The GrindletoniansRoger Brerely, John Webster, Robert TowneJustine DarlingSubmitted in partial fulfillment of therequirements for the degreeof Doctor of Philosophyin the Graduate School of Arts and SciencesColumbia University 1986

ABSTRACT

An analysis of the theologies of three Puritan ministers accused of holding "Grindletonian" doctrine, of the charges of erroneous opinions made against them, and of the religious background of the congregations to which they ministered, results in a definition of what was identified as "Grindletonianism" in seventeenth century England. "Grindletonianism" is seen to be a part of a larger antinomian movement which exaggerated some aspects of Calvinist doctrine in defense against the encroachments of Arminianism in the Established Church. The rationale for antinomianism in the larger movement was the unconditional character of "free grace." The "Grindletonians" were distinguished by a different concept of regeneration which identified the believer with Christ himself.

Two sources of a similar paradigm of doctrines appear to have converged; the first drawn from the mystical theology of John Everard by the ministers, and the other drawn from old Lollard and Familist tenets which, it is speculated, were carried in the religious life of the congregations. These doctrines were imposed on a Calvinist base which included the concepts of predestination, unconditional election, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In the "Grindletonian" paradigm, the "old man" is completely destroyed and the elect soul becomes a new creature, identified with Christ, and "begodded."

The distinctive constellation of "Grindletonian" doctrines is shown to form a link, both geographically and theologically, with the early Quakers "convinced" by George Fox in 1652 "Grindletonian" doctrine appears also to be the source of the "erroneous opinions" of Anne Hutchinson, who was banished from the Massachusetts colony in New England in 1638.

INTRODUCTION

Grindleton is a small parish in the northern part of England at the foot of Pendle Hill,. George Fox's mountain of vision. Trouble began there about 1618 when Roger Brerely, the "perpetual curate"1 of Grindleton, was charged with heresy. After long investigation and legal proceedings, Brerely was declared innocent of the charges by Archbishop Toby Matthew and he was publicly exonerated in 1628. Apparently Brerely continued to preach controversial doctrine during the years in which he was involved in litigation. Among the fifty allegations brought against Brerely in 1618 was the assertion that he and his Independent congregation "are of the belief that the Child of

God in the power of grace doth perform every duty so well that to ask pardon for falling, either in matter or manner is a sin."1 The basic charge against both Brerely and his congregation, then, was antinomianism. The rationale behind Brerely's antinomianism was the belief in the primacy of the Spirit in matters of religious authority. This was, of course, inimical to both Anglican and Puritan doctrine because Brerely set the authority of the Spirit not only over that of ecclesiastical authority, but over that of both Scripture and Reason. He was an outstandingly effective preacher and his influence appears to have been great in the parishes surrounding Grindleton. A curious fact, in light of the allegations against both Brerely and his "hearers" is mentioned in contemporary writings of the period--that there were among his congregations people "more advanced" than he.2

Perpetual Curate, a clerk nominated by the Impropriator of a benefice and licensed by the Bishop. Here the origins go back to very early times and are found in the practice of appropriating parish churches to monasteries which was frequent on one pretext or another from at least the early thirteenth century. When a monastery became Impropriator, and the church was appropriated to the monastery, the monastery assumed the position of both patron and rector, took the endowments and all forms of income of the church including particularly the rectorial or greater tithes and supplied (often if12not usually) from its own members a "Curate" for whose stipend etc. it became responsible, although this did not always allow him to enjoy the 'minor' or Vicarial tithes. But after the Dissolution of the Monasteries, the lands and moneys of the religious houses passed to lay holders, and in many parishes this meant that the new holder of the monastic lands became patron and Rector of the parish church; although a layman he was impropriator, and as such was entitled and indeed bound, to nominate a "Curate" who then needed only the license of a Bishop. Such a Curate was in a sense 'perpetual' for he was not removable by the Impropriator, but only by withdrawal of his licence by the Bishop. J. S. Purvis, An Introduction to Ecclesiastical Records. (London: St. Anthony's Press, 1953) p. 18

The Grindletonian movement, however, extended beyond Brerely. His spiritual successor was John Webster, who became Curate of Kildwick in 1634 and was "converted" by Brerely in 1635.1 Webster in turn influenced and was influenced by William Erbery. Robert Towne, another important figure in the area, was accused of Grindletonianism in 1640. Curate of various parishes in the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire, he taught that "if men believe sin and death and curse to be abolished, they are abolished. They that believe on Christ are no sim;ers." Towne goes on to ask, "Are we for this Familists?2 Then Luther is a Familist. To faith there is no sin, nor any unclean heart." 3

The problem of analyzing the theological positions of the three Puritan ministers who were accused of being Grindletonians is immensely complicated by the eclectic religious climate of the period. One must consider the indigenous religious tradition inherent in the survival of Lollardy, strongest in the north of England, a ubiquitous millenarianism with strong Joachimite elements, and the overall impact of an English Bible now generally available and accessible to the most humble Englishman. Acting as a catalyst in this religious climate was the first powerful thrust of Reformation thought flowing into England in a wave of newly printed theological treatises by Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and their followers, all quickly translated into the vernacular by English sympathizers of the great Reformers. It is probable that

in the process of translation, many of the concepts of the original authors were simultaneously "anglicized." And equally important for the analysis of the thought of this particular group of sectarians, we must examine the influence -f the Anabaptist groups that had found refuge in a newly reformed England during the latter part of the sixteenth century, bringing with them the ideas of Caspar Schwenckfeld, John Denck, Sebastian Castellio, and, later, the ideas of Jacob Boehme, Paracelsus, and many other innovative thinkers of the latter part of the sixteenth and the early years of the seventeenth centuries.

1Geoffrey Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1946) p. 178.

2Members of the Anabaptist sect of "The Family of Love" were called "Familists." For a detailed discussion see page 122 of this study.

3Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas' during the English Revolution (New York: Viking Press, 1972, p. 173.

During the years from 1633 to 1642, all of the above groups and doctrines were being suppressed as heretical by Archbishop Laud's High Commission, and the persecution of adherents of these doctrines became increasingly severe under Laud until the very eve of the civil war in 1640. In the underground "conventicles" of religious groups in the early 1600's, non-conformity to the Church of England was in itself a unifying factor which concealed the basic conflict of the religious views held among their members. It was therefore a milieu conducive not only to the fusion but to the confusion of religious ideas.

Nor was there any doctrinal accord within any of the particular sects, for a man might embrace some of the concepts and dispute others. For this reason we must not consider the Grindletonians as a sect with a rigid set of doctrines, but rather consider the existence of a "Grindletonian position" which appears to be a coherent theological statement of the authority of the Holy Spirit and its corollary relationship of grace and works.

The Scholarly DebateTheodor Sippell, in a 1920 study of Quaker antecedents, asserts that the contents of Brerely's sermons offer a great surprise: "it is a pure, unadulterated Lutheran preaching of grace, altogether free of all Calvinist or Melancthonian, and also of antinomian coloring." 1 Sippell speculates that certain Seeker groups in Westmorland, a county just north of Lancashire, where Pendle Hill is located, form the immediate antecedents of the Quakers and might be identified with the Grindletonians.2 If so, they would provide a direct link, he asserts, between Luther and George Fox. Sippell is "puzzled" by evidence of the mysticism of the thought of John Everard on that of Roger Brerely, and notes that the element of pietism in Brerely's thought anticipates by two generations the introduction of the pietistic movement in continental Europe.

1Theodor Sippell, Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums, Mit einem Vorwort von D. Friedrich Loofs. Studien zur Geschichte des Neueren Protestantismus herausgegeben von Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann and Prof. D. Leopold Zscharnack. Volume 12-14. (Geissen: Verlag von Alfred Topelmann, 1920) p. 5.

2Seekers were alienated groups of Englishmen, who in the seventeenth century, repudiated all forms of religious ceremonies and sacraments, awaiting a new dispensation that would be closer to the Gospel forms.6More recently, Geoffrey Nuttall has put forth his regional evidence of the connection between the Grindletonians and the Westmorland Seekers who were absorbed into Quakerism. He isolates three distinct groups in his theory of the development of the type of radical religion from which Quakerism was born, tracing the origin to the radical dissent of late sixteenth-century Puritans in the northern counties of England. The three groups he has isolated are(a) Wigginton and Wilson; (b) Brerely, Webster, and Towne; and (c) Thomas and Christopher Taylor, who were among the first Quakers to be "convinced" by George Fox. William Braithwaite, the distinguished Quaker scholar, has also suggested that the Grindletonians may be identified with the Westmorland Seekers and thus is in accord with Theodor Sippell and with the sequence supported by Geoffrey Nuttall.

It will be our task to test these theories by analyzing the theological basis of the charges made against the so-called "Grindletonians" and to examine the available literature which represents the thought of the three ministers most closely associated with what was called "Grindletonianism." By developing a definition of this position, we will best be able to affirm or deny the theories of these scholars.I7

ThesesIn seventeenth-century England, Roger Brerely, Robert Towne, and John Webster, as well as John Saltmarsh and others, were accused of having "Grindletonian" tendencies. Governor.Winthrop banished Anne Hutchinson from the Massachusetts colony in 1638 for having been influenced by "Grindletonian" tendencies. Who were the Grindletonians? What made their tenets distinctive from those of other sects, and from whence did they come? This study is an effort to identify the particular constellation of doctrines which were labeled "Grindletonian" in seventeenth-century England and New England by analyzing the major printed works of the above three English ministers and an attempt to place the movement within the complex religious and theological context of the times.Through this analysis, we believe the evidence will reveal that the Grindletonian position was a development within Puritanism in which the concept of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the elect generated the development of an ecstatic type of religion which encouraged an identification with Christ himself, leading to perfectionist and antinomian doctrines. We will strive for a definition of the Grindletonian position.We believe also that the Grindletonians were a part of a larger antinomian movement, but a part distinguished by spiritualist tendencies drawn from the mystical theology of John Everard, as well as from certain Familist doctrines which appear to have prevailed in8

the northern counties of England in the seventeenth century. Evidence will reveal that the basis of the Grindletonian position is Calvinist, but with a predilection for exaggerating various Calvinist tenets.In the course of our analysis, it will be apparent that while the Lutheran doctrine of grace and the "simultaneity of opposites" forms the basis for the antinomian position in the larger movement and in the thought of Robert Towne, a different concept of regeneration forms the basis of the antinomian position in the thought of Roger Brerely and John Webster.And finally, we believe that the Grindletonians form both a geographical and a theological link between radical Puritanism and the early Quakers.9CHAPTER IHISTORIC BACKGROUNDThe Development of PuritanismBecause of the torrent of doctrines pouring into England by 1530, it is extremely difficult to compartmentalize Lutheran, Zwinglian and Calvinist thought as these doctrines penetrated into English religious life. Indeed if there is one characteristic common to English sectarianism, it might be eclecticism. But Puritan thought does reveal several distinctive strands which should be borne in mind for further analysis, particularly in view of Sippell's assertions concerning the importance of Lutheran theology during these years in England. There is little doubt that the initial thrust of Reformation thought in England was Lutheran, but it was not long thereafter that evidence of Zwinglian influence is revealed. In Tyndale's theology, this Zwinglian characteristic paralleled Lollard ideas, particularly in regard to the anti-ceremonial polemic, the sacramentarian view of the sacraments as "signs," and the corollary denial of the doctrine of transubstantiation. Wyclif had asserted the sole authority of Scripture and the Augustinian doctrine of predestination.10Thomas More accused Tyndale of the heresy of psychopannychism, or the sleep of the soul after death, but Tyndale replied that he was agnostic on this issue, blaming Joye's translation, in which he (Joye) substituted "life after this life" for "resurrection." The doctrine of the sleep of the soul after death pending-the resurrection was rather widely held during the Reformation period as the Italian substitute for German solafideism and Swiss predestinarianism over against the Roman Catholic doctrines of Purgatory and the efficacy of indulgences, according to George Huntston Williams. Williams asserts that this doctrine was also held by Michael Servetus and by Martin Luther for a portion of his reforming career, if somewhatambiguously.1The most influential of the early English Protestant works was a translation of The Summe of the Holye Scripture, "the most complete compend of Protestant theology to appear in English during the time of the early Henrician exiles," by Simon Fish, an associate of William Tyndale.2 The origin of the book is unknown, but there are sections from Luther, other sections from 0ecalampadius, and it has been argued that the original author was William Farel.3Here too, Clebsch has identified the influence of Reformed

1George Huntston Williams, The Radical Reformation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962) p. 24.

2William A. Clebsch. England's Earliest Protestants, 1520-1535 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1964) p. 246.

