Footnotes
[vi] In addition to the books referred to in the subsequent pages, may be mentioned Towgood’s Letters to White; Furneaux’s Letters to Blackstone; Robinson’s Plan of Lectures on Nonconformity; Graham on Ecclesiastical Establishments; Marshall’s “Ecclesiastical Establishments considered,” and “Ecclesiastical Establishments further considered;” Scales’s “Principles of Dissent;” Thorn’s “Union of Church and State Antiscriptural;” and, amongst a multitude of able pamphlets, that by the Rev. J. B. Innes, of Norwich, entitled “Ecclesiastical Establishments Indefensible,” and “A Letter on the Principles and History of Dissenters,” by the Rev. John Raven, of Hadleigh.
[vii] Bishop Burnet.
[3] Matt. xxiii. 10.
[4] One of the opinions Wycliffe was charged with holding was this, “It is blasphemy to call any but Christ, head of the church.”
“The office of the head is, to prescribe laws to his church which should bind men’s consciences to the obedience of the same: and of such lawgivers there is but one. James iv. 18.”—Archbishop Usher.
“Christians are forbidden to look up to any man as having dominion over their faith, as entitled to implicit credence and submission, or, as the head of their sect whose decisions were stamped with authority over their consciences; they were to oppose all claims and pretensions of this kind by whomsoever they were advanced or on whatever grounds.”—Rev. T. Scott, late Rector of Aston Sanford, Comment. Matt, xxiii. 8–10.
It is equally difficult to reconcile a hearty belief in the twentieth article of the Church of England with these sentiments, and to distinguish them in substance from the following: “Authoritative and legislative interference apart from him, we dare not recognise: our loyalty to Christ as the church’s only head, compels us to disclaim it, and to protest against all human dictation. It cannot be shown that he has any where delegated his sovereignty; that he has appointed any order of men to act for him in a vice-regal capacity, and invested them with irresponsible and discretionary powers, or indeed with any powers at all, to frame articles of belief and formularies of worship and discipline, to fix the meaning of his word, or to devise and prescribe the religion of a congregation, or community, or province, or nation.”—Scales’ Principles of Dissent, p. 72.
[5] Isa. viii. 20. “With respect to difference of opinion on religious subjects, the basis of religion is the Bible, and those [are the] most orthodox christians who adhere the most strictly to the doctrines laid down in that sacred volume. To explain it, is the duty of all mankind, and its interpretation is confined to no particular sect. To use coercion in compelling uniformity is not only impolitic, but while man is constituted as man, it will be impracticable.”—Hansard’s Debates, May 21st, 1811. Speech of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
[7a] Acts v. 29.
[7b] John, iv. 23, 24.
[7c] Acts v. 38, 39. The conduct of the apostles “was a stand for principles; and in this respect they take their station at the head of the reformers of the world.”—Bogue and Bennett’s History of Dissenters, i. 290.
[8] Earl of Chatham, in the House of Lords, 1773.
[10] There is abundant evidence that the christian sects properly called with reference to their church government, Independents, are entitled to this honourable distinction. The Rev. Thomas Adkins in his recently published Records of the Independent Church at Southampton, (a book more especially valuable for its argumentative and explanatory observations,) has collected several testimonies in support of the statement that “The Independents were the first as a sect, in this country, to discover and to recognise, to their full extent, the sacred rights of conscience.”
The editor of Col. Hutchinson’s Memoirs, (a clergyman of the Established Church,) says, they “proceeded upon that principle which, how general soever it ought to be, is, however, unfortunately very uncommon, of allowing to all that liberty of conscience they demanded for themselves.”—Introd. p. 17.
Mr. Brodie, the learned author of the History of the British Empire from the accession of Charles I. to the Restoration, remarks that “The grand principle by which the Independents surpassed all other sects was, universal toleration to all denominations of christians whose religion was not conceived to be hostile to the peace of the state, a principle to which they were faithful in the height of power as well as under persecution.”—Vol. iii. p. 517.
“By the Independent divines, who were his instructors, (says the noble biographer of Locke,) our philosopher was taught those principles of religious liberty which they were the first to disclose to the world.”—Lord King’s Life of Locke, 4to ed. p. 178.
On the motion for inquiring into the cause of the death of the missionary Smith, Lord Brougham is reported to have said, “Mr. Smith was a pious and faithful minister of the Independents, that body, much to be respected indeed for their numbers, but far more to be held in lasting veneration for their unshaken fortitude, with which, in all times, they have maintained their attachment to civil and religious liberty, and holding fast by their own principles, have carried to its utmost pitch the great doctrine of absolute toleration.”
[14] He affirmed, from his own perusal of them, that in the primitive church there were but two orders of ministers, priests and deacons, and that “by the ordinance of Christ priests and bishops were all one.”—Vaughan’s Life of Wycliffe, 2nd ed. vol. ii. p. 275.
[15a] Stat. 26 Hen. VIII. c. 1.
[15b] Stat. 34 & 35 Hen. VIII. c. 1.
[16] He “laid all his subjects on the bed of Procrustus; some he stretched as too short for the extent of the monarch’s faith; and others he decapitated for presuming to look over his shoulders.”—Bogue and Bennett, i. 44.
