NONCONFORMISTS.
Nonconformist preaching was orthodox. The existing generation, however, deviated from their father’s footsteps. Sermons differed from those of an earlier period in form: divisions were less numerous and perplexing, bones were not so visible, there was more symmetry of proportion, and more roundness of style. In spirit some preachers diverged from their predecessors—betraying a lack of fire, unction, and healing power. Nevertheless, there were pastors who caught the mantle and spirit of the departed. Anyone visiting “the ancient and fair city of Chester” found a specimen of this in the ministry of Matthew Henry. At a meeting-house in Crook Street—still in existence, as I have already said, with the original pulpit and sounding-board, from which the good man delivered his homilies—he had a congregation so large, that ultimately it contained as many as 350 communicants, including a few city magnates. They assembled in their large oaken pews at 9 o’clock on a Sunday morning, the richer men in curly wigs, lace ruffles, and ample broad cloth suits; their wives and daughters with long stomachers, hoops, and lofty head-dresses; but beneath costumes fashioned by the fancies of the age, they carried in their hearts wants, cares, and desires belonging to all ages, and such as the worship and ministry upon which they attended were adapted to meet and satisfy.
1688–1702.
The service began with the hundredth psalm, according to the version of Sternhold and Hopkins; and then we can easily image the pastor beneath the huge sounding-board, standing erect—portly in form, dignified in mien, comely in face, his person set off to advantage by a curled wig and a flowing gown—offering prayer and next expounding a lesson in the Old Testament. The matter and manner may be learnt from perusing his Commentary, where, in the picturesque quaintness of his thoughts, he aims not at singularity, but at fixing Divine truth in people’s memories and hearts. Another psalm and a longer supplication succeeded, and judging from his book on prayer, he must have excelled in that form of spiritual exercise. Then followed a sermon full of useful practical thought, arranged in singular devices, after Puritan precedents; for Matthew had great reverence for the ways of his father Philip, and of his father’s friends. What is said of the sire may be said of the son: “Many a good thought has perished because it was not portable, and many a sermon is forgotten, because it is not memorable; but like seeds with wings, the sayings of Henry have floated far and near, and like seeds with hooked prickles, his sermons stuck in his most careless hearers. His tenacious words took root; and it was his happiness to see, not only scriptural intelligence but fervent and consistent piety spreading among his parishioners.”[518] Singing and praying wound up the service, after it had lasted some three hours. This protracted worship would be deemed sufficient for one day; but in the afternoon the same thing was repeated, the exposition of the New Testament being substituted for that of the Old. We are apt to pity men who performed or endured such lengthened duties, but really the duty cannot be regarded as having involved much hardship for them. Such long services were their own choice. Some might fancy that under the weight of these prayers, these expositions, and these sermons, every Sabbath regularly for twenty-four years, the pastor’s strength would break down; yet the good man seems to have borne the wear and tear of it all remarkably well.
NONCONFORMISTS.
The Lord’s Supper he celebrated monthly, remarking that “among the Jews, the beginning of the month was esteemed sacred; and although he did not consider the Jewish law as to the new moons still in force, yet from general reasoning he thought the conclusion a safe one, that whatsoever may be our divisions of time, it is always good to begin such divisions with God—seeking first His kingdom and its righteousness.”[519]
He was impressive in his mode of administering baptism, which he likened to the taking of a beneficial lease for a child while in the cradle, and putting his life into it. He used the Assembly’s Catechism, and when “he perceived in any of his catechumens symptoms of thoughtfulness upon religious subjects, he specially noticed them, and as soon as there was a competent number, conversed with them severally and apart upon their everlasting interests; afterwards in the solemn Assembly, he catechised them concerning the Lord’s Supper, by a form which he printed.” He next appointed a day in the week preceding the monthly sacrament, in which, before the congregation, he was their intercessor at the Heavenly Throne: a sermon was addressed to them, and the following Sabbath they were welcomed to the Lord’s-table. “Such in his judgment, as in that of his father also, was the true confirmation, or transition into a state of adult and complete church membership.” He considered the ordinances of Christ as mysteries, of which His ministers are the stewards, and in admitting any to membership, “they were entrusted with the keys.”[520] Holding this view, he kept in his own hands the exercise of discipline; and on one occasion he pronounced sentence of excommunication on three persons, the act being accompanied by a congregational fast.
1688–1702.
Neighbouring villages were visited, and periodical lectures established. Twice a year county unions met, when ecclesiastical matters came under discussion. “Affairs of the State or the Established Church were never meddled with.”[521]
The account I have given applies particularly to Presbyterians, but association meetings were also held by Independents. They did not, however, at these gatherings ordain ministers; ordinations amongst them generally took place in the presence of the church members by whom the pastor was chosen. Orders—technically speaking—maintained by Presbyterians as well as Episcopalians, could scarcely be said to be recognized by Congregationalists, who considered ordination simply as an acknowledgment of the church’s act in electing ministers. The key to the difference between the two denominations is found, on the one hand, in the Presbyterian idea of power being lodged in the ministry, and, on the other hand, in the Congregational idea of power being lodged in the people; and as this distinction and difference affected the subject of ordination, so it did that of admission and discipline. Admission of members amongst Congregationalists depended upon a vote of the church, after an account had been given of the candidate’s religious character. Congregational churches were not all alike as to terms of admission. Some were narrow and severe. They exacted circumstantial proofs of conversion, and an ample confession of faith. In not a few cases this was required to be given in writing. Others accepted the children of members, to use their quaint language, when they took hold of their father and mother’s covenant, and expressed their confidence in Christ’s passion, and repentance from dead works. The Church having nothing to object to “their walking,” they were permitted to partake of the Ordinance of the Supper, and were confirmed.[522]