to their children. The refusal was sometimes resented, and in some cases the parishioners tried to enforce what they believed to be their rights by an appeal to the law. On July 19, 1658, at the Lincoln Assizes, Mr. Justice Windham gave his charge both to the laity and clergy.

"The laics he exhorted to a reverent esteem of their pastors, to vindicate them from the reproach and contempt of the world, to afford them that maintenance which by law is due to them. The clerics he did solemnly charge to be at unity amongst themselves, and to be diligent in performing their offices toward their people, as preaching and administering the sacraments, especially the Lord's Supper."

"Neglect of this," he said, had been "a chief means to divert men from religion to popery and other erroneous and fanatic ways of worship. He said that the sacrament was due from the Rector to his people by the first law that was ever made for the settlement of . . . Religion, namely I of Edward VI., which law they never repealed." "He declared

it was a tyranny (beyond that of Prelacy), for every minister to make his own articles, and to deny the sacrament to all those who will not subscribe them, and pin their faith on his sleeves."

The grand jury, so encouraged, presented several ministers who had refused the sacraments-amongst others both the ministers of Boston. Those of Lincoln, we are told, escaped "only because they were lecturers and not curates." On the Western Circuit, the same Judge took the same line. He said :

66

That in any case ministers did not do the duties of their office, as particularly to baptize their children, and to administer the Sacrament to all but such as were ignorant and scandalous, they might refuse to pay them their dues, and they should present such ministers, which was agreeable to the law, and if they were by them presented, they should be dealt withal."

The details of another case that came before him at Derby assizes in the same summer, have been recorded at some length.

Thomas Palmer of Aston-upon-Trent was charged at the

"The Congregationalists of that age refused baptism to the children of those who were not church members. See ante, pp. 126, 180..

J

Derby Assizes in July, 1658, by Robert Houlden and others of his parishioners with refusing to allow them to receive the Sacrament. When asked by Mr. Justice Windham why he did not administer the Sacrament to his parishioners, Palmer replied that he did not administer holy ordinances to unholy men. The judge then asked him if he did not know that he was bound by law to administer the Sacrament to all his parishioners; Palmer replied that there was no such law in force, and that if there were it ought to be repealed. When the clerk of the court, at the Judge's order, was about to read an extract from a statute of Edward VI., Palmer asked whether the statute obliged him to administer the Sacrament to the "scandalous and ignorant." The judge admitted that he was not, but denied that Palmer had the right to "exercise an arbitrary power over other men's consciences." "You and such as you," he went on to say, are the causes of the divisions in the nation. But, I say, if I be upon my journey, and coming to an inn, if the inn-keeper refuse to lodge me, I have my action against him, and I know not but the like will hold in this case." "But, my lord," asked Houlden, “what must I do? "I know not," answered Windham, "but if you will bring it before us, we will do you right." Finally, the judge advised the complainants to withhold their tithes. so long as the minister withheld the Sacraments; and they combined together for that purpose.

But the ministers were not without support. The papers that record the Judge's charges also include "a petition of sundry gentlemen, ministers of the gospel, and others in the County of Lincoln," signed by John Tooley, Mayor of Boston, and others, stating that "some of our godly and reverend brethren, preachers of the gospel," had been presented for refusal to admit all to the Sacrament, referring to Palmer's case and to Mr. Justice Windham's utterances, and praying that ministers might be protected against the effects of the Judge's action.45

The theory of the English Establishment that every baptized parishioner is a member of the English Church, could not be made to work easily when Congregationalists were parish ministers.

45 State Papers: Interregnum (Domestic Series), clxxxiii. (136), Nov. 25, 1658. And for a similar case, ibid., clxxxiv. (24), Dec. 9, 1658.

V

Very few eminent Congregationalists held considerable positions in the University of Cambridge, during either the Commonwealth or the Protectorate. Cambridge was visited by the Earl of Manchester under the authority of an ordinance of Parliament passed early in the Civil War, when the Westminster Assembly and the Presbyterian party were in the fulness of their power." 46 The scholars and divines who were appointed to the offices of ejected "delinquents" were therefore Presbyterians or moderate Episcopalians: the Covenant was imposed only on those persons who were known to be disaffected to Parliament. Eleven heads of colleges were removed; the most distinguished of their successors were Cudworth, Whichcote, and Lightfoot, all of whom conformed at the Restoration, and Lazarus Seaman, Anthony Tuckney, and Thomas Young, who were Presbyterians.47

At Oxford the Congregationalists were very numerous. For many years after the war had begun, the city had been the head-quarters of the King. When it fell into the hands of the Parliament the condition of the university was "sad and deplorable."

