} CHAP. tism, through the licentiousness of the late times crept in among us, is now become necessary.' VIII. Year after the apo stles. 6 The parliament, assembled upon the said restauration, expressed the dislike the nation had conceived against the tenets and behaviour of these men; when making an act for the confirming all ministers in the possession of their benefices, how heterodox soever they had been, provided they would conform for the future, they excepted such as had been of this way. It is to be noted, that when this opinion began first to increase, they did not all of them proceed to separation from the established church; they held it sufficient to declare their sentiment against infant-baptism, to reserve their own children to adult-baptism, and to be baptized with it themselves; without renouncing communion in prayers, and in the other sacrament, with the pædobaptists. 1545. In the year 1645, when Marshall had in a sermon objected to the antipædobaptists the sin of separation, Tombes answers, that this was practised only by some that it was the fault of the persons, not of the principle of antipædobaptism: that he himself abhorred it: and he quotes, as concurring 1544. with him, the Confession of Faitht in the name of 'seven Churches of Antipædobaptists in London, 6 Art. 33.' But these that continued in communion were not for Oliver's turn. There was great care taken to instil into them principles of total separation; which proved too effectual: and within a while they did all, or almost all, renounce the settled s Examen, part ii. §. 9. [p. 31. edit. 1645.] t [Published at London, in 4to, in the year 1644.] VIII. congregations, and became great enemies to them. CHAP. In which separation they do still, almost all, continue. The present state of them is this: They that are now, are as commendable as any other sort of men are, for a sober and grave, quiet and peaceable way of living. They profess obedience to magistrates: and they will commonly express a dislike and abhorrence of those plunderings and other violences committed by some of their party, as well as by the rest of the army of that usurper aforesaid, of odious memory. They are particularly commended for maintaining their poor liberally, (which is a way that never fails to attract the good-will of the multitude, and to make proselytes,) as also for passing censures upon such members of their own congregations as live disorderly. This character, of obedient subjects, is what they now own and profess; and what I hope is the real sentiment of most of them. One Mr. Hicks did indeed about twenty years ago (if what was informed against him were true) give a most ugly and reproachful account of the whole body of this people as to this point. There was at that time, 1683, a villainous conspiracy, headed by Shaftsbury, Monmouth, &c., against king Charles; either to murder, or at least depose him. The conspirators sent their emissaries about, to see what numbers and parties of the people could be drawn in to join in the rebellion. And amongst other discoveries made afterward of this treason, there was this following information given upon oath by one Mr. West of the Temple, which is Year after the apostles. CHAP. printed in the account of that plot. Copies of VIII. Informations, p. 41. Year after the apo stles. This examinant further says, That Mr. Roe 'told this examinant, that he had discoursed with one Mr. Hicks a tobacconist, an anabaptist preacher, a great ringleader of the anabaptists; and that the said Hicks had told him that the anabaptists 'could, and he believed upon good consideration 'would, make up an army of twenty thousand men, ' and fifteen hundred of the twenty thousand would be horse and though perhaps there would be a necessity of making use of some great men at the beginning, (and this examinant thinks he mentioned the duke of Monmouth,) yet when the anabaptists were once up, they would not lay down 'their arms till they had their own terms.' If Hicks did never say so, he ought to have publicly disowned it. And if he did, the antipadobaptists ought to have disowned him from being a leader. Whether either of them were done, or whether Hicks be now living, I know not. God Almighty keep all sorts of people from such leaders, as will lead them in a way to which the Scripture expressly assigns damnation. But however, there were but two men of the twenty thousand that appeared then to have been guilty; and those two were among some of the first that made an ingenuous and voluntary confession. And besides, it is not credible that that party of men could at that time have made up such a number, if they had been never so unanimous in the wickedness. P.S. I hear since that Hicks is dead; but that he lived in Lon u [His informant was Mr. Stennett; see Defence,' chapter VIII. don many years after this; and that the foresaid CHAP. accusation was not made good against him; but that king Charles II, upon a hearing of his case in Year after council, discharged him. the apo stles. The number of them had been considerably 1560. abated upon the restauration, and the resettling of the church of England. Many at that time returned to the church, and brought the children which they had had in the mean time, to be baptized according to the order thereof. And during the remainder of king Charles' reign the number of them stood much at a stay, or rather decreased; but since late times of general liberty and tolera- 1587. tion, they have increased again. In some of the counties of England they are the most numerous of any sort of men that do separate from the established church. This is chiefly in the east parts; Essex, Kent, Sussex, Surrey, &c. There are very few in those parts that make any separation from the church, but they. Which is the occasion that I, as I am placed in those parts, have the more minded what I have read in any ancient book relating to that question; from whence have sprung the notes that make the first part of this work. In other parts of England they are much over-numbered by the Quakers. There are also great numbers of them in London and the suburbs. And it is observed from some late passages, that the presbyterians look as if they would court their friendship, and as if they aimed to add this stick also to the other two. Their tenets are, besides the denying infants' baptism, these: * [He was at this time vicar of Shoreham in Kent.] СНАР. VIII. the apo stles. 1. They do many of them hold it necessary, as I said, to renounce communion with all Christians that Year after are not of their way. Many of them are so peremptory in this, that if they be in the chamber of a sick man, and any pædobaptist, minister or other, come in to pray with him, they will go out of the room. And if they be invited to the funeral of any pædobaptist, they will go to the house, and accompany the corpse with the rest of the people to the church door: but there they retreat; they call it the Steeple-house. They seem to judge thus: those that are not baptized are no Christians, and none are baptized but themselves. So they make not only baptism itself, but also the time, or age, or way of receiving it, a fundamental. It is strange to see how deeply this principle of division is rooted in some of them by the care that many of their teachers take to cultivate it. If any one that has been one of them, be afterward prevailed on to go ordinarily to church, and hold communion in all things that he can, though he keep still his opinion of antipædobaptism, they of them that are of this principle bemoan him as a lost man; and speak of him as we should do of one that had turned an apostate from the Christian religion. If any man, being not satisfied with the baptism he received in infancy, do desire to be baptized again by them, but do at the same time declare that he means to keep communion with the established church in all things that in conscience he can; there are (or at least have been) several of their elders that will not baptize such a man. To renounce the Devil and all his works,' &c. has been always required of persons to be baptized into the Christian religion; but to 6 |