any that "The third master of this sect was Barrow, the most bitter and clamorous censurer of all the Reformed Churches of yet hath put pen to paper, choose whom you will of the most despiteful Jesuits. However, before he could gather any formed congregation, his invectives against the Faith, Baptism, and Laws of England were so excessive, that Queen Elizabeth, impatient of his contumelies, by the evil advice of the cruel Prelates about her, caused him in a morning to be hanged on the Tower-hill.-The fourth leader of this way was Master JOHNSON, who, afraid at Barrow's execution, got over, with the church he had gathered, to Amsterdam; and there, for many years, was pastor to the first settled congregation of Brownists. we read of. This man, with AINSWORTH his Doctor, sent out to all the Reformed Churches the Confession of their Faith, in the year 1602. But long it was not till it appeared to the world, that no better spirit did reign in that company than in the former societies of this way. For, incontinent, three shameful schisms, one upon the neck of another, broke out among them:-FIRST. Many of them turned Anabaptists, and were excommunicated. -SECONDLY. Master Johnson fell to so great odds, first with his brother Master George for small matters, and afterward with his father, that he excommunnicated them both; and was cursed by both, when he had rejected peremptorily the mediation of the Presbytery of Amsterdam for reconciliation.-THIRDLY. The remnant of the company, a little after, rent into two, upon needless questions: Master Ainsworth, the Doctor, with his half, did excommunicate Johnson and his half, who were not long behind, for they also did quickly excommunicate Ainsworth and all his followers.-Hereupon, the war betwixt these two handfulls of people became so sharp, that Amsterdam could not keep them both: For Johnson, with his side of the house, got away to Embden, where, after his death, that little company, as I suppose, dissolved and vanished. Ainsworth's company, after his death, remained long without all officers, very likely to have dissolved: Yet, at last, after much strife, they did chuse one Master Canne for their pastor, but could not agree, till very lately, upon any other officer; and, even yet, they live without an eldership, as they did before without a pastor." Such were the disgraceful acts of these "new disciplinarian brethren" in foreign lands! We should have witnessed similar • They sent a copy in Latin to Junius, in 1596; and one at the same time to "the Professors of Divinity at St. Andrews in Scotland, Heidelberg, Geneva, and the other christian Universities in Holland, Scotland, Germany, and France." The allusion in the text is to the English translation of it in 1602. scenes among the modern Independents, had not both ministers and people long since perceived it to be their duty as well as their interest, to establish, virtually though not nominally, a species of Presbytery in all the most respectable of their congregations. To this expedient, indeed, they were compelled to resort in an early period of the history of Independency ;* but not generally with favourable results. By this method, though the pastoral deputies from "neighbour churches" are invested with no ostensible authority, yet they really possess the power of keeping out improper persons from the ministerial office, and of giving advice (which is only not called judgment) in all contests between pastors and their people, and between the different members of the same churches. This effect is also to be attributed, in no inconsiderable degree, to the extensive but often unacknowledged influence of the mild principles of Arminianism: Nine-tenths of the modern Independents may claim the title of BAXTERIANS, with far greater propriety than that of CALVINISTS. This effect, indeed, cannot have been produced by the amenity which has been derived from any supposed superiority of learning in the modern Independents: For the advantages were, in this respect, decidedly in favour of Ainsworth, Johnson, Kniveton, and their associates; but, in those ancient worthies, was not fulfilled the truth of the often-quoted Latin axiom: "Ingenuas didicisse "As for Master Ward, his ministry [at Rotterdam] became so unsavoury to that people, that they did never rest till judicially, by their own authority alone, they had deposed Master Ward from his pastoral charge. This act was much stumbled at by divers, who were fully persuaded of Master Ward's integrity; and at last, by the intercession of some from the church of Arnheim, he was restored to his place : But the ground of the controversy was no way touched. For when the four commissioners from Arnheim, Master [Thomas] Goodwin, Master Nye, Master Laurence, and another, had met in a chamber of a private house in Rotterdam, with some members of that faulty congregation,—and so made up their famous Assembly, which the Apologists [the authors of the Apologetical Narration] are pleased to equal, if not to prefer, to all