View Shopping Cart

A HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH BAPTISTS

By Joseph Ivimey

CHAPTER 9. - A. D. 1667-1685.

THE fall of Lord Clarendon, the great patron of persecuting power, and the removal of Archbishop Sheldon and Bishop Morley from the councils of the King, occasioned a considerable alteration in favour of the dissenters, so that they went publicly to their meetings in London without fear.

The king appeared disposed to promote a general toleration, but the House of Commons were so enraged at the favours shewn to the Nonconformists that they presented a petition to his majesty, praying him that he would issue a proclamation for enforcing the laws against conventicles. To this the king consented, and a proclamation declared, "he would not suffer such notorious contempt of the laws to go unpunished &c." The proclamation however produced but little effect, as the people still ventured to attend the meetings, although forbidden by the laws. To this different causes contributed. One was the want of churches, in consequence of the fire of London. In addition to this, the indolence of the established clergy, and the laboriousness of the nonconformist ministers were so apparent, that a decided preference was given to the latter by all who had any regard for religion.

Bishop Burnet acknowledges this, and says,

"The king was highly offended at the behaviour of most of the bishops. When complaints were made of the conventicles, the king told me (says he) that the clergy were chiefly to blame; for if they had lived well, and gone about their parishes, and taken pains to convince the nonconformists, the nation might have been well settled; but they thought of nothing but to get good benefices, and keep a good table." -

In another conversation with bishop Burnet about the ill state of the church, his majesty said,

"If the clergy had done their part, it had been easy to run down the nonconformists; but they will do nothing, and will have me do every thing, and most of them do worse than if they did nothing. I have a very honest chaplain (said he) to whom I have given a living in Suffolk; but he is a very great blockhead, and yet he has brought all his parish to church. I cannot imagine what he could say to them, for he is a very silly fellow; but he has been about from house to house, and I suppose his nonsense suited their nonsense; and in reward of his diligence, I have given him a bishoprick in Ireland."

The measures of the king to promote a general toleration doubtless flowed from a desire to tolerate the Roman catholics; but to this the dissenters were very averse, and rather chose to suffer themselves than be instrumental to the bringing in of popery.

In 1670, the House of Commons proposed the addition of some new clauses to the Conventicle Act, to which the court agreed, as they thought this would reduce the presbyterians to the necessity of petitioning for a general toleration.

"If we would have opened the door, (says Mr. Baxter,) that their toleration might have been charged upon us, as done for our sakes and by our procurement, we might in all likelihood have had our part in it; but I shall never be one of them who shall consent to petition for the papists’ liberty. No craft of jesuits or prelates shall make me believe that it is necessary for the nonconformists to take this odium upon themselves."

The court bishops were for the bill, but the moderate clergy were against it. To the honour of Bishop Wilkins it ought to be recorded, that he spoke against it in the house; and when the king desired him in private to be quiet, he replied that

"he thought it an ill thing both in conscience and in policy: therefore, as he was an English-man and a Bishop, he was bound to oppose it. And since by the laws and constitution of England, and by his majesty’s favour, he had a right to debate and vote, he was neither ashamed nor afraid to own his opinion in that matter."

The bill however passed both houses, and received the royal assent, April 11. 1670.