صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

parliament for that purpose. By this time there began to appear some other visionaries, of the same make and complexion with George Fox, who spoke in places of public resort; being moved, as they said, by the Holy Ghost; and even some women, contrary to the modesty of their sex, went about streets, and entered into churches, crying down the teaching of men, and exhorting people to attend to the light within themselves.

It was in the year 1650 that these wandering lights first received the denomination of Quakers, upon this ground, that their speaking to the people was usually attended with convulsive agitations, and shakings of the body. All their speakers had these tremblings, which they gloried in, asserting it to be the character of a good man to tremble before God. When George Fox appeared before Gervas Bennet, esq. one of the justices of Derby, October 30, 1650, he had one of his agitations, or fits of trembling, upon him, and with a loud voice and vehement emotion of body, bid the justice and those about him tremble at the word of the Lord; whereupon the justice gave him and his friends the name of Quakers, which being agreeable to their common behaviour, quickly became the distinguishing denomination of this people.*

any of them were Christ?" to which insidious query he answered, "Nay, we are no thing; Christ is all." He was next interrogated, "If a man steal, is it no sin?" to which his reply was, “All unrighteousness is sin." With what candour, with what propriety, with what truth, could the charge of blasphemy be grounded on these declarations, especially by the magistrates who examined and committed him? The names to the mittimus were Ger. Bennet and Nath. Barton: both of them were independents, the latter an officer and preacher: men whose own tenets implied a supernatural influence, and admitted no interference of the civil magistrate in spiritual concerns, but were pointed in favour of universal toleration one of whom could himself have no commission to preach but on the ground of God's moving him to it. These were the men who accused Fox of blasphemy, and imprisoned bim : “ a remarkable instance (observes Mr. Gough) of the inconsistency of men with themselves in different stations of life:" a remarkable instance, it may be added, how the law may be wrested and justice perverted by passion and prejudice. Mr. Neal's manner of relating this transaction, unhappily, conceals the criminal conduct of these magistrates, and is too much calculated to perpetuate the prejudice which misled and governed them. Sewel's History, p. 24; and Gough's History, vol. 1. p. 90—94.

-ED.

*The above paragraph has given great offence, and is severely censured by Mr. Gough, as "an opprobrious description approaching to scurrility." The plain fact, as it stands in Sewel, has none of those circumstances of agitations, a loud voice and vehement emotions, with which Mr. Neal has described it, and for which he has quoted no authority. Fox, according to Sewel, having bid the justice and those about him to "tremble at the word of the Lord," Mr. Bennet took hold of this weighty saying with such an airy mind, that from thence he took occasion to call him, and his friends, scornfully, Quakers. This name was eagerly taken up and spread among the people. As to the convulsive emotions with which, it is said, the preaching of

[blocks in formation]

At length they disturbed the public worship by appearing in ridiculous habits, with emblematical or typical representations of some impending calamity; they also took the liberty of giving ministers the reproachful names of hirelings, deceivers of the people, false prophets, &c. Some of them went through divers towns and villages naked, denouncing judgments and calamities upon the nation. Some have famished and destroyed themselves by deep melancholy; and others have undertaken to raise their friends from the dead. Mr. Baxter says,* many Franciscan friars and other Papists have been disguised speakers in their assemblies; but little credit is to be given to such reports.t

It cannot be expected that such an unsettled people should have a uniform system of rational principles. Their first and chief design, if they had any, was to reduce all revealed religion to allegory; and because some had laid too great stress upon rites and ceremonies, these would have neither order nor regularity, nor stated seasons of worship, but all must arise from the inward impulse of their

"We

these Christians, was accompanied, it is but fair to hear their advocate. readily admit (says Mr. Gough) these promulgators of primitive Christianity had no university education, were not trained in schools of oratory. It was plain truth and righteousness they sought to follow and recommend in a plain simple way, without the studied decorations of fine language, or the engaging attractions of a graceful motion; they spoke not to the head, or to the eye, but to the hearts of their auditors. Being themselves animated, and deeply affected in spirit with the inward feeling of the power of that truth, to the knowledge of which they aimed to bring others, that thereby they might be saved; an unaffected warmth of zeal in recommending righteousness, and testifying against vice and wickedness, might produce a warmth of expression and action also, which to an invidious eye might appear convulsive but their convulsions did not bereave them of understanding; they spake with the spirit and with the understanding also, of things which they knew, and testified of things which they had seen. And their doctrine was often effectual to open the understanding of their hearers, to see clearly the state of their minds, both what they were and what they ought to be." Gough's History, vol. 1. p. 96, note.—ED. Baxter's Life, p. 77.

