of Nonconformists at the 
 beginning of the nineteenth century was 
 such as is very difficult to realise to-day. 
 They were still under the ban of the law ; 
 they were unable to hold any public offices ; 
 the national Universities were closed to them ; 
 they could not be married in their own 
 churches nor be buried save with the rites of 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 199 
 
 the Church of England. They were com- 
 pelled to pay church rates for the support of 
 the Establishment, and, if their worship was 
 tolerated, it was only in specially licensed 
 conventicles. Add to these things the fact 
 that reaction was in full force and Dissenters 
 everywhere denounced as Jacobites and 
 revolutionaries, and that their growth and 
 prosperity were viewed by the authorities with 
 alarm and hatred, and we have a condition 
 of things that might well have led them to 
 give up their cause in despair. So far from 
 this being the case, however, they were 
 everywhere active and full of zeal. Indeed, 
 it was freely said that one reason why efforts 
 to improve their position were somewhat 
 slackened during this period was that they 
 were so fully occupied with the work of 
 evangelism and philanthropy. Certainly 
 there was need for it. The country was 
 suffering grievously from the prolonged war 
 with France ; there was much poverty and 
 great unrest. Public life was tainted with 
 corruption, and disinterested service either 
 of the country or of mankind was very far 
 to seek. Yet it was just now that prison 
 reform was seriously taken in hand ; that 
 movements for popular education were set 
 on foot ; that parliamentary reform was 
 begun ; that the slave trade was declared 
 illegal and finally abolished ; that missionary 
 societies were started, and that the British 
 and Foreign Bible Society began its work. 
 
200 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 In all of these events Nonconformists had 
 their full share, and very frequently they took 
 the lead. The founding of the Bible Society 
 on an unsectarian basis gave rise to a dispute 
 in which the attitude of the average Church- 
 man towards Dissent was made abundantly 
 clear. It was thought a monstrous and 
 scandalous thing that Dissenters should be 
 admitted to any society on an equality with 
 Churchmen. Men feared that " the pre- 
 eminence of the Established religion would 
 be gradually forgotten and lost," and that 
 Dissenters only joined the new movement 
 in order to " carry on their evil designs 
 against Church and State." For all that, 
 the Society flourished exceedingly, with the 
 support of the Nonconformists and of the 
 more evangelical in the Church of England. 
 
 The first and most important task which the 
 Free Churches had to face in this period was 
 the removal of disabilities. For seventy 
 years they were engaged in a life-and-death 
 struggle "^for freedom. That they won a 
 great succession of triumphs was due, not so 
 much to their own powers, and to the ability 
 with which they were led, as to the inherent 
 justice of their cause and the growing demo- 
 cratic feeling in the country. The nation 
 itself was waking to a new life, and the 
 Nonconformists found themselves inevitably 
 sharing the aspirations of the people. The 
 cause of freedom in religion was bound up 
 with the liberties of the democracy. What- 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 201 
 
 ever may be thought to be the case to-day, 
 historically, at any rate, Nonconformity was 
 committed without question to all those 
 causes which are now grou.ped under the 
 name Liberal. There is no need to apologise 
 for the fact that Dissenters acted politically. 
 If they were to remain true to their principles, 
 and if they were to advance the cause they 
 had at heart, they could do no other. Their 
 success may be measured by the well-known 
 words of Lord John Russell : "I know the 
 Dissenters. They gave us the emancipation 
 of the slave. They gave us the Reform Bill. 
 They gave us Free Trade. And they will give 
 us the abolition of Church Rates." 
 
 But this is to anticipate. The first-fruits 
 of victory was the repeal of the Test and 
 Corporation Acts in the year 1828. The work 
 of the Dissenting Deputies, and of the more 
 recently founded Protestant Society, had 
 discovered to Nonconformists something of 
 their strength. They were in close alliance 
 with the Whigs, and, being secure of their 
 support, they began again the agitation for 
 repeal of the Acts. By this time the passing 
 of an Indemnity Act was become an annual 
 affair, and, while it somewhat relieved the 
 Dissenters, it showed, at the same time, 
 how little danger there would be either to the 
 Church or to the Crown in putting them on 
 an equality with all other citizens. In spite 
 of this, there was much opposition, and the 
 Acts were only repealed on condition that 
 
202 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 all magistrates and holders of municipal offices 
 should make a declaration that they would 
 not use their position " to injure or weaken 
 the Protestant Church as it is by law estab- 
 lished in England, or to disturb the Bishops 
 and Clergy in the Possession of any Rights 
 or Privileges to which such Church or the 
 said Bishops and Clergy are or may be by 
 Law entitled." 
 
 The Nonconformists, under the leadership 
 of John Bright, were conspicuous among the 
 supporters of the great Reform Bill of 1832. 
 Its passing largely increased their political 
 power, and led many of them to believe 
 that the time was not far distant when 
 complete religious equality would be won. 
 They scarcely realised how ingrained was the 
 conservatism of the British people. They 
 made a good beginning, however, with an 
 attack on Church Rates, arguing that they 
 ought not to be compelled to pay rates for 
 the maintenance of buildings used for religious 
 services at which they were never present and 
 to the forms of which they conscientiously 
 objected. It was argued on the other side, 
 in the words of Sir Erskine May, that " the 
 fabric of the Church was national property — an 
 edifice set apart by law for public worship 
 according to the religion of the State — open to 
 all — inviting all to its services — and as much 
 the common property of all as a public 
 museum or picture gallery." The first sug- 
 gestion made was that an Exchequer grant 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 203 
 
 of a quarter of a million annually should 
 be voted to take the place of tlie rate. But 
 this satisfied neither side. After several 
 other abortive proposals, the matter was 
 taken up by Mr. Gladstone in 1868, and a Bill 
 was passed simply abolishing the right of a 
 vestry to compel payment of the rate. This 
 struggle had been continued for forty years, 
 and was of immense value in educating the 
 nation in the true meaning of a Church Es- 
 tablishment, and in enforcing upon Noncon- 
 formists their own principles. In this case, 
 again, as in that of the Test Acts, the Non- 
 conformists won because they had on their 
 side the more enlightened public opinion 
 of the country. 
 
 Meanwhile they had obtained a further 
 measure of relief by securing a reform of the 
 Marriage Laws, and the provision of civil 
 registration of births, marriages and deaths. 
 They had also helped on the good work of 
 Catholic emancipation, in spite of the fears of 
 some of their leaders. While the Government 
 of the day frankly admitted that they made 
 the concession to Catholics because they 
 feared that otherwise they would have 
 civil war in Ireland, the Nonconformists as 
 frankly took up the ground that religious 
 liberty should be granted to all. Daniel 
 O' Council, speaking at a meeting of the 
 Protestant Society, acknowledged on behalf 
 of the people of Ireland the help thus re- 
 ceived. " I stand here," he said, " in the 
 
204 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 name of my country to express our gratitude, 
 in feeble but in sincere language, for the 
 exertions made in our behalf by our Protestant 
 Dissenting brethren. I have come here to 
 express my thankfulness for the support 
 which they have given to the great cause of 
 my country." 
 
 From early in the nineteenth century until 
 the present day the question of Education 
 has sharply divided Anglicans and Noncon- 
 formists. The latter have often been re- 
 proached with neglecting education, but 
 the reproach comes badly from those who 
 saw to it that till about the end of the eight- 
 eenth century no school could be opened 
 except under the licence of a bishop. When 
 Nonconformists once had the opportunity, 
 they lost no time in making use of it. It 
 was in 1797 that Joseph Lancaster, a young 
 Quaker, started his schools for poor children, 
 and, in two years' time, he had a thousand 
 pupils under instruction. In 1808 a Society 
 was formed to extend and carry on these 
 schools, and it afterwards became the British 
 and Foreign Schools Society. It was managed 
 on the broadest religious principles, and 
 laid the foundation of that simple Bible 
 teaching, or undenominational religious in- 
 struction which, in practice, has proved so 
 easy and useful a thing, but in theory, and 
 in the eyes of its opponents, is so terrible a 
 bugbear. From the first the system was 
 bitterly opposed in the Established Churchy, 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 205 
 
 and Churchmen, as they could not suppress 
 the schools, were forced to rival them. As 
 a writer in the Edinburgh Revieio said, " The 
 great exertions of the Dissenters stirred up 
 a corresponding spirit in the Church." In 
 1811 the National School Society was 
 founded with the express purpose of training 
 the children of the poor in the principles of 
 the Church of England. The two systems, 
 sectarian and unsectarian, thus went on side 
 by side. They were both voluntary agencies, 
 but the great wealth at the disposal of the 
 Established Church enabled her to do far 
 more for her schools than the Nonconformists 
 found possible. By neither party, however, 
 was the work well done, and the revelations 
 of a special Commission in 1848 persuaded 
 even Nonconformists that State education 
 had become a necessity if the work was to 
 be adequately taken in hand. Up to that 
 time several attempts to give State aid, in 
 some more generous fashion than the pro- 
 vision of building grants, had been made. 
 But they had all been on the basis of giving 
 more public money to the Church of England 
 and of increasing clerical control over the 
 schools. They were all defeated by the 
 Nonconformist agitation against them. By 
 this time the Free Churches had begun to 
 understand that it was useless to attempt 
 to work for religious freedom and equaUty, 
 while, all the time, the control of education 
 by one Church was being perpetuated. And, 
 
206 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 quite apart from the Nonconformists, there 
 were many in the country who entirely 
 agreed with Lord John Russell when he said, 
 in the year 1843, " When in 1808 a society 
 was established the principle of which was 
 that no creed or liturgy, estabhshed by 
 human authority, should be a part of instruc- 
 tion in their schools — that the Bible alone 
 should be taught there in connection with 
 religion — but that the ministers of the 
 Church or the different religious persuasions 
 should be at liberty to inculcate their own 
 peculiar doctrines elsewhere — when that 
 society was established, he must say he 
 thought it was a misfortune to the country 
 that their principles had not become pre- 
 dominant." 
 
