29 PROTESTANT DISSENTERS. NAMES. THE word Dissenter is a very comprehensive negative term; and Dissenters in England are those religionists, of whatever denomination, with all their subdivisions, who dissent and separate from the worship and communion of the Established Church. The original Dissenters, from their professing and proposing extraordinary purity in religious worship and conduct, began to be reproached with the name of Puritans, about A.D. 1563, or, according to Neale, in 1559*; and by this name both they and the Presbyterians in Scotland were chiefly distinguished till the Restoration, when, by the Act of Uniformity in 1662, the Dissenters were increased by nearly 2,000 ministers, who thought themselves in conscience obliged to quit the Established Church, refusing to conform to certain conditions, whence they were called Non-conformists. During the last century, their descendants have usually been called Protestant Dissenters ;—a moderate appellation, sanctioned by Act of Parliament, and originally given at the Revolution to the three great bodies of Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, when they first received a legal security, by having the Act of Toleration extended to them. This Act, which is the Magna Charta of Dissenters, included all, of every denomination, excepting those who deny the Divinity of Christ; to whom also its benefits were extended in 1813; and the name of Dissenters now comprehends a great variety of sects and parties, some of which are numerous and respectable. RISE, PROGRESS, &c. There were some who began to absent themselves from church in the reign of King Edward the Sixth; but they did not break off till about the year 1565, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth; nor did matters proceed to an open rupture till 1570. And even after that period, many Puritans continued in occasional communion with the church, down to 1645, • This nick-name is said to have been first devised by Saunders the Jesuit, to cast a reproach upon those concerned, and to render them suspicious and odious to the state. when Presbyterianism was established. But it would exceed our limits to detail here at full length their origin and progress; nor is it necessary, as so many have already written on the subject. A full account of every thing relating to them is given in the late Dr. Toulmin's edition of Neale's "History of the Puritans;" in which the editor, in his notes, attempts to obviate the objections which have been made to it by Bishops Maddox and Warburton, Dr. Gray, and others. This work, of which an abridgment in two volumes has lately been published by Mr. Parsons, of Leeds, though by no means distinguished for impartiality, is still the great oracle and support of the Dissenters; and from it we are led to conclude, that their sufferings at different times have only been exceeded by their religious zeal. The historian traces, step by step, the differences which originally occasioned the separation; and an affecting narrative is given of the sufferings which they underwent in what they conceived to be the cause of religious liberty *. The Puritans first objected to the order of bishops, the liturgy, the clerical dress, the sign of the cross in baptism, the use of godfathers and godmothers, turning to the East in the repetition of the Creed, and bowing at the name of Jesus, together with the posture of kneeling at the celebration of the Lord's Supper; and the general principles, on which their descendants declare their dissent from the United Church is now founded, are, according to Palmer's "Protestant Dissenter's Catechism "1. Its general frame and constitution as national and established t. 2. The character and authority of certain authorities appointed in it. 3. The imposition of a stated form of prayer, called the Liturgy, and many exceptionable things contained therein. 4. The pretended right of enjoining unscriptural cere monies. • Dr. Calamy's " Abridgment of Baxter's Life," is likewise an able publication on the subject; and in Mr. Orton's "Memoirs of Dr. Doddridge," or in his "Life," by Dr. Kippis, prefixed to the seventh edition of his "Family Expositor," may be found much information relative to the Dis senters, during the period in which Dr. Doddridge lived. The modern Dissenters appear to be as entirely Dissenters, on several points, from the Puritans and Non-conformists of former days, as they are from the Church of England. Thus, it is well known that all, or nearly all, the Dissenters now in England, are Independents, or Congregationalists; whereas the Puritans and ancient Non-conformists were for a national church and establishment, and a priesthood with no small authority. 5. The terms on which ministers are admitted into their office. 6. The want of liberty in the people to choose their own ministers; and 7. The corrupt state of its discipline." Or, more briefly, they ground their dissent on " the right of private judgment and liberty of conscience, in opposition to all human authority in matters of religion; the supremacy of Christ, as the only Head of his church; and the sufficiency of the holy Scriptures as the rule of faith and practice." Ever since the first separation from the church under Cartwright, who has been styled the father of the Puritans, long and various have been the disputes that have been carried on between Churchmen and Dissenters, and perhaps not without some degree of warmth and acrimony on both sides. The tolerant spirit of the present day has had its due effect on these disputes: it is therefore to be regretted that this catechism should be formed, not so much to teach the children of Dissenters the great fundamentals of religion and morality, as to teach them how our ancestors quarrelled and maltreated one another, and how their feuds must never be forgotten, but carried on as a war ad internecionem*. A more full and more candid statement and defence of their grounds of dissent may be seen in Pierce's " Vindication of the Dissenters," and Towgood's "Letters to White;" and, on the other hand, they may be found as fully and fairly answered in Dr. Bennett's "Abridgment of the London Cases," and in Bishop Huntingford's "Call for Union with the Established Church, By the Test Act, which was passed (1673) in the reign of Charles II., all are excluded from places of trust and profit under