31bid., p. 245.11theology. Summe of Scripture appeared in two editions about 1535, published by Robert Redman, and other editions quickly followed in 1547, 1548, and about 1550, evidence of wide circulation throughout England. The effect of this book, Clebsch asserts, was to turn the face of English Protestantism away from Wittenberg toward Geneva andStrasbourg.l The Summe of Scripture insisted upon justification by faith as strongly as Luther had, but it taught that justification was verified by the high moral life of the believer. Thus English Protestantism came very quickly under the influence of Reformed theology, and the concept that a good life provided assurance of election remained dominant in English religion.Vestiarian ControversiesA more direct link between Roger Brerely and Reformed theology may be found in the vestiarian controversies in which his schoolmasters, the Midgelys, both father and son, were involved. An early leader of the Puritans in this continuing dispute was John Hooper (d 1555), a former Cistercian, who was converted by reading the works of Zwingli and Bullinger.2 Returning to England after the second Henrician exile (1539 - 1546/7) with other Reformers who had taken refuge in Europe, Hooper, who had spent a considerable amount of1Cle5sch, England's Earliest Protestants, 1520-1535 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1964) p. 248.2Dictionary of National Biography. Reprinted1959-60) s.v. "Hooper, John," by George C. Perry, pp. 1198-1200.12time in Zurich under Zwingli and Bullinger, assumed leadership of the more radical reform party in England. All the Reformers agreed on the necessity of abolishing specifically Roman Catholic institutions such as the doctrine of transubstantiation and clerical celibacy,and their efforts appeared to be successful during the first two years of the reign of Edward VI. Hooper was the leader of a group that resisted the wearing of clerical robes for religious services because such attire appeared to deny the Reformation doctrine of the priesthood of the people. Hooper also frowned upon the custom of kneeling during the communion since this practice was associated with the Roman Catholic duc'r:rine of transubstantiation. The practice of sitting or standing during the Communion ceremony was advocated by Hooper in these controversies with the more moderate Anglican clerics of the Edwardian Reformation. He was supported in this by another Zwinglian, John a Lasco, pastor of the Foreigner's Church in London, and by Bullinger himself. The Anglicans held that these matters were adiaphora, "things indifferent," but the more radical Reformers were

determined to eliminate from the English church all ritual and ceremonial associated with the "papists".In this they were supported by still another Zwinglian, John Knox, whose more radical reform was sweeping Scotland. Knox and his supporters, including Hooper, were eventually successful in revising the Forty Two Articles of the English Creed of the year 1550 insofar as kneeling at the Communion was concerned, for while the custom of . kneeling was retained, an explanatory declaration was inserted stating13 that the action in question did not imply any belief in the doctrine

of transubstantiation. This was the the so-called "Black Rubric."l Hooper himself was finally convinced to wear vestments as "things indifferent" after spending several weeks in prison, and was afterwards consecrated as Bishop of Gloucester on 8 March, 1551, attired in full episcopal robes.2During the short-lived reign of Edward VI, the Zwinglian forms of church organization were developed by John a Lasco, a close friend of Hooper's, in his London church. The communion service was Zwinglian and the sermon took on greater prominence. Zwingli's liturgy of the Lord's Supper was first used on Easter 1525 in Zurich. Anticipating the simplicity of future Seeker and Quaker meetings,

Zwingli resolved to create a liturgy which would accommodate his idea of contemplatio. What were chiefly required were stillness and repose, so that the worshipper need suffer no distraction but could fix his mind in the contemplation of Calvary, to which all Christian faith referred. Thus, there was no music, no speech, except the reading of Scripture. Instead of going forward to . communicate, the people did not stir from their seats. The elements were brought down from the table in wooden plates andcups and delivered to the people where they sat. Each communicated and passed the elements to his neighbor. None stirred, no one disturbed the monumental stillness of the Zwinglian Eucharist.31Powel Mills Dawley, John Whitgift and the English Reformation (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1954) footnote 49, p. 58.2DNB, s.v. "Hooper, John," by George C. Perry, p. 1199.

3Bard Thompson, "Ulrich Zwingli", in Reformers in Profile, ed. B. A. Gerrish. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967) p. 130.14 Prophesyings

During the week, in a Lasco's church, there were two gatherings for spiritual edification, called "prophesyings," so called from the Pauline use of the term. These meetings assumed greater importance under Edmund Grindal's term as Archbishop of Canterbury (1576-1583), when they formed the chief instrument for adult education among the Puritans.

An 'exercise of prophecy' was a kind of public conference in the form of two or three sermons, preached in succession on the same text, approached in the course of systematic exposition of some part of Scripture or of some commonplaces in divinity by a company of ministers meeting under a

moderator, to whom it fell to summarize and wind up proceedings. Afterwards there was a formal 'censure' both of the doctrine preached and of the lives and faults of the members in the context of a conference private to the ministers. As large assemblies, asserting the social ascendancy of protestantism, the prophesyings attracted hostility and were more than once denounced at court. In 1577 they came under the queen's personal and immediate ban, after Archbishop Grindal had declinid to convey to his suffragans an order for their suppression.

This type of exercise had been pioneered in Zurich and was probably more influential than the congregational prophesyings held at a Lasco's church, since that of the ministers evolved eventually into the classis and synods of Presbyterianism. In English Puritanism the prophesyings as a type of dialogue were replaced by the practice of 'repetition' as a method of inculcating certain concepts in the training of ministers.

The need for improvement of religious education was evident inPatrick Collinson, Godly People, Essays on English Protestantism and Puritanism (London: Hambledon Press, 1983)p. 473.115Hooper's day as the records show. While Cranmer made provision for securing a learned and preaching clergy, the most vigorous efforts were Hooper's. Records reveal astounding confessions of ignorance among the clergy of his dioceses.

Out of three hundred and eleven clergy, one hundred seventy-one were unable to repeat the Ten Commandments, and thirty-three of these did not know where they were to be found. Thirty could not tell where the Lord's Prayer was written, and twenty-seven of them could not name its author. Ten could not even say it. 1By the spring of 1553 the Puritans, while still a left wing movement within the established church, appeared to be making progress. The 1552 Prayer Book revealed the increasing influence of Zwinglian thought. In that book the alb and the chasuble were quietly eliminated and the sacrament took on a Zwinglian form. But by late spring, young Edward VI was dead of tuberculosis, and in July of 1553 Mary Tudor took the throne. From that moment, for the next five years, Protestantism was identified with treason, and Protestants and Catholics exchanged places.

The Marian Exile

In one of the bloodiest periods of English history, the leaders of the Puritan movement were imprisoned-and most often executed during Mary's short reign (1553-1558). Anglicans and Puritans moved closer in the common threat from the Roman Catholic "Terror." Over eight hundred English Protestants

sought refuge from the persecutions in Europe, where Anglicans and Puritans often continued their1Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, A Chapter in the Historyof Idealism. (Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1963) p. 100.16 contentions in the refugee churches.

Puritans had found a sympathetic ear and a hospitable host in Zwingli's Zurich during the Henrician exile, but the Marian exile was primarily in Calvin's Geneva. Something like a quarter of all the English religious exiles came under Genevan influence. One refugee called Geneva the "holy city." Knox considered it "the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of theApostles."l Calvinist literature on predestination was translated into English and the Geneva Bible was printed, with all the marginal comments against bishops, doctors, bachelors, and masters. Calvin's Geneva

In Geneva, the English Puritans imbibed some of the distinctive emphases which characterize Brerely's sermons. As true Protestants, they subscribed to Luther's doctrine of justification by faith, but in Geneva the definition of faith was somewhat broadened to emphasize the role of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, we now hear of a religion of the "heart," for Calvin had translated the Latin anima into French as Coeur.

Therefore our mind must be otherwise illumined and our heart strengthened, that the word of God may obtain full faith among us.1Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 136.2John T. McNeill, The History and Character of Calvinism, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954) p. 116, p. 108.17

Now we shall possess a right definition of faith if we call it a firm and certain knowledge of God's benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to lur minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy Spirit.

For Calvin, the work of the Spirit precedes and engenders faith. It is not in the power of fallen man to believe or to have faith without the help of God's Spirit. We will recognize this concept later in the thought of those charged with antinomianism and will perceive that this concept represents a rather strict adherence to Calvin's own doctrine. Calvin explains further:

But our mind has such an inclination to vanity that it can never cleave fast to the truth of God; and it has such a dullness that it is always blind to the light of God's truth. Accordingly, without the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the Word can do nothing. From this also it is clear that faith is much higher than human understanding. And it will not be enough for the mind to be illumined by the Spirit of God unless the heart is also strengthened and supported by his power. In this matter the Schoolmen go completely astray, who in

considering faith identify it with a bare and simple assent arising out of knowledge, and leave out confidence and assurance of heart. In both ways therefore, faith is a singular gift of God, both in that the mind of man is purged so as to be able to taste the truth of God and that his heart is established therein. For the Spirit is not only the initiator of Faith, but increases t by degrees, until by it he leads us to the kingdom of heaven.

The word of God, as contained in the Scriptures, cannot be effective without the illumination of the Spirit. This Calvinist concept, when taken apart from Calvin's ecclesiology, was the basis of the1John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion.Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. 2 vols. The Library of Christian Classics, Volume XX (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960) Volume I, Book III, Chapter II, verse 7, p. 551.

2lbid., Volume I, Book III, Chapter II, verse 33, pp. 580-581.18Grindletonian doctrine of the authority of the Spirit in the interpretation of Scripture. Calvin, however, had adopted the Augustinian concept of a visible church in Geneva.

In no doctrine is Calvinist theology more distinctive than in the claim to double predestination. John McNeill explains that for Calvin

.. . not all men share in the salvation of God. It is a gift which he bestows on some and withholds from others by his inscrutable will, without regard to any man's worthiness. Calvin is far from original in this. He stands at the culmination of a resurgence of Augustinian theology that had been represented by such men as Thomas Bradwardine (d. 1349) and Gregory of Rimini (d. 1358) as well as by Wyclif, Huss, and Luther. His doctrine of predestination goes somewhat beyond that of Augustine but, essentially, hardly beyond that of Gregory of Rimini, except in the fact that it is supported with a greater array of Scriptural texts. Calvin's observation of life as well as his searching of Scripture led him to conceive of the destiny of each man as determined by a divine decree by which before time began, each was appointed to salvation or damnation.

Fear of the "dread decree" led the Puritans to seek the assurance of election, but the uncertainty of one's fate created a sense of insecurity and anxiety that provoked many a theological debate. Yet for Calvin, the Holy Spirit communicates this assurance:

Therefore the Spirit accordingly serves as a seal, to seal upon our hearts those very promises, the certainty of which he has previously impressed on our minds, and takes the place of a guarantee to confirm and establish them. "After that ye believed ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of prrise, which is the guarantee of our inheritance." Eph. 1:13.1John Calvin. On the Christian Faith: Selections from the Institutes, Commentaries and Tracts. Ed. John T. McNeill.

(Indianapolis and New York: Hobbs Merrill Company, Inc., 1957) p. xxii.

2Calvin, Institutes, Volume I, Book III_, Chapter II, verse 36,' p. 584.19But even with such assurance, the Puritans faced persecution and the exigencies of the situation compelled the Reformed or Puritan party in England to have temporary recourse to a kind of congregationalism. Secret meetings were held, "conventicles," and when ordained men were not available, laymen. took their place. The Edwardian form of service, much influenced by Reformed doctrine, was used. Thus a precedent was established for practices in which radical religious thought might develop.Elizabethan HostilityIn 1558 Elizabeth I, a practical monarch, ascended the throne. It soon became apparent that the Puritans would fare no better under her regime than they had under that of her father, Henry VIII. To exacerbate matters further, Knox had written a tract in 1556 asserting that women should not be rulers, and so.he was denied admission to England, lest, in the words of Bishop Aylmer, the "pocky Frenchman" (Calvin) and the "scurvy Scot" (Knox) despoil the realm.lSome of the more radical reformers were offered bishoprics, but the conditions for acceptance included the obligation to wear the clerical costume and to enforce its use by subordinates. The vestiarian disputes involved a question of authority as well as theology. The returning Geneva group debated whether to boycott the Queen or to accept her appointment, rationalizing that were they to1Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 174.20refuse, inferior ministers might be appointed in their stead. In the end, the Puritans agreed that the clerical attire might be regarded as "things indifferent" and took the posts. Puritans like Parker and Cox took office in the new government, and Sandys, Grindal, Jewel, and even Parkhurst eventually did the same. Once installed, they tended to lose their more radical Puritan views, although occasionally they might be involved in a dispute with their more conservative colleagues. Among the more radical ministers, however, the newly revived vestiarian controversy continued, and these new bishops were inclined to "wink" at some of the accusations of the Anglicans regarding the omission of ceremonial attire by Puritan ministers, unless under pressure of orders from the queen. Parker, for instance, did not enforce the laws against either the Catholics or the Puritans.The Advertisements enforcing uniform clerical attire and the forced subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 continued to be a bone of contention to the Puritans. In 1566, one hundred and ten ministers were summoned and thirty seven were suspended from their positions and their incomes sequestered for infractions. In the same year a certain Robert Crowley published A Brief Discourse Against the Outwarde Apparell and Ministering Garments of the Popishe Church, which provided an explanation of Puritan antipathy to clerical robes but at the same time advocated passive resistance rather than open controversy for attaining the Puritan objectives. Crowley's critique was answered by Parker in A Brief Examination for the

Tyme of a Certain Declaration Lately Put in Print, in which Parker asserted that21the act of an individual priest in disobeying an order of the Queen was to reject the biblical doctrine of the royal supremacy.1 A decreewas secured in Council forbidding the publication of anything directed against the laws of the realm, the Queen's injunctions, or the ordinances of the commission.2 In 1570, the Pope excommunicated the Queen and absolved her subjects from their allegiance to her. Jesuits from the Continent traveled through England, passed on in disguise from village to village, hiding in 'priest-holes' behind the wainscot, hoping to infuse into old English Catholicism the new zeal of the European Counter-Reformation. But the threat of militant Roman Catholicism made the Protestant cause more attractive in England and aided the spread of Puritanism. The Protestant religion became identified with patriotism in the minds of Englishmen.There were Protestant martyrs as well as Catholic ones during this period, as Elizabeth pursued her "middle course" of religious moderation. Puritan controversialists like Penry, alleged author of the Marprelate tracts, Barrow, and Greenwood, were hanged as seditionists (1590-1593) and Thomas Cartwright was imprisoned. Wilson and Wigginton, two radical Puritans whom Geoffrey Nuttall has isolated, as the first in his sequence of ministers in the north of England, were imprisoned during this period.1Knappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 199. 2Ibid., p. 199-200.22 The Elizabethan High Commission

The most influential method Elizabeth employed in order tomaintain this middle course was the hearings of the High Commission.