 It was in 1870 that Mr. Forster's Act set 
 up a system of State education by providing 
 for Board Schools under public management 
 side by side with existing voluntary schools, 
 and giving them power, if they wished, to 
 enforce the attendance of all children between 
 the ages of five and twelve. The crux of 
 the Bill was in the clauses deahng with 
 religious teaching. As originally drafted 
 these gave absolute discretion to the local 
 authority, they might have any religion or 
 no rehgion taught. The proposal roused 
 the bitter hostihty of the Birmingham 
 League, a powerful body of Nonconformists 
 led by men like Henry Richard, Edward 
 Miall, and R. W. Dale. The League put 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 207 
 
 forward its own programme of free, com- 
 pulsory, and secular education, which, though 
 premature, was certainly logical, and, so far 
 as the first two items of it are concerned, 
 has now become the law of the land. The 
 League represented the feeling of most 
 Nonconformists in objecting strongly to the 
 State support of any kind of religious teach- 
 ing. A compromise was arrived at in the 
 famous Cowper-Temple amendment, which 
 provided that no Catechism or other dis- 
 tinctive formulary should be used in Board 
 schools, and that no money from the rates 
 should be given to Voluntary Schools. At 
 the same time it greatly increased the Par- 
 liamentary grant to Voluntary Schools. Non- 
 conformists accepted this as the minimum 
 of concession, but it is an entire mistake to 
 imagine that it ever satisfied them. Mr. 
 Forster's measure represented so immense 
 an educational advance that they were not 
 prepared to wreck it. As time went on it 
 produced some unexpected results. Board 
 schools multiplied, and most Boards under- 
 took the business of simple Bible teaching, 
 which worked extraordinarily well and became 
 popular both with parents and teachers. 
 Many Nonconformists came to acquiesce in 
 it simply because it worked, but they never 
 accepted it in principle, and it was always 
 disliked by the more extreme Anglicans. 
 
 In the year 1880 the first point in the 
 Birmingham programme was carried, and 
 
208 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 education was made entirely compulsory. 
 The second followed in 1891, and education 
 became free. In common justice it ought 
 at the same time to have been made un- 
 sectarian. This was so far recognised among 
 Nonconformists that large numbers of 
 their schools were surrendered to the public 
 authority. In the Church of England, 
 however, the voluntary system had been 
 growing, fed as it was by small concessions 
 from time to time. These were crowned in 
 1902 by the Act which put the Voluntary 
 Schools on the rates. Thousands of Non- 
 conformists at once took up a position of 
 passive resistance, and, whether they resist 
 or not, they naturally object to being com- 
 pelled to pay for schools which are under the 
 control of one religious body, and in which 
 their sons and daughters cannot hope to be 
 teachers without accepting the formularies 
 of the Church of England. They entirely 
 agree to-day with the position laid down by 
 Mr. Chamberlain and Dr. Dale in 1870. 
 The former said, " The payment of money 
 out of the rates to the denominational schools 
 would be an infringement of the rights of 
 conscience," and the latter, " What we 
 ask for is education, the best education 
 possible and at any cost for every child in 
 England. But not even at the bidding of a 
 Liberal Ministry will we consent to any 
 proposition which, under cover of an edu- 
 cational measure, empowers one religious 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 2C9 
 
 denomination to levy a rate for teaching its 
 creed and maintaining its worship." It is 
 easy to sneer at this protracted squabble 
 over religious education, but to do so argues 
 a very imperfect understanding of the 
 issues. The fight is one between the forces 
 of progress and the forces of reaction. The 
 principles of religious equality and religious 
 freedom are at stake in it, and Nonconformists 
 would be false to all their traditions did they 
 not continue to work for a system of educa- 
 tion which shall be, at least, unsectarian, as 
 well as compulsory and free. 
 
 From elementary education the Noncon- 
 formists next turned their attention to 
 secondary. It had long been one of their 
 most serious grievances that they were 
 shut out from the older Universities. They 
 had done great things for the education of 
 their ministry in providing academies and 
 colleges, and they had made considerable use 
 of the facilities for higher education open to 
 them in London and Scotland. But they 
 wanted more, and they were now strong 
 enough to get it. In spite of the veiled 
 opposition of Mr. Gladstone, there was 
 introduced in 1871 a Government Bill which 
 abolished all ecclesiastical and theological 
 tests for professors, tutors, fellows, and 
 scholars at Oxford and Cambridge. Clerical 
 fellowships were still retained, however, and 
 members of the Theological Faculty were 
 still obliged to be clergymen of the Church 
 
210 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of England. As Mr. Herbert Paul says, " The 
 Act would have had greater success if it 
 had been bolder and more comprehensive. 
 But such as it was, it did much more than 
 remove a Dissenter's grievance. It made 
 Oxford and Cambridge really representative 
 of the country, not merely of the predominant 
 Church. It gave them the fresh intellectual 
 air which was the thing they chiefly needed ; 
 it freed all studies, except Divinity, from 
 the cramping influence of a sectarian system ; 
 and it taught the lesson that contact with 
 all forms of opinion is no danger to honesty 
 or to faith." Since the removal of the 
 tests Nonconformists have gone up to 
 Oxford and Cambridge in ever-increasing 
 numbers, and there are now some five or six 
 hundred of them at each University. They 
 have also established theological colleges in 
 both places. But the anomaly still remains 
 that, however eminent as teacher or scholar 
 in theology a Nonconformist may be, he 
 cannot obtain a theological degree, or share 
 in the work of the Theological Faculty. 
 During the last twenty years at Oxford 
 Nonconformist students have won the Uni- 
 versity Theological prizes at the rate of 
 more than two per year, and yet these men 
 still remain under the restrictions indicated. 
 The founding of free Theological faculties in 
 London, Manchester, and Wales, and their 
 entire success, has shown the better way, and 
 it is to be hoped that it will not be long 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 211 
 
 before the older Universities follow the 
 example thus set. 
 
 Another grievance which Nonconformists 
 had long felt very keenly was removed by 
 the Burials Acts of 1852 and 1880. Before 
 the former date there were no public burial- 
 grounds except the churchyards. A few 
 chapels had small private burial-places 
 attached to them, and there were a few 
 held by private companies. But in most 
 places, when Nonconformists had to bury 
 their dead, it was with the help of the clergy- 
 man and under the rites of an alien Church. 
 In 1852 a Bill was passed enabling Corpora- 
 tions to provide public burial-places con- 
 taining consecrated and unconsecrated 
 ground and chapels. Naturally, however, 
 these were only provided in populous dis- 
 tricts, and the Act did nothing to remove 
 the trouble felt in the villages. In 1880, 
 therefore, it was enacted that burials should 
 be permitted in parish churchyards, either 
 without any religious service, or with such 
 Christian and orderly service as those in 
 charge of the funeral might desire. None 
 of the evils predicted have followed from 
 this very obvious concession, and it has 
 finally closed a most painful and unnecessary 
 controversy. 
 
 The gradual and steady advance of the 
 Nonconformist policy which these conces- 
 sions represent could not but weaken the 
 position of the Anglican Church as an 
 
212 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Establishment. A natural consequence of 
 this was that Free Churchmen were en- 
 couraged to attack the principle of the 
 Establishment itself. As early as 1811 the 
 Protestant Society for the Protection of 
 Religious Liberty was founded, and it played 
 a great part in securing the repeal of 
 the Test and Corporation Acts. It was 
 followed in 1844 by the formation of the 
 British Anti-State Church Association, which 
 afterwards became the Society for the 
 Liberation of Religion from State Patronage 
 and Control. For many years the leading 
 spirit in this Society was the Rev. Edward 
 Miall, who, as editor of the Nonconformist 
 newspaper, did very much to educate Non- 
 conformists in their own principles, and to 
 inspire them to take action in their defence. 
 Miall was an extremely effective writer and 
 speaker, and his incessant attacks on the 
 abuses of the Establishment produced a 
 great effect on the younger generation of 
 Nonconformists. The older ministers, though 
 they were very much alarmed at the time 
 by the spread of the Tractarian movement 
 within the Church, were by no means inclined 
 to follow Miall. He was a Radical, and they 
 were not. He was a disturber of the peace of 
 Israel, and they preferred to let sleeping 
 dogs lie. However, the future was with the 
 man of energy and convictions, and the 
 positions for which Miall contended were 
 gradually adopted by all thinking Non- 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 213 
 
 conformists. They came to see that, so long 
 as the State Church existed, there was no 
 real security for religious freedom, and they 
 discovered how great an anomaly was an 
 Established Church when it only commanded 
 the support of a fraction of the population. 
 