"The colleges and halls were gone to ruin, five of them perfectly deserted, and the rest in a very shattered condition. The public acts had been discontinued for some years, the schools turned into magazines for the king's army, and the chambers filled with officers and soldiers, or let out to townsmen: there was little or no instruction for youth, nor hardly the face of a university; poverty, desolation, and plunder, the sad effects of war, were to be seen in every corner; the bursaries were emptied of the public money, the plate melted down for the king's service, and the colleges involved in debts which they were not able to satisfy." 48

An ordinance of two Houses of Parliament, passed on May 1, 1647, empowered a body of twenty-four visitors— fifteen lawyers and nine divines-to inquire into the "crimes, offences, and disorders" that they might find in the University; "to inquire by oath concerning those that neglect to take the Solemn League and Covenant," and who opposed

46 C. J. (Dec. 12, 1643; Jan. 22, 1643-4), iii. 338, 373. Fuller, History of the University of Cambridge, 235.

47 Neal, iii. 94-107; and Walker, Sufferings of the Clergy, i. 124. 48 Neal, iii. 360-361.

the execution of the ordinance of Parliament concerning Church Discipline and the Directory of Worship. The Commission was to report to a Committee of both Houses consisting of twenty-six peers and fifty-two commoners.49

The Visitors were met with a most strenuous resistance extending over two years; but at last-on July 5, 1649-they ordered "a serjeant (attended with some files of musketeers), to publish by beat of drum, before the gates of the several colleges, that if any of those who had been expelled by the Visitors should presume to continue any longer in the University, they should be taken into custody, and be made prisoners by the Governor." Four days later, they again sent the serjeant, the musketeers, and the drummer, to the gates of every college to announce that if any one who had been expelled, did presume to tarry in the town, or should be taken within five miles of it, he should be deemed as a spy, and punished with death." 50 This cleared the University of the Royalists, and left the Visitors free to carry out their reforms. Seven of the heads of colleges, and three professors were undisturbed. Twelve heads of colleges and seven Professors were ejected. Most of the men who were appointed to the vacant offices were Presbyterians, but several of them were Episcopalians who were willing to submit to the authority of Parliament. A few years later some of the most important positions in the University were held by Congregationalists. John Owen was Vice-Chancellor and Dean of Christ Church; Thomas Goodwin was President of Magdalen; Thankful Owen, President of St. John's; Thomas Cole, Principal of St. Mary's Hall; Francis Howel, Principal of Jesus; Francis Johnson, Master of University. Among the distinguished Fellows were John Howe, Theophilus Gale, and George Porter of Magdalen; Ralph Button of Merton; Stephen Charnock of New; Samuel Lee of Wadham. Owen did very much to restore the glory of Oxford, and many of the most eminent scholars of the latter half of the century were educated there during his ViceChancellorship.51

49 L. J. (May 1, 1647), lx. 169-170. Before the ordinance was passed in its final form, much discussion and many conferences took place between the two Houses.

50 Neal, iii. 384. Walker, Sufferings of the Clergy, i. 138. Wood, Antiquities, i. 387 foll.

51 Orme, Memoirs of Owen (Works), i. 133-135.

VI

The theological belief and the ecclesiastical theory of the Congregationalists of the Commonwealth are set out with great fulness in A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and practised in the Congregational Churches in England: Agreed upon and consented unto by their Elders and Messengers in their Meeting at the Savoy. October 12th, 1658.

Some months before the death of Cromwell the leading Congregationalists petitioned him for liberty to hold an Assembly of the ministers and "messengers" of the Congregational Churches, for the purpose of agreeing upon a Confession that might be published as an authoritative statement of the theology and ecclesiastical order of English Congregationalists. The circulars, issued to the Congregational Churches in different parts of the kingdom, directing them to hold meetings to appoint their "messengers" had an official character; they were signed by the Clerk to the Council.52 The Assembly was held in the Palace of the Savoy, in the Strand, on September 29, 1658, rather more than three weeks after the death of Cromwell. It consisted of about two hundred delegates, representing a hundred and twenty Churches; the majority of the delegates were laymen. Thomas Goodwin, John Owen, Nye, Bridge, Caryl, and Greenhill were appointed a Committee to draw up the Confession. On October 12 the whole Confession was finally accepted.53 In their Preface they say: "The whole of days in which we had meetings about it— set aside the two Lord's days, and the first day's meeting, in which we considered and debated what to pitch upon-were but eleven days; part of which also was spent by some of us in prayer, others in consulting, and in the end all agreeing.' That "so numerous a company of Ministers, and other principal brethren, should so readily, speedily, and jointly, give up themselves unto such a whole body of Truths that are after

54

52 Peck, Desiderata Curiosa (xiii. 15), ii. 501-502. Hanbury (Memorials, iii. 515) is mistaken in supposing that the Assembly was to draw up a national Confession of Faith such as was suggested in The Humble Petition and Advice, vide sup., p. 261.

53 For Preface and Text of Savoy Declaration, see Hanbury, Memorials, iii. 517-548. The original text (1659) has been restored in the passages quoted. 54 Ibid., 522.