+ If but little credit is to be given to such reports, it may be asked, why are they introduced: when, if not refuted, they tend to mislead the reader, and to fix a reproach on an innocent people? Is it becoming the candour and dignity of an historian, by recording, to appear to give them a sanction? As to the case in hand, Mr. Baxter, on whose authority Mr. Neal speaks, though he was a great and excellent man, was not entirely exempt from the influence of prejudice and credulity. In general, stories to the discredit of a new, despised, and hated sect, are, often, eagerly adopted and spread with circumstances of aggravation. So it happened to the first Christians. This has befallen the Methodists in our times. And the Quakers, being particular objects of priestly indignation, had reason to complain of this. They were often confounded with an ephemeron sect, whose principles were totally incompatible with theirs, called Ranters, and whose practices outraged all decency and order. An aetive preacher amongst the Quakers, Mr. Edward Burroughs, and the celebrated Barclay, wrote against the practices of these people. Gough's History, vol. 1. p. 128, 129, note; and vol. 3. p. 15.-ED.

spirits. Agreeable to this rule, they declared against all sorts of clergy, or settled ministers; against people's assembling in steeple-houses; against fixed times* of public devotion, and consequently against the observation of the sabbath. Their own meetings were occasional,* and when they met, one or another spake as they were moved from within, and sometimes they departed without any one's being moved to speak at all.

The doctrines they delivered were as vague and uncertaint as the principle from which they acted. They denied the Holy Scriptures to be the only rule of their faith, calling it a dead letter, and maintaining that every man had a light within himself, which was a sufficient rule. They denied the received doctrine of the Trinity and incarnation. They disowned the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper; nay, some of them proceeded so far as to deny a Christ without them; or at least, to place more of their dependance upon a Christ within. They spake little or nothing, says Mr. Baxter,‡ about the depravity of nature; about the covenant of grace; about pardon of sin,

*This is not accurate, or is applicable only to the infancy of the sect. For, though they did not esteem one house more holy than another, and believed all times equally the Lord's, and that all days should be sabbaths or times of continual rest and abstinence from evil; yet as soon as their numbers were sufficient for the purpose, they held fixed and regular meetings for worship, particularly on the first day of the week, which they chose as more convenient, because more generally accepted than any other. In 1654, meetings were settled in many places in the north, and also in the city of London, which were held in private houses, till the body growing too large to be accommodated in them, a house known by the name of Bull-and-Mouth, in Martin'sLe-Grand, near Aldersgate-street, was hired for a meeting-house. And no body of Christians were more open, steady, and regular, than they have been in their public associations for worship or discipline. Sewel's History, p. 80. 84. Gough's Hist. vol. 1. p. 144 and 509-ED.

It

†The account which Mr. Neal gives of the sentiments and practices of the Quakers in this and the preceding paragraph, is not drawn up with the accuracy and precision, not to say candour, which should mark the historic page. It has too much the appearance of the loose desultory representation, which those who had not investigated their principles, nor looked into their writings, would exhibit of this sect. is, I think, introduced at an improper place, in too early a period of their history; when Mr. Neal himself has related only what concerned George Fox, and before his followers were formed into a body. At that time it was not to be expected, that their principles should be made into a system; and their doctrines being delivered as the assertions of individuals only, and deriving their completion from their different tastes, capacities, and views, would to the public eye wear the aspect of variety and uncertainty. But long before Mr. Neal wrote, their principles had assumed a systematic form. Penn had published his Key, and Robert Barclay his Catechism and Confession of Faith, and that elaborate work his Apology. The propositious illustrated and defended in this treatise exhibit a concise view of the chief principles of the Quakers; and that they may speak for themselves we will give them in the Appendix, no. 12.-ED.