 It was the growth of convictions like these 
 which prepared the way for the Disestablish- 
 ment of the Irish Church. Ireland then, as 
 now, was predominantly Catholic, and it 
 was computed that scarcely an eighth of the 
 people were connected with the Established 
 Church. When Mr. Gladstone took the 
 question up in 1868 he had a staunch ally 
 in John Bright, who at that time had as 
 much influence with the Liberal electorate 
 as the Prime Minister himself. The recent 
 General Election had shown the country to be 
 fully ripe for the measure as a first instalment 
 of that justice to Ireland that has been so 
 long delayed. The Bill provided for severing 
 the connection between the Church and the 
 State by putting an end to the jurisdiction of 
 the ecclesiastical courts in Ireland, and by 
 taking away from the Bishops their seats in 
 the House of Lords. It was provided also 
 that the Queen in Council should be em- 
 powered to recognise any governing body of 
 the Irish Church to which her clergy and 
 laity should agree, and that such body should 
 be incorporated by law. As to disendow- 
 ment, the property of the Church, so far 
 as it was affected by the Bill, was vested in 
 
214 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Commissioners appointed by Parliament. 
 Private endowments given or bequeathed 
 since 1 660 were not to be touched. The Church 
 fabrics and parsonages were handed over 
 to the governing body of the DisestabHshed 
 Church. Lay patrons were compensated by 
 receiving the full value of their patronage, 
 and beneficed clergy might continue to draw 
 their incomes for life, or receive a sum in 
 commutation. Curates of two years' stand- 
 ing in a parish were also to be compensated, 
 and glebes and tithe-rent charges were to 
 be vested in the Parliamentary Commissioners. 
 At the same time the regium donum payments 
 to the Maynooth Catholic College and to the 
 Presbyterians were to cease, and compensation 
 was to be given from the funds of the Dis- 
 established Church. The surplus of this 
 property was to be devoted to the relief 
 of unavoidable calamity not provided for 
 sufficiently by the Poor Law. The Bill easily 
 passed the Commons, but was assailed with 
 the utmost hostility in the Lords. It is a 
 matter of history how near it came to creating 
 the gravest possible constitutional crisis. 
 Finally it was allowed to pass with some 
 alteration in the financial details. It is 
 generally admitted that the Disestablished 
 Church is stronger and more prosperous than 
 ever it was as an Establishment. The Irish 
 Church to-day is an object-lesson in the truth 
 of John Bright 's words : " The past and present 
 State alliance with reUgion is hostile to 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 215 
 
 religious liberty, preventing all growth and 
 nearly destroying all vitality in religion 
 itseK." 
 
 From Ireland we may turn to Scotland. 
 In that country Free Church convictions were 
 of comparatively late growth. In the days 
 of the Stuarts the struggle was one between 
 Episcopacy and Presbytery, but the Cove- 
 nanters, who made so magnificent a fight 
 against the imposition of an alien Church, 
 were State Churchmen to a man. When the 
 struggle was over and Scotland had her 
 Presbyterian Church by law established, all 
 the life and fire seemed to die out of it. 
 From the Revolution in 1688 onwards the 
 rule of the Moderate in the Scotch Church 
 was supreme. And the rule of the Moderate 
 meant a positive hatred of anything like 
 Evangelical enthusiasm and a fear of all 
 theological change, combined with a deep 
 respect for the principle of Establishment. 
 It was a highly respectable, unemotional 
 and very decorous type of religion that then 
 prevailed. In the Settlement of 1688 many 
 of the Episcopal incumbents became Presby- 
 terian in order to retain their positions, and 
 these, and their followers, were no source of 
 strength. But the sleep of stagnation did not 
 remain long unbroken. Early in the eighteenth 
 century, John Glas, a Dundee minister of 
 rare spirituality and devotion, challenged the 
 Covenanting position. He taught that there 
 was no Scripture warrant for an Established 
 
216 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Church, that the civil magistrate had no 
 authority in rehgious matters, and that the 
 imposition of a creed was not a Christian 
 thing. After a long controversy, in which 
 Glas was warmly supported by his con- 
 gregation, he was deposed from his ministry 
 in the Church of Scotland, and founded an 
 independent Church which was known as 
 Glasite. A similar awakening on the theo- 
 logical side is marked by the Sandemanians, a 
 community founded by John Sandeman, a 
 son-in-law of Glas. More important, how- 
 ever, than either of these were the Marrow 
 men, so called from the Marrow of Modern 
 Divinity, a compilation of Puritan Theology 
 by one Fisher, a chaplain in Cromwell's 
 army. About 1718 this was republished 
 in Scotland by Thomas Boston, the author 
 of the Fourfold State and other books. It at 
 once became popular among ministers, and 
 caused something like an Evangelical revival. 
 In consequence it was condemned by the 
 Assembly, and the ministers who accepted 
 it were "admonished and rebuked." Among 
 these was Ebenezer Erskine, the son of an 
 English ejected minister, who became the 
 leader of the first secession from the Estab- 
 lished Church. The cause of it was the 
 question of patronage, and the immediate 
 occasion an enactment by the Assembly of 
 the Kirk in 1731 that, in case a patron failed 
 to present to a vacant living, the presentation 
 should be made by the elders and heritors 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 217 
 
 (i.e. landholders of the district). Erskine 
 protested against this in the interests of the 
 Church and " as giving a wound to the 
 authority of Christ." The Assembly there- 
 fore suspended him. He and three other 
 ministers then formed the first Associate 
 Presbytery at Gairney Bridge, near Kinross, 
 in the year 1733. 
 
 This was the beginning of the Secession 
 Church, which for many years exercised a 
 profound influence on the life of the Scotch 
 people. It was a Voluntary Church de- 
 pendent on the freewill offerings of the 
 people, and independent of any State control. 
 But it was at first Voluntary in practice 
 rather than in principle. It clung to the 
 Covenants with pathetic insistence, and it 
 was not without much discussion and after 
 long hesitation that the Covenants were first 
 freed from the clauses which insisted on the 
 supremacy of the State in religious as well as 
 in civil affairs, and afterwards made optional 
 for those who joined the Secession Churches. 
 The history of this process is too long and 
 intricate to recount here, but it is a very 
 interesting example of the gradual victory 
 of the Voluntary principle. In the year 1747 
 a controversy arose within the Secession 
 Church on the lawfulness of taking the oath 
 administered to burgesses in Edinburgh, 
 Glasgow and Perth, in which reference was 
 made to " the true religion presently pro- 
 fessed within this realm." This was in- 
 
218 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 terpreted by some to mean the Established 
 Church, and by others merely the Protestant 
 faith. So arose the Burgher and Anti-Burgher 
 sections of the Secession Church. Early in the 
 nineteenth century the breach was healed, and 
 the United Secession Church formed. It 
 was from this Church that James Morison was 
 expelled in 1845 for his broad views on the 
 Atonement, and founded the Evangelical 
 Union of Scotland. Thomas Carlyle was 
 brought up in the Secession Church, and 
 it is of one of its chapels that he wrote : 
 " That poor temple of my childhood is 
 more sacred to me than the biggest Cathedral 
 then extant could have been; rude, rustic, bare, 
 no temple in the world was more so : but 
 there were sacred lambencies, tongues of 
 authentic flame which kindled what was 
 best in one, what has not yet gone out." 
 Side by side with the Seceders grew up the 
 Belief Church, founded by Thomas Gillespie, 
 a minister who was deposed for refusing to 
 take part in the installation of a pastor 
 appointed against the will of the people. 
 Gillespie had been trained by PhiHp Dod- 
 dridge and was of a more Catholic temper than 
 most of the Covenanting clergy. He gave 
 the name Belief to his Churches because 
 their aim was relief from the oppression of 
 patronage. In 1847 his Churches united 
 with the Seceders and formed the United 
 Presbyterian Church of Scotland. 
 
 But the question of appointing ministers 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 219 
 
 by patronage had other and more important 
 results still. During the early part of the 
 nineteenth century the Assembly of the 
 Scotch Kirk had become somewhat more 
 favourable to the system. But in 1834, 
 under the guidance of Dr. Chalmers, the 
 Assembly passed the Veto Act, which was 
 contrived in order to determine the rights 
 of the people without interfering with those of 
 the patrons. It provided that if a majority 
 of male communicants who were heads of 
 families objected to the patron's nomina- 
 tion, the presbytery might refuse to ordain, 
 and intimate to the patron that the Church 
 was still vacant. A case of the kind came 
 up at Auchterarder, where the patron and 
 his nominee refused to accept the Veto Act, 
 and took the matter into the Civil Courts. 
 More than once the Courts declared in favour 
 of the patrons and against the people. In 
 1842 the Assembly issued a Claim of Right, 
 remonstrating against the encroachments of 
 the Civil Courts, and questioning the legality 
 of some of their decisions. At the same 
 time efforts were made to get Parliament 
 to interfere, but without avail. In 1843, 
 when the General Assembly met in Edin- 
 burgh, a protest was laid on the table before 
 the Queen's Commissioner, setting forth the 
 wrongs of the Church, and declaring the 
 intention of the signatories to form a new 
 organisation as the Free Church of Scotland. 
 When the protest was read a large number 
 
220 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of ministers and laymen, led by Dr. Chalmers, 
 left the Assembly and proceeded, amid vast 
 crowds in the street, to another place of 
 meeting, where the Free Church of Scotland 
 was constituted. Those who took this action 
 cut connection with the State altogether ; 
 they abandoned churches, manses, glebes, 
 and stipends, because they could not brook 
 State interference with the Crown rights 
 of Jesus Christ. It was a magnificent de- 
 monstration of the Free Church principle. 
 Four hundred and seventy out of the twelve 
 hundred ministers of the Kirk joined it, 
 along with all the foreign missionaries and 
 a great number of laymen in all parts of 
 Scotland. Many of them suffered not a 
 little, but the new Church grew apace. It 
 was splendidly organised from the first, 
 Dr. Chalmers being a master hand at the 
 work. His sustentation fund for the support 
 of the ministry was a model of its kind, and 
 amply secured the object aimed at from the 
 beginning. Both the Free Church and the 
 United Presbyterian Church continued to 
 flourish side by side until the year 1900, 
 when they determined to join hands, and 
 became the United Free Church. The union 
 was entered into with enthusiasm by all but 
 a small minority of Free Church ministers, 
 mostly in the Highlands, who contended 
 that the union violated the trusts under 
 which their property was held. The Scotch 
 Courts decided against them, but when the 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 221 
 
 matter was taken to the House of Lords the 
 decision was in their favour. The Lords 
 held that the Free Church was to be regarded 
 simply as a Trust, and that among the articles 
 of association were the Principle of Establish- 
 ment, which had never been repudiated, and 
 the doctrines of election and predestination 
 as taught by the Confession of Faith. They 
 held that union with the United Presbyterian 
 Church violated these articles, because it 
 left the relation of the Church to the State 
 an open question, and because the Declaratory 
 Act of the United Presbyterian Church was 
 inconsistent with the Confession of Faith. 
 The result was that the dissentient ministers 
 and congregations, less than thirty in number, 
 were adjudged to be the true Free Church 
 (Wee Frees, they were popularly called), and 
 all its property was handed over to them, 
 consisting of over a thousand churches and 
 manses, and other property valued at ten 
 million pounds. The situation thus created 
 was an impossible one, and Parliament was 
 compelled to interfere. The greater part of 
 the property was restored to the United 
 Free Church, and it has rapidly recovered 
 from this unexpected set-back at the beginning 
 of its career. At the same time the Estab- 
 lished Church has shown great signs of 
 activity, and negotiations are again on foot 
 for the reunion of Presbyterianism in Scotland. 
 That this will be brought about at some 
 not very distant date is practically certain. 
 