The High Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical were empowered by the Act of Supremacy (I Elizabeth c.1) to undertake the enforcement of any ecclesiastical discipline that might be required. The result was the establishment of a court under the presidency of the Archbishop of Canterbury armed with powers to fine and imprison not wielded by ordinary church courts. The court had jurisdiction throughout the whole of the country, although it did not normally concern itself with the northern province.1Due to some peculiarities in ecclesiastical jurisdictions, however, the Archbishop of York was never able to use the High Commission to establish his own authority in his diocese. The advantage of the High Commission's powers lay in its ability to use secular sanctions to enforce church law, and in its ability to pursue a delinquent from one ecclesiastical jurisdiction to another. And the power of the High Commission was such, that even bishops were obliged to obey its orders.

The Puritans and Cambridge

A significant period of Puritan development took place in the latter part of Elizabeth's reign, aided in large part by the stream of well-educated Puritan

ministers and preachers turned out by Cambridge University, particularly from Christ's College.Ronald A. Marchant, The Church Under the Law. Justice, Administration and Discipline in the Diocese of York, 1560-1640 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969) p. 33-34.123Puritanism at Christ's owed its rise not to the Masters, but to the quality of its Fellows. H. C. Porter explains that in the Elizabethan period, Fellows at Cambridge were "tutors," in loco parentis, to an extent unknown today. A don might have from one to twenty pupils, boys who lived with him, paid him directly and were entirely controlled by him.1Edward Dering was a Fellow at Christ's from 1560 to 1571, Laurence Chaderton in 1568, Richard Rogers in 1566, Arthur Hildersham in 1570, Francis Johnson matriculated in 1579. William Perkins and Francis Johnson were elected Fellows in 1574, and Perkins remained a Fellow until 1595 when he married. Durinr, his years at Cambridge, Perkins' was the great name at the College, and his influence was great. William Ames and Thomas Taylor were Fellows in the early years of the seventeenth century, Thomas Goodwin in 1614, and in 1622 John Milton was at Cambridge. These were the great men of Puritanism and their influence, both by their preaching and their writing, added prestige and power to the Puritan cause. All were convinced that a further alteration of the ecclesiastical system was necessary, and they were impatient to be about the business.This new generation of Cambridge Puritans took preaching seriously. It was considered a most demanding duty and a preacher was expected to devote the better part of a week in preparation for the1H. C. Porter, Reformation and Reaction in Tudor Cambridge (Cambridge: Cambridge University-Press, 1958) p. 237.24Sunday sermon. Extra clergymen, whose sole duty was preaching, were often attached to a parish. Sometimes these extra clerics preached only on Sunday, but often a sermon before the opening of the weekly market was added to their responsibilities. Gentlemen from the surrounding countryside shared the costs for the preacher's salary. Lay magistrates protected these preachers from being disturbed by the authorities, and often maintained their cause in the face of prosecution in the ecclesiastical courts. The device of special preacherships provided a way to care for non-conformist and deprived ministers who were not able to secure a regular living. The protection of the magistrates was what saved John Webster fromprison years later, as we shall see, and may have been instrumental in the release of Brerely after his first trial in 1618. But what was most important in this development were the signs of growing support among the people, the gentry, and the magistrates for the Puritan cause over against that of the bishops.It must be remembered that all the bishops of Elizabeth's reign were Calvinist in their theology. Doctrinal differences between the Puritans and the bishops do not appear to have developed at this period. The polarization involved ecclesiology and ceremonial as well as the continuous vestiarian arguments.

The Puritans were moral reformers and were so€indalized at the increasing wealth and corruption of the Anglican bishops. There was nothing in the Reformed idea that ruled out the role of bishops. Neither Calvin nor Knox was opposed to episcopacy, but the power of the bishops was supposed to be25moderate. The New Testament had spoken of bishops, but not of "lord bishops."

The high moral tone of Puritanism created a gulf between them and the more worldly bishops. Marchant points out that

Puritanism was not only a party programme for reform, but also an ethos of a distinctive type of religion. It was a religion which sought the grace of God to turn the wayward passions of man to the somber pursuit of the will of God, by hard work, temperate habits, charitable works, the study of the Bible for 'doctrines' and 'uses,' and so to 'glorify God' and equally at the same timeto 'enjoy Him forever.' Their religion, rather than their ideas of church government was the feature that was most attractive•to their contemporaries.1The year 1572 saw the publication of An Admonition to the Parliament, a Puritan critique of the Church of England, the authors of which were subsequently apprehended and jailed. It was Whitgift who answered the Admonition in favor of the Queen's religious position, a fact which undoubtedly contributed to his appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1583 on the death of Edmund Grindal. Thus ended the period of coalition with the more advanced Puritans which Grindal had attempted on his appointment in 1576. Grindal's reforms, including the holding of meetings for "prophesying," had been suppressed by the Queen in 1577, and he himself sequestered then in the same year until his death in 1583. The "prophesyings" continued, however. In 1578 Archbishop Sandys of York ordered prophesyings held in each archdeaconry, but he called them "quarterly synods," and'Ronald A. Marchant, The Puritans and the Church Courtsin the Diocese of York 1560-1642, (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1960) pp. 14-15.26in 1580 Bishop Chaderton ordered them to be held quarterly in Chester. Secular authorities cooperated with Puritans to set up "little English Genevas" in the provinces, and granted congregations the right to choose their own ministers. Local justices of the peace supported the Puritans as magistrates began to take over some of the former ecclesiastical court functions. Lecturers began to administer the sacraments. All of these abrogations of the law took place behind the Queen's back, but when such situations came to her notice, her punitive action was swift and sure. The alliance of the Puritans with the lawyers and magistrates was a practical move for both groups, for the Puritans resented the authority of the bishops as representatives of the Queen over their religious life, and the lawyers resented the increased influence of the ecclesiastical courts over their own.With the accession of Thomas Whitgift as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1583, a direct assault on the Puritans was initiated. Preachers were required to wear

vestments and to administer the sacrament according to the Prayer Book system.A shower of petitions came forth from the Puritan clergy against Whitgift's subscription and he was summoned before the Council, with its majority of Puritans, to answer to the ministers' charges. Since Elizabeth wanted her name kept out of these controversies, the only authority for the subscription was a legal one, and procedures had to be conducted according to the law. The lawyers had not assisted the Puritans during the vestiarian disputes, but by 1583 they had been27impregnated with the new religious zeal of the radicals, primarily through the preachers retained by the Law courts. Knappen claims that

Nearly all the common lawyers were jealous of the jurisdiction of the church courts and alarmed by the growth of the prerogative courts which did not use the traditional English law and thus were a peril to their livelihood. So they were anxious to cooperate with the Puritan clergy. Since the law schools were the training grounds for the more influential of the justices of the Meace, we have already seen some of the fruits of this connection.

Issues were raised concerning the legality of the orders, especially questioning the existence of a statute permitting bishops to deprive ministers of benefices for non-subscription. In response to the accusations, Whitgift took steps to improve his disciplinary technique and abandoned the practice of punishing men for non-subscription alone. The new technique was the administration of the ex officio oath.

The Ex Officio OathThe refusal to take oaths was a custom that might be traced back to the Lollards and represented a protest against the authority of the state. The ex officio oath was not an ordinary oath, but rather, a device drawn out of Roman law, designed to prove a

suspect guilty of overt acts. 4Jhile Marchant may look benevolently on the oath, the Puritans, at the time, were irate. For Marchant

This oath had a long and respected history behind it as used in the church courts, but the essential feature of canonical discipline was that it was intended not so much to punish as to reform the offender. . . . Its primary purpose was to extract a publicKnappen, Tudor Puritanism, p. 270.128

confession of guilt, an expression of contrition, a profession of reformation and incidentally, to serve as a warning to others.1The Archbishop proceeded to draw up twenty-four articles inquiring about the use of the surplice, the sign of the cross in baptism, the wedding ring,

churching of women, the liturgy, and the burial service. The Twenty bur Articles were to be administered to any whom the Ecclesiastical Commission chose to summon. The oath may have been grounded on precedent, but it was contrary to common law. A Brief Treatise of Oaths, by James Morice (1591 or 1592) states the common law case against the ex officio oath. The lawyers managed to find arguments against the oath, and, in addition, they found a way to

use a delaying technique so that court cases against the Puritans were long, drawn-out affairs in which the ministers were often eventually exonerated. Ample evidence of these protracted cases can be found in the records and there is little doubt that Brerely, and Towne, who endured years of litigation before their cases were settled, were similarly supported by the lawyers. Webster even dedicated his best known work to magistrates who had supported him against the accusations of his enemies. The Puritan case against the oath was that it was illegal since no provision was made for it under parliamentary statutes. The Anglicans argued that after the Act

of Supremacy, the church courts drew their authority directly from the Queen.1Marchant, The Church Under the Law, p. 4.29

England Under James IAs the sixteenth century drew to a close, and soon thereafter the reign of Elizabeth, the Anglican party gained increasing dignity and there was a reaction against the bare coldness of the Reformed creed and service.Not all Englishmen were impressed with the Puritan protests against formalism and superstition. The customs of sitting with covered heads during the reading of the Gospel and Epistle and of sitting around a table to take communion were not especially respected. Apart from these aberrations during their services, the Puritan ministers were not all well educated. Less than a third of their ministers had university degrees. Not only that, it was also evident that the "flesh" was not always overcome among the Puritans and the spectacle of debauchery among them was not unknown.Nevertheless, attempts were being made by the Puritans to quicken the religious sensibilities of the laity by means of supplements to the ordinary services. Public fasts were occasionally ordained, which served to call the people to serious thinking and to attendance upon extra sermons. Neighboring clergy often joined in the public exercises on such occasions. Small groups began meeting together in private homes. One of the charges against Roger Brerely was that he had conducted these "conventicles" in various locations in the area surrounding Grindleton.Small groups would meet in private houses for prayer, conferences,30and mutual edification, after the manner of the ministers' "prophesyings." These "gatherings of the godly" were frequent enough to have been the origin of the English idiom, "gadding about."1 The meetings of the "godly" were not

necessarily Separatist in character, for ministers of the established church were frequently present.The Arminian ControversiesThe end of the sixteenth century saw the outbreak of the Arminian controversies, which had the effect of dividing the predominantly Calvinist English into two opposing camps.In 1589 Jacobus Arminius was appointed to reply to Direk Coornhert to defend the supralapsarian position on predestination, but in the course of studying the issue, was converted to Coornhert's position. The dispute centered around the order of the decrees. Did God decree election and reprobation, and then permit the fall as a means by which the decree could be carried out (supra lapsum)? Or did He first foresee and permit that man would fall and then decree election as the means of saving some (infra lapsum)?By 1595 the controversy broke out in Cambridge, where Peter Bare (1534-1599) was advocating the liberal doctrines of Arminius against the supralapsarian position of Perkins. The discussions at Cambridge led to the publication, under Whitgift's auspices, of the strongly Calvinist "Lambeth Articles," which, however, were never adopted.1Collinson, Godly People, p. 10.31After Arminius' death in 1609, the "Arminian" views were systematized and in 1610, under the leadership of Johann van Oldenbarneveldt (1547-1619) the "Remonstrance" was drawn up. Over against the Calvinist doctrine of absolute predestination, the Remonstrants taught a predestination based on God's foreknowledge of the use men would make of the means of grace. Against the Calvinist doctrine that Christ died for the elect only, the Remonstrants asserted that He died for all, though none received the fruit of his death except believers. The Remonstrants were in accord with the Calvinists in emphasizing the absolute inability of man to do anything of himself, and emphasized the sola gratia of classical Reformation thought. But in opposition to the doctrine of irresistible grace, the Remonstrants taught that grace may be rejected, and they declared uncertainty regarding the Calvinist teaching of the perseverance of the Saints, holding that men may lose grace once received.We are now writing of the period in which Roger Brerely, born in 1586, was reared and educated. The Arminian controversies would have been the topic of serious discussion among the English Puritans in the years in which he was being trained for the ministry. On the political horizon, polarization was beginning to set in between Anglicans and Puritans. James I ascended the English throne in 1603. In 1604 the results of the Hampton Court Conference brought no significant changes, despite the pleas of the Puritans, with the exception of the authorization of a new translation of the Bible, the "King James Version" of 1611. The Anglican victory at Hampton Court was followed32by the enactment of a series of canons which were highly objectionable to the Puritans. The leader in this movement was Bancroft, who would later succeed Whitgift as Archbishop of Canterbury (1604-1610). Bancroft was in turn succeeded by George Abbot, and it was while.Abbot was Archbishop of

Canterbury (1611-1633) that Roger Brerely and his congregation at Grindleton were charged with heresy.Under Abbot's leadership, Puritanism further developed its "lectureships," the successors of the "prophesyings." In those parishes where the legal minister was hostile or unable to preach, Puritan money sponsored afternoon preachers of a decidedly Puritan cast. Those preachers who could not in conscience administer the sacraments in the prescribed manner thus had a forum in which they could proclaim their message.To add to the polarization between Puritans and Anglicans, James published his famous Book of Sports in 1618, in which he commended the old popular games and dances for Sunday observance. To the Puritans, who had always stressed the importance of a strict observance ofSunday and who adhered to the rules set forth in Nicholas Bownde's book, The Doctrine of the Sabbath, printed in 1595, the King's book seemed a royal command to disobey God. Anglicans came more and more to be identified with royal policy. The situation was exacerbated under Charles I, who ascended the throne in 1625, and by the appointment of William Laud as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633 by Charles, an appointment that brought the situation to a head.33Lancashire and YorkshireIn the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