[17] Stat. 2 & 3, Edw. VI. c. 1. 5 & 6, Edw. VI. c. 1.
[18] Burnet’s Hist. Ref. ii. 178.
[19] Framlingham Castle had been granted by the preceding monarch to Mary. One inducement to take her station there during the suspension of her rights, probably was the proximity of the place to the sea coast. The residents in Suffolk who came forward as her adherents do not appear to have been all favourable to the reformation. The first who took up arms and levied men in her defence was Sir John Sulyard of Wetherden, who, as a reward for his fidelity, was appointed to guard her person during her stay at Framlingham; and whom we shall presently find zealously engaged in executing her sanguinary edicts.
[20a] Eftsoons, immediately.—Bailey.
[20b] It was an argument employed in her favour by the Earl of Arundel, in his harangue at the great meeting of her friends at Baynard’s castle, that she had made this promise. Who, he asked, had seen cause to think that, in matters of religion, Queen Mary intended any alteration? for when she was lately addressed about this, in Suffolk, she had given a very fair, satisfactory answer.—Green’s Hist. of Framlingham, p. 79.
[21a] Fox’s Acts and Monuments, ed. 1684, vol. iii. p. 12.
[21b] Neal’s History of the Puritans, ed. 1822, vol. i. p. 73.
[22a] Stat. 1 Mary, sess. 2, c. 2.
[22b] Neal’s Pur. i. 77.
[22c] The Statutes of Rich. II. and Hen. IV. for burning heretics, were revived.—Neal’s Pur. i. 82.
[23a] Burnet’s Hist. Ref. ii. 267.
[23b] Fox’s Acts & Mon. iii. 98.
[24a] Fox’s Acts and Mon. i. 600.
[24b] Neal’s Pur. i. 92. Price’s Hist. of Prot. Nonconf. i. 191.
[24c] Fox’s Acts and Mon. iii. 773. Brook’s Lives of the Puritans, i. Introd. 13.
[26a] Rev. vi. 9. See Mather’s Hist. of New England, 1702, p. 140. From the last-mentioned of these brothers, was descended Mr. John Fisk, an eminent preacher and writer in the primitive times of New England. He was born at the parish referred to in the text, about 1601, and died at Chelmsford, N. E. 16 Jan. 1676.
[26b] Acts and Mon. iii. 12.
[27] Fox has preserved the whole of this interesting document. Acts and Mon. iii. 578.
[29] “The mouth of the Yare at that time, (cir. A.D. 1000.) was an estuary or arm of the sea, and extended, with considerable magnitude, for many miles up the country. Tradition, the faithful preserver of many a fact which history has overlooked or forgotten, confidently and invariably asserts it; and the present appearance of the ancient bed of the river, from Yarmouth to Harleston in Norfolk, tends to confirm it.”—Gillingwater’s Hist. of Lowestoft, 4to, p. 26.
[30a] The upper part of this porch forms a room in which is a small, but valuable, collection of books in divinity.
[30b] A subscription has been set on foot, a site purchased, and the promise of a grant from government obtained, for the erection of a school on the principles of the British and Foreign School Society.
[31] The herring fishery was evidently a principal source of emolument to the inhabitants. In the time of the Conqueror the fee farm rent of the manor of Beccles to the king was 60,000 herrings, and in the time of the Confessor 30,000.—Domesday Book.
The grant to the inhabitants at a later period, of the tract of marshes reclaimed from the sea, was perhaps an inadequate compensation for the loss of the fishery. It was stated by a writer at the commencement of the seventeenth century that more wealth was raised out of herrings and other fish in his majesty’s seas by the neighbouring nations in one year, than the king of Spain had from the Indies in four.—Phœnix, i. 222.
[32] There has been a difference of opinion respecting the derivation of the name, which is not likely to be settled. The common notion is, that the first letter is an abbreviation of Bella. Some suppose the first syllable, Bec, to be derived from the name of an abbey in Normandy. A third interpretation may be suggested. Bec de terre, a point of land, was sufficiently descriptive of the spot, while the marshes which lie west, north, and east of the town, remained under water. Bec and eglise might be compounded into Becclys, the ancient orthography. It has been surmised that the town may have owed its origin to its site having “protruded into the ancient river” and served during the Roman, Saxon, and Danish invasions, as a convenient situation for placing a beacon or signal.—Gillingwater’s History of Lowestoft, p. 26. At all events, the Rev. Geo. Crabbe has been led into an error in supposing the name to be derived from the present “beautiful church,” nor does it appear why he prefers “beata” to “bella.” Crabbe’s Life and Works, vol. i. p. 147.
[33] Under him it is said that “the sable clouds of paganism which had overshadowed these parts near two hundred years,” were “dissipated by the glorious rays of the gospel.”—Gardner’s History of Dunwich, Blithburgh, and Southwold, 4to, 1754, pp. 42, 43.
[34] The first rise of any material improvement, in this respect, is to be traced to the labours of the philanthropist Howard. He visited Beccles in the years 1776, 1779, and 1782, and thus describes the arrangements of that comparatively recent period. “Beccles.—A room on the ground floor, called the ward; a chamber for women, called the upper ward; a day-room with a fire-place; and a dungeon seven steps underground. In the ward is a window to the street, which is highly improper; . . . no proper separation of the men and women. Only one court; . . . Licence for beer: (a riotous alehouse)” . . . State of the Prisons, 3rd ed. p. 303.