222 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 but, whether by concessions to the principle 
 of Establishment on the part of the United 
 Free Church, or by the disestablishment of 
 the Kirk, no one would venture to predict. 
 
 The story of the Presbyterian Church in 
 England in modern times may be very briefly 
 told. After the lapse into Unitarianism 
 in the eighteenth century there were very 
 few orthodox Presbyterian Churches left. 
 Such as there were were constantly rein- 
 forced by additions from Scotland, and in 
 1876 the Presbyterian Church of England 
 was formally set up with the countenance 
 and on the model of the United Presbyterian 
 Church. Though largely a Scotch Church, 
 it has attracted to itself many English 
 people, and has grown to considerable influ- 
 ence, especially in London and in the large 
 towns in the North. It has a cultured and 
 able ministry, a large Sustentation Fund, and 
 an admirably equipped mission in China. 
 Like their namesakes in an earlier generation, 
 many of these modern Presbyterians are not 
 Free Churchmen in the strict sense of the 
 term. They believe in the principle of a 
 State Church, though all their affinities are 
 with the Free Churches of England, and 
 time will, no doubt, gradually bring them 
 round to the full Free Church position, which 
 is quite compatible with a strong sense of 
 responsibility for the national well-being on 
 the part of the Churches. 
 
 The Congregational and Baptist *' interests " 
 
PROGRESS AND CONSOLIDATION 223 
 
 in Scotland ov>^e much to the work of the 
 brothers Robert and James Haldane. These 
 were young laymen who, under the impulse 
 partly of the French Revolution and partly 
 of the Evangelical revival, carried on a great 
 Evangelistic mission in the east and north 
 of Scotland from the year 1789 onwards. 
 They gathered great crowds to hear them, 
 and, in spite of opposition from the Estab- 
 lished Church, their movement prospered. 
 In time James Haldane adopted Baptist 
 principles, and his brother Robert, with his 
 followers, founded the Scottish Congregational 
 Union. The Haldanes, however, were Free 
 Church in practice rather than in theory. 
 When Dr. John Brown refused in the year 1833 
 to pay the tax for the support of the Estab- 
 lished Church ministers, Robert Haldane 
 denounced his conduct as "rebellion against 
 Christ," and w^as warmly commended for 
 his action by Dr. Chalmers. For all that, 
 he and his brother are practically responsible 
 for the foundation of the Congregational 
 and Baptist Churches in Scotland, Churches 
 which have maintained a good testimony to 
 the principles of religious freedom and the 
 doctrines of grace. The fact that they have 
 played a much smaller part in Scotland 
 than in England is due to the excellence of 
 the Presbyterian system. In modern times> 
 at least the Presbyterian Churches have 
 shown no little power of adaptation to new 
 circumstances. They have become more 
 
224 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 and more Congregational in practice by- 
 respecting the autonomy of the individual 
 Church. There has also grown up a much 
 more friendly feeling between the Established 
 and Free Churches in Scotland. The Estab- 
 lished Church is far more tolerant than it 
 once was, and co-operation between the two 
 is frequent and cordial. The situation is 
 thus quite different from that which obtains 
 in England. 
 
 It may be said that by the end of the 
 nineteenth century the principle of religious 
 liberty had won its way into full recognition. 
 The Free Churches have, therefore, become 
 less negative in their attitude, and have been 
 able to turn their attention to constructive 
 endeavour. While this has meant a certain 
 slackening of zeal in regard to Church 
 Establishment and similar questions, it has 
 meant also an increase in spiritual force and 
 social service. The Churches are beginning 
 to turn from their rights to their duties. 
 While they will not be slow to assert the 
 former whenever the occasion requires it, 
 they are, for the moment, more concerned 
 to grapple with the moral and spiritual 
 problems with which our modern civilisation 
 confronts them. It is their growing ability 
 for such a task which makes their future full 
 of hope. 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 225 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 THE PRESENT TIME 
 
 During the latter half of the nineteenth 
 century the Free Churches made great and 
 rapid progress. With the removal of various 
 disabilities came a new spirit of hope and 
 energy. Chapels were erected all over the 
 country. The little old meeting - houses 
 tucked away in back streets gave place to 
 large and commodious buildings. Sunday 
 Schools multiplied and became more efficient. 
 The Missionary Societies, founded at the 
 time of the Evangelical revival, greatly 
 increased the scope of their operations and 
 laid siege to the whole of the heathen world. 
 The great preachers of Nonconformity began 
 to take the place that their powers and 
 influence entitled them to. Men like Spurgeon 
 and Dale, each in his own way, left a deep 
 mark on the history of his time, and counted 
 for more than many men who bulked much 
 more largely in the popular mind. The 
 principles of religious liberty and equality, for 
 which the Nonconformists had fought so long 
 a fight, came gradually and tacitly to be 
 recognised as part of the heritage of the 
 British people. Here and there, no doubt. 
 Nonconformists will still often be subject 
 to certain social disadvantages, and where 
 possible the opportunity will be taken to 
 
226 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 exercise various petty forms of persecution. 
 But public opinion is against anything of 
 the kind, and there is every prospect that it 
 will become more and more rare. At the 
 same time the attitude of Nonconformists 
 themselves has become less negative and pug- 
 nacious than it was. The gradual aban- 
 donment of the names Nonconformist and 
 Dissenter, and the substitution for them of 
 *' Free Church," is significant of a change 
 that is being felt through the whole religious 
 life of the country. It is recognised by Non- 
 conformists that their position cannot be 
 expressed only by negative terms. Opposi- 
 tion to the Established Church is by no 
 means their sole raison d'etre. They stand 
 for certain positive principles of Church life 
 and religious belief, and their object is to 
 extend these rather than to antagoni^3e any 
 other body of Christians. With Anglicans 
 as such they have no quarrel ; but they have 
 a quarrel with the principle of the State 
 establishment of religion. They believe it to 
 be contrary to the very genius of Christianity 
 that it should require the countenance and 
 support of the State, and they believe that 
 the State connection is a real hindrance to the 
 spiritual development of the Church. They 
 know that this view of the matter is shared 
 by many Anglicans, and they feel with them 
 that in advocating disestablishment they are 
 acting in the highest interests both of religion 
 and of the Church itself. 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 227 
 
 It must be admitted, however, that the 
 relations between the Free Churches and the 
 Anglican Church have been very greatly 
 complicated by the great success of that 
 Anglo-Catholic revival popularly known as 
 the Oxford Movement. While this has 
 given new life and force to the Church of 
 England, it has tended to emphasise the 
 separation between that Church and all 
 others. The sacerdotal and sacramentarian 
 ideas on which it is based, and its insistence 
 on the necessity of the historic episcopate, 
 have given to the Church a spirit of exclusive- 
 ness and arrogance which have been most 
 unfortunate. While there are many High 
 Churchmen who are better than their creed, 
 and are willing to fraternise with Noncon- 
 formists, and even, on occasion, to co-operate 
 with them, there are many others who can 
 only count them as " heathen men and 
 publicans." The organ of their party, The 
 Church Times, seldom speaks of Noncon- 
 formity without a sneer, and deliberately 
 adopts the attitude that the Church of 
 England is the religion of England. It is this 
 temper that is responsible for the religious 
 difficulty (so called) in the schools, and that 
 perpetuates our unfortunate divisions. As 
 long as it exists, co-operation with Anglicans 
 can only be occasional and sporadic, and 
 anything like corporate reunion is a dream. 
 The Free Churches are always ready to meet 
 Anglicans on equal terms, and to work hand 
 
 H 2 
 
22^ NONCONFORMITY 
 
 in hand with them in any cause which will 
 further the Kingdom of God On both sides, 
 however, there is need for more knowledge 
 one of the other, for more charity, and for a 
 better mutual understanding. These things 
 are slowly but surely coming about, and 
 with time and patience, and the gradual 
 removal of causes of dissension, we may 
 come to see a better spirit predominating, and 
 a more real unity among the various repre- 
 sentatives of the Christian name. 
 
