NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

THE DECLARATION AGAINST THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT PRESCRIBED IN THE ACT OF UNIFORMITY.

"I, A B, do declare that it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take arms against the King; and that I do abhor that traitorous position of taking arms by his authority against his person, or against those who are commissionated by him, and that I will conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England, as it is now by law established. And I do declare that I do hold there lies no obligation upon me, or on any other person, from the oath commonly called 'The Solemn League and Covenant,' to endeavour any change or alteration of government either in Church or State, and that the same was in itself an unlawful oath, and imposed upon the subjects of this realm against the known laws and liberties of this kingdom.”

CHAPTER XXXIV.

THE INTERNAL HISTORY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND

DURING THE REIGN OF CHARLES II.

1660-1685.

§ 1. Little excitement at the ejection of the Ministers. § 2. Notes as to the Conformists and Nonconformists. §3. Rise of the Latitudinarian School. § 4. The attempt at comprehension by Wilkins and Baxter. § 5. Writ ings on the question of Separation. § 6. Writings on the question of Civil Obedience. § 7. Mr. Boyle's labours in propagating the Gospel. § 8. Physical Science and the Clergy. § 9. Church Restoration-the building of St. Paul's. § 10. Great Divines of the Church of England -Hammond, Sanderson, Jeremy Taylor, Isaac Barrow, South, Gunning, Pearson, Bull, Cumberland, Cudworth. § 11. Nonconformist Divines-Owen, Baxter. § 12. Drawbacks to the Church in state of the country Clergy. §13. Sancroft as Primate. §14. Gradually dimin ishing popularity of Nonconformity.

§ 1. Ir is certainly very marvellous that the ejection of so many ministers from leading positions on St. Bartholomew's day 1662, and the almost revolution in the Church which the enforcement of the Act of Uniformity involved, could have been accomplished with so little disturbance and opposition. This would seem, indeed, well nigh inexplicable had it been the fact, as some writers are fond of stating, that the Nonconformist ministers had everywhere large and attached congregations which bitterly lamented the loss of their beloved pastors. Had this been the case in anything like the number of 2000 churches, certainly some more traces of popular movement and excitement might have been expected. But of this there is little evidence. The country generally acquiesced contentedly in the change. Nevertheless it would not be fair to infer that there were no regrets, no discontent and repining. There were many, no doubt, ardently attached to the principles of the nonconforming divines, and these afterwards formed the congregations which worshipped in secret and in peril, until the happy days of toleration arrived. Some interesting facts, brought together by a modern writer, may serve to illustrate the state of things which succeeded what was known among the Nonconformists as the Black Bartholomew.1

§ 2. We learn in the first place that there was no cessation of service generally on account of the change of pastors.

1 See Dr. Stoughton's Church and State, chap. xii.

Bishop

Sheldon had taken vigorous measures in London. "None (of the Nonconformists) preached on the 24th" (says a contemporary diarist) "but Mr. Blackmore, Mr. Crofton, and Dr. Manton, between the Tower and Westminster, the bishops having provided readers or preachers for every place." A newspaper of the day, Mercurius Publicus, has its columns filled with tidings of the " care and pru dence of the most worthy Diocesan of London" in filling up the numerous vacancies. At Northampton all except two or three conformed. At Gloucester there was scarce a man who did not subscribe. The city and county of Norwich generally conformed. At Chester there were four Nonconformists; in the county of Northumberland only two or three, who were Scotchmen; in the Isle of Wight of twenty-six parishes only two Nonconformists. From Taunton we have the account of a great gathering of the townsfolk and the neighbouring gentry in the grand church of St. Mary, when (Mr. Newton, the minister, having departed) Mr. James read the Church service on August 25 in his surplice, and baptized some children according to the Book of Common Prayer. "The whole town was present, behaving themselves as if their minister, Mr. Newton, had carried away with him all faction and nonconformity. The mayor and aldermen were all in their formalities, and not a man in all the church had his hat on, either at service or sermon, which gave the gentry of that county great satisfaction." 1 The bishops were everywhere met by huge processions of the gentry of the county, and escorted to their cathedral towns amidst shouts of rejoicing, the discharge of guns, and general acclamations. In the general joy at the Restoration, many ministers brought themselves to sacrifice somewhat of their opinions rather than mar the auspicious peace. We read of twenty ministers, all of whom had been strong Presbyterians, making up their minds to go in a body and subscribe ;2 of many after lingering awhile overcoming their scruples. Lightfoot, Wallis, and Horton, who had been Presbyterian commissioners at the Savoy, became Conformists. So did Conant and Gurnall, both known as scholars. The complaint, in fact, from the orthodox side soon was, that so many, whose principles were not really in accordance with the Church, had conformed. The bishops, in many instances, are noted as having endeavoured to keep men in the Church whose principles were really those of nonconformity This is told of Juxon, of Earle, of Morley, of Sanderson, of Laney, of Wilkins, of Cosin, of Reynolds. Sheldon indeed, who soon succeeded Juxon in the primacy, was of a different view. He desired, above all things, to keep men of a Puritanical temper out 1 Letter in Mercurius Publicus, Kennett, p. 749.