[35a] Account of the Corporation of Beccles Fen, 1826, p. 4.
[35b] Ibid. p. 14.
[36] Account of the Corporation, p. 14. There is an engraving of the seal in Lewis’ Topographical Dictionary of England.
[37] Acts and Mon. Ed. 1579, p. 1735. Ed. 1684, vol. iii. 589, col. 2. The diction and orthography of the earlier of these editions is here preserved.
[40] Toplady, in his “Historic Proof of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of England,” adduces the testimony of these men as contained in this last article. Toplady’s Works, ed. 1825, vol. ii. p. 42.
[41a] Tradition assigns as the immediate scene of this, in every view, execrable affair, the ground eastward of the town, and now called the Fair close. A statue, or an obelisk, has often marked a spot far less worthy of being had in remembrance by the friends of protestantism and religious liberty.
[41b] Prior to the reign of Henry VIII. the sheriff had been allowed to burn heretics without the writ de hæretico comburendo. It was rendered necessary by stat. 25. Hen. VIII. cap. 14. Neal’s Puritans, vol. i. pp. 7, 13. The writ was abolished by 29 Car. II. c. 9.
[44] Quarterly Review, (Dec. 1836,) vol. lvii. p. 366.
[45] “I may grow rich by an art that I take not delight in; I may be cured of some disease by remedies that I have not faith in; but I cannot be saved by a religion that I distrust, and by a worship that I abhor. . . . Faith only, and inward sincerity, are the things that procure acceptance with God.”—Locke’s third Letter concerning Toleration, 4to, pp. 26, 27.
[48a] See Locke’s third Letter on Toleration, 4to, p. 105. “He that would vex and pain a sore you had, with frequent dressing it with some moderate, painful, but inefficacious plaister, that promoted not the cure, would justly be thought not only an ignorant, but a dishonest surgeon.”—Ibid. p. 124.
[48b] Like the prudent monk, who, when Satan would have drawn him into heresy, by asking him what he believed of a certain point, answered, Id credo quod credit ecclesia. But, Quid credit ecclesia? said Satan; Id quod ego credo, replied the other.—Dr. Jortin’s Preface to his Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, pp. 27, 28.
[49] Rev. Samuel Charles Wilkes. See Binney’s “Dissent not Schism,” p. 44.
[50] Stanzas prefixed to the Bible, 1598.
[51a] “They may not maim a man with corporal punishments; may they use any corporal punishments at all? They may not starve and torment them in noisome prisons for religion; that you condemn as much as I; may they put them in any prisons at all? They may not deprive men of their estates; I suppose you mean their whole estates; may they take away half, or a quarter, or an hundredth part?”—Locke’s third Letter for Toleration, 4to, p. 107. See also p. 121.
[51b] Dr. Jortin, ubi supra, pp. 30, 31.
[52a] Locke’s second Letter concerning Toleration, 4to, p. 9.
[52b] Paradise Lost, b. xii. 1. 524–530.
[54] This statute, (1 Eliz. cap. 2.) and that of supremacy, (1 Eliz. cap. 1.) “constitute the basis of the reformed church of England, and will be regarded,” says Mr. Price, “as its disgrace or glory, according to the views of religious liberty which are entertained.”—Hist. Prot. Nonconf. vol. i. p: 134.
[56] Such as the crossing of infants on the forehead in baptism; bowing at the name of Jesus; kneeling at the sacrament, as a term of communion; the use of sponsors to the exclusion of parents; confirmation; and the marriage ring.—Brook’s Puritans, i. Introd. p. 29.
[57] Neal’s Puritans, i. 125.
[59a] Brook’s Puritans, i. Introd. 29, 40.
[59b] Ibid. 36.
[59c] Particularly Dr. Scambler, Bishop of Peterborough.
[59d] 1 Cor. xiv. 31. Neal’s Puritans, i. 221, et seq.
[60] Neal, i. 224.
[62a] Neal, i. 277.
[62b] Ibid. 283.
[63a] Neal, i. 284.
[63b] Brook i. Introd. 39.
[63c] Ibid.
[64a] Brook, i. Introd. 43.
[64b] Strype’s Annals, III. i. 264.
[65a] September 1583.
[65b] Neal, i. 320.
[67a] Strype’s Whitgift, pp. 115, 116. Neal, ubi supra. Brook, i. Introd. 45.
[67b] Neal, i. 323. Brook, i. Introd. 46, where a list is given of the ministers suspended in Suffolk.
[67c] Neal, i. 330, 341.
[68a] Neal, i. 345, 352, 376.
[68b] Ibid. 335, 353.
[68c] Ibid. 337.
[70a] Page 31.
[70b] The surrender is dated 26 Jan. 26 Eliz. [1583, O. S.] and was signed at a meeting of the inhabitants held in the parish church.—Account of the Corporation, p. 10.
[72a] Account of the Corporation, pp. 14, 15.