 There is no doubt that the Free Churches 
 have suffered from their very freedom. 
 While they have been characterised by a 
 fine enterprise and by a real adaptability 
 to new conditions, they have also tended 
 to develop too great an individuality. Their 
 liberty has sometimes degenerated into licence, 
 and their independence into impatience of 
 all control. The various denominations have 
 gone their way and done their work too often 
 without any regard to others who were work- 
 ing in the same field, and even individual 
 Churches have sought their own prosperity 
 and been quite heedless of how their neigh- 
 bours fared. This has been especially the 
 case among the Congregationalists and Bap- 
 tists, with whom the autonomy of the local 
 Church is very jealously guarded. In these 
 denominations the difficulty was partly met 
 by the foundation of the Congregational and 
 Baptist Unions, in both of which the tendency 
 of later years has been strongly in the direction 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 229 
 
 of closer federation and connexionalism. 
 Even the most Independent Churches found 
 that it was necessary for them to stand 
 together as one body, and for the strong to 
 help the weak. Their union has enabled 
 them to build churches and found missions, to 
 raise the status of the ministry and to give 
 advice and help to churches in poor or 
 sparsely populated districts. At the same 
 time it has given them a sense of corporate 
 fellowship and a platform, which have 
 enabled them to become conscious of their 
 strength, and to influence public opinion 
 in a way that would have been impossible to 
 them as isolated atoms. At the same time 
 nothing has been done to interfere with the 
 autonomy of the individual Church in spiritual 
 things. It is accepted as axiomatic that the 
 government of the Church shall be in the 
 hands of those who are members of the 
 Church and not with any outside authority. 
 This principle has gradually come to be 
 recognised in all the Churches. Among the 
 Presbyterians and many of the Methodist 
 bodies the individual Church is practically au- 
 tonomous in religious matters, and even in 
 the Church of England there is a marked 
 growth of pubHc opinion in favour of giving 
 to the laity a much greater share in the 
 management of Church affairs. 
 
 A great step in the direction of the closer 
 federation of the Free Churches was taken 
 in the year 1892, when the National Free 
 
230 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Church Council was formed. This was a 
 genuine federation of all the Evangelical Free 
 Churches. It was brought about by the 
 desire for closer intercourse and common 
 action which was keenly felt in the larger 
 Free Church denominations. Expression to 
 this had been given at various meetings and 
 conferences, and under the guidance of 
 men like Hugh Price Hughes and Charles 
 Berry it was crystallised into action. The 
 Association comprises Churches of every type, 
 and no difficulty has been experienced in 
 getting them to stand together on a common 
 platform and to take united action in defence 
 or furtherance of Free Church principles. 
 One immediate effect of it has been to 
 enable the different Churches and their 
 leaders to know and understand one another 
 better, and to set on foot measures for pre- 
 venting unnecessary rivalry and overlapping 
 among the Free Churches. The Council 
 has also rendered good service in giving to 
 Free Churchmen a suitable opportunity for 
 the defence and exposition of their principles, 
 and in applying them to the social and political 
 needs of the time. Its strength in this 
 direction was abundantly demonstrated by 
 the campaign undertaken against the re- 
 actionary education policy of the Conservative 
 Government of 1902. It enabled the Free 
 Churches to discover a solidarity and a 
 determination which stood them in good 
 stead. Though the Education Act could 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 231 
 
 be accurately described as the " Government's 
 triumph over the Nonconformists," it was a 
 dearly bought victory, for it was the spirit 
 of resistance which it had brought forth in 
 the Nonconformists which afterwards drove 
 the Government from office. The Free Church 
 Council is often regarded as a merely political 
 institution, and in many quarters is greatly 
 blamed for its political activities. It was 
 perhaps unfortunate tha t so early in its history 
 it should have been driven into political 
 action of a pronounced kind. But in this 
 it was only following the traditional Non- 
 conformist example. When political action 
 threatens religious liberty or the cause of 
 righteousness and truth, then Free Church- 
 men will always be compelled to assert them- 
 selves. To them, citizenship means more than 
 any party programme. They cannot view 
 it apart from the sanctions of their faith. 
 Lord Palmerston was speaking the truth 
 when he said : "In the long run EngUsh 
 politics will follow the consciences of the 
 Dissenters." The offence of the Free Church 
 Council is that to this despised Nonconformist 
 conscience it has given an articulate voice. 
 It is a voice which the forces of privilege 
 and reaction have every reason to fear. 
 
 Primarily, however, the Free Church Council 
 exists for purposes which are purely spiritual. 
 It is an association of Churches concerned 
 chiefly for the objects for which those 
 Churches themselves exist. Its main work is 
 
232 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 the propagation of Evangelical principles. 
 Part of its regular organisation is the arranging 
 for missions to be carried ont systematically 
 up and down the country, and at its annual 
 Conferences the main topics of discussion are 
 those which bear on the spiritual life and 
 aims of the Churches. One of its most 
 notable achievements has been the preparation j 
 of the Evangelical Free Church Catechism, 
 a document which has revealed a surprising 
 amount of agreement among the Free Churches 
 on the theological expression of their faith. 
 The work of the Council so far has certainly 
 done much to help on the cause of reunion 
 among the Churches. It has made possible 
 that mutual knowledge and respect which are 
 a condition precedent of all attempts at 
 reunion, and it has provided the opportunity 
 for practical co-operation. It is now re- 
 cognised that anything like uniformity among 
 the Churches is an impossible dream, but 
 that a unity of spirit, aim and service is well 
 within the range of practical politics. The 
 reunion of certain of the Methodist denomi- 
 nations, of the United Presbyterian and Free 
 Churches in Scotland, the constant co- 
 operation of Congregational and Baptist 
 Churches in this country and the schemes 
 of reunion that are being ventilated in 
 Canada and Australia, all these point in the 
 direction of something even closer than a 
 federation of the Free Evangelical Churches. 
 On the mission field this has already been ac- 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 233 
 
 complished. There, too, friendly co-operation 
 with the AngUcan Church is more frequent 
 and more possible than under existing con- 
 ditions it can ever be at home. The recent 
 Edinburgh Missionary Conference was a 
 striking demonstration of the fundamental 
 unity of Christendom, and in the minds of 
 many pointed the way to a much closer 
 co-operation in service for the future. We 
 do not overlook the obstacles which still have 
 to be reckoned with, but we have to record 
 a notable advance in the spirit which would 
 emphasise the agreement among the Churches 
 rather than their differences, and would 
 accept the help and service of all those who 
 profess and call themselves Christians. 
 
 The advance of this spirit among Noncon- 
 formists is the more hopeful because they 
 have now become so large a part of the 
 Christian forces in the world. From the 
 most recent available statistics, those of the 
 year 1910, we can gather some idea of their 
 strength in comparison with one another 
 and with the Anglican Church. Taking the 
 sixteen leading Free Churches in England 
 and Wales, and comparing these alone with 
 the Anglican Church, we find the following 
 results. In church accommodation the Free 
 Churches have 8,788,285 sittings, while the 
 Anglican Church has 7,236,423 sittings. 
 The Anglican Church has 2,231,753 com- 
 municants, and the Free Churches have 
 2,125,275. The Free Churches have 406,764 
 
234 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Sunday-school teachers, and the Anglican 
 Church has 212,712. The Free Churches 
 have 3,393,118 Sunday-school scholars, and 
 the Anglican Church has 2,494,227. The 
 international statistics show, of course, a 
 much greater disparity in the numbers. If 
 we take only the four leading Free Church 
 denominations — viz. the Methodists, Baptists, 
 Presbyterians, and Congregationalists — we find 
 that these have between them 21,862,092 
 communicants, 1,316,449 Sunday-school 
 teachers, and 16,225,912 Sunday-school 
 scholars. The figures for the Church of 
 England are: 4,022,493 communicants, 262,303 
 Sunday-school teachers, and 2,932,014 Sunday- 
 school scholars. These figures include the 
 United Kingdom, the British Colonies, the 
 United States of America, and India. They 
 show at least that while in the British Isles 
 the Free Churches have raised themselves 
 to a position of numerical equality with 
 the Anglican Church, in the English-speaking 
 world they have far surpassed it. Taking 
 them all together, however, these figures 
 cannot be regarded as satisfactory. They 
 represent far too small a proportion of the 
 population; and if we compare them with 
 those of previous years, we find that they 
 do not indicate a growth commensurate 
 with the growth of population, and that — at 
 present, at least — the Free Churches are doing 
 little more than mark time and holding the 
 ground they have won. We do not find 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 235 
 
 anywhere a decided increase in numbers, 
 and in some cases there is a positive decline. 
 It is a familiar truth that history repeats 
 itself, and the history of the Church is no 
 exception to the rule. There also progress 
 is never by a steady advance all along the 
 line, but by action and reaction, by ebb and 
 flow. It would certainly seem that we have 
 now reached a period of religious reaction, 
 of an ebb-tide in spiritual things. It does 
 not need any show of statistics, any counting 
 of heads, to prove to us that the great mass 
 of the people of this country are profoundly 
 indifferent to all the Churches and to religion 
 as represented by them. The advance in 
 scientific discovery and in temporal well- 
 being has brought about a spirit of practical 
 materialism which tends to make religion 
 both unnecessary and unreal. It is quite 
 true, as every careful observer must realise, 
 that this is only part of a general decadence 
 that marks our modern civilisation. It is 
 by no means confined to this country, nor 
 does it affect only the Free Churches. These, 
 however, from their very nature, are the 
 more likely to suffer from it. They cannot 
 live save in an atmosphere of reality. The 
 unrest which is so marked a feature of 
 religious life at the present day is due largely 
 to the efforts which the Churches are making 
 to readjust themselves to the new circum- 
 stances and conditions. They are showing 
 that they have that adaptability to fresh 
 
236 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 surroundings that is the surest sign of life, 
 and the situation must be judged accordingly. 
 On the intellectual side profound and far- 
 reaching changes have already taken place 
 in the attitude of the Free Churches. They 
 have been helped here by their freedom 
 from bondage to any fixed formularies ; 
 but they have never been altogether free. 
 There is a bondage of tradition which can 
 be as hard as that of the letter, and the 
 process of emancipation has been marked 
 by some severe and protracted struggles. 
 In most of the Free Churches at the beginning 
 of last century the Calvinistic tradition was 
 predominant. In all of them the source of 
 authority was the Bible, regarded as literally 
 and verbally inspired. But the new wine 
 of modern thinking was too strong for these 
 old bottles. The immense advance in natural 
 science, with its reinterpretation of the 
 history of the Universe and of the nature 
 of man, and the application of the historical 
 and critical method to the Christian sources, 
 made some theological reconstruction absol- 
 utely necessary, if Christianity was any 
 longer to appeal to the more thoughtful 
 section of the community. Among the 
 growing pains of this advance have been the 
 Rivulet controversy, the Davidson case, the 
 Leicester conference, and later the New 
 Theology omong Congregationalists, the 
 down-grade controversy initiated by Mr. 
 Spurgeon among the Baptists, and the 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 237 
 