We have examined the historic background of the Reformation in England and the events that were important in the development of Puritanism. Let us now consider what was happening in the particular places in the north of England in which Roger Brerely and the other ministers accused of Grindletonianism lived out their lives and ministries. (See the Three Maps in Appendix II)

Under Elizabeth, the population of Yorkshire and Lancashire has been described as both poor and ignorant:

The problems confronting the Elizabethan government in the north of England were compounded from the ignorance of the inhabitants, their attachment to medieval religious ideas, and the general poverty of the area. The secular government had not only to meet the armed revolts of the Roman Catholics, but also more continuing social changes. The growth of textile and manufactures in the West Riding brought increasing prosperity to a growing population, but the industry was subject to periodic slumps. The increased activity there, and at its port of Hull, was accompanied by a decline in the traditional industrial and commercial centres of York and Beverly. Agricultural poverty, produced by the relative infertility of the soil and the large areas of forest still remaining, was dispelled in the East Riding, where the wolds were enclosed into prosperous sheep runs, but with enclosure went eviction of tenants and depopulation. The Elizabethan church was faced with the task of stamping out the last traces of the unreformed faith and with converting the members of a rapidly developing society to Anglican ways.l

Evidence of the strength of Puritanism in the north is revealed in the prosecution by the High Commission under Thomas Young, Elizabeth's first Archbishop of York, of William Whittingham, Dean of Durham;Marchant, Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 15.134

John Pilkington, Archdeacon of Durham; as well as several canons; and of Melchior Smythe, Vicar of Hessle and Hull. These notable Puritans were prosecuted in 1566-67 principally in order to compel them to wear surplice, cope, and other apparel as ordered by the Advertisements of 1564. Marchant notes that "despite Young's attempt to tread amongst the independent and conservative northerners with the delicacy of an Agag, his rule ended in disaster - the Northern Revolt of 1569.i1Young was succeeded as Archbishop of York in 1569 by Edmund Grindal, who remained in that post until he was transferred to the See of Canterbury in 1576. Grindal described the conditions in Yorkshire that he found in 1571:

Oftentimes where there are a thousand or fifteen hundred peoplein a parish, there is neither parson nor vicar, but only a stipend of seven or eight pounds for a curate.2The Victoria County History of Yorkshire notes that the reason was often the impropriation of the rectory. Other sources note that of 581 parishes reported in 1603, 336 or fifty-eight percent were impropriated.3 Grindal was a Calvinist, and his efforts at reform in Yorkshire consisted primarily of wiping out all vestiges of Roman religion, which he repressed by means of the Visitations of the High Commission and the influence of the Council of the North. On the positive side, he spent himself in efforts to educate both the clergy1Marchant, Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 16.22bid., footnote 5, p. 16. 31bid., footnote 5, p. 16.35

and the laity in the new Reformed doctrines. We have noted his efforts in encouraging the religious exercises of the synods and the "prophesyings" in his diocese. Under Grindal, forty preachers were secured from the universities for the dioceses, and we may safely assume that they were Puritans, solidly grounded in Reformed tenets. Thus a learned and preaching Puritan clergy was established in the north and a tradition of a more learned dissent was begun.

Edwin Sandys succeeded Grindal as Archbishop of York in 1576. Sandys was, like Grindal, a Calvinist, and he continued in the same work as had Grindal. Marchant notes that it was Sandys and his son Sir Edwin who were the principal agents behind Richard Hooker's

Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, and notes that "one of the keynotes of Hooker's attitude is his emphasis on law and order."1 Thus, it was those with extreme positions that suffered most under Sandys--himself a conformist at heart. Quiet non-conformity apparently was not as odious to him as those

New orators. . . rising up from among us, foolish young men, who while they despise authority, and admit of no superior, are seeking the complete oprthrow and rooting up of our whole ecclesiastical polity.

John Wilson

One of these "foolish young men" was John Wilson. Some seventeen miles to the northeast of Grindleton and Pendle Hill, in the1Marchant, Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 18. 2Ibid., p. 20.36county of Craven, lies the small parish of Kildwick, a parish in which Roger Brerely, and later, John Webster, would serve as curates. John Wilson, whom Geoffrey Nuttall mentions first in the sequence of dissenting ministers in the north, was born in Kildwick, probably during the latter years of the reign of Elizabeth. He was ordained a deacon according to the order of the Church of England, and he obtained a license from the Archbishop of York to preach at Skipton, just a few miles from Kildwick, in the same county. We first hear about him in 1586 when charges were brought against him and he appeared before Archbishop Sandys and the High Commission at York for preaching without a license. A record of his hearing before the High Commission is available and is included in Brook's account of the Lives of the Puritans.lWilson was accused of preaching without a license, despite his ordination as a deacon. In 1587, a year after Roger Brerely was born, Wilson was showing reluctance at taking an oath (probably the ex officio oath), and was accused of conducting services withoutsurplice and not according to the Book of Common Prayer. His emphasis was on preaching rather than ritual. He refused to use the sign of the cross in Baptism, and claimed to have been preaching at the will and consent of the people, rather than of the authorities. He was1Benjamin Brook,.The Lives of the Puritans. ABiographical Account of Those Divines Who Distinguished Themselves in the Cause of Religious Liberty. Under Queen Elizabeth to the Act of Uniformity in 1662. In Three Volumes. (London: Printed for . James Black, 1813) Volume I, pp. 339-355.37

accused of holding night-assemblies or conventicles, which were considered seditious, although legislation against holding such conventicles was not passed until 1593. As a result of these charges he was ordered to be excommunicated from the Kildwick church. Wilson replied;

I say it is marvellously strange dealing, that one extremity

must drive out another. Excommunication from Kildwick church must drive out the public confession before required. Will you neither suffer me to preach there nor to hear others? This is very hard dealing. God willing, I will never yield unto it . . . I was born and brought up in that parish and I am bound to attend there by the laws of the realm. Do you then sit here to Ixecute the law and will you bind me to act contrary to the law?

One of the Commission exclaimed, "Erase it, erase it, for shame! It is a thing never before heard of, that a man should be bound from attending at his own parish church."2 It was agreed then to replace the excommunication order with one forbidding Wilson to preach in Kildwick. Forbidden to preach anywhere in Yorkshire, Wilson, on being set free, frequently preached in London. After a sermon delivered in St. Michael's in Cornhill with the permission of the minister there, he was immediately silenced by the Bishop of London, and both he and the minister were excommunicated. An order was subsequently sent out to all the churches in London, both from Bishop Aylmer of London and Whitgift, the Archbishop of Canterbury, that none should preach without a license, and Wilson's name was prominent on the order, alongBrook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume I, pp. 347-348. 2Ibid., p. 348.138with several others, including Giles Wigginton, the second Puritan mentioned by Nuttall in his sequence of dissenting ministers.Wilson's answers to the charges brought against him suggest that he viewed the sacraments as symbols and signs of a spiritual reality, and had raised the function of preaching to that of a sacrament. However, what seems to have antagonized the authorities more than his doctrines in these Elizabethan hearings, was the seditious aspect of the "night assemblies" held by this early Puritan. Brought before Whitgift and questioned again, Wilson asserted that any man or woman might teach and preach to others if asked to do so, without benefit of a license. This Spiritualist doctrine did not win any friends for Wilson, and while his case was subsequently dismissed without further examination, his certificate to preach was never returned to him.The distinctive set of doctrines held by Wilson is typical of the Puritan dissent of the Elizabethan period, and while the basic Calvinism of the Puritan stance was manifest, the particular doctrines were at the same time in line with the traditional form of English dissent of Wyclif and the Lollards. In the material available to us, there is no sign of the type of "enthusiasm" characteristic of the Grindletonian position in Wilson's thought, except perhaps the notion that both men and women might preach if asked to do so. But this was not the case with Wilson's fellow preacher, Giles Wigginton, who also was teaching unorthodox doctrine in Yorkshire during the Elizabethan period.39 Giles Wigginton (1564-1597)

Giles Wigginton was born in Northamptonshire and educated at Cambridge University. He received his B.A. in 1568-69 and was subsequently elected a fellow, notwithstanding the strong opposition of his master, John Whitgift, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, who disliked Wigginton's Puritan views.

He was awarded the master's degree in 1572 and was instituted to the vicarage of Sedbergh in Yorkshire, where, eighty years later, George Fox was to have such success among the populace. Wigginton appears to have preached without any trouble until 1581, when Edwin Sandys, the Archbishop of York, wrote severely concerning his practices to his diocesan, William Chaderton, remarking "he laboureth not to build, but to pull down, and by what means he can to overthrow the state ecclesiastical."1

Whitgift persisted in his persecution of Wigginton, but Wigginton remained constant in his refusal to take the ex officio oath.

In 1584, when in London, he was appointed to preach beforethe judges in the church of St. Dunstan-in-the-West. Information of this coming to the knowledge of Archbishop Whitgift he sent a pursuivant to Wigginton in the dead of night, while he was in bed in his lodgings, who forbade him to preach, and required him to give a bond for his appearance at Lambeth the next day. Upon his appearance he was tendered an oath ex officio to answer certain articles altogether unknown to him and, on his refusal, the archbishop, after reviling and reproaching him, committed him to the Gatehouse, where he remained nine weeks all but one day. On1DNB, 1959-60 ed., s.v. "Wigginton, Giles," by Edward Irving . Carlyle.40his release he was admonished not to preach in the province without further license.?Wigginton was arrested and cited before Chaderton the following year, and, upon orders from Whitgift to Sandys, deprived of his living. Again in 1586, while visiting London, he was apprehended by one of Whitgift's pursuivants and carried before Whitgift at Lambeth, where, on refusing to take the oath again, he was committed to the White Lion prison and treated with great severity. Removed to another prison still, he was sentenced to deprivation and degradation, even though the Earls of Warwick and Huntingdon pleaded for him.

After Wigginton was released from jail in 1586, he returned to Sedbergh but was excluded from the pulpit of his former vicarage. Thereupon he began to preach in his own house and at other places, gathering large congregations to hear him. When Whitgift heard of this, Wigginton was arrested again, being released in 1588. However, within a month of his release, he was arrested again for suspicion of involvement in the Marprelate affair. Although he denied the accusation, he declined the oath, and was committed to the Gatehouse where he remained for a long period. It was during this term of imprisonment that Wigginton became acquainted with William Hacket and Edmund Coppinger, two "enthusiasts," who were soon thereafter to meet with unhappy ends-Coppinger a suicide and Hacket executed. The relationship of Wigginton with the two men is uncertain, but he is1DNB, 1959-60 ed., "Wigginton, Giles," by Carlyle.41

reported to have been the author of a pamphlet entitled "The Fool's Bolt," which was put into circulation by the two men.l Strype gives an account of Wigginton and his involvement in the Martin Marprelate affair.

Then the part of one Wigginton, a Puritan Minister, (deprived about 1587) was taken. He had been Vicar in Sedberge and Dent in the north parts, but for his insolencies and contempts against laws, and the peace of the Church, was both deprived, and deposed from his ministry, by authority of her Majesty's commission for causes ecclesiastical: but most famous for being chief counsellor to mad Racket, that stabbed one of the Queen's Council, out of his Puritanical zeal; as our histories of Queen Elizabeth's reign relate; and a book purposely writ by Dr. Cosin, about that horrible Attempt, called, Conspiracy for pretended Religion. The libeller had spoken very favourably of this Wigginton, and vIry reflectingly on the Archbishop for his proceedings with him.

Strype also tells of the libel of one, Atkinson, who was "a chief stickler for Wigginton's deprivement," and Benjamin Brook castigates Dr. Cosin, a member of the High Commission, for slanders against Wigginton. The point is that Racket was indeed "mad"--an extremist of the most pronounced type--and Wigginton's acquaintance with Racket strongly suggests complicity or at least sympathy with him. Richard Baxter makes a connection between the fanatical group led by William Racket, of which Wigginton was one, and with the Grindletonians. Of Racket's group, Baxter says that they "lived a while as wrapped up in the Spirit, and in antinomian fancies"; of the "Grundletonians" he1DNB, s.v. "Wigginton, Giles," by Carlyle.

2John Strype, M.A., The Life and Acts of John Whitgift D.D., the Third and Last Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. In Four Books. (Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1845) Volume I, pp. 584-586.42says, "I had an old, godly friend that lived near them, and went once among them, and they breathed on him as to give him the Holy Ghost."1 Baxter may, in the mid-seventeenth century, attribute so-called

"Grundletonian" tendencies to Wilson and Wigginton, but to our knowledge the designation was not extant until 1618 when Brerely and his congregation at Grindleton were brought up on the fifty charges. What Baxter undoubtedly refers to is the type of ecstatic religion, an identification with Christ himself, which was one of the characteristics of the seventeenth-century Grindletonians. Thomas Fuller describes William Hacket as "a great stickler for Geneva discipline, of cruel and violent disposition, very great with Wigginton." Of Hacket, Fuller reports that

Once he desperately took his dagger and violently struck the same into the picture of the Queen, aiming at her heart therein by proportion. He pretended also to revelations, immediate raptures and discourses with God, as also to

buffetings of Satan, atesting the truth thereof with most direful oaths and execrations.

Apparently Hacket railed against Archbishop Whitgift and other of the privy counsellors, claiming he was sent from heaven to reform the church and state, and to bring a new discipline into both.