the Assemblies they ever had seen: Whether [it were] that National Synod, wherein Master Nye had seen the flower of the Scottish nation enter into the covenant with very great devotion: Or this great Assembly at Westminster, where he and his brethren oft have seen sitting the Prince Elector, [Prince Rupert's eldest brother,] the most noble members of both Houses of Parliament, the prime divines of all England, the commissioners of the Church of Scotland. That Assembly, I say, of Rotterdam did not so much as touch the main question: They drew a thin skin over the wound, but durst not assay to lance it to the bottom. For did they ever rebuke, or so mh as once speak to, the people of that congregation, for usurping a tyrannical authority to depose their pastor? Did they ever attempt to cognosce on the great scandal, the ground of all the rest, Master Simpson's separation? &c. It seems the Assembly was wiser, than to meddle with evils which they found much above their strength to remedy." BAYLIE's Dissuasive. This author's choler was excited by the comparison, thus instituted by Nye, between the paltry chamber meeting at Rotterdam, and the Westminster Assembly of Divines, in which Baylie was then sitting (1645) as one of the Scottish Commissioners. fideliter artes, emollit mores," &c. Learning neither "softened their manners," nor prevented them from exhibiting the detestable "ferocity" of the Papists. The commendable improvement, then, which we are permitted to behold among this denomination of Christians, is a doctrinal amenity attributable to Arminianism, and has no reference whatever to higher advance in learning. In the preceding brief notice of early Independency, the reader will have recognized the names of several persons who afterwards bore a conspicuous part in the Grand Rebellion, and whose scriptural motto (profanely abused) was then, what they had formerly avowed it to be, (p. 144,) " Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood! Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones !”—Yea, rather happy would it have been for these flaming Calvinists themselves, had they had a better understanding in the spirit of the gospel, and had been under the salutary control of its peaceable and hallowing principles. Yet I have, in this instance also, often admired the wonderful economy of Divine Providence in the over-ruling of evil: This inconsiderable sect, the scum of Holland and the bane of New England, was permitted, for a series of years, to wage successful war with the intolerant principles of the Presbyterian Calvinists,-though its own, when fully explained, were not one whit more liberal; and when they bore the semblance of Toleration, they were assumed for mere temporary purposes, and the Toleration of the Independents was applied to those alone who with themselves, held what they called "the doctrines of grace," as I have shewn in my "Calvinism and Arminianism Compared." This contest continued till the introduction of sounder and more liberal principles of religious liberty among them, by some of their own body,* who during the Interregnum became Armini * In addition to the numerous proofs of this fact, which I have given in the work quoted in the text, (which proofs might easily be increased a hundred-fold,) the reader will recognize, in the following brief Questions and Answers, composed by the celebrated John Goodwin, some resemblance of the enviable civil and religious liberty which we now enjoy : Q.-Is it not an ungodly thing to suffer men to be of any religion? A. No: For both our Saviour and the Apostles, and the primitive Christians, did the same. Q.-Ought we not, at least, to keep our different opinions and religion unto ourselves, in obedience to the civil magistrate that commands it? A. No: Because it is better to obey God than man. Q.—But if Jesuited Papists and other subtle heretics be suffered, will they not seduce many unto their seditious by-paths? A. Though a toleration of erroneous opinions may gain some to Satan, yet Truth, being therewith to be published and approved, will, in all probability, not only gain so many more to God; but any one, thus won to the Truth, is worth thousands of these that fall from it.-Answer to A. Stewart's Second Part. ans, and who in consequence were called to endure all the rage of their brethren and of the Presbyterians. But happier still would these Independent Calvinists themselves have been, and the cause of much happiness to others, had they listened to the advice contained in the following extract of a letter, which Professor Junius addressed to them: “I observe, in your pamphlet, three things which you seem to have transmitted for our advice, and on which you desire our opinion. The FIRST is The Doctrine which you maintain in your pamphlet.-The SECOND is The Fact of which you accuse the English Churches.