 Robertson Smith case in Scotland. Of 
 similar import, and much more widely known, 
 were the Colenso case, and the publication 
 of Essays and Reviews in the Church of 
 England. The net result of these contro- 
 versies has been a gradual transference of 
 emphasis from the doctrinal to the experi- 
 mental in religion. The process is by no 
 means complete. Among many sections of 
 the Free Churches and among Evangelicals 
 in the Church of England there is an entire 
 absence of theological interest and enlighten- 
 ment. Men still cling pathetically to the 
 old formularies, and regard every suggestion 
 to alter them as a profanation of the ark 
 of God. Even among the larger Free Churches 
 there is not a little intolerance and a deter- 
 mination on the part of some to make all 
 others accept the theological position with 
 which they agree on pain of being branded 
 as heretics. On the other hand, there is in 
 most of the Churches a theological left wing 
 that seems to love what is new and strange 
 for its own sake, and takes an almost mis- 
 chievous delight in stating it to others in 
 the most extravagant forms possible. But 
 midway between these two extremes stands 
 the great bulk of Nonconformist opinion, 
 that is neither reactionary on the one hand, 
 nor given to extravagant novelties on the 
 other. Free Churchmen generally regard it 
 as essential that they should maintain liberty 
 in all things and the charity that thinketh 
 
238 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 no evil. While they are thoroughly evan- 
 gelical in spirit, they do not confound their 
 gospel with their theology, and fully recognise 
 the necessity for reconstruction in the intel- 
 lectual presentation of the truth. They 
 cannot bind themselves to the letter of any 
 ancient creed, and if they accept any for- 
 mulary at all, it is in a declaratory rather 
 than in an authoritative sense. They believe 
 in the test, " by their fruits ye shall know 
 them," and they view with sympathy every 
 type of Christianity that makes itself felt 
 in changed lives and in the service of man- 
 kind. They respect each other's right to 
 think and speak as conscience bids ; and 
 while they are ready to criticise those who 
 differ from them, and to show them the better 
 way, they will condemn no man hastily or 
 unheard. They realise that Christianity is 
 a life, and they are concerned to let it have 
 free course and find its expression in varying 
 forms. They believe profoundly in the work 
 of the Holy Spirit, which means to them 
 that God has not exhausted Himself in any 
 of the ancient forms of revelation, but that 
 He is still speaking in these days to all who 
 have ears to hear. 
 
 The dangers and difficulties of a position 
 like this lie on the surface. To maintain 
 it in any sound and reasonable way requires 
 real faith, and is something almost beyond 
 the capacity of the average man. Sight is 
 so much simpler and easier than faith. To 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 239 
 
 accept a verbal statement of a creed and 
 swear to it on all occasions, or to commit 
 oneself to an authoritative Church and let 
 the Church do the thinking while her sons 
 passively accept her conclusions, is for most 
 people the line of least resistance. On the 
 other hand, to keep an open mind is a difficult 
 and uncomfortable thing, especially as it is 
 not always easy to see where it will lead. 
 It is no wonder that many observers attribute 
 the stagnation of the Free Churches at the 
 present time to theological unrest and sigh 
 for the safer dogmatism of a former age. 
 Such an attitude is neither brave nor sane. 
 It is impossible to put back the hands of 
 the clock, and the Churches must be able 
 to speak to the men of to-day in language 
 which they can understand, and in the terms 
 of the current intellectual life, or they will 
 cease to appeal at all. The Free Churches, 
 being less trammelled by credal formulas, 
 have here a very great opportunity, and 
 many of them are using it not unworthily. 
 The unrest of which so much is heard will 
 not trouble us very long. Indeed, it is 
 already giving way to a larger and saner 
 faith which is based on experience and 
 grounded in fact. 
 
 But it is not only among the more intel- 
 ligent middle-class people, where their chief 
 strength has always been, that the Free 
 Churches seem to be losing hold. A far 
 more serious sign of the ti-rofts is their lack 
 
240 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of progress among the labouring ana artisan 
 classes. It is easy to exaggerate the extent 
 of this, and it is only right to remember 
 that in many districts Methodism has a 
 large hold among working folk, and that 
 the Brotherhood and Adult School move- 
 ments are almost exclusively recruited from 
 the working classes. But when every allow- 
 ance has been made in this way, it still 
 remains true that the great masses of the 
 wage - earning population are altogether 
 alienated from the Churches, whether Non- 
 conformist or Anglican. The reasons for 
 this are predominantly social. In the large 
 towns working men realise that the Churches 
 belong rather to the order of the employers 
 than of the employed. They are democratic 
 only in name, and both their government 
 and finance are so arranged as to suit the 
 haves rather than the have-nots. In other 
 respects the complaint is made that the 
 Churches are too comfortable and too re- 
 spectable, and people who are neither of 
 these things do not find in them what they 
 need. The salvation which they preach is 
 said to make too little allowance for a man's 
 bodily needs and material surroundings. 
 In the present state of the industrial world, 
 a gospel which only takes account of things 
 spiritual does not easily commend itself to 
 those who are bearing the heat and burden 
 of the day. Now, exaggerated as these 
 contentions often are, there is much truth 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 241 
 
 in them. They at least supply quite sufficient 
 ground for the attitude of indifference to 
 religion which is normal among working 
 men. It must not, however, be supposed 
 that the Free Churches are not alive to the 
 facts and deeply concerned to find a remedy 
 for the existing condition of things. Indeed, 
 nothing is more remarkable about their 
 recent history than the extent to which the 
 social implications of Christianity are being 
 studied and emphasised. There is no doubt 
 that a new conscience on this subject is 
 making itself felt, and that it will yet produce 
 great results. Without making any con- 
 cessions to doctrinaire socialism, the Free 
 Chm'ches are steadily using their influence 
 to improve the conditions of life and labour 
 among the less favoured members of the 
 community. The Settlements connected with 
 the Congregational Churches, the Central 
 Missions of the Wesleyan Methodists, and 
 the magnificent social service department 
 of the Salvation Army are not merely 
 agencies for relieving need of various kinds : 
 they are social experiments, and through 
 them quite as much is learned as is taught. 
 It may be claimed for the Free Churches 
 also that they have had not a little to do 
 with rousing the new social passion which is 
 making itself felt in present-day politics. 
 
 At the same time the Free Churches are 
 becoming more conscious of the world-wide 
 scope of their mission. The claims of the 
 
242 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Foreign Field are being felt by the more 
 educated among the younger Nonconformists 
 as never before. While it is true that the 
 work of Foreign Missions is not supported as 
 widely or as adequately as it should be, it 
 is being carried on in a more thorough and 
 statesmanlike fashion than was once the case. 
 It may be well, now, to conclude this brief 
 and rapid survey by attempting a rough 
 characterisation of the leading Free Churches. 
 The Presbyterians represent a kind of aris- 
 tocracy among the Free Churches. Thej^ are 
 predominantly Scotch in character and they 
 appeal to the more hard-headed and thought- 
 ful of the community. Their ministers are 
 the best trained and the best equipped of all 
 the Free Churches, an average of seven years' 
 preparation being required of them. They 
 are supreme in Scotland and in the North 
 of Ireland, and in England they have a 
 considerable hold in many of the large towns. 
 They have a total membership throughout 
 the world of 5,336,524. Their work, however, 
 is almost entirely confined to the more 
 respectable of the middle class. Among 
 these they are spreading, and their decorous 
 and orderly worship and paternal method 
 of Church government serve to commend 
 them in suburban and well-to-do quarters. 
 They have made very notable contributions 
 to Christian scholarship, and their leaders are 
 men of whom any Church might well be proud. 
 The recent formation of the United Free 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 243 
 
 Church, and the troubles to which it led, have 
 helped to consolidate Presbyterianism, and 
 the future is full of promise. There is very 
 little doubt that belief in the voluntary 
 principle is growing, and there are more 
 improbable things than that Disestablish- 
 ment in Scotland may come about by mutual 
 consent. As it is, the two Churches, Free 
 and Established, work together with great 
 harmony, and whenever they become one 
 Presbyterianism will be in a very strong 
 position indeed. 
 
 It is difficult to speak of Methodism as a 
 whole and in general terms, yet there is a 
 very real sense in which the Methodist Churches 
 are one amid and in spite of their differences. 
 They have their peculiar genius and they 
 stand for a type. In England, and indeed 
 throughout the world, they are among the 
 most progressive of the Churches. It is 
 often said that the older Wesleyans represent 
 a conservative and respectable temper as 
 against the more democratic Primitives and 
 United Free Methodists. And yet it is 
 among the Wesleyan Methodists that the 
 great popular missions in London, Manchester, 
 Birmingham, and other centres have been 
 established with such extraordinary success. 
 Theologically, Methodism is thoroughly 
 Evangelical and is not greatly enamoured 
 of the modern spirit. It produces good all- 
 round ministers rather than great preachers, 
 and is especially successful in commanding the 
 
244 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 services of large numbers of laymen. The 
 itinerant system, in spite of many obvious 
 drawbacks, has the effect of strengthening 
 the weaker Churches and of maintaining 
 a general level of power throughout the 
 denomination as a whole. Whether at home 
 or abroad Methodists are evangelistic in 
 spirit, and through their world's OEcumenical 
 Council are conscious of their world-wide 
 mission. They are by far the largest factor 
 in the religious life of Protestantism, having 
 some 8,865,000 communicants. The sectarian 
 divisions within Methodism are not very im- 
 portant. They show how the same spirit can 
 work under different forms and adapt itself 
 to different circumstances. Of the minor 
 bodies the Primitive Methodists are the most 
 active and progressive. They have a great 
 hold of the working classes in many parts of 
 the country, and through the higher education 
 of their ministry are keeping themselves 
 abreast of the times. 
 