? Browne's Tour in Derbyshire, quoted by Stoughton, p. 350.

of the Church; and Seth Ward, Bishop of Salisbury, is said by Burnet to have been altogether of the same mind. Generally speaking, however, the bishops of the Restoration period were tolerant, and some of them must have winked at things which were distinctly opposed to the law. Thus Heyrick, who refused to conform, was allowed to continue warden of Manchester. Tilsey, another Nonconformist, continued to preach in his church in the diocese of Chester. The same is noted of Mr. Ashurst of Arlesley, Mr. Chandler of Petto, Mr. Swift of Peniston, Mr. Angier of Denton, Mr. Jones of Chadkirk, Mr. Billingsley of Blakeney. Kennett makes out a list of about twenty cases in which ministers ejected from benefices became chaplains in hospitals or prisons. Many also became curates to other ministers, and cases are recorded where in the same church a nonconforming and an orthodox congregation worshipped alternately. It seems, therefore, hardly true to assert (as is done by Calamy) that "the ministers were not only excluded preferments, but cut off from all hope of a livelihood, as far as the industry and craft of their adversaries could reach. Not so much as a poor vicarage, not a blind chapel or a school was left them; nay, though they offered (as some of them did) to preach for nothing, it must not be allowed them."2

§ 3. The contention between Conformists and Nonconformists, and all the bitter trials which had been endured for the sake of opinions, gave birth to what was known as the Latitudinarian School. A class of divines arose who were neither Puritans nor High Churchmen, but who regarded the whole of the matters in dispute from an entirely different point of view. They dated the origin of their opinions back to John Hales and Chillingworth, before the troubles, and soon after the Restoration they acquired considerable prestige and force. Henry More, Whichcot, and Worthington, at Cambridge; Stillingfleet, Wilkins, Tillotson, Patrick, and Lloyd, in London—all of them men of learning and distinction-belonged to this new school. "They were Platonists and Cartesians," says Baxter, "and many of them Arminians, with some additions, having more charitable thoughts than others of the salvation of heathens and infidels." They were opposed to the imposition of tests, and an attempt to exact rigid conformity. Hence, says Burnet," men of narrower thoughts and fiercer tempers fastened upon them the name of Latitudinarians." 3 The school thus commenced was destined long to reign triumphant in the English Church, and to it the deadness, carelessness, and indiffer

1 Stoughton, p. 369.

2 Calamy's Baxter i. 189

3 Baxter's Life and Times, p. 386; Burnet's Own Time, pp. 127, 128

ence, prevalent in the eighteenth century, are in great, measure to be attributed.

§ 4. One immediate effect of the rise of the Latitudinarian School was a serious attempt at comprehension of the Dissenters. The chief actors in this were Dr. Wilkins1 and Mr. Burton on one side, and Baxter and Manton on the other. These divines seem to have been agreed to comprehend all except Papists and Socinians. Baxter's proposals on behalf of the Nonconformists were essentially the same as those urged at the Savoy Conference. In the view of Wilkins all these demands might be readily admitted if they could be got to pass through Parliament. Finally he drew up a paper containing, at the same time, a scheme for comprehension and toleration. Some of the Dissenters were to be included in the Church; to others a toleration was to be extended.2 It was one of those wellmeant but shallow and feeble designs, which were a real danger to the Church, and could not possibly have been productive of good. Concessions made to an opponent are apt afterwards to be resented and grudged by those who have made them, or, if not, a system which a man is ready to treat thus, he cannot regard with zeal and devotion. Comprehension is either fatal to earnestness, or else generates a wound which rankles in secret, and will sooner or later break out with increased venom. The concessions suggested by Wilkins, and accepted by Baxter, were thrown into a bill by Sir Matthew Hale, with the intention of having them brought before Parliament. Bishop Ward obtained intelligence of what was proposed, and took effectual measures to stop it. The House of Commons came to the strange but very wise decision, that no bill having comprehension for its object should be received 3 (1668).

§ 5. The Latitudinarians were not all so advanced in their views as Dr. Wilkins. Simon Patrick, who ranked as one of them, published about this time (1668) his Friendly Debate between a Conformist and a Nonconformist, in which he is very severe upon the Nonconformists and their teaching. The following year came out Samuel Parker's Discourse on Ecclesiastical Policy, "who wrote," says Baxter, "the most scornfully and rashly, the most profanely and cruelly, against the Nonconformists of any man who ever assaulted them." This treatise is pure Erastianism or religious Hobbism. It claims for the prince an absolute and uncontrollable power over his subjects' consciences in matters of religion. Parker

1 He was brother-in-law of Cromwell. Had been warden of Wadham at Oxford, and master of Trinity at Cambridge. He conformed readily at the Restoration, and soon reached a bishopric (Chester). He is best known as one of the founders of the Royal Society.

2 For the details of this scheme, see Notes and Illustrations to this Chapter. 3 Birch's Life of Tillotson, p. 42; Parl. Hist. iv. 415