-The THIRD is The Conclusion which you infer from a comparison of your doctrine and of that act of the Church of England; that is,-you cannot with a good conscience hold communion with such churches, but feel towards them the greatest aversion of mind. On these three topics, therefore, I will with much brevity deliver my sentiments, beseeching you as a brother to receive this my reply with complacency. "I. I wonder, beloved brethren, that you have transmitted the statement of your doctrine, or the pamphlet of your Confession to me; and I am equally amazed at your having sent it to 'all those who profess Sacred Literature in all Christian Univer'sities. For if there is a certain consent of doctrine, as you pretend, I do not really perceive what necessity existed for to publish a new Confession in this consent of the holy and ancient doctrine. But if, perchance, there exists some dissension in doctrine, or rather some verbal discrepancy, such dissension ought by no means to be concealed, since you have considered it necessary to give an account of your doctrine. And then, why do you The philanthropy manifested in this quotation is much superior to that displayed in the following extract from An Answer to Thirty-two Questions, by the Elders of the Churches in New England, which was published, by Hugh Peters, in 1643 : "If that discipline which we here practise, be the same which Christ hath appointed, and therefore unalterable, we see not how another can be lawful. So if a company of peop shall come hither and set up another, we cannot promise to approve of them in so doing." On these principles of exclusion this insignificant denomination acted, with considerable severity, both in New and in Old England. The following extract, of an earlier date, (1590,) from BARROW's Plain Refutation, proves, that the founders o this sect, in common with their Calvinistic brethren of that age, did not disavow the use of force in matters of the mind:" The only point which they were anxious to establish, was, that the temporal sword would be wielded to much better effect, by themselves, than by their opponents: "We acknowledge, the prince ought to compel all his subjects to the hearing of God's word, in the public exercises of the church: Yet cannot the prince command any to be a member of the church, or the church to receive any without assurance by their public profession of their own faith, or to retain them any longer than they continue to walk orderly in the faith.” you send to me what relates to a public Confession? I am truly in wonder and amazement, brethren, at your intentions, both in regard to the purpose which you have in view, and in regard to the act itself. "(1.) If you have published this Confession with a design to clear yourselves, tell me, brethren, why do you wish yourselves cleared before such a number of souls, who never yet knew that you were accused, who never will be able to take cognizance of the lawfulness or the injustice of the accusation, and who are not called to that province by any just reason? And, what is still more grievous, why are you desirous of exposing this fact [of their having been accused] before so many men who are in decided hostility to God and the Church, who thirst for nothing with such avidity as for the blood of the church, and who rejoice exceedingly at the increase of the wounds which are inflicted by our own imprudence, that through these wounds they may draw out the blood of Truth and the moisture of Charity from the Church, that precious body of Christ? Why do you expose your grievances before such a number of infirm souls, since they have scarcely learnt that you are in existence; and (if I may so express myself,) they are offended with the foetid and cadaverous stench of schisms in the Church, before they know its body to which they may safely adhere? Ah, Brethren, Brethren! Is this clearing of yourselves of so much consequence to you, as on account of it to put the common good of the Church into imminent hazard? A christian, humble and pious nind must evince its wisdom after another fashion; and, laying aside all regard to its private concerns and feelings, will constantly form these resolutions: Let the earth first open for me in its deepest caverns,' would be the exclamation of such a wise man, rather may I become anathema for my brethren, than, through me and on ' account of my reputation, any offence be given even to one of the least of these people, to prevent his coming to Christ, and his continuance in Christ who is my Salvation! Let any de'traction be made from my reputation, who am a Christian, let 'me be trodden under foot by all men, provided I detract not the least thing from Christ and his body !'-Such, my brethren, I am fully persuaded, ought to be your resolution and the object of your deliberations; and to this very point ought all your labours to be directed. But what end have you in common with this? Alas! Pardon my freedom of speech, for you requested me to speak out: In this particular affair you seem to have gone astray. As far as I can perceive, in the contemplation of your own personal case you have been deceived. This circumstance, |