Afterwards he gave it out that the principal spirit of the messias rested in him, and had two attendants, Edmund Coppinger (the queen's servant and one of good descent) for his prophet of mercy1Nuttall, The Holy Spirit, Appendix I, The Grindletonian Movement, p. 178.

2Thomas Fuller, The Church History of Britain from the Birth of Jesus until the year MDCCCXLV, 6 vols. RevisedBy the Rev. J. S. Brewer, M.A. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1845) Volume V, p. 159.143and Henry Arthington (a Yorkshire gentleman) for his prophet of judgment. These proclaimed out of a cart in Cheapside that Christ was come in Racket, with his fan in his hand, to purge the godly from the wicked. Next day all three were sent to Bridewell and Racket, arraigned before judges at Westminster, was condemned.1Racket was hanged, drawn, and quartered. The details of his proclamation in Cheapside are included in Fuller's account, and provide an interesting parallel to Nayler's entrance into Bristol on a donkey, proclaimed as Christ. Fuller relates how Coppinger and Arthington offered to anoint Racket as king:

According to Stow, these two persons offered to anoint Racket as king, but he, taking Coppinger by the hand, said to him, "you shall not need to anoint me, for I have been already anointed in heaven by the Holy Ghost himself!" Then Coppinger asked him what his pleasure was to be done. "Go your way, both," quoth he, "and tell them in the city that Christ Jesus is come with his fan in his hand to judge the earth; and if any man ask you where he is, tell him he lies in at Walker's house by Broden Wharf (where Racket then resided) and if they will not believe it, let them come and kill me if they can; for as truly as Christ Jesus is in heaven, so truly is he come to judge the world." Then Coppinger said it should be done forthwith and therefore went foreward, and Arthington followed; but ere he could get down the stairs, Coppinger had begun below in the house to proclaim news from heaven of exceeding great mercy - that Christ Jesus was come.2

These events, including the imprisonment of Wigginton, and the condemnation and death of Racket, took place in the year 1586, the year that Brerely was born, and over thirty years before Brerely was brought before the High Commission in 1618. Another prophetic parallel1Fuller, Church History of Britain, pp. 160-161. 2Ibid., footnote, p. 160.44

with the Grindletonians was the excommunication of many members of Wigginton's congregation for attending his meetings. Brook relates that

About one hundred and forty of Mr. Wigginton's people, for the sad crime of hearing him preach after his deprivation, were cited to appear at York and other places, at the distance of sixty or eighty miles, most of whom were excommunicated by the ecclesiastical commissioners.1Do Wilson and Wigginton stand at the beginning of a line of development that would connect them with the Grindletonians and subsequently with the first Quakers? The tradition of dissent within the northern counties of Westmorland, Yorkshire, and Lancashire is decidedly established, and the dissent is characteristically Puritan. Evidence of a spiritualist element is strongly suggested by the association of Wigginton with Racket's group, but the association appears to be tenuous.21Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume I, p. 442.

2Benjamin Brook believes that Wigginton has been much maligned by the "bigotted" historian, Dr. Cosin, and that many ofthe allegations against him, in particular those associating him with Racket, are grossly exaggerated, if not absolutely false. Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume I, pp. 427-428.45 The Northern Counties Under James I

Archbishop Sandys was succeeded by John Piers, whose short primacy of five years (1589-94) at York was marked by increased efforts to enforce conformity. But the reign of James I brought a series of Archbishops to York who were more tolerant of dissent. Piers's successor was Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York (1595-1606). Marchant notes Hutton's sympathy with the Genevan type of religion, but he was in principle in favor of tolerating both Roman Catholics and Puritans. From various sources, Marchant has compiled the following description of Hutton:

He had a distinguished career at Cambridge, holding successively the Lady Margaret and Regius Professorships of Divinity, and was Bishop of Durham from 1589 until his translation to York. Hutton was a skilled patristic scholar and it was apparently for this reason that he was sent north from Cambridge so that there could be a learned man to dispute with Roman Catholics and to convert them. He was much engaged in this task, and not unsuccessfully. Archbishop Parker described him as "a very honest, quiet and learned man (but not fit to be Bishop of London!)."1The period of toleration under Archbishop Hutton continued during the primacy of his successor, Toby Matthew (1606-1628). Matthew's primacy is of central importance not only to the religious history of Yorkshire, but also to the development of Grindletonianism and the story of Roger Brerely. Marchant writes of Matthew:Marchant, Puritans and Church Courts, footnote 1, p. 23.146

He attempted to convert Roman Catholics with every means at his disposal and was one of the central government's most trusted agents in the north, but he was not an advocate of persecution. He endeavoured to increase the pastoral efficiency of his clergy, particularly by supporting the exercises which had been established by his predecessors but which were suspected by many of the anti-Puritan party. He was a great advocate of preaching, but of plain and effective sermons, not lacking in wit, but not weighed down with a show of learning. Most of all, despite his formal attachment to the established order of the Church of England, he took no extreme measure to remove or discipline nonconformists, except in very exceptional circumstances; usually he was content to attempt to convince them by the power of argument.1Archbishop Matthew's toleration was to enable the Puritans, and in particular the Puritan preachers, to advance their cause in the north and to consolidate their position in the Church of England. It was under Matthew that Roger Brerely's preaching gained such wide influence in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and it was under Archbishop Matthew that he was exonerated of all fifty charges of heresy. Brerely not only participated in the "exercises" encouraged by Matthew, but also held "conventicles" or private meetings, which apparently were tolerated under Matthew's primacy. The continuation of the "exercises" in the tradition of the "prophesyings" of Grindal's primacy was probably the reason for the widespread dissemination of Brerely's ideas among the clergy of the area. Oliver Heywood, the leading Puritan of the next generation, wrote of the "exercises" at Halifax:Marchant,The Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 29.147All those times, for thirty years together and upwards to my coming (1650), there was a famous exercise maintained every month at halifax, whereat not only neighbour ministers preached in their turns, but strangers far and near were sent for to preach it; two sermons a day, being the last Wednesday in the month; multitudes of hearers. It's said this exercise was maintained in Dr. Favour's day who was a great friend to nonconformists, maintained two famous men as lecturers at Halifax,lwhom he shrouded under his authority and interest with the bishop.

Dr. Favour was the chaplain to Archbishop Matthew, and also the Vicar of Halifax. Evidence of other exercises in Yorkshire is not hard to find. There are references to an exercise in Leeds, in Rowley in the East Riding, and references to an exercise in Craven. Marchant believes that the list of the members of the Craven exercise as it existed in 1616 is none other than the list of letters compulsory against twelve ministers in Craven to attend court at the trial of Roger Brerely. It is important to note that the "Exercises" under Matthew's primacy were primarily designed for ministers alone.

The trial of the orthodoxy of Roger Brearley in that and the following year, led to the issue of letters compulsory against twelve ministers (to which number another two were later added) to attend court as the first witnesses to be examined, the list being headed by Christopher Shute, Vicar of Giggleswick,

the leader of the Puritans in Craven. To obtain knowledge of Brearley's theology, what would be more natural than to call for evidence from the members of the exercise who would be familiar with his expositions of the doctrines wherein he was alleged to be heretical?2Christopher Shute, the Vicar of Giggleswick, probably presented negative evidence against Brerely at the trial, for he is mentioned1The Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 30. 2lbid., p. 31.48in one of the fifty charges against Brerely and his "hearers." (See Appendix I, Charge Number 43)

The Yorkshire exercises promoted Puritan psychology and pastoral psychology rather than issues of church order and liturgy, but in the West Riding the selection of the curate by the parishioners was initiated in a number of places because of the particular needs of the area:

The size of many parishes had compelled the erection of chapels of ease two or three or more miles away from the parish church, each served by a curate who depended almost entirely upon voluntary contributions for his stipend; Halifax, for instance, had twelve dependent chapels, Bradford three. Usually, the stipend was paid by means of a rate leviable upon all the wealthier inhabitants, and once they had agreed to pay it, it became a legal obligation which the curates could enforce in the courts. In return, the ratepayers were able to elect their curate, subject only to the right of veto exercised by the incumbent and archbishop.lOne of the favorite exercises of the Puritans was the custom of repeating the sermons preached in the church to private gatherings. Marchant mentions the incident at Beverley where the Headmaster of the Grammar School or his usher repeated the sermon preached that morning to a company of schoolboys and others, about sixty in all. Not only did they hear the sermon again, but they also sang psalms. Marchant notes three facets of Puritanism which were probably typical rather than exceptional.1The Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 31.49First, there was the close connection between the Grammar School and the Puritan preacher. Secondly, the singing of psalms by the group pointed to a possible development towards a Puritan service, in these meetings they could have the type of devotion denied to them by the Book of Common Prayer. Thirdly, their conduct to the vicar showed the members of the group were not only increasing .their piety by scriptural study, but that the meeting was providing a folus and giving a cohesion to the more militant type of Puritanism.

This "close connection between the Grammar School and the Puritan preacher" should be borne in mind in assessing the impact of the Midgeleys, father and son, both radical Puritans, on young Roger Brerely as a student in their Grammar School in Rochdale.

William Self Weeks provides us with a picture of how much these "exercises" held in Lancashire and Yorkshire meant to the people and the lengths to which they would go to attend.

Though there is little information as to Church life in Clitheroe during the early part of the seventeenth century, there is evidence of religious activity in the neighbourhood, which could hardly fail to influence religious life in Clitheroe. It appears from Nicholas Assheton's Diary that an "Exercise" was set up at Downham. This was an institution particularly favoured by the Puritans, and consisted of a Lecture or Preaching by special Ministers held on a week day, usually once a month, in which many persons resorted often from considerable distances. The following extract relating to these Puritan lectures or exercises is from the "Life of John Bruen of Bruen, Stapelford," quoted by Canon Raines in his notes to Nicholas Assheton's Diary:-

"For in those days it seemed good unto the Lord, having compassion on his people, to raise up and establish many holy exercises of religion, both in Cheshire and in Lancashire; which were kept constantly every month, and maintained worthily by the godly labours of the faithful ministers and messengers of God in those parts, and that with great and comfortable successe and fruit, for the edifying of the churches of God in knowledge, faith and obedience to the gospell."'The Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 38.50

And the writer tells us that John Bruen took "many long and sore journies, with much toyle and travell of his body, and no small cost and charge of his purse, riding early and late, in heate and cold, short dayes and foule waies, sometimes ten, sometimes twenty, sometimes thirty miles, as the distance of the place, and season of the yeare required," in order to attend such exercises.lWeeks notes that sermons were a luxury-in the seventeenth century, since only those clergymen who were licensed by the Bishops were allowed to preach to their flocks. The curate of Clitheroe, a town only a few miles from Grindleton, held no license to preach in the year 1601, probably because of his Puritan leanings. The curate, Martin Dickson, was presented to the High Commission in 1601 for not wearing the surplice, so also in 1606, an indication of his Puritan beliefs.

Puritanism was very strong among the Lancashire clergy in the latter part of Elizaabeth's reign. Halley, in his "Lancashire and its Puritanism and Nonconformity," states that on the death of Bishop Downham of Chester in 1579, "the queen accepted the policy of making Puritanism in the north, much as she disliked it, the means of opposing the advances of popery, which she had much more reason to fear," and speaking of this period, or a little later, he says, "the surplice was scarcely ever worn by the Puritan clergy of Lancashire.2What kind of service could a curate without a license conduct?

This was the situation of the Clitheroe fold under Martin Dickson, the minister of Clitheroe at the commencement of the century, who we have seen was reported "as being no preacher" which probably means he did not hold the Bishop's license to preach. By the Canons, every beneficed man not allowed to be preacher, is directed to procure sermons to be preached in his cure once a month if his living, in the opinion of the bishop,1William Self Weeks, Clitheroe in the Seventeenth-Century, Reprinted from the "Clitheroe Advertiser & Times." (Clitheroe: Advertiser and Times Co., 1928) p. 174.

2Ibid., p. 168.51

would be able to bear it. Clearly the small income of Clitheroe would not have borne this expense. Those Clergy not licensed to preach were to read some one of the Homilies set forth by authority. There were two Books of Homilies-the first was set forth in the reign of Edward VI and the contents of the second are set forth in the 35th of the Thirty-Nine Artlcles.1Sermons in the seventeenth century were very long, and a sermon of an hour and a half was commonplace. Weeks wistfully points out that it would not be possible today "to beguile the weariness" of a long sea voyage with three sermons a day of the Puritan sort, as is recorded of the passengers of the Griffin in 1633, on their way across the ocean to the Massachusetts colony.2

Weeks notes that Grindleton was a very poor benefice, and that in the Commonwealth Church Survey of about 1650, it is stated that the income was only five pounds, the interest of money given to that use.3 Weeks has described Brerely as

a man of a kindly dispositiRn, animated by a spirit of toleration not very common in his day.

