They deny the prince's authority in making laws ecclesiastical; which they do attribute to their synod. Though in words they will not deny the oath of supremacy, yet in very truth they take it away; for they say she is supreme governour over all persons, and all causes ecclesiastical, but not in causes ecclesiastical, for they attribute no more to her, but to establish their discipline, and to defend them, from time to time, in the execution of it, which is nuda potestas facti et non juris; an authority attributed by the papists unto their princes. "That her majesty, being a child of the church, is subject to the censures of excommunication by their eldership, as well as any other people; and that no man ought to aid, comfort, salute, or obey, an excommunicate person; and that so long as one is excommunicated, he cannot exercise his magistracy. 66 That all persons, as well as meaner persons, must willingly be ruled and governed, and must obey those whom God hath set over them, that is, the just authority of ecclesiastical magistrates, and must lick the dust off the feet of the church.* "That the eldership and synods are to call and proclaim publick fasts; that the offices of this church of England are invented by the magistrate, and so no members of Christ's body; that she doth injure the church to keep the true officers out; that she maimeth and deformeth the body of Christ; that every These again are the words of Cartwright, the great leader of the puritans; the force of which cannot be well perceived, but by giving a more enlarged extract from his defence of the admonition: "It must be remember'd that civil magistrates must govern the church according to the rules of God, prescribed in his word, and that, as they are nourises, [nurses,] so they be servants unto the church; and as they rule in the church, so they must remember to subject themselves unto the church, to submit their sceptres, to throw down their crowns before the church; yea, as the prophet speaketh, to lick the dust of the feet of the church." Def. of Adm. p. 180. A very palatable doctrine this to Elizabeth. Christian magistrate is bound to receive this government by pastors, doctors, elders, and deacons, into the church within his dominions, whatsoever inconvenience may be like to follow the receiving of it; that those who withstand it, hold it to be lawful for her majesty and the state, to bid God to battle against them; and that they make our prince and governour wage war against God. 66 Against her majesty's safety in the kingdom. That the government of the church is aristocratical or popular; and that the government of the commonwealth must be framed according to the government of the church; even as the hangings to the church, [the house.] "Against the state and policy of the realm. "That the judicial law of Moses, for punishing divers sins by death, is in force, and ought to be observed in every commonwealth, as commanded by God; and therefore, that no prince nor law can, or ought to save the lives of wilful offenders, not offending by ignorance only; nor of blasphemers of God's name; nor of conjurers, soothsayers, persons possess'd with an evil spirit; HERETICKS, perjured persons, wilful breakers of the sabbath day, neglecters of the sacraments, without just reasons; disobedient to parents, or that curse them. "That ministers of duty, not only may, but ought to determine and decree of all, both civil and ecclesiastical causes; though not of the very fact, as civil magistrates do, yet touching the right, and what the law is; for that thereof they are appointed of God to be administrators. "The second sort of puritans now called Barrowists. "They do hold all the former posi. tions; and besides, they also hold these errours following. 1. That it is not lawful to use the Lord's prayer publickly, in the church, for a set form of prayer. 2. That all set and stinted prayers are meer bab. bling in the sight of the Lord; and not to be used in publick Christian assemblies. 3. That the publick prayers and worship of God in England, as it is by law, in the church of England established, is false, superstitious, popish, and not to be used in any Chris tian congregation. 4. That the church of England, as it is now establish'd, is no lawful government, nor Christjan, but anti-Christian, and popish. 6. That the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper, as they are administered in the church of England, be not true sacraments. 7. That infants ought not to be baptized according to the form of baptism, administered in the church of England, but are rather to be kept unbaptized. And that such as have been baptized according to that form, are not rightly baptized. 8. That the laws ecclesiastical, that are established by authority of the queen and realm, be not lawful. 9. That if the prince or magistrate do refuse or defer to reform such faults as are amiss in the church, the people may take the reforming of them into their own hands, before or without his authority. 10. That the presbytery and eldership may, for some causes, after admonition, (if there ensue no reformation) excommunicate the queen. 11. That the church of England (as it standeth now by law established) professeth not a true Christ, nor true religion; that it hath no ministers indeed, nor sacraments indeed; and therefore, they will communicate with us neither in prayer nor sacraments; nor come to our churches, which they call popish parish assemblies." It will be seen, from these statements, that the government looked upon the puritans in the same light in which the radicals are considered at the present day; as persons who were disposed to subvert the whole constitution. It was evidently their design to set up a government like that of the Jewish theocracy, in which the civil should be under subjection to the ec clesiastical authority; in a word, to arrogate to themselves the whole power of the nation. The references contained in the first statement are expressed so briefly, that their seditious character is not as obvious as it would be, if the quotations were given at length; but in this way we might fill a volume. A few examples must suffice. In the town of Bury, where the ministers and justices of the peace were puritans, and the whole town, as Strype says, "remarkably affected to puritan. ism," they painted in the church, under the queen's arms, this