Baxter, p. 77.

and reconciliation with God; or about moral duties.* But the disturbance they gave to the public religion for a course of years was so insufferable, that the magistrates could not avoid punishing them as disturbers of the peace; though of late they are become a more sober and inoffensive people; and by the wisdom of their managers, have formed themselves into a sort of body politie, and are in general very worthy members of society.

CHAP. II.

FROM THE CORONATION OF KING CHARLES II. IN SCOT LAND, TO THE PROTECTORSHIP OF OLIVER CROMWELL.

165t.

THE Coronation of king Charles by the Scots, which had been deferred hitherto, being now thought necessary to give life to their cause, was solemnized at Scone on Newyear's-day 1651, with as much magnificence as their circumstances would admit ;† when his majesty took the following oath: "I Charles, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, do assure and declare by my solemn oath, in the presence of Almighty God, the searcher of all hearts, my allowance and approbation of the national covenant, and of the solemn league and covenant; and faithfully ob

[ocr errors]

in

*This quotation is not correct. Mr. Baxter's words, concerning the strain of their preaching, are these. They speak much for the dwelling and working of the 'Spirit in us; but little of justification, and the pardon of sin, and our reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ." Here is nothing said about their neglecting sist on "moral duties." The great object of Fox's zeal, we are told, was a heavenly temper and a life of righteousness: and his endeavours to propagate true religion and righteousness were not confined to public or private meetings, bat exerted in other places as occasion offered; particularly, in courts of judicature, to admonish to justice, and caution against oppression in markets, to recommend truth, candour, and fair dealings, and to bear his testimony against fraud and deceitful merchandise : at public houses of entertainment, to warn against indulging intemperance, by supplying their guests with more liquor than would do them good: at schools and in private families, to exhort to the training up of children and servants to sobriety, in the fear of their Maker; to testify against vain sports, plays, and shows, as tending to draw people into vanity and libertinism, and from that state of circumspection and attentive consideration, wherein our salvation is to be wrought out, forewarning all of the great day of account for all the deeds done in the body. This was certainly insisting on moral duties, and bringing home the principles of righteousness to the various circumstances of human life, with much propriety and energy. Gough's History, vol. 1. p. 67. 75.-Ed.

+ The ceremonial of this coronation is given at length by Dr. Grey, vol. 3. p. -124.-ED.

111

lige myself to prosecute the ends thereof in my station and calling; and that I myself and successors shall consent and agree to all the acts of parliament enjoining the national covenant, and the solemn league and covenant, and fully establish Presbyterian government, the directory of worship, confession of faith, and catechisms, in the king. dom of Scotland, as they are approved by the general assembly of this kirk, and parliament of this kingdom; and that I will give my royal assent to all acts of parliament passed, or to be passed, enjoining the same in my other dominions; and that I shall observe these in my own practice and family, and shall never make opposition to any of these, or endeavour any change thereof." This oath was annexed to the covenant itself, drawn up in a fair roll of parchment, and subscribed by him in the presence of the nobility and gentry.*

His majesty also signed a declaration, in which he acknowledged the sin of his father in marrying into an idolatrous family; and that the blood shed in the late wars lay at his father's door. He expressed a deep sense of his own ill education, and of the prejudices he had drunk in, against the cause of God, of which he was now very sensible. He confessed all the former parts of his life to have been a course of enmity to the word of God. He repented of his commission to Montrose. He acknowledged his own sins, and the sins of his father's house, and says, he will account them his enemies who oppose the covenants, both which he had taken without any sinister intention of attaining his own ends. He declares his detestation and abhorrence of all Popery, superstition, idolatry, and prelacy, and resolves not to tolerate them in any part of his dominions. He acknowledges his great sin in making peace with the Irish rebels, and allowing them the liberty of their religion, which he makes void, resolving for the future rather to choose affliction than sin; and though he judges charitably of those who have acted against the covenant, yet he promises not to employ them for the future till they have taken it. In the conclusion, his majesty confesses over again his own guilt; and tells the world, the state of the question was now altered, inasmuch as he had obtained mercy to be on God's side,

* Ol mixon's History of the Stuarts, p. 391.

istory of the Stuarts, p. 387. Burnet, vol. 1. p. 78, Edinb. edit.

« السابقةمتابعة »