By examining Brerely's writings, we too may be able to discern the kind of man we are dealing with in this first "Grindletonian."1Weeks, Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century, p. 173. 2Ibid., p. 173. 3 Ibid., p. 173. 4lbid., p. 176.Chapter IIROGER BRERELYRoger Brerely was born on August 4, 1586 in Marland, a town near Rochdale in Lancashire, of an excellent family. Educated in Archbishop Parker's famous grammar school in Rochdale, he was trained under the ministry of two strongly dissenting Puritans, Joseph Midgley and his father Richard. The Victoria History notes that Richard Midgley, former vicar of Rochdale, was involved in the vestiarian controversy of 156466, and that his son Joseph "had no surplice and his communicants received sitting."1 After his ordination, Roger Brerely became the "perpetual curate" of Grindleton, and served in the Grindleton Chapel from 1615 to 1622, years that Christopher Hill believes

were very important in the history of the Grindletonian movement. Hill believes that the movement "probably antedated Brerely and certainly survived him."1William Farrer and J. Brownhill, M.A. "The Victoria History of the County of Lancaster." The Victoria History of the Counties of England, William Page, F.S.A., ed. Institute of Historical Research. (London: Dawsons of Pall Mall, 1966). Volume II, pp. 58=61.53

The Pennine valleys and Cleveland dales, extending from Bradford to the extreme northwest of Yorkshire, provided safe refuges for religious unorthodoxy. Familism probably got a hold here in Elizabeth's reign and interest in it extended over most of the area. During Brerely's curacy, 'many go to Grindleton (from Giggleswick, seven miles away) and neglect their own parish church.' Brerely often preached outside his own parish. By 1627 opinions tending to the sect called Grindletonians' were detected within a few miles of York. Brerely moved to Kildwick in 1622, ten miles east of Grindleton. He left the dioceses altogether in 1631.Marchant writes that the district of Craven is located in the westernmost area of the county of Lancashire, reaching as far north as Giggleswick and extending eastwards nearly to the town of Bradford.

It was here that the Grindletonians arose, followers of the teaching of Roger Brerely. Brerely began his ministry as an orthodox Puritan, but later developed more mystical ideas, similar to those held by John Everard. It was these ideas which he preached for many years in Craven. In 1615 he was curate of Grindleton, but was apparently accustomed to preaching elsewhere, for he was presented for preaching without a license at Gisburn. Two years later he was brought before the High Commission charged with non conformity and with fifty erroneous propositions (probably of Antinomian tendency) taken from his teaching. The accusation of unorthodoxy could not be maintained, but his non-conformity was proved. With some persuasion, he subscribed to the three articles of Canon XXXIX and was rewarded with the grant of an official license to preach. About 1622 Brerely moved to Kildwick, where he remained undisturbed until he was involved in the anti-Puritan drive of 1627, but he weathered the storm and remained there another three years until he left the diocese. Thus it came about that a man of distinctive theology, the leader of a group of followers who undoubtedly took his doctrines to greater extremes than he did, was able to preach in Craven for a least fifteen years without being silenced.Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down, Radical Ideas During the English Revolution. (New York: Viking Press, 1972) p. 66.2Marchant, The Puritans and the Church Courts in the Diocese of York 1560-1642 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1960) p. 40.154Brerely's curacy at Kildwick was to last only until 1626 when he held a close in Castleton, the manor of Rochdale, which had belonged to his grandfather,

after which he was instituted to the living of Burnley in Lancashire, where he died in June of 1637. The Burnley register records that "Roger Brearley, minister," was buried June 13, 1637. He was married and apparently had a daughter, Alice.

Alexander Gordon, writing in the Dictionary of National Biography, casts some interesting light on the fifty allegations brought against Brerely in 1618. (The list of the fifty charges is attached as Appendix I.) Gordon notes that in a sermon preached at Paul's Cross by Stephen Denison, minister of St. Catherine Cree on February 11, 1627 and published under the title of The White Wolfe, Denison charges the 'Gringltonian familists' with holding nine points of an antinomian tendency. These nine points are repeated, he claims, from Denison by Ephraim Pagitt in his Heresiography. Pagitt is the authority given by Sir Walter Scott for the following description:

Those Grindletonians or Muggletonians in whom is theperfection of every foul and blasphemous heresy, united with such an universal practice of hypocritical assentuation as would deceive their master, even Satan himself.lThe Muggletonians were another radical group which flourished in England: they believed that the Age of the Spirit had already arrived in them. Gordon goes on to say that the nine points may possibly be a caricature of positions advanced by some of Brerely's hearers, but they bear no resemblance to his own teaching.1DNB, 1959-60 ed., s.v. "Brerely, Roger," by Alexander Gordon.55Listing the nine charges, Denison exclaimed that

. . . I would we had not Gringltonian Familists in the North partes of England which hold:

First, that the Scripture is but for novices,

Secondly, that the Sabbath is to bee observed but as a Lecture day,

Thirdly that to pray for pardon of sinne after one is assured of God's love is to offer Christ againe,

Fourthly, that their spirit is not to bee tryed by the Scripture, but the Scripture by their Spirit,

Fifthly, that we must not now goe by motives but by motions.

Sixthly, that when God comes to dwell in a man, he so fills the soule that there is no more lusting.

Seventhly, that they see no reason why Ministers should speak against the sinnes of the wicked, seeing the wicked man canne doe nothing but sinne.

Eighthly, which boast and thanke God, that they have cast off praying in their Families, repeating of Sermons and such like, long agoe.

Ninthly, which scoffe at such as make Conscience of words, with many other pernicious points.1

Gordon perceives that if Denison derived the nine points from the fifty articles mentioned by J. C. as exhibited against Brerely at

York by the High Commission, it can easily be understood that 'when he came to his trial not one of them [was] directly proved against him.'1Stephen Denison, The White Wolf, or a Sermon Preached at Paul's Crosse February 11, 1627. Wherein Faction is Unmasked and justly taxed without malice for the safetie of weake Christians. Especially the Hetheringtonian Faction growne very impudent in this Citie of late yeers is here confirmed. (London: Printed by George Miller, dwelling in Black Fryers [sic], 1627) p. 39.56

This trial must have been prior to 1628, for it was held before Archbishop Tobias Matthew, who died 29 March of that year. Matthew, a strict and exemplary prelate, sustained Brerely in the exercise of his ministry, and before leaving York he preached in the cathedral. It is certain that Brerely was not conscious of any deflection from Calvinist orthodoxy. He expressly censured Arminius (Serm.21),. 'who will needs set rules and laws to God.'He calls the heresies of Nestorius, Eutyches, &c, 'little holes in Christ's ship' (Poems, p. 46). Although his language about the second Person of the Trinity may be thought to show traces of Socinian influence, no anti-trinitarian heresy seems to have been charged upon him. Denison's most damaging point is clean contrary to Brerely's own language. He quaintly owns that 'men no angels are,' and he doubts the possibility-of perfection in the saints on earth. He is very strong against mere forms; for instance, he calls 'bread and wine a silly thing, where the heart is not led further' (Sermon 9). But he was the very opposite of a sectary and desired to remain a humble son of the church.lIt is interesting to note that Gordon perceives Brerely as the "opposite of a sectary," an orthodox Calvinist, and as one who doubted the possibility of perfection in this life. If this is true, then one wonders why he appears to have been the center of such controversy. Is it possible that Gordon may be right, but that there was another element in Brerely's doctrine that made his preaching unique and brought down on his head the ire of the established church?

Marchant notes that Brerely had at least two clerical adherents, Richard Tennant, Rector of Burnsall, who had been preaching without a license at Gisburn in the same year as Brerely (1615), and Thomas Squire, Rector of Escrick, both of whom hailed from Yorkshire. Brerely and Tennant admitted in 1627 that they had held conventicles and they1DNB, "Brerely, Roger," by Alexander Gordon57

were made to confess the names of those who had attended the secret meetings. However, no prosecutions arising from their disclosures were recorded. Marchant points out that

The relative immunity from disturbance which attended Brerely's labors during these years is more surprising when it is noticed that it was well known as early as 1618 that his preaching had attracted a select following of adherents, and in 1627 he was the subject of a denunciatory sermon at Paul's Cross. It can only be assumed that his theology was officially regarded with less concern Ilan the more militant outpourings of the orthodox Puritans.. This was, of course, exactly the policy of Archbishop Tobias Matthew in tolerating discrepancies in doctrine so long as church unity was preserved.Marchant also points out that in the Cleveland district there were references to suspicious occurrences that created the impression that there was a movement afoot which was not reconcilable with Puritanism. Several men were brought before the High Commission on different occasions for attending unlawful meetings in private houses and at conventicles, but they said they were sorry and would not attend them again. A propensity for denying one's beliefs under pressure of accusations is noted by Marchant in a quotation from Justice Hotham, and he suggests that the groups holding the unlawful meetings were not orthodox Puritans, but might have been Seekers. Could these have been Grindletonians?These prosecutions were unconnected with those concurrently made against Puritan ministers for attending private discussions together and it is most likely that the Cleveland prosecutions concerned Seekers rather than orthodox Puritans. There were no .Marchant, Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 41.158

other such prosecutions, but the reason for this lack was expressed to Fox by Justice Hotham: "all the Justices in the nation could not have stopped it with all their laws, because they would have said and doe as they commanded them, and yet kept their principle still.

The area around Woodkirk near Dewsbury, the home of James Nayler, who was born in 1618, was apparently another stronghold of non-conformity under the leadership and protection of the Saviles (John Savile, First Baron Savile of Pontefract [1556-1630]). One of the few Puritan ministers presented to the High Commission for nonconformity before 1630 was Anthony Nutter, Sir John Savile's chaplain. Nutter was seventy years old in 1619 when charged, and 74 years old in 1623 when presented. His name is listed with Roger Brerely among those charged with non-conformity by the High Commission in 1618. Like Brerely, Nutter had apparently been preaching for many years before he was presented, attracting many from the surrounding parishes to his services.2 The fact that James Nayler was born and raised in the parish of Woodkirk establishes another link between the distinctive type of radicalism prevalent in the northern counties and the development of Quakerism.

It can well be understood how the powerful support of Savile protected Nutter and his Puritan activities, and although there is no evidence to show that Savile was himself an extremist, the emergence of the congregation at Woodkirk in the fourth decade of the century as one of Independent persuasion strongly indicates that Nutter held left wing opinions. The final development to Quakerism came in the person of James Nayler and his followers from that locality.1Marchant, Puritans and the Church Courts, p. 42. 2Ibid. 31bid.59Geoffrey Nuttall makes the connection between Nayler and the possibility of a tradition that is related to the Grindletonians in the area around Woodkirk.

Before Fox converted him to Quakerism, Nayler was a. member of the Congregational church at Woodkirk, alias West Ardsley, between Wakefield and Halifax, of which the minister was Christopher Marshall. Marshall had been educated in New England, whence he took his first wife, a niece of Anne Hutchinson, whose antinomianism is attributed by Winthrop to Grindletonian influence.)

The connection with Marshall may be tenuous, since it was Marshall who played a role in the excommunication and subsequent banishment of Anne Hutchinson from the Massachusetts colony in 1637.2Among the fifty charges brought against Brerely and his congregation at York in 1618, the following are representative. A complete list appears in Appendix I.

1. A motion rising from the spirit is more to be rested in than the word itself;

2. It is a sin to believe the Word. . . without a motion of the spirit;3. The child of God in the power of grace doth perform every duty so well that to ask for pardon for failing in matter or manner is a sin;

7. The Christian assured can never commit a gross sin;

14. A soul sanctified must so aim at God's glory, as he must never think of salvation;33. A man having the spirit may read, pray or preach without any other calling whatsoever;'Geoffrey F. Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1946) pp. 179-180.

2Edmund Calamy, The Non-Conformists Memorial. Abridged and Revised by Samuel Palmer. 2nd ed. 3 vols. (London: Printed by J. Cundee for Bulton and Son, and T. Hurst, 1803) Vol. 3, p. 455.6038. Neither the preacher nor they pray for the King. . . . They know not whether he be elected or not;

46. They cannot have more joy in heaven than they have in this life by the spirit.

Such beliefs obviously presented a grave challenge to traditional Calvinism. While Hill asserts that Brereley himself speaks of mastering sin, which sets believers free from hell and death, and of the possibility of living without sin and attaining heaven in this life, we will show that the texts of Brerely's writings are ambivalent on these issues, but I believe that Alexander Gordon is closer to understanding Brerely than is Christopher Hill.2 Let us now examinethe content of the sermons, so that some of these conflicting interpretations may be resolved.

"d Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing, and Comforting Truths" Brerely's thought world is known to us from his sermons, which are contained in two extant publications:

1. A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting Truths, Edinburgh (1670)

2. A London edition of the above dated 1677 contains earlier material and includes:

a. a 70 page preface by Brierly on True Christian Libertyb. Song of the Soul's Freedom, a poem (contains Self Civil War)c. a paraphrase on Romans 7 in experiential manner

The Epistle to the Reader which serves as a Preface to A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting Truths provides a1Codex Rawlinson, Mss 399, fol. 296, the Bodleian Library, Oxford University.

1Hi11, World Turned Upside Down, p. 50.61sympathetic description of Brerely's life and "an account of the ground and rise of the word Grindletonianism, by which many men of the world, as adverse parties, styled his followers.nl The Epistle to the Reader is signed "J. C." and is attributed by some to John Camm and by others, including the Library of the British Museum, to John Cheney. "J. C." describes Breeely thus:

Concerning his life and conversation therein, it was as becamethe Gospel of Jesus Christ, and comely in the eyes of the Sons and Daughters of Sion, and beautifyl in the Street of the Citie, so that none could lay any shame thereon. As for his message that was given him for to declare to the world, it was mighty and piercing to the laying open in the very heart and conscience of man, the most secret and hidden things of dishonesty, though ne{er so closely unfolded in the deepest mystery of iniquities.

The author bears witness to the effect of Brerely's preaching

And to this I bear record, such was the penetrating power of God in his ministration that if thousands were before him and under it, in very few hours discourse, every man's several condition, whether under Light or Darknesse, should have been spoken to, layed open, bare and naked, that every one might truly have confessed in their everal conditions that the word was spoken to them in particular.Roger Brierly. A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting Truths: Clearly Deduced from Diverse Select Texts of Holy Scripture, and Practically Improves both for conviction and consolation. Being a brief Summary of Several Sermons preached at large, by that faithful and pious servant of Jesus Christ, M. Rodger Breirly, Minister of the Gospel at Grindleton in Craven. (Edinburgh: Printed for James Brown, Bookseller in Glasgow; And are to be sold at his shop about the middle of the south side of the Salt Merest street, Anno Dom. 1670) Epistle to the Reader, by J. C. [p. 3]2Ibid., [p. 5] 3lbid., [p.6]162According to "J. C.", not only he, but many others gave witness "that God was in him, of a truth."