sentence from Rev. ii. 20. "Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, that thou sufferest the woman Jezebel, which maketh herself a prophetess, to teach and to deceive my servants; to make them commit fornication, and to eat meat sacrificed unto idols." This, Strype informs us, was done after consultation and advice upon it, when they had suffered no severities, but their non-conformity had been treated with great indulgence. "Kings, princes, and governours," says Gilby," have their authority of the people, and upon occasion the people may take it away again, as men may revoke their proxies, and letters of atturney. It is lawful to kill wicked kings and tyrants; the subjects did kill the queen's highness Athalia: Jehu kill'd the queen's majesty Jezabel: Elias, being no mugistrate, kill'd the queen's majesties chaplains, Baal's priests: These examples are left for our instruction. Where justice is not executed, the state is most corrupt. If neither the inferiour magistrates, nor the greatest part of the people will do their offices; then the ministers must excommunicate such a king." Gilby was one of the English exiles, with Knox, and Goodman, and Whittingham, at Geneva. It is well known that Knox openly maintained the same doctrine, that princes might be deposed and put to death by their subjects; This and in his "Blast against the monstrous regiment and empire of women," he maintained, that it was altogether unlawful for women to reign. "To promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion, or empire, above any realm, nation, or city, is repugnant to nature, contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to his revealed will, and approved ordinance; and, finally, it is the subversion of all equity and justice." Such was the first sentence and principal proposition of the work. Queen Elizabeth took so much offence at it, that she would not grant permission to Knox to pass through her dominions. "My first blast," says he, in a letter from Dieppe, in 1559, "hath blown from me all my friends in England." Goodman, Whittingham, and Gilby, avowed the same obnoxious opinion; and as it came from Geneva, and was thus supported by some of the principal puritans, there is every reason to believe, that the queen considered it as a part of their system. The state of affairs in Scotland tended to confirm her in this belief. She saw there the prostration of the royal authority at the feet of the same system, which the puritans were labouring to introduce into England; and it was natural for so sagacious and resolute a defender of her prerogative, to anticipate a similar result, and to take active measures to prevent it. right sorry to understand, that the order of common prayer, set forth by the common consent of the realm, and by the authority of the parliament, in the first year of her reign, wherein was nothing contained but the scripture of God, and that which was consonant unto it, was, now of late, of some men despised and spoke against, both by open preachings and writings; and of some bold and vain-curious men, new and other rites found out and frequented, whereupon contentions, sects, and disquietness, did arise among her people, and for one godly and uniform order, diversity of rites and ceremonies, disputations and contentions, schisms and divisions, were already risen, and more like to ensue; the cause of which disorders her majesty did plainly understand to be THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE BISHOPS and other magistrates, who should cause the good laws and acts of parliament made in this behalf to be better executed, and not so dissembled and winked at, as hitherto it might appear that they had been." year Very important and strong testimony to the mildness of the bishops is given, in a letter from the lords of the council to the archbishop. "After our hearty commendation to your lordship. By her majesty's proclamation, dated October 20, it appears how careful the queen's majesty is, that the order set forth in the book of common prayer, The puritans cast all the odium of allowed by parliament in the first her severities upon the bishops, be. of her majesty's reign, should be secause, by so doing, they served a verely and uniformly kept throughout double purpose; they could attack the the realn; and that the fault why such diepiscopal character with greater safety versities have of late been taken up in than the royal, and by rendering the many churches, and thereupon contenbishops odious, the way would be pre- tions and unseemly disputations risen, pared for the elevation of the presby- in her highness's opinion, is most in terian platform. But the bishops were you, to whom the special care of ecso far from being the prime movers in clesiastical matters doth appertain, aud the severities against the puritans, that who have your visitations, episcopal, they actually incurred the displeasure archidiaconal, and your synods, and of the queen for what she was pleased such other meeting of the clergy, first to consider their remissness. In the and chiefly ordained for that purpose, year 1573, she issued a proclamation, to keep all churches in your diocese in in which she declared, that she " was one uniform and godly order. Nothing is required, but that godly and seemly be attributed to the proper cause, and orders, allow'd by the queen's majesty let the obloquy fall upon the real auand whole realm, be kept, the which, thors. except you did wink at and dissemble, there needed not these new proclamations and strait calling upon," &c. They conclude their letter with these strong and pointed expressions: "Wherefore if now you would take, for your part, care and heed, and so the rest of your fellow bishops, the quiet of the realm might soon be purchased in our mind, touching any such matters, which should be great pleasure to her majesty, and comfort unto us. The neglecting whereof, how grievous it will be to her highness, and what danger may be to you, her highness hath express'd in the said proclamation. Thus praying you to consider these things, and withal speedily to put order in them, and from time to time to certify us what you have done herein, to the fulfilling of her majesty's desire, we bid you most heartily farewell. From Greenwich, the 7th of Novem. 