 The Congregationalists, again, are very 
 difficult to characterise. It is generally said 
 of them that they appeal to the more educated 
 middle-class people and represent a kind of 
 intellectualism among the Free Churches. 
 At the same time they are missionary in 
 spirit and through Institutional Churches 
 and various kinds of settlements give them- 
 selves heartily to work among the poor. They 
 also have large numbers of Chiu*ches in the 
 country districts through which they keep 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 245 
 
 in close touch with the labouring classes. 
 They retain much of the independence and 
 love of liberty which characterised their 
 forefathers and have always been in the 
 front ranks of the fight for religious equality. 
 Latterly, however, they have come to see 
 the need for a closer federation among their 
 Churches. The formation of the County 
 Unions and the provision of funds in aid both 
 of Churches and ministers have led to a 
 much closer organisation and have destroyed 
 the individualism of the old independence. 
 At the same time Congregationalism also 
 has become conscious of its world-wide 
 mission largely through the international 
 councils held from time to time in different 
 parts of the world. They have now 
 1,444,699 communicants. This tendency to- 
 wards connexionalism does not mean any 
 abandonment of their original principles. 
 They still stand for the position that the 
 members of a Christian Church should be 
 Christians, and that the sole head of the 
 Church is Jesus Christ. In things theological 
 they allow a wide latitude of opinion, and their 
 general position is broadly Evangelical. 
 They lay more stress on life than on organisa- 
 tion or creed, and though they suffer from 
 the dangers of this liberty their witness in 
 history and in the religious life of to-day 
 fully justifies their attitude. 
 
 Much the same may be said of the Baptists 
 who reckon as Congregationalists in ecclesi- 
 
246 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 astical polity. Their appeal, however, hag 
 always been more popular than that of the 
 Congregationalists proper, and they have 
 reached a membership of 6,195,817. They 
 do excellent work among the lower middle 
 and working-class populations, and they are 
 Evangelical to the core. They tend to a 
 rather stiff form of orthodoxy, but there are 
 many signs which show that they are feeling 
 their way to a broader position. They have 
 always been among the staunchest and most 
 active of Nonconformists, and this country 
 owes them a very real debt for the vigour 
 of their political witness. Like the Con- 
 gregationalists they have been doing much 
 in recent years to draw their Churches nearer 
 together, to make it more possible for the 
 strong to help the weak, to raise the status 
 of their ministry, and to give to their dis- 
 tinctive witness a more articulate voice. 
 In their root -principle of baptism only on 
 conversion they have what gives to their 
 mission a certain definiteness and strength. 
 But it ought not to divide them from the 
 other Congregational Churches as it does. 
 There is no doubt that the two denominations 
 are drawing much nearer together, and it is 
 to be hoped that the time is not far distant 
 when they will become one. 
 
 Among the other denominations the 
 Salvation Army has earned a splendid pre- 
 eminence for its work among the lowest 
 and most degraded of civilised mankind, 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 247 
 
 and for its wide -reaching philanthropic 
 efforts. There can be Httle doubt that its 
 mihtary disciphne and rough and ready 
 EvangeUsm, however distasteful to the more 
 cultured, do find a response among those 
 whom seemlier and more orthodox methods 
 fail to reach. The Quakers remain a kind 
 of spiritual elect, chnging as they do to the 
 doctrine of the inner Hght. They have 
 an influence out of all proportion to their 
 numbers. Their unwavering testimony in 
 the cause of peace and their bold experiments 
 in social service have put all the Churches 
 in their debt. There are signs, too, of a 
 revival among them, led by their younger 
 members. Tiiese are adapting themselves 
 to modern conditions and preparing the way 
 for a yet greater service in the future. The 
 Plymouth Brethren, Particular Baptists, and 
 several other small sects, stand for the old 
 orthodoxy based on the verbal inspiration of 
 the scriptures. Their position is represented 
 in some small degree in most of the Free 
 Churches and will always attract those 
 who fear new ways and need the support 
 of some external authority. The Unitarians 
 stand for the very opposite view. They are 
 intellectuaUsts pure and simple, and with 
 them religion is a thing of the head rather 
 than of the heart. They have rendered very 
 great service to the cause of the Free Churches 
 by their zeal for education and social reform,, 
 and by their steady advocacy of freedom 
 
248 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 of theological thought. They appeal mainly 
 to the cultured few, and as a denomination 
 do not make very rapid progress. Their 
 aims and methods naturally keep them apart 
 from the Evangelical Free Churches, but as 
 changes are taking place on both sides it is 
 to be hoped that better relations may be 
 estabhshed in the not very distant future. 
 As the range of theological study widens, 
 and the historical and experimental methods 
 come into greater prominence, the hard 
 dogmatic attitude which has characterised 
 both sides aUke is found to be no longer 
 possible. And as it comes gradually to be 
 understood that behef in the Divinity of 
 Jesus Christ depends not so much on philo- 
 sophical interpretations of His Person and 
 place in the Godhead, as on the Christian's 
 personal faith in and devotion to Himself, 
 the old Unitarian controversy loses much of 
 its point and meaning. There will always 
 be a great gulf fixed between those to whom 
 Jesus Christ is a mere man among men, and 
 those to whom He has the religious value of 
 God. Meanwhile Christians of all types will do 
 well to cultivate a larger charity in their 
 relations with each other, remembering always 
 the words of their Master, "He that is not 
 against us is on our side." 
 
 It very often seems to the outsider that 
 the Free Churches present a picture of almost 
 hopeless confusion and that their divisions 
 are a grave cause of weakness. But they 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 249 
 
 are not in the least conscious of this them- 
 selves. Apart from the Unitarians and one 
 or two very small sects, the great mass of 
 them are entirely at one in spirit and aims. 
 They are Evangelical in the best sense of the 
 word, and they have not the least difficulty 
 in working together. They recognise that 
 some of the old causes of division are no 
 longer operative. They are hoping that it 
 will, therefore, be possible for them to draw 
 nearer one another, and in some cases even 
 to unite. But they do not regard their differ- 
 ences of organisation as any real hindrance 
 to the unity of the spirit and to common 
 service. They reahse that they are much 
 better off than the Anglicans, who within the 
 bonds of a rigid uniformity are more seriously 
 divided. The variety in the Free Churches 
 has no taint of disloyalty about it, but is the 
 free outcome of their vigorous Hfe. So far 
 as Protestant Christianity is concerned, they 
 believe that the future is with them, and they 
 have no fear of the changes it may bring. 
 They are prepared to adapt themselves 
 readily to new circumstances and conditions, 
 and their adaptability again is a sign of life. 
 At the same time they are loyal to their 
 traditional faith. They stand for spiritual 
 freedom above all things, for the right of 
 the individual to enter into personal com- 
 munion with the Divine and to worship God 
 according to the dictates of his conscience. 
 They have no feehng of hostihty to any other 
 
250 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Church, but are wiUing to live and let live. 
 To them the Church is a spiritual body, and 
 the only Head and Foundation of the Church 
 is Jesus Christ. Therefore they are against 
 the principle of State Estabhshment because 
 it means secular control in spiritual things 
 and is an infringement of the Crown rights 
 of the Lord Jesus. They cannot admit the 
 claim of any Church, simply because it is 
 estabhshed, to a regularity and authority 
 which they do not possess themselves. It 
 is by their fruits that Churches should be 
 judged and not by any position of privilege 
 they may have attained. In refusing to 
 conform and in actively seeking the Dis- 
 estabhshment of the AngHcan Church they 
 are animated by no desire to see that Church 
 injured or humihated, but rather wish to set 
 it free to give its testimony and to do its 
 work. If it be urged that once the Church is 
 disestablished Nonconformists will no longer 
 have any raison d'etre, they cannot agree. 
 There will always be room for the more 
 democratic ideal of Church government and 
 fellowship which, in their various ways, they 
 represent. They have proved the worth 
 of their principles and methods by experience, 
 so that these have come to have a positive 
 value of their own. They can appeal con- 
 fidently to the contribution they have 
 made to the religious hfe and progress of the 
 world as their best justification. Though 
 they have to face some very difficult problems 
 
THE PRESENT TIME 251 
 
 in the immediate future, and are always con- 
 fronted with the necessity of reconstructing 
 their theological position, they do not lose 
 heart or hope. At the present time they 
 are showing their determination to meet 
 the needs of the hour by fresh efforts and new 
 enterprises. Their history is a perpetual 
 source of encouragement and inspiration. 
 They believe in the continual guidance of the 
 Spirit of God, and in that belief they are 
 prepared to go forward conquering and to 
 conquer. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 The following books form a useful selection from the 
 great mass of material available on the subject. 
 
 1. General, — Clark, History of English Nonconformity ; 
 Silvester Home, Popidar History of the Free Churches; 
 Skeat and Miall, History of the Free Churches of England ; 
 Turner, Original Records of Early Nonconformity ; 
 Burrage, The Early English Dissenters ; Gardiner, 
 History of England ; Evangelical Christianity^ its History 
 and Witness. 
 