And not only so, but mighty and powerful was his ministration in the evident demonstration of the Holy Ghost, to bear witness, in and to the desolate, weary, forlorn, hopeless, broken heart of man, sentenced unto death, of that unchangeable love in the faithful promise of th? healing covenant of God, established in, and with Jesus Christ.

People came "from several miles distant" to hear Brerely preach, some seeking in earnest a spiritual awakening, others from mere curiosity:

And this his ministration being (as I may say) in the Authority and Power of the living God, and not as the ministration that stands only in the Art, Wisdom and Eloquence of Man, to draw hearers from divers places about, several miles distant, to wait on his ministry, some in good will, hungering and thirsting and travailing in birth under the stroke of the powerful Word, until the living Seed were brought forth by the Spirit of Life in open view in their hearts, to give unto them that Bread that should endure unto eternal Life, the taste whereof made their Spirit to dance for joy and caused them to tell it out unto others what they had seen and heard and handled, that they also might come and taste of the same love of God. The Eccho [sic] and Fame whereof went out diversely abroad. Some saw and heard the wonders of God and believed, others, astonished, went away wondering, that they never heard any preach like him.1But many others came to hear what should cause such strange reports and tried to catch something that they also might report, "whereupon mistakes went abroad and great contentions stirred up, and jealousies fixed in men's minds, that some great heresie should appear.n2

The author now tells us how the term "Grindletonian" came into being, for when these troublemakers could find no error or heresy in2lbid.tBrierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, Epistle to the Reader by J. C.63 Brerely's doctrine,

being in the hearing of it silenced, that they had nothing to say against it, yet to show their minds, what good-will they bare to him in his message and to those who did embrace it, because they could not well stile them by the name of Breirlists, finding no fault in his Doctrine, they then styled his hearers by the name of Grindletonians, by a name of a town in Craven, called Grindleton, where this author did at that time exercise his ministry, thinking by this name to render them odious, and brand them for some kind of sectaries, but they could not tell what Sect to parallel them to: hence rose the name Grindletonianism.)

We note that not Brerely, but rather, his "hearers" were labeled Grindletonian, a unique situation in the annals of seventeenth-century English sectarianism, attributing odium to the congregation rather than to the preacher. The eloquent tribute to the ministry of Roger Brerely reveals some interesting aspects of his preaching. We note that, according to J. C., "God was in him, of a truth," and that his ministration was "mighty and powerful in evident demonstration of the Holy Ghost." The concept of the indwelling of God and the witness of the Spirit place Brerely among the more radical Puritans as defined by Geoffrey Nuttall, and begins to define the theological basis of what was called "Grindletonianism."

The Epistle to the Reader of the collection of sermons included in A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting

Truths, was written after his death by an admirer who may have been a Quaker. Theodor Sippell believes that the mysterious "J. C." was unquestionably a Quaker, but this is impossible to verify.Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, Epistle to the Reader by J. C.164Brerely's sermons reveal his theology. Whether or not they represent either the nature or the quality of his preaching is debatable, since the above descriptions of the power and influence he was able to effect in the northern counties seems to be contradicted by the gentleness of his written sermons. Either the fire has been edited out of the published sermons in the interest of preserving evidence of his orthodoxy for posterity, or the power of his personality was such as might imbue his words with an influence beyond the words themselves.Theology in Brerely's SermonsThe Authority of the SpiritIn Brerely's sermons, the authority of the Spirit over man's reason is manifest, "for man's wit and reason will gather a thousand errors out of God's truth, viz., when it will not be content to become a tool, but will needs comprehend

a Spiritual Truth and determine thereof according to its own Principles and Judgments.nl For Brerely, a world of absurdities then arises out of the wit of fleshly minded men, for "the Spirit leads unto all Truth." "God is Spirit," Brerely insists, and must be worshipped "in spirit and in truth" (John 4.24), trusted and loved with the spirit of our minds, else in communion with him".2Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 3. 2Ibid., p. 227.1.65Scripture is to be interpreted by the Spirit. Without the Spirit of Christ dwelling in a man, he cannot understand. Preaching against those who think worldly or book knowledge will enable them to understand the Scripture, he gives four arguments:1. For the Gospel is not understood by wisdom but by that spirit whereby it is revealed to the faith of a believer that is blind in himself and seeks wisdom from God.2. Faith only sees things not seen; if they be seen and comprehended by man, they are not of faith3. The Son that's grown wise through pride casts off the Father; but the little child walks in his hands,4. Conceit of knowledge makes man unteachable and hard-hearted; as a man that sits on high looks down to the dungeon, can see nothing there, but sitting in the dungeon looking up, sees (the) light of the sun. So a man, sitting above and looking down to the gospel as a thing under him, sees nothing. But he that sits in darknesse of his own heart and looks up to the sun sees all waiting still for the sun to shine. Though [a] man know all the mysteries of life to be in Christ, yet without Christ he knows nothing that he dare trust.to.1The Indwelling ChristWhile these sermons are primarily exhortations, animplicit spirituality leaning toward mysticism is suggested. Brerely condemns those "high contemplatives that soar above and seek Christ in Heaven and make him a high speculative Angel," but rather, assures us that Christ "is with us, like us, suffering, watching, praying, poor, judged, and reproached, and dying as we are."2 For him, Christ cares not for those "high religious ones," but for poor and contriteBrierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 112. 2Ibid.166

ones. "With these he hath fellowship and they with him." In a tender passage he explains that Christ is

ever with us in weil and woe! Thou thinks thy case singular;thou art poor, he poorer, thou wants the Father's love, so did he, thou art afflicted, so was he, thou art sick, he swate drops oft water and blood for the sick: Nay in all he was with thee.. .

In addition to the primary commandment to love God, the indwelling Christ "makes us also to partake with others, to mourn with them that mourn, bear

their infirmities, and covers sin, helps the needy, relieves the oppressed, etc.," 2

For Brerely, the indwelling Christ is synonymous with His Spirit and he uses the two concepts interchangeably. We dwell in God because Christ and his Spirit dwell in us. This indwelling is brought about in us by faith, which for Brerely is not a "reasonable persuasion," but a "powerful cleaving unto Christ." 3 For "he whose heart dwells in love, dwells in God, in nothing do we more resemble Christ."4 In a moving exposition of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5), Brerely explains the passage, Thou shalt see God:

This is not by curious comprehension but by simple believing,that is, that God would shew himself in mercie, love and wisdom to them, so that the poor and simple believing heart trulie understands the way of God and sees him in his goodnesse and God reveals secrets to them that fear him and to none else.5Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 112. 2Ibid., p. 112. 3lbid., p. 197. 4Ibid., p. 202. 5Ibid., p. 205.167 Brerely's Anthropology

Brerely holds to the very basic Lutheran and Calvinist concept of the ravages of original sin in the human soul, for "there is nothing in man but weaknesse and baseness."1 Until we confront our own helplessness and corruption and "cry out for mercie" daily, we cannot preserve our faith. Repentance is born, not out of seeing this and that action amiss, but that a man see and feel the "original fountainand guilt."2 "0 that God would give us hearts to see that misery that we might mourn in time and break off sin by repentance," Brerely exclaims.3Through God's free grace man is saved:

All men, yea every Son of Adam, through original sin and guilt of every heart, are debtors to God and bound over to death and destruction which we must pay and suffer unlesse God's mercy and free grace in Christ do free us. Rom. 3.24 4

Man's wicked heart is softened by trials, "for the salvation of God is never given but to repenting hearts that are ashamed of themselves and their own cursed and rebellious hearts."5 "Christ is only present to afflicted spirits and his love and compassion only is the stay of repenting hearts and nothing else."6 For Brerely, "Faith and all good is preserved to man in "dayly and deep humilitie, when he dayly lives in the life of Repentance."71Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Cahvincing Truths, p. 47. 2Ibid., p. 41. 3Ibid., p. 44.4Ibid., p. 51.5lbid., p. 162. 6Ibid., p. 172. 7Ibid., p. 149.68

When we are conscious of being beyond hope and reason, Christ is born in us:

So when thou art past hope and sees no Reason, then shall Christ be born to thee, for that is the fulnesse of time, and till then the fulnesse of time is not come. And we see that Christ is nothing to man till he be born in man, that the living Word of the Father live and rule in him beyond all Reason and Imagination of flesh. l

The trials and tribulations are sent by God to purge the flesh.

"God doth not take delight in afflicting his people, but rather than that they shall return to the world and delight and be deceived by the flesh, that His truth should seem a lie, He will beat and strike the flesh to the death with one crosse after another until it be subdued."2

If the crosse ly long on thee, the cause is because there is yet somme looking for help from flesh or some lust will not yield; thy stubborn heart is yet hardened by fleshly hope. For when God hath accomplished his ends, there shall freedom come.3

The purgation process is infinitely painful, for man's sinful nature permeates all his thoughts and actions. Brerely points out the tenacity of concupiscence even in the regenerate, for

when a man hath tasted of God's love and mercie and it may behath inclined to do God's will, yet there is a group of rebellious lusts and affections underneath which both darkens the light of Faith and keens man's soul in bondage and either they or we must be destroyed.Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 194. 2Ibid, p. 180. 3Ibid., p. 181. 4lbid., p. 207.169

For Brerely, believers need an abundance of purging through affliction. "The true God is found in trouble, not at the sound of musick."1 ". . . for till man be thoroughly whipt, he flies to some new shift, and God, in love, chaseth him from all holds, that he may not settle in carnality."2 For "Man would lay hold in anything rather than drown, but thus God plungeth him into the deep and then he prayes.„3

Constant prayer and constant repentance are necessary, even after our initial repentance and turning to God, lest we become secure and fall back into sin. In the following passage, Brerely, by admitting the possibility of "backsliding" after justification, seems to repudiate the charge of perfectionism which was leveled against his "hearers."

But herein it is, that our Faith is turned to a dead and fleshly security because repenting days are gone; we did repent, and felt the bitternesse of sin, but it is all removed and joy and freedom is come and thou become secure, so that

thus turns the eye from our selves and Christ too, and so repentance is hid from our hearts. Is sin less odious to God than before, or doth he more tolerate it in thee than others? Art thou not more guilty, having felt his love, to turn from him; Is not thy Pride and Self Will and Love thy security and high thought as odious to him? 4Brerely perceives "that there is in all men a rebellious will and lust, yea even in believers which it ever leads man from God into

misery and bondage.n5 By lust, Brerely means desire for material as well1Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 129. 2Ibid., p. 129. 31bid., p. 130. 4Ibid., p. 123. 51bid., p. 156.70as fleshly satisfaction,) but the "way of Christ from the first to the last in accomplishing man's redemption is in povertie, lowlinesse and deep humilitie of heart, far separated from the World and the riches and glory thereof.n2 "For all God's people are born in humility and live lowly and humblie even in the stable, that is, well pleased with anything and so advanced by God's free gift, for which they praise him."3

And in the believer in whom Christ is born,

There is an anointing from above that teacheth all things, and none can say that Jesus is the Christ but by the Holy Ghost, though we think that Jesus is the Christ and Saviour, yet we think but after the flesh, but his wonderful love, Truth, Power, bitternesse of sufferings, victory over hell and death, not known by comRrehending, but revealed to poor and miserable minds from above.

Far from preaching libertinism, Brerely exhorts believers to practice mortification, insisting that while mortification does not give life to the soul, it does serve to prevent the heart from hardening by "fleshly ease and fulnesse,"

It is good to restrain appetite, to keep out the world, to walk temperately and soberlie and diligentlie in our calling. These are good ang honest wayes to be chose, to keep under the rebellious flesh.

But he warns his hearers that mortifications in the belief that they have "life" is "most base and double dealing, for while we pretend toBrierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 142. 2Ibid., p. 30. 31bid., p. 31.4Ibid., p. 32.5Ibid., p. 155. 61bid., p. 13.171 be humble we are inwardly proud, while we seem to mourn, we laugh in

ourselves; he that deals with Christ must deal with a single mind and shut out all doors but Christ."1

Predestination and Free Will

Brerely preaches the doctrine of predestination, although he makes scant mention of the concept of "double predestination."

Our election is from this ground: God hath chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world was laid, who bath predestinated us to be adopted in Christ Jesus, according to his grace he saved us, so he chose Israel. Who can give a reason in himselfe, why God doth any good to man, but his good will and pleasure. For it is God that moves man and sets him aworking, not man God.2Against the Arminians and following both Luther and Calvin, Brerely denies man's free will:

What place then hath free will, which depends only on God's good pleasure and not on thy right use of free will. For there is no more willingnesse in thee than in others that never obeyed the truth, but it was only his good pleasure to thee. For by nature Man fights against God and would have rest any way rather than this; and loathe to commit himself to his good pleasure, but still would have a hand in his own safety and so share in the glory. But Christ takes all boasting away that Faith may live, and Man thereby: that God's pleasure may stand and Man subject thereto, that his grace may be communicated and Man praise his goodnesse.3

For Brerely the doctrine of free will "destroys faith, sets his pleasure aside and binds God, lifts up man in pride and presumption and makes him secure in a few faint endeavors of his own.n4 Brerely1Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 155. 2Ibid., p. 13. 31bid., p. 14.4Ibid., p. 14.72

asks his believers rather to rest in the "good will of God, "accepting all the manifold ills of life in patience and humility." The only possible freedom and power in man comes from the indwelling Christ,

Where then is the free will and power of-Man without Christliving in him and leading into all Truth; drawing the will of man to wait on God in subjection? All else, is but a trusting to the Wit of Nature which is alwayes blind.