1573." It gives great weight to this testimony to the mildness and indulgence of the bishops towards the puritans, that it was signed by the lord Burleigh, lord Leicester, and sir Francis Knollys, the two last of whom were remarkably at tached to the puritans, and the earl of Leicester, in particular, was considered as their great patron. The bishops, from their office, were obliged to preside in the ecclesiastical courts, and thus to appear prominent in the rigorous proceedings against the puritans; but they were no more to be blamed for this, than the civil judges would have been, in the like case, for carrying into effect the law of the land. In every instance, in which it could be done, they interceded with the queen for the mitigation of punishment; and it would be easy to produce many instances, in which, under the greatest personal provocations, they sought to turn aside the severity of the law. Whatever, therefore, may have been the hardships of the puritans, let them There is no disposition to justify the arbitrary notions, which then existed, of the royal prerogative, or to defend that servility which would tamely surrender the liberties of the subject. The contest which arose between the government of England and the puritans, was directed by the good providence of God, so as to subserve the cause of civil liberty, in the same manner as storms and hurricanes restore salubrity to a vitiated atmosphere. But in contemplating the blessings which have followed this mighty concussion, let us not attribute undeserved credit to the subordinate agents by whom it has been accomplished. On more Though the puritans had correct views upon the abstract questions of civil polity, and were right in deriving the authority of the governour from the consent of the governed, yet they had no idea of religious freedom. that subject, even papal infallibility could not be more exclusive or arbitrary. Their discipline they considered as the law of Christ, and, therefore, as binding upon the conscience. A departure from it was, therefore, an act of rebellion against God, and, as such, must be punished by the secular arm. To use the quaint, but forcible language of one of the writers of NewEngland, "To authorize an untruth by toleration of the state," was, in their estimation, "to build a sconce against the walls of heaven, to batter God out of his chair." In tracing the causes, therefore, which have led to the freedom of religious profession in this country, very little credit is to be given to the puritans. If the United States had been settled entirely by men of the same sentiments as the Plymouth colonists, is it likely that the present freedom of the different religious denominations would have existed? Is it likely that there would have been such a total dismemberment between the church and the state?—or that there would have been even a toleration for men of different sentiments? No. The real cause of the present state of things has been the heterogeneous character of our primitive population. The establishments made here by the mother country, being often the preference of a few to the many, as in Ireland, created a prejudice against all establishments; and situated as this country was, after the revolution, it was wise in our statesmen to give protection to all, but support to none. What may be the result of an experiment, hitherto untried among the nations of the earth, time only can determine. Perhaps, the indulgence and expansion of religious feeling, to use the beautiful thought, and, as nearly as possible, the beautiful language of Mr. Webster, like the elemental fires, will only agitate and purify the atmosphere; and when the fatal tendency of religious dissension has been sufficiently felt, and men have grown wise by suffering, Christians will again be "of one heart and of one soul," and will continue "steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." Boston, January 11, 1822. ** J. * If readers should be disyour posed to become further acquainted with this subject, or should be desirous of examining the authorities, from which the statements, contained in this and the last communication, have been taken; they will derive great satisfaction from a comparison of Neal's history of the puritans, with the answer to that very unfair and uncandid work, by bishop Maddox and Dr Grey. Reference has occasionally been made to Strype, Burnet, the second volume of Collier's ecclesiastical history, Heylin's history of the presbyterians, Fox's book of martyrs, volume third, Stillingfleet's unreasonableness of separation, M'Crie's life of Knox, and Calderwood's history of the church of Scotland. As Heylin and Neal may be considered as the antipodes of the controversy, between the church of England and the dissenters, nothing has been adopted on the single authority of either. [THE following communication has almost tempted us to congratulate our selves and our readers, on the publication of the ill-natured pamphlet to which given occasion to so elegant and spiritit refers; since the perusal of it has ed a version of the 108th psalm.] To the Editor of the Gospel Advocate, THE spirit of the Christian religion is assuredly a pure and a holy spirit. Yet, in controversy, on the most hallowed subjects, this principle is almost universally forgotten. The gospel, which came to us in purity and peace, can only be successfully preached and defended, in a spirit as pure and holy as its own. The rack and the faggot have done just nothing to retard its progress; and as little has been effected in its favour, by the rage and the ribaldry of polemicks. I am a layman, and would most submissively inquire of any pope, or cardinal, or controversial divine, could I be permitted to approach, under safe conduct, or in some happy interval of peace, from which of the evangelists is to be selected the most elegant example of satirical composition! Which of the apostles has most effectually promoted the ends of Christianity, by expressions of acrimony and ridicule against its adversaries! Is there one drop of gall, in the whole matter, of which the new testament is made! And, if there be not, am I to attribute this remarkable deficiency to the affluence, and ease, and undisturbed repose of the apostles, contrasted with the "necessities and distresses, the stripes and imprisonments, the tumults, the labours, the watchings, and fastings" of our polemical divines ! The most eloquent and popular ora |