CHAPTER II. INDEPENDENCY IN ENGLAND, FROM THE DEATH OF WHITGIFT TO THE FORMATION OF HENRY JACOB'S CHURCH, IN LONDON. 1603-1616. WHILE the controversies of which we have given a brief account in the last chapter were pending in Holland, important events occurred in England, to which we now direct the reader's attention. Archbishop Whitgift died in February, 1603, and was succeeded in the following year by a man of kindred spirit, whose brief administration of ecclesiastical affairs was quite as inimical to liberty as that of his predecessor. Bancroft received his appointment, it is said, on account of his deep-rooted enmity to the puritans and nonconformists, and his Elizabethan spirit in all matters pertaining to the church. One of his first acts was to procure a decision of the twelve judges that it was lawful to enforce subscription, and to punish the puritans and others who petitioned against that, or any other supposed grievance ;* and no sooner was he thus armed with legal power, than the work of persecution went on under his direction with increased severity. "Our puritans go down on all sides"-"The poor puritans are ferreted out of all corners"-was the language of the courtiers of the * Vaughan, i. 139. day, who looked on and sometimes wondered what these oppressions might lead to. In 1605, about three hundred of the clergy were "deprived;" while during the same time, according to one whose testimony may be relied on in this matter, more churches were beautified and repaired 66 than had been in many years before." But for the growing opposition of parliament, it is not easy to say where the clearing process would have terminated. The parties who were thus expelled from the church of England, were some of her most able and devoted ministers. In doctrine, they were nearly all evangelical or Calvinistic; while in respect to polity and worship they were somewhat divided. All of them objected to popish ceremonies; but some went farther than others in the principles on which they refused to comply with the terms of subscription. They were divided in the last respect into two classes, namely, rigid puritans, and moderate puritans. The "moderate puritans" constituted at this time the larger class; although, as years rolled by and persecution continued, many of these became more decided in their views and joined the others. Generally speaking, the moderate puritans limited their objections to the surplice, the cross in baptism, and other matters of custom and rite. "It is contrary," said they, "to God's word to use such ceremonies in the worship of God as man hath devised, if they be notoriously known to have been abused unto idolatry or superstition." The writings of this party were freely canvassed by the * Offer of a Conference, etc. Dedication. Hanbury, i. 126—128. Heylin's Hist. of Presbyterianism, p. 376. conforming clergy and the ecclesiastical rulers of the day, no doubt because they seldom went to the root of the matter in their objections to the established order of things. Bishop Morton,* Dr. Burgess, and some other high church advocates, undertook to enter into the lists of controversy with them, and not always without some appearance of success. The "rigid puritans" were men of another stamp. They took their stand on well-defined principles; and though too willing to remain in the establishment, could they have done so without dishonour, were sufficiently enlightened and conscientious to make great advances in succeeding years. They acknowledged the churches of the establishment as true visible churches; but regarded the Scriptures as the only rule in all matters pertaining to religion, and declared it to be "a sin to force any Christian to do any act of religion that could not be warranted by the same.” They also held that a church is an assembly of true believers, which should be free from all external ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and empowered to choose its own officers. They were, in fact, Congregational Independents; and the very name of Independent originated with one of their own number. There was scarcely a single point on which they differed from the exiles in Holland. This circumstance is one of great interest, and proves to how great an extent the Richard Baxter, *This bishop had the honour of "confirming when a boy, and of inspiring him with an early repugnance to that episcopal ceremony, by the slovenly manner in which he performed it. Third Defence of Nonconformity, p. 40. + Price's History of Nonconformity, vol. i. pp. 505, 506; Bradshaw's English Puritanisme. This work was put into Latin by Ames, in 1610, and afterwards appeared with his name, in 1641. principles of the Brownists, Barrowists, and their successors, had already leavened the public mind. Due consideration has not been given to the fact now adverted to. The name of puritan has acted too much as a veil in respect to the real character of these men; and hence modern writers have often regarded them in a wrong light, and have been led to erroneous conclusions respecting some matters of importance relating to the history of these times.* The term Independent was not used as the name of a party until some years after this; but the principles of Congregational Independency were advocated from the time of Browne downwards, and by the parties termed "rigid puritans," no less than by the separatists of Holland. Henry Jacob was at the head of this body of English Independents. According to some he was considered as the father of Independency, rather than Robinson.† And, according to Wood, his son Henry spoke of him as "the first Independent in England." Some parts of his history are involved in obscurity. He appears to have been the minister of a congregation at Leyden for some time; to have, left Leyden and entered the church of England at the end of Elizabeth's reign, and to have returned afterwards to Holland, but when it is not certain. Governor Bradford, speaking of himself and of the members of Robinson's church, says, "We some of us knew Mr. Parker, Dr. Ames, and Mr. Jacob, in Holland, when *For example, see Broadmead Records, Historical Introduction, p. lxxviii. &c. Mr. Underhill has not discriminated between Congregational Independency and separatism. + Cotton's Way, p. 15; Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation, p. 53. It is also said, "Robinson succeeded (though not immediately) Jacob, in his congregation at Leyden." they sojourned for a time in Leyden; and all three boarded together, and had their victuals dressed by some of our acquaintance." He also adds, " and after Mr. Jacob returned," but does not say when.* The main difference between the rigid puritans as represented by Jacob, and the exiles, related not to the principle of Congregational Independency, but of separation from the church of England. The exiles would not acknowledge the church of England to be a true visible church; † but the rigid puritans made a distinction between the church of England and "the churches of England," and, considering many of the latter to be true visible churches, or that they might be such, were unwilling to separate from the system unless compelled to do so. By bearing this fact in mind, we shall see how it was, that at a later period the Independents, following in the steps of these predecessors, came to occupy so many of the parochial churches of the country. As early as 1604, Jacob avowed the principles of Independency, in a work already referred to. In 1606, he and his party drew up and published, "A Christian and Modest Offer of a most Indifferent Conference, or Disputation, about the main and principal Controversies betwixt the Prelates and the late silenced and deprived Ministers in England; tendered by some of the said Ministers to the Archbishops and Bishops, and all their adherents." In this, the same principles are advocated. In 1609, the * Young's Chronicles, p. 439. † Johnson excepted. See Ainsworth's Counterpoison, in reply to Sprint, Bernard, and Crashaw, for puritan views on the one side, and separatist on the other. Hanbury, i. 170-178. See vol. ii. p. 239, of the present work. |