 2. Special Periods and Persons. — Trevelyan, 
 England in the Age of Wyclif ; Gardiner, Lollardy and 
 the Reformation ; Gasquet, The Eve of the Reformation ; 
 Frere, History of the English Church in the Reigns of 
 Elizabeth and James ; Neal, History of the Puritans ; 
 Dexter, Congregationalism of the last Three Hundred 
 Years ; Ivimey, History of the Baptists ; Burgess, John 
 Smith the Se-Baptist ; Taylor, History of the General 
 Baptists ; Arber, Story of the Pilgrim Fathers ; Drysdale, 
 History of the Presbyterians in England ; Clarendon, 
 History of the Rebellion ; Trevelyan, England under the 
 Stuarts ; JMasson, Life of Milton ; Hetherington, History 
 of the Church of Scotland ; Gardiner, Constitutional 
 Documents of the Puritan Revolution ; Gardiner, History 
 of the Civil War, History of the Commonwealth and Pro- 
 tectorate ; Stoughton, History of Religion in England ; 
 Barclay, Inner Life of the Religious Societies of the 
 Commonwealth ; George Fox, Journal ; Firth, Last 
 Years of the Protectorate; Burnet, History of his ovm 
 
 253 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 253 
 
 Times ; Brown, Life of Bunyan ; Gould, Documents 
 relating to the Settlement of the Church of England tinder 
 the Act of Uniformity ; Lathbury, History of the Non- 
 jurors ; Wilson, History of the Dissenting Churches ; 
 Leslie Stephen, English Thought in the Eighteenth Century ; 
 Gledstone, Life of George Whitefldd ; Southey, Life of 
 Wesley ; Wesley, Journal^ Edited by Cumock ; Paul, 
 A History of Modern England, 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abbot, Archbishop, 62 
 Act of Supremacy, 26 
 Admonition, The, 35 
 Ainsworth, Henry, 51 
 Amsterdam Church, 51, 52 
 Andrewes, Bishop, 48 
 Angflican Settlement, 24 ff. 
 Anne, Queen, 152 
 Apolowetical Narration, 81 
 Authorised Version, 61 
 
 Bancroft, Archbishop, 62 
 Baptists, 52, 148, 245 
 Barbon, Praise-God, 58 
 Barclay, Robert, 104 
 Barrow, 47 
 
 Baxter, 87, 96, 127, 135 
 Beverley, John, 13 
 Bible Christians, 191 
 Bible Men, 14 
 Bible Society, 200 
 Bilney, 19 
 
 Birmingham League, 206 
 Bishops' Wars, 79 
 Black Death, 11 
 Bonner, Bishop, 49 
 Bowland, Thos., 46 
 Bradbury, Thos., 158 
 Breda, Declaration of, 116 
 Bridge, Wm., 81 
 Bro\vn, Robert, 44 ff. 
 Bunyan, 127 
 Burghlev, Lord, 48 
 Burials Acts, 211 
 Burroughes, Jeremiah, 81 
 
 Cambridge, 47, 209 
 Canons, Book of, 70 
 Carlyle, Thos., 70 
 
 Cartwright, Thos., 36, 37 
 Catholic Emancipation, 203 
 Chalmers, Dr., 219 ff. 
 Charles I, 62 ff. 
 Chaucer, 22 
 Chester, Bishop of, 27 
 Church Rates, 202 
 Civil War, The, 74 ff. 
 Congregationalism, 44 ff., 147, 244 
 Conventicle Acts, 51, 125, 128 
 Covenant, 77 ff., 83 
 Coverdale, Miles, 20 
 Cromwell, 74, 86 ff., 107, 109 
 
 Dale, R. W., 167, 208 
 Declaration of Rights, 141 
 Defoe, Daniel, 154 
 Diotrephes, 39 
 Disestablishment, 214 
 Dissenting Deputies, 161 
 Doddridge, 164, 169 
 
 Education, 145, 204 ff. 
 
 Edward III, 9 
 
 Edward VI, 18 
 
 Edwards, 96 
 
 Elizabeth, 25 ff. 
 
 Elmar, Bishop, 49 
 
 Erasmus, 19 
 
 Erastians, 82 
 
 Erskine, 216 
 
 Et Cetera Oath, 70 
 
 Evangelical Churchmen, 193 
 
 Fairfax, 92 
 
 Fifth Monarchy Men, 120 
 Fitz, Richard, 46 
 Five Members, The, 74 
 Five Mile Act, 126 
 
 254 
 
INDEX 
 
 255 
 
 Foreign Missions, 242 
 
 Fox, George, 98 fi. 
 
 Foxe, John, 15 
 
 Free Church Council, 230 ff. 
 
 Free Churches, English, 226 S. 
 
 Free Church, Scotch, 219 fi. 
 
 Friars, 8 
 
 Gainsborough, 51 
 Gangrcena, 96 
 Gardiner, Dr., 113 
 Gifford, George, 41 
 Glasites, 215 
 Goodwin, Thos., 81 
 Graham of Claverhouse, 136 
 Green, J. R., 95, 122 
 Greenwood, 47 
 Greyfriars, 78 
 Grind al. Archbishop, 34 
 
 Haldanes, The, 223 
 Hall, Bishop, 79 
 Hamilton, Marquis of, 78 
 Hammond, Dr., 38 
 Hampden, 66 
 
 Hampton Court Conference, 61 
 Harrison, Robert, 44 
 Helwys, 53 ff. 
 Henry VIII, 17 
 Higginson, Francis, 64 
 Hodgkins, John, 40 
 Holland, Church in, 52 ff. 
 Hooker, Bishop, 82 
 Huntingdon, Countess of, 184 
 Hutchinson, Col., 67 
 
 Independents, 81 ff. 
 Indulgence, 118, 129, 138 
 Ireton, 91 
 Irish Church, 213 
 
 Jacob, Henry, 58, 62 
 James I, 60 ff. 
 Jeffreys, Judge, 134 ff. 
 Jessey, Henry, 58 
 Johnson, Frances, 51 
 
 Knollys, Hanserd, 58 
 Knox, John, 21, 23 
 
 Langland, 22 
 
 Laud, Archbishop, 60 ff., 86 
 
 Law, Wm., 173 
 
 Leyden Church, 51 
 
 Liberation Society, 212 
 
 Licenses to preach, 131 
 
 Locke, John, 144 
 
 Lollards, 11 
 
 Long Parliament, 70 ff. 
 
 Luther, 14, 18 
 
 Marprelate Letters, 39, 42, 51 
 Marston Moor, 87 
 Mayflower, 51 
 Methodism, 185 ff., 243 
 Miall, Edward, 212 
 Millenary Petition, 60 
 Milton, 67, 83, 93, 107, 115, 127 
 Moravians, 175 
 
 Naseby, 87 
 
 New England Church, 56 
 
 Newbury, 87 
 
 Normans, 7 
 
 Nye, Philip, 81 
 
 Gates, Titus, 132, 135 
 Occasional Conformity, 145, 155, 
 
 160 
 Orange, William of, 140 
 Owen, John, 112 
 Oxford, 174, 210 
 Oxford Movement, 227 
 
 Parker, Archbishop, 32 
 
 Paterines, 15 
 
 Peasant Rising, 11 
 
 Penn, Wm., 133, 138 
 
 Pennington, Isaac, 105 
 
 Penry, John, 40, 50 
 
 Pepys' Diary, 125 
 
 Perth, Articles of, 77 
 
 Pilgrim Fathers, 51 
 
 Plumbers Hall, 34 
 
 Poll tax, 11 
 
 PrasLytf rians, 38, 76 ff., 117, 147, 
 
 223, 242 
 I^ride's Purge, 92 
 Primitive Methodists, 190 
 
256 
 
 NONCONFORMITY 
 
 Prophesyings, 37 
 Protestantism, 22 
 Publicans, 15 
 Puritans, 29 &., 63 ff., 67 
 
 Quakers, 95 ff., 148, 247 
 
 Regium Donum, 161 
 Remonstrance, The, 72 
 Restoration, The, 114 ff. 
 Revival, The, 171 ff. 
 Revolution, The, 134 ff. 
 Richard II, 12 
 Robinson, John, 51, 58 
 Roman Catholics, 118, 129, 137 
 Root and Branch Petition, 71 
 
 Sacheverell, 153 ff. 
 Sacraments, 103 ff. 
 Walters Hall, 163 
 Salvation Army, 247 
 Savoy Conference, 94 
 Saxons, 7 
 
 Saye and Sele, Lord, 82 
 Scotland, 20, 215 
 Scrooby, 51 
 Seceders, 217, 218 
 Separatists, 43 ff. 
 Ship-money, 65, 66 
 Sliorter Catechism, 85 
 Simpson, Sidrach, 81 
 " Smectymnus," 80,82 
 Smyth, John, 52 
 St. Giles, Edinburgh, 77 
 St. Giles Fields, 13 
 St. John, Oliver, 82 
 
 Stanhope, Dr., 49 
 Statistics, 233 
 Strafford, 72 
 Strype, 17, 41 
 Sunday Schools, 194 
 
 Test Acts, 138, 201 
 Theology, 236 ff. 
 Throckmorton, Job, 40 
 Toleration, 96, 110, 142 ff. 
 Translation of Bible, 19 
 Turner, Rev. G. Lyon, 129 
 Twisse, Wm., 81 
 Tyndale, 19, 20 
 
 Udall, John, 39, 40 
 Uniformity Acts, 18, 27, 120 ff. 
 Unitarians, 149, 162, 196, 247 
 
 Vane, Sir Harry, 82 
 Vestments, 32 
 
 Waldegrave, 39 
 Wales, Religion in, 173 
 Watts, Isaac, 164, 168 
 Weavers, 15 
 Wesley, Charles, 183 
 Wesley, John, 174 ff. 
 Wesley, Samuel, 153 
 Westminster Assembly, 80 
 WTiitefield, 174 ff. 
 Wliitgift, 36 
 Winthrop, John, 68 
 Wyclif, John, 9 ff., 23 
 
 Young, Mr. Justice, 49 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0035518847 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 BRITTLE DO NOT 
 PHOTOCOPY 
 
 • 
 
 00 
 
 ^ -t 
 
 ro 
 
 UJ 
 
 O^ 
 
 -A