[72b] Neal, i. 353, 354.
[72c] Brook says, on that day he was suspended and deprived by Bishop Scambler, adding, “This is attested by Richard Skinner the Bishop’s Register.”—Lives of the Puritans, iii. 509. But there is some inaccuracy in this account. His suspension was the act of Whitgift himself, and had taken place some months earlier. Dr. Scambler was not elected Bishop of Norwich till December 15th, 1584, when Dr. Freke was translated to the see of Worcester; so that the latter was more likely to have been the immediate instrument of Mr. Fleming’s deprivation.—Blomefield’s History of Norfolk, iii. 558, 559. His successor was first instituted November 2nd, 1583, and again September 5th, 1584.—Lib. Inst. xx. 97, 111. This was Mr. John After. A person of the same name is mentioned by Strype in his Life of Grindal, (p. 59,) as a native of Calais, who was ordained by that prelate, July 25th, 1560, at the age of fifty.
The living of Beccles, at the period of Mr. Fleming’s deprivation, was vested in Lady Anne Gresham, the widow of Sir Thomas Gresham, Knt., founder of the Royal Exchange. Previously to her marriage she was the widow of William Rede, merchant, of London and Beccles.—Lib. Inst. ubi supra. Account of the Corporation, pp. 11, 15.
In the volume of Blomefield above referred to, (pp. 272, et seq. and 552,) will be found some account of Bishop Hopton, and of his Chancellor Dunning, (or Downing,) mentioned in the preceding chapter.
[74a] The register of Beccles parish records in the interval from 1586 to 1592, the baptisms of several children of “Mr. William Fleming, preacher” (and “minister”) “of the gospel, and Anne his wife.”
[74b] In a more recent transcript of the register here quoted, Mr. Fleming is merely styled “preacher of God’s woorde.”
[75] “Which word minister became usual in these times for distinction from the idolatrous priests of the Romish church.”—Strype’s life of Parker, i. 127. Anno 1559.
[77a] Price’s Hist. Prot. Nonconf. i. 146–149.
[77b] Rom. xiv. 21; 1 Cor. x. 23, 32; 2 Cor. iv. 1, 2; xiii. 8.
[79a] Ezek. xxxvi. 26; John iii. 7; 2 Cor. v. 17; James i. 18; 1 Pet. i. 23.
[79b] John iii. 16; Acts xvi. 30, 31; and Mark xvi. 16; on which passage it has been well observed, “By connecting baptism with faith in the former clause, our Lord plainly forbids our treating that institution with indifference, and by his omitting it in the latter we are taught not to lay an undue stress upon it as necessary to salvation.”—Stennett’s Works, i. 139.
[80a] Luke v. 21. See also Isa. xliii. 25; Psal. cxxx. 4; Dan. ix. 9; Col. i. 14; 1 John i. 9.
[80b] Psal. li. 6; Tit. ii. 7, 8.
[81] Psal. cv. 28.
[83] 1 Cor. xv. 50.
[84] See Wilton’s Review of some of the Articles, passim; a work to which the writer of these pages is indebted in several instances, and of which he has availed himself the less scrupulously as it has been long out of print.
[85] After the lapse of two centuries and a half, the terms of subscription in the Church of England remain substantially the same, with this additional safeguard against evasion, that the subscription is required, by the Act of Uniformity, to be made ex animo. The writer does not feel himself called upon to reconcile this fact with the increased spirit of investigation which characterizes the present age, or with the acknowledged upright character of many of the clergy. It may be conceded that each party is conscientious; but each should bear in mind that there is an essential and unalterable difference between truth and error; and that it cannot be a matter of slight importance whether the one or the other is embraced and propagated.
[86] Binney’s Dissent not Schism, p. 30.
[88a] Acts xv. 12, 22, 23. 1 Cor. v. 4, 13. Harmer’s Misc. Works, 144.
[88b] Strype’s Annals, III. 23. [17.]
[89] Mr. Harmer attributes these practices to their “not considering that the 14th of the 1 Cor. was a portion of an epistle directed to a church in which miraculous powers at that time existed,” and to “a want of due deference to their ministers, or in the language of St. Paul, ‘knowing them which laboured among them, and were over them in the Lord, and admonished them.’”—Misc. Works, 145.
[90] Neal, i. 428.
[91] See Price’s Hist. i. 404–406.
[92a] Strype’s Ann. III. i. 266, [184.]
[92b] Grahame’s Hist. of the United States, i. 215.
[92c] Price, i. 452.
[93a] Brook, i. Introd. 62.
[93b] Grahame, i. 218.
[94] Brook, i. Introd. 64.
[95a] Neal, ii. 43.
[95b] Wilson’s History of Dissenting Churches, i. 31.
[95c] Mather’s History of New England, b. i. p. 5.
[97] He died before he could fulfil his intention of accompanying the remaining part of his congregation to America.
[98a] Wils. Diss. Ch. i. 33.
[98b] Mather’s New England, b. i. p. 6.
[99] Mrs. Hemans.
[100] Neal, ii. 44, 92.
[101] Phenix, i. (1.)