Faith

For Brerely, all knowledge comes through faith,

We see then that all Knowledge comes by Faith, as suppose a man or stranger promise to ransome me (a captive). I believe he will, but I know not that he will, but only wait in faith, nor how he will do it, nor why he will, but when he makes good his word, then I know his love which he revealed to me, and I not

able to conceive in myselfe. So with Christ, he promiseth that he will redeem me, but I know not that he will, onlie I believe and wait in miserie, yet by that Faith I am preserved through the Word, though I feel nothing but death and bondage. Wouldst thou know the love of God that passeth Knowledge? Wait on Christ by Faith, believing his Word and he will reveal the love of the Father. For though we know not the mind of God, yet we have the mind of Christ, so that thou must know nothing but in him, abide in him, and His Word abide in thee, and he will reveal all things unto thee. So that our curious and busie Wit, so hunting to know, and straining out the Wit to understand, leads to many fancies. But know, that his ways are unsearchable, but wait and attend, and he will reveal Christ and the Father, if thou sit under the burden of thine own ignorance, and content for the time to know nothing but thy own vileness.2Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 19. 2Ibid., p. 18.173 Law and Gospel

The Gospel occupies a central position in Brerely's theology. In a fiery sermon he demonstrates the power of the Word:

So that the Word of Truth is a mighty Word, it layes all low before it: none is able to stand before-it but Christ, not the holiest Pharisee, for this shall judge the world and cast out all the fictions of man and all the pride and glory of the world, and shall be a terrible word to all tyat believe not, when every tittle thereof shall be verified on man.

In the end, nothing will remain but Christ and the Gospel. The nature of the Gospel "is plain and low and simple" and wants nothing but believing hearts to make it known, yet not understood of any but such as stand truly in need thereof.2

The Gospel is the Executioner of the Law and kills it in the heart of man. It is rather the "kindly effect of the Gospel" to establish faith and love in the heart of man and to bring all things down in man by the Crosse of Christ and to lay him low under the feet ofall.3 For "the Gospel is a low thing, Faith is a low thing, though mighty in Christ, and Love is a low thing."4 If a man be brought under the power of the Gospel, Christ will be precious to him and His Word will be the Life and Treasure of his soul, and man will love other men as Christ did, even our enemies.5 Thus for Brerely, following Paul, the Law condemns, life is in the Gospel, and the Law of Love is implanted in man's heart through the indwelling of Christ.1Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths p. 34. 2Ibid., p. 62. 31bid., p. 4.4Ibid.5lbid.74Ecclesiology

Brerely is first and foremost a Protestant. For him the foundation of the church

is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Lord of the Covenant, the engraved form of his Image, given of the.Father for the Restoration of man, to whom he bath given all power in Heaven and in Earth: and hath hidden in him the treasures of wisdom and knowledge and the heart of man built on this foundation by faith thereon, cannot fail.

God first "layes the foundation of rest" in the Church,

that though it fare ill with his enemies, yet is his Church, built upon the foundation of free mercy in Christ and his truth revealed by him shall stand against all others. So that God hath laid in His Church and conveyed to his people a foundation of rest in Jesus Christ which shall preserve them against all crafts of Death and Hell, and no storm shall be able to overthrow it.2Brerely claims that the Church of Rome translated the foundation from Christ to the Church, from the head to its members.3 He makes an issue of "Austin's definition of faith" to refute the Roman concept of the church. He goes so far as to blame the Jesuits, who, fearing prejudice to the Pope's supremacy, concluded that "the Church is the Church Vertual, or the Pope only or alone"4

And so while they boast of the church, their Mother, they mean nothing but the Pope their Fathe. What foundation can there be here for man to rest on?

If Brerely's ecclesiology was based on the indwelling Christ, his theology of the Mass and the sacraments tended toward1Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 92. 2Ibid. 31bid., p. 93.

4Ibid., p. 94. 5Ibid.75

viewing them as signs and symbols, emphasizing the centrality of faith for their efficacy. The "things themselves are lowly,"

And yet we see God's way was always a low way. He a silly Lamb, and now ordinary food of Bread and Wine, that thereby he might reveal the great mysterie. They are poor and common, that he may crosse man's curious devices and that the flesh may see no beautie in them but in him onlie.

1. There is the outward elements set before the common senses of men,

2. The Word, to inform the understanding,

3. And Christ and his Spirit to feed the heart and spirit of man that he may believe,

4. So that all the Word and Sacrifices are nothing without Faith as in Hebrews 4. This leads past all figures, yea, when nothing

. appears but Death, this finds Life. This gives a place in the heart of man for eating of the Lamb; Bread and Wine a silly thing, where the heart is not led further.lEschatology

Brerely does not seem to conceive of heaven and hell as places,

and one might infer perhaps, from lack of further evidence, that for him, heaven and hell are states of mind. But the last judgment will surely come:

There will come such a winnowing day upon all Flesh, good and bad, to destroy and take from men all confidence in the Flesh, in which the Faithful shgll be preserved only by Faith and Repentance and Patience.

He warns his people against playing wanton with knowledge and "feasting1Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 86. 2Ibid., p. 120.76on Christ's dainties," pointing out that in the end they will be taken away:

So know that these will fail and nothing left but naked Christ, a poor despised man. Let the worldling know that there will come a scattering night, where thou and thy guilty portion must part, and horror possess thy mind which all thy Wealth will not quiet.

Perfectionism and Antinomianism

Webster's Dictionary defines an antinomian as "a member of a Christian sect which held that faith alone, not obedience to the moral law, is necessary for salvation."2 William Stoever, in hisexcellent theological study of the New England antinomian controversy, writes that

Antinomianism has a long history as a characteristic form of Christian dissent. It is evident in the New Testament, and it enjoyed its latest and perhaps greatest flowering on the Continent and in England during the Reformation era. The label "antinomianism" derives from the syndrome's distinctive mark, namely the denial of the relevance of the moral law to true Christians because of the ability claimed for the Holy Spirit to separate persons directly and radically from the obligations of ordinary worldly existence. The New Testament notions of the work and witness of the Spirit and of liberation through spiritual rebirth, and especially the Pauline antitheses of law and gospel and of works and faith, contain the seeds of antinomianism and during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries it sprang up1Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 111.

2Noah Webster, Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Deluxe Second Edition. Based upon the Broad Foundations Laid Down by Noah

Webster. Extensively Revised by the Publisher's Editorial Staff under the General Supervision of Jean L. McKechnie.Illustrated, Dorset & Baber. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979) p.81.77wherever free grace and spiritual conversion were vigorously preached.1Stoever isolates two types of antinomianism in his analysis, one affirming that the law delivered in the Old Testamaent has nothing

to do with justification, the other asserting that the justified have nothing to do with the law.

The first is concerned primarily with the means of conversion and justification, the second with the grounds of Christian conduct and assurance. In the Sektengeschichte of the Reformation both forms appear, separately and in combination. The former, in the name of free justification and the power of the preached gospel, denied the preparatory function of the law, as a "schoolmaster," to drive men to Christ through fear of sin; and it was hostile to any suggestion of causal relationship between law, works, or human agency, and justification. The second variety denied that the law pertains to the relationship between God and the justified, either because God no longer regards sin in them or because the Spirit so dwells in them that they are incapable of sinning; and it was opposed to the urging of duties of obedience upon Christians and to seeking marks of election in such obedience, as confusing legal works and free grace.2

The connection between antinomianism and the debacle of Munster in 1532 was regularly exploited thereafter for polemical purposes, although there is sufficient evidence of moral license in the. sixteenth and seventeenth centuries to give credence to the connection. However, as Stoever points out, it was possible to hold antinomian doctrines without in practice committing or condoning moral excess, and not every one who might be called "antinomian" ended in libertinism.31William K. B. Stoever, A Faire and Easie Way to Heaven: Covenant Theology and Antinomianism in Early Massachusetts. (Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1978) p. 161.

2Ibid., p. 161. 3lbid., p. 162.78

The assault upon authority inherent in the antinomian position was one of the primary reasons for the hostility it generated among orthodox Reformed Puritans. Stoever explains that "from the antinomian perspective the agency and instrumentality of creatures are incidental to the Spirit's gracious work, which renders the Christian morally and ontologically, a veritable "new being."1 He notes that "both forms of the syndrome exalted the unconditioned, unmediated operation of the Spirit in the application of redemption, to the point of seriously minimizing, if not altogether overruling, the Christian's continuing rootedness in the ontological and moral orders of

creation."2 Antinomians differed from the orthodox Reformed in their theology of regeneration:

Reformed orthodox theologians conceived of regeneration as the infusion into man of supernatural principles, empowering him to new understanding and new obedience, but without altering his condition as a creature or freeing him from earnest struggle with the remnants of sinfulness in himself. Antinomians, in contrast, tended to regard regeneration as a spiritual transformation, elevating the individual above the moral ambiguities of creaturely existence and freeing him from the canons of "common," "earthly," merely "legal," morality.3

The antinomian concept of a spiritual transformation, which involved the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, led to a doctrine of perfectionism which in its more conservative aspect asserted that the "born again" Christian remained ever afterwards so close to God that he could not sin (1 John 3.9) and in its radical aspect assertedStoever, A Faire and Easie Way, p. 162. 2Ibid., p. 162. 31bid., p. 162.179

the libertine notion that even the most gross violation of the law was not a sin for the regenerate man.

Thus the Dutch sectary Henrik Niclaes could affirm of himself that "he is godded with God and co-deified with him, and that God is hominified with him"; and a Swiss enthusiast could declare thathe had attained a condition of perfect submission to the Spirit and was accordingly undefiled by sin, so that whatever he did, including decapitating his brother, was God working in him. In a less extreme form, an English "familist" maintained that through Christ he was accepted by God as perfect, that perfection may be obtained in this world, that "Christ dwelling in a believer, and being his guider and disposer, he may say, 'Repentance is hid from mine eyes,"' and, referring to believers, that "He that is born of God sinneth not."

"Of True Christian Liberty"

Roger Brerely considered himself a poet as well as a preacher. His poetry is, unfortunately, with few exceptions, not very good. However, his poems do reveal something of the internal struggle of this devout Puritan, and for this reason, are valuable for our thesis. This poem, "Of True Christian Liberty," represents an apology not only for his life, but for his theology.

Brerely describes the pain of the rift between himself and the "fellowship of Saints here below" because of the accusation of antinomianism with which he

has been charged. He claims he was once more strict and is now perhaps not quite so strict, not because

of the liberty bestowed by faith, but because the "old Adam" continues to live in him. In some of his friends lately he has "strangeness seen" which heretofore he would have dreamed impossible.Stoever, A Faire and Easie Way, pp. 162-163.180Thou God forbid, or that my latter ageShould be secluded from thy heritage.I mean, the fellowship of Saints belowWhich if I want, I whither shall I go.In some friends lately, I have Strangeness seen I once thought, could not possibly have been If, 0 my God, this rent from thee arise, Then smell the savour of a sacrifice.But if some other Son of man have done it, Curst be that sin which at the first begun it.1Brerely remains somewhat ambivalent on the possibility of attaining to that perfect "libertie" of the elect. But he castigates as "blasphemie" the libertine notion that the reborn soul can commit mortal sin with impunity.

Then say I what? Not liberty to sin Because of freedom God hath set us in,So that ene may, whoredom and these commit And not withstanding, not offend in it, Nor that the Spirit so renewes the will As quite excludes all motions unto ill? 0 Blasphemie! dare any brag of ground Wherein there may such mark of grace be found, Nor of God's presence, knew I ere such senseAs drives from his, all sin and doubting thence.2

He believes, however, that the possibility of sinlessness does exist for the elect soul since the Law of Love unites him so closely to the will of God that his will is "link'd" to that of God.Roger Brierly, "Of True Christian Liberty," Included in A Bundle of Soul Convincin: Directin: and Comfortin: Truths, Clearly Deduced from Diverse Select Texts of Holy Scripture and Practically Improven both for Conviction and Consolation. Being a Brief Summary of Several Sermons Preached at large by that faithful and pious servant of Jesus Christ, M. Rodger Brierly, Minister of the Gospel at Grindleton in Craven. (London: Printed by J. R. for Samuel Sprint, in litle Brittain, 1677) p. 3.

2lbid., p. 5.81But this I saw, that there's a rest of faith Which sets believers free from hell and death: That out of us, our health and life is wrought, That out of us, the same is to be sought. That God's elect, even from their second birth Unto their death, are strangers on the earth. That precious liberty they thereby win: How sweet a thing it is to master sin: How this new Law doth set Believers free, How Christ his yoke is perfect libertie. How this can be that men can part from ill When dangerlesse, they may do what they will. That God

sometimes, his presence so reveals; That for the time both sin and sorrow vails;How such shall think that while, belt short or long They nev'r shall move, their hill is made so strong; That more one doth from this degenerate The more he falls to pride or worse estate: How God doth draw by his sweet cords of love Souls here below: to live with him above Who whiles they see Gods will is so (o strange) Their present bliss, for greater would not change. Not but that they full freedom would require But thus to Gods will, linkt is their desire What power with God this law of love doth give How in his Members Christ is said to live How grace doth with a Metamorphose strange Deep threatnings into exhortations change. That the World, Flesh, Sin, yea Satan and the rest Are for God's children forc't to worke the best. So God for his, good out of ill doth draw