X.

A.D. 1661.

CHAPTER determination "that no man shall be compelled to use the cross in baptism, or suffer for not doing it; CHAS. II. and that no man shall be compelled to bow at the name of Jesus :" as to the surplice, he was content that "men should be left to their liberty to do as they should think fit, without suffering in the least degree for wearing or not wearing it." And he suspended the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the subscription required by the canon from the clergy at their admission into benefices, till it should be otherwise determined by a synod called and confirmed by his authority. The puritan clergy drew up a grateful acknowledgment to his majesty for his gracious concessions. It was presented on the 16th of November, and the ministers returned home from the royal presence with light hearts and boundless gratitude. Baxter had some misgivings; but he was always querulous: and upon the whole the prospects of the puritans were bright, and there seemed at length to be a hope that the breaches of the church would be restored.

Just at the same time it was generally known that several of the vacant bishoprics, and other high preferments, had been offered to the presbyterian chaplains and their friends: the bishopric of Hereford to Baxter, Norwich to Reynolds, Lichfield and Coventry to Calamy; the deanery of Rochester to Manton, that of Coventry to Bates, and that of York to Edward Bowles, a name less known. Except Reynolds, all declined their honours. The king, we suspect, was really in earnest in pressing them to accept the benefices, whatever were the views of others. They gave various reasons for

X.

A.D. 1661.

their behaviour; but their explanations are not CHAPTER sufficient. They acted with integrity, but they were not wise. Their motives were of different kinds: CHAS. II Calamy's wish was that they should all decline or all accept together; making a common cause, and stating their reasons to the world. But there seems to have been now, as there always was at every period of their history, a want of concert and of practical good sense amongst the puritan leaders. Reynolds accepted his bishopric at once; Baxter declined with equal precipitation; Calamy hesitated till it was supposed he would accept the mitre, but he too refused it, and then the others followed his example. The defection of Reynolds and the hesitation of Calamy were of serious consequence; the presbyterians were weakened by division, and the addition of one puritan to the bench of bishops had no sensible effect in their favour. The presbyterian clergy acted in this affair with pure intentions; but they were too much afraid of incurring censure from their friends. Some of them had taken the covenant; Calamy had held and expressed strong opinions against the hierarchy; Baxter waited to see the king's declaration acknowledged by the parliament and stamped with legal authority. But there are times when good men are imperiously called on to accept preferment at the expense of reputation. Vulgar minds will find it impossible to respect or even to understand their motives. The race of ambition is a passion so universal that the few who pursue it from disinterested motives are never appreciated. Yet christian heroism calls, though rarely it must be allowed, for this species of self

X.

A.D. 1661.

CHAPTER immolation; and men, for their heavenly Master's sake, must even be content sometimes to have CHAS. II. greatness thrust upon them. To accept the preferments was at least to gain more influence with the court; to reject them was to abandon the little they possessed. They ought to have renounced the covenant; they ought to have unsaid the former extravagances of themselves or of their party: this indeed they did in private; and they should not have shrunk from doing it publicly and before the people. Nor had they in truth much cause for shame. Which of their opponents had not something to retract? Which of them, for instance, now ventured to maintain (whatever they might secretly wish) the canons of 1640 and the practices of Laud? Besides there were amongst the surviving bishops several whose judgment upon all the weightier points in dispute scarcely differed from their own. How slight, for example, the line which separates the mature opinions of Baxter on church government from those of bishop Sanderson. Had they accepted preferment it seems impossible that the calamities should have occurred which now immediately ensued. Could the act of uniformity have passed with Richard Baxter in the house of lords? Would the most violent high churchman have ventured to recommend the king to put his hand to a bill which must instantly create a new secession and place at its head a band of nonconforming bishops? The presbyterian clergy admit that they had no scruples of conscience; they merely thought it inexpedient: but they were too sensitive to public opinion; and they did not perceive the

X.

importance of the crisis, and that this was their last CHAPTER opportunity. Their motives were pure but their decision was unfortunate.

But the king had promised that the liturgy should be reviewed and some effectual method taken for the relief of tender consciences. On the 25th of March, 1661, he issued a commission appointing an equal number of learned divines of both persuasions to review the prayer book. Twelve presbyterian commissioners, with nine assistants, were summoned to meet as many bishops and their assistants. The meeting was appointed at the Savoy, the bishop of London's lodgings. It was long and tedious: the proceedings fill many pages which few cotemporaries ever read, and which in later times are scarcely known except to the idle reader of curious books. It was merely a sham fight, without hope on one side or heart on either. Of the episcopal commissioners several were never present, others only once or twice. Even of the presbyterians two never appeared, and two others, one of whom was Dr. Lightfoot, very seldom. And Baxter complains that after a time the attendance dwindled upon his own side to that of three or four besides himself. Gunning, bishop of Chichester, was his chief opponent : he was a divine of the Laudian school, who clamoured for a return to the usages of the primitive church; particularly he insisted on praying for the dead, anointing the sick with oil, and various ceremonies of the same kind: others took part sometimes. Loungers crowded into the room for mere amusement; and men of parts to witness an intellectual combat; but no real importance was attached

CHAS. II.

A D. 1661.

A.D. 1661.

CHAPTER to their discussions.* A new parliament had now X. assembled, its members were intent only to aggranCHAS. LI. dize themselves, and for that purpose they offered the most obsequious homage to the king. The people were more violent and more abject than the parliament. Burnet expresses his firm belief that had Charles been so disposed he might have restored the star chamber, the court of high commission, and, in short, all the extravagances which brought his father to the scaffold, amidst the applauses of a besotted kingdom. Under such circumstances the question of a revised liturgy and a comprehension of dissenters had no interest; and the presbyterians had no support from that public opinion which ten years before had invested them with sovereign power. The management of the controversy on the puritan side was again unfortunate. They do not seem to have understood each other; they wanted concert; their demands, if not unreasonable, were vague; and their objections extended over too wide a surface; and they fought with the carelessness of despair. The royal proclamation had invited them, as they understood it, to a friendly conference: they were "to advise and consult;" but when they met, the bishops refused to proceed until the puritans had stated all their objections. To this, with the sole exception of Baxter, they were exceedingly Of a metaphysical turn of mind, and confident in his dialectic skill, Baxter was always too ready for the fray. The good sense of his associates, and perhaps their greater modesty, told them that in the present state of public feeling this categorical * Burnet, Hist. Own Times, vol. i, p. 254.

averse.