[102a] Brook, i. Introd. 68. Several of the bishops objected to so strange a display of ecclesiastical supremacy; and Archbishop Abbot, being at Croydon when the order for publishing the “Declaration” came forth, expressly forbad its being read there. Ibid. 69.
[102b] Blomefield’s Norfolk, iii. 566.
[102c] Brook, i. Introd. 69.
[102d] Ibid.
[103a] 1626.
[103b] 1633.
[103c] Neal, iii. 169, 173.
[104a] Phenix, i. (1.)
[104b] Neal, ii. 247.
[104c] Ibid. 248.
[104d] Brook, i. Introd. 81.
[105a] Blomefield says, “He had a Friday lecture here, and was paid for it by the court.” Hist. of Norf. iv. 362.
[105b] In 1637. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 19. Mr. Bridge was afterwards one of the “five pillars of the Congregational party, distinguished by the name of the Dissenting Brethren, in the Assembly of Divines.” Neal, ii. 228. iv. 403.
[105c] Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 19.
[107] Neal, iv. 172. Harmer’s MSS.
[108a] Nonconf. Mem. iii. 286.
[108b] It can hardly be doubted that if prudence had permitted, they would have done so at an earlier period, without any scruple as to the lawfulness of such a proceeding. They had, indeed, as Mr. Harmer suggests, “this to plead for themselves, among other things, that they entered not actually into these associations till the whole legal frame of the episcopal church was dissolved by the extinction of monarchy, and men left to follow their own light in these matters by the then public authority.” But to attach any importance to such an argument, would betray the advocate of religious liberty into a surrender of his great principle,—a principle clearly stated in a quotation occurring in connexion with the above language: “As freedom is the birthright of mankind, any number of persons may voluntarily unite themselves for such purposes, and under such regulations, as appear useful and convenient to them, provided they do not encroach on the rules of justice, and the rights of others. And if they may unite for other purposes, much more may they unite for the purposes of religion, and the service of their common Lord and Master.”—Harmer’s Misc. Works, 147, 149.
[109] Morell’s Hist. of England, ii. 253.
[110] Neal, iv. 69.
[112a] At Wymondham, North Walsham, Guestwick, Tunstead, Stalham and Ingham, Edgefield, Godwick, and Bradfield. The churches at Walpole, Bury, Wrentham, and Woodbridge, were formed somewhat earlier: that at Wattisfield in 1654, and that at Denton in the following year. Norwich Ch. bk. Neal, iv. 172. Harmer’s Misc. Works. 147.
[112b] At this period, the use of ordinal numbers, instead of the pagan names of days and months, was not peculiar, as at present, to the Society of Friends, but was common with serious persons of other denominations. The Friends have become singular in this respect from the desertion of the practice by other religious communities.
[112c] The early Congregationalists were much attached to the term covenant, which, while it was accurately descriptive of the transactions to which they applied it, derived, in their estimation, a peculiar sacredness from its employment in the Old Testament. See Harm. Misc. Works, 159.
[113] Regiment,—established government; mode of rule; (not in use). Johnson.
[114a] Norwich Church Book.
[114b] Neal, iv. 175, note.
[115] Harmer’s Misc. Works, p. 156. Phil. iii. 15, 16.
[116] Norwich Church Book.
[117] Account of the Corporation, p. 16. It will be remembered that the Corporation Act had not yet stigmatized, as unworthy of being intrusted with civil power, all who could not conform to the legislative creed, or consent to prove themselves unworthy, by desecrating the most solemn ordinance of religion to the unscriptural and unholy purpose of qualification for office. Dissenters have been relieved from this grievance, but it is deemed necessary still to require, on their acceptance of municipal offices, a solemn declaration against using the influence they may possess by virtue of these offices, to the injury of the established church. This is one of the “acknowledgments” which dissenters are still obliged to render to the dominant church; objectionable enough to be felt, by many of them, as a legislative insult and a bitter grievance; but forming indeed a poor protection to the establishment, since every dissenter may, nevertheless, use his extra-official influence to bring about that great renovation and extended usefulness of the episcopal sect, which will result from a dissolution of its alliance with the state.
[118a] Neal, iv. 172.
[118b] The statement of Calamy that he “came to Beccles in 1655,” is not warranted by the authority he quotes. Contin. ii. 803.
[119] The same writer mentions Mr. John Shardalow, who had been instituted to the living of Beccles in 1640, as being one of the episcopal clergy who suffered persecution during the grand rebellion.—Attempt, &c. p. 371. Persecution is to be deprecated wherever it is found, but the Independents, as a body, are not chargeable with the many instances of it which occurred at that period.
[120] Neal, iv. 93.
[121] Cal. Contin. ii. 803.
[123a] Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 17.
[123b] Ibid. iii. 19.
[124a] Christ Set Forth, p. 8.
[124b] It appears that the church had previously invited Mr. Asty, of Stratford, to take the spiritual oversight of them; for in the accompts kept at the period in question, are the following items:—“To Bro. Shildrake, for his journey to Stratford, to Mr. Asty, to give him a call, 10s.” and, “Pd. to Girling, for goeing to Mr. Brewster’s in ye night, to inqr. abought Mr. Asty, 4d.” This might be the Asty who was ejected from Stratford in 1662, or the individual (probably his son) who, in 1675, became teacher in the Independent church at Norwich. See Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 288. Harmer’s Misc. Works, p. 195. Wils. Diss. ch. ii. 537.
[125] Mr. Harmer (and after him the Editor of the Nonconformists’ Memorial) was evidently led to consider Mr. Ottee as the pastor chosen in 1653, by mistaking the year in which he was said to be “made pastor,” which is certainly 1656. Mr. Harmer says, “July 29, 1653, Mr. Robert Ottee was chosen their pastor, and ordained Nov. 12th.” See also Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 255. Mr. Ottee is stated, in the dedication prefixed to his posthumous Sermons, to have been minister of this congregation “for above thirty years,” which would be a more natural mode of expression, if he had been thirty-two, than if he had been thirty-five years pastor; and he died in 1689.
[127a] It will be recollected that prior to 1752, the year commenced on 25th March.
[127b] He baptized, on this occasion, two of his own children, (Mary and Samuel,) and three others. The baptism of his son Samuel is recorded under the same date, in the parish register: “Samuell, ye sonne of Robert Ottey, preacher of God’s woorde, & Margret his wife.” This appears to have been the only son of Mr. Ottee who attained manhood, and he died at the age of twenty.
[128a] Acts vi. 1–6. In the “Form of making of Deacons” prescribed for the church of England, the apostles are said to have been inspired to choose the martyr Stephen, and others, to this office; whereas it is plain that the election was the act of “the multitude of the disciples.”
[128b] Neal, i. 428.
[128c] 1 Cor. xi. 23–26.
[133] Mather’s Hist. New England, b. iii. p. 100.
[134] See Neal, i. 305.
[135] This expression, (as well as the practice itself,) was evidently borrowed from the “prophesyings” of the Elizabethan times.
[137] Neal, iv. 172.
[139a] Harmer’s Miscellaneous Works, p. 150.
[139b] Neal, iv. 177.
[141] Mather’s Hist. New England, b. iii. p. 4. Palmer’s Nonconf. Mem. passim. It is no satisfactory answer to the statement in the text, that the episcopal clergy had suffered persecution at a previous period. See on this subject, Adkins’s Hist. Indep. Ch. at Southampton, p. 38, note; and Rogers’s Life of Howe, p. 129.
[142] Mr. Samuel Baker’s Experience, 1667, MS. He was born about 1645, at Wrentham, of which place he declared his belief that religion had there flourished longer, the gospel had been more clearly and powerfully preached, and more generally received, the professors of it were more sound in the truth, open and stedfast in the profession of it in an hour of temptation, more united among themselves, and more entirely preserved from enemies without, than in any village of the like capacity in England. He was sent to school at Beccles, and mentions that, during the latter part of his stay there, being about twelve or thirteen years old, he was “exceedingly pleased with Mr. Ottee’s ministry, and became more serious and affectionate.” He afterwards studied at Cambridge, and at one of the Inns of Court. He became the proprietor and occupier of Wattisfield Hall, a zealous Congregationalist, and a sufferer unto bonds for a good conscience. Ibid. And see Harm. Misc. Works, p. 182. Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 283.
[144a] Dedication to “Christ set forth.” William Bidbanck, M.A. was ejected under the Act of Uniformity, from Scottow in Norfolk, and was afterwards pastor of the congregation at Denton, where he was greatly beloved for his sweetness of temper, obliging deportment, and excellent preaching. He died, much lamented, about 1693.—Palm. Nonconf. Mem. iii. 14.
[144b] “Christ set forth, in several Sermons upon the 7th chapter to the Hebrews, by Mr. Robert Ottee, late Pastor to a congregation in Beckles, in Suffolk. London: printed for Edward Giles, Bookseller in Norwich, near the Marketplace, 1690.”
[145] Ejected from Totney, Lincolnshire; “a man of the most remarkable seriousness, meekness, prudence, and patience, mingled with the greatest zeal to do good to the souls of men.” Palm. Nonconf. Men., ii. 434. And see Blomefield’s Norfolk, iv. 465.
[147a] Christ Set Forth, pp. 70, 71.
[147b] Ibid. p. 76.
[148a] Christ Set Forth, pp. 87, 88.
[148b] See Palmer’s Nonconf. Mem. iii. 9, and Blomefield’s Hist. of Norfolk, iv. 149. The value of Dr. Collinges’s friendship may be learned from the former of these works. The latter writer contents himself with stating that “he was a grand Presbyterian.”
[149a] Christ Set Forth, pp. 54, 155.
[149b] Ibid. 121, 122, 142.
[149c] Ibid. 54, 55.
[149d] Ibid. 124, 125.
[149e] Ibid. 115, 116.
[149f] Ibid. 127, 128.
[149g] Ibid. 1, 157.
[149h] Ibid. 129, 130.
[150] Christ Set Forth, pp. 22, 23.
[151] Christ Set Forth, pp. 113, 114.
[152a] “May, 1689, Robert Utto, clarke, was buried, the 5th day.”—Beccles Parochial Register.