government, except those who take the Oaths of Allegiance and Assurance, and make the Declaration against Transubstantiation, and receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, according to the usage of the Established Church, within six months after their appointment. This last qualification, some think, cannot be consistently complied with by any conscientious Dissenter: and hence loud complaints have been made respecting this exclusion; since, as members of the civil community, they conceive they are *This, surely, is not to teach them to become "peace-makers,” and so to gain the heavenly appellation of "children of God." No; and hence the great Bishop Horsley, having no doubt also in view the unfair and unjust statements of this catechism, has said of it, “that it inculcates no principle of the Christian religion, or of any religion under the sun; bat is rather calculated to instil into the minds of our youth a spirit of sedition and rebellion." entitled to all the common privileges of that community."This Act was indeed originally levelled against the Roman Catholics, of whom several had been promoted by the Court; but it was so expressed as also to exclude the Protestant Dissenters, and these last have made several unsuccessful applications for its repeal. In 1787, the question was warmly agitated in the House of Commons, when, on each side, numerous publications issued from the press. See, in particular, a tract by an eminent divine on the side of the church, entitled, "Observations on the Case of the Protestant Dissenters, with Reference to the Corporation and Test Acts*." The chief argument urged for the continuance of the Test Act, is their presumed hostility, not so much to the civil, as to the ecclesiastical part of the British Constitution; or "the safety of the Established Church." The principal arguments alleged for its repeal are, that it is "a prostitution of the Lord's Supper;" and that " to withhold civil rights on account of religious opinions, is a species of persecution." But is there not a Test Act for the king himself, who must not only be a Protestant, but of the Church of England; and who must marry none but a Protestant? Such a test ought not, therefore, to be viewed as an unwarrantable imposition. At the same time, it must be highly desirable that some other test was substituted in the room of that now in force. Until towards the end of the seventeenth century, there were few Protestant countries in which the exercise of any religion was permitted, except that which was established by law. Even the great and good Archbishop Usher was strongly against tolerating the Roman Catholics of Ireland. But at the era of the Revolution-an era not less memorable for the extension of civil than of religious liberties in Englandthe rights of toleration were recognised, in the famous Act by which it is declared that the statutes of Queen Elizabeth and King James I., concerning the discipline of the church, should not extend to Protestant Dissenters; or, that they should be exempted from suffering the penalties which the *The "Corporation Act" prevents all persons from being legally elected into any office relating to the government of any city or corporation, unless, within a twelvemonth before, they have received the sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Church of England; and it enjoins them to take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, when they take the oath of office, otherwise their election is void. See Bishop Sherlock's" History of the Test Act," octavo, 1790; and also his " Vindication of the Corporation and Test Act," octavo, 1736.-See a list of most of the tracts, both for and against the repeal, in Dr. Kippis's edition of Dr. Doddridge's Lectures, vol. ii. p. 397-8, note. law inflicted, and permitted (on certain conditions) to worship God according to their own consciences. The conditions, by which this Act, known by the name of the "Toleration. Act," was limited, and to which they themselves in general consented, are, that all dissenting ministers are required “not only to take the oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and to make the Declaration against Popery, but also to subscribe the doctrinal Articles of the Church of England." Besides this, they are not to hold their meetings till their place of worship is certified to the bishop of the diocese, or to the justices of the quarter sessions, and registered; also they are not to keep the doors of their meeting-houses locked, during the time of worship. And, to secure to them the free exercise of their religion, whoever disturbs or molests them. in the performance of Divine worship, on conviction at the. sessions, is to forfeit 20., by the statute 1st of William and Mary. But this Act provided no relief to dissenting tutors and schoolmasters; for, before any person could be legally qualified to keep a school, or instruct youth, a licence from the archbishop, bishop, or ordinary, was still necessary, together with a declaration of conformity to the Church of England. The matter of subscription also to the Articles was afterwards considered as a grievance; for, though at the time when the Act was made, the doctrines thus enjoined to be assented to were equally the belief of the Established Church and the Dissenters in general, this has not been supposed, more lately, to be the case. Application was therefore made to Parliament, by a very great proportion of the Dissenters, for the redress of these grievances, in 1772; that being thought a seasonable opportunity, in consequence of the favourable sentiments expressed in respect to them, in the late debates on the petition presented to Parliament the same year, by "certain of the clergy of the Church of England, and of certain of the two professions of civil law and physic, and others," praying to be relieved from the subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion. But the application of the Dissenters (though renewed next session), as well as the petition of the Churchmen, was without effect. However, without any further application on their part, an Act of Parliament passed in 1779, whereby, instead of that subscription to the doctrinal Articles of the Church, which the Toleration Act required, all its benefits were granted to Protestant Dissenting ministers and schoolmasters, |