[152b] This statute, though it was invaluable to the dissenters, and was gratefully received by them, as affording considerable protection, and as opening the way for further improvements, was, nevertheless, encumbered with intolerance. It afforded no relief to Papists, or Unitarians. It exacted from dissenting teachers a subscription to nearly all the Articles of the church of England; it did not abrogate the Corporation and Test Acts; nor permit the solemnization of marriage by dissenters in their own places of worship, nor exonerate them from the obligation to contribute to the maintenance of the public religious establishment, though they do not attend on its ministrations. To a great extent, these deformities have been removed by successive struggles. The period immediately following the revolution may be regarded as one of comparative bondage; but much still remains to be accomplished, before the religion of the Bible will have shaken off all the impediments which have hitherto interrupted its free and triumphant course.
[153] Neal, v. 30.
[154a] His gravestone remains in the church-yard, near the south porch;—“Here lyeth ye body of Mr. Francis Haylovck, who departed this life, March ye 7th, 1702, aged 77 yeares.”
[154b] 1694. February, “Edmund Artis, gent. was buried the 21 day.”—Parochial Register.
[157] See page 142.
[160] MS. in the possession of Rev. E. Hickman.
[161a] Wils. Diss. Ch. ii. 515, 518.
[161b] August 7th, 1695.
[161c] The trustees were, John Killinghall, Robert Sherwood, William Crowfoot, John Primrose, Nathaniel Newton, John Utting, and Thomas Feaver.
[162] There cannot be a greater mistake than to suppose that at the period referred to above, the Presbyterian dissenters alone couched their trust deeds in general terms; unless it be the strange notion that the absence of doctrinal restrictions implied indifference as to religious sentiments. The present is one instance of many in which a Congregational place of worship was settled in that manner, under a minister whose sermons betray no symptoms of such an indifference. Equally unfounded, and more unkind, is the imputation of intolerance cast upon the modern Independents, on account of the restrictions by which experience has taught them to protect property they devote to a specific object, from being diverted into other channels. In order to sustain so serious a charge it should be shown, not merely that the Independents attach the highest importance to the possession of scriptural views on the doctrines of Christianity, and that they take care not to allow their chapels to be held by those whose opinions they disbelieve, and even regard as dangerous; but that they desire to employ some degree or kind of coercion to induce others to profess their opinions and to worship in their temples. The truth is, that the importance attached by the Independents to certain doctrines, imparts a more honourable character to their advocacy of religious liberty, than can belong to those who deem religious opinions of minor if not of trivial moment. The writer has been induced to advert to these topics in consequence of a remark on the subject of Presbyterian practices, in an interesting work, written by one whom he well knows to be incapable of wilful misrepresentation, or even of an unkind feeling towards any denomination of Christians. See Murch’s History of the Presbyterian and General Baptist Churches in the West of England, pref. p. x.
[163] Wils. Diss. Ch. iv. 147.
[165] Howe on Charity in reference to other men’s sins. Works, vol. ii. pp. 226, 231.
[166] Of the esteem in which he was held amongst his own flock, a touching illustration is afforded in the following circumstance. Mr. Green, it seems, was extremely fond of roses, and several of the good people, desirous to testify their respect to the old gentleman, in every form, used to bring him roses and stick in the pulpit, till sometimes it was almost surrounded with them. Harmer’s MSS.
[167a] See the eminent Mr. Benjamin Robinson’s death-bed address to his children, Wils. Diss. Ch. i. 377.
[167b] Calamy’s Life and Times, by Rutt, i. 139, 142.
[168a] Life and Times, i. 144.
[168b] The first mention of him in the church book, occurs 28th July, 1703.
[168c] Milner’s Life and Times of Watts, p. 290.
[169] Watts’s Works, Barfield’s ed. iv. 451, 452.
[171] Watts’s Works, iv. 461.
[172] This advice is stated in the church book to have been given by “the reverend elders, met at Norwich.” Such meetings were occasionally held in the earliest times of the Congregational churches, in Norfolk and Suffolk. At a later period, stated meetings were held by the ministers of the Walpole, Wrentham, and Southwold churches, who were, by degrees, joined by others of their brethren. Dr. Doddridge, in 1741, dedicated a sermon (preached at Kettering) to the associated ministers of Norfolk and Suffolk, with expressions of great affection and respect. In 1761, these meetings, which, (as Mr. Harmer remarks,) “agreeably to the usual course of human affairs,” had been attended with diminished zeal, were revived on an extended scale, and continued to be held twice a year, for some years afterwards. Those who attended them, claimed no “authoritative power, but merely a reverential regard to counsels, given in the gentlest way.”—Harmer’s Misc. Works, pp. 197–200.
[173a] Wils. Diss. Ch. ii. 536. Prot. Diss. Mag. vi. 259. There was, at one period, a disposition amongst some of the members of the Independent church at Norwich, to invite Mr. Nokes to settle there as colleague to Mr. Stackhouse.—Harm. MSS.
[173b] Calamy says “in Suffolk.” Life and Times, i. 142.
[174] MSS.
[175a] Harmer’s MSS.
[175b] Prot. Diss. Mag. vi. 349.
[176a] Rev. Samuel Hurrion’s Diary. MS.
[176b] Prot. Diss. Mag. vi. 95. Wils. Diss. Ch. iv. 369.
[177] Harmer’s MSS. Wils. Diss. Ch. iv. 369. The seceders were afterwards joined by the Baptist church of Rushall, which is said to have been as ancient as the protectorate. About 1730 a Mr. Miller was its pastor. He subsequently removed to Norwich, and was succeeded by Mr. Milliot. Towards the close of his life they chose a Mr. Simons, the benefit of whose ministry the Baptists of Beccles were also desirous of enjoying. For their accommodation the seat of the church was removed to Beccles, and there Mr. Simons resided till his death. After that event the interest at Beccles declined. It was broken up about 1766, and the members residing in or near Beccles re-united with the Independents there and with the congregation at Rushall.—Harmer’s MSS.
[178a] Dr. Ridgley published a sermon on his death, preached at Fetter-lane, Nov. 9, 1749.
[178b] When the chapel was re-built in 1812, several gravestones were laid down in the floor of the entrances, and amongst them Mr. Tingey’s. This accounts for the partial obliteration of the inscription. Two or three are almost entirely effaced. There is one to the memory of “Mrs. Elizabeth Playters, relict of Mr. Richard Playters, who departed this life December the 22nd, 1727, aged 44 years.” And another which pointed out the resting-place of “Joshua Nunn, who departed this life Feb. ye 27th, 1729, aged 80 years.” Surely a more respectful mode of disposing of these memorials of the departed might have been adopted.
[179a] He had a daughter married to the Rev. W. Parry, the late divinity tutor of the Academy at Wymondley.
[179b] Mr. Samuel Hurrion being obliged, by an impaired state of health, to resign his ministry, retired first to Bungay, and then to Beccles, where he died Oct. 25th, 1763, aged fifty-three years. He was buried at Denton, his native place. Wils. Diss. Ch. iii. 296. He is described on his tombstone as “late of Beccles.”
[184] Prot. Diss. Mag. v. 1—6. 355. vi. 112. Aikin’s General Biography.
[185] Wils. Diss. Ch. ii. 554.
[186] Harmer; MSS.
[190a] His father, in consequence of this step, disinherited him, and never saw him but once afterwards. Theol. Mag. iii. 179.
[190b] His academical certificate is dated 6 Kal. Junii 1771, and is signed by Drs. Conder, Gibbons, and Fisher, and by Messrs. Barber, Hitchin, Watson, and Stafford.
[191] These were Thomas Ebbs, afterwards a highly respectable deacon, and whose daughter Mr. Heptinstall married; Wm. Leabon [Leavold]; and John Dann.
[192] Mr. Heptinstall’s ordination took place on the sixteenth anniversary of Mr. Bocking’s.
[194] It appears that these two excellent ministers and the late Rev. John Carter of Mattishall, Norfolk, all commenced their labours, at the respective places in which they so long adorned the gospel, upon the same sabbath. They enjoyed an unchanged friendship till separated by death—a friendship which has been renewed in heaven, never more to be interrupted by distance, or severed by calamity.
[196] Theological Magazine, iii. 177–181.
[202] Those who are acquainted with Mr. Jay’s “Life of Winter,” will understand this reference to his cruel treatment with regard to the ordination he desired to obtain in the church of England,—treatment, however, which was so overruled by Providence, that he possessed, as Mr. Whitfield predicted, “the greatest preferment under heaven,—to be an able, painful, faithful, successful, suffering, cast-out minister of the New Testament.”
[206] Mr. Sloper’s MSS. and Evan. Mag. 1803, p. 406.
[207a] Church book.
[207b] At first they united themselves to the Baptist church at Claxton, in Norfolk, under the pastoral oversight of Mr. Job Hupton; but the inconvenience of attending public worship at so great a distance, induced them to obtain the use of a building in Beccles. The place they procured had been occasionally used for devotional purposes, and the celebrated John Wesley had once preached there; but it was sometimes appropriated to the barbarous amusement of cock-fighting. This circumstance was very repugnant to the feelings of those who resorted thither for religious purposes, and it stimulated their efforts to provide a house of prayer of their own. In 1805, the present Baptist meeting-house was erected. On the 5th Sept. 1808, a church was formed consisting of twenty-four persons; and, on the 12th July, 1809, Mr. Tipple, late of Hail-Weston, Hunts. was publicly recognized as their pastor. He resigned his pastorship in the following year, and from that period the church and congregation were supplied by a succession of ministers, without pastoral settlement, till 1822, when the Rev. George Wright commenced his labours. On the 19th July, 1823, he was set apart to the pastoral office, which he now ably and usefully sustains. The church comprises, at the present time, nearly 150 members.
[209] Jay’s Life of Winter, p. 284.
[211] Jay’s Life of Winter, 2nd ed. p. 223.
[217a] Anna Seward. See Campbell’s Life of Mrs. Siddons, ii. 241.
[217b] Campbell’s Life of Mrs. Siddons, ii. 329.
[218] September 16th.
[225] Evan. Mag. 1813, p. 61.
[232] Pp. 15–17.
[250] The writer regrets that the scantiness of his information, as well as the unexpected length to which these records have extended, prevent his noticing some other excellent and exemplary individuals, who have been ornaments to the church, and are now “through faith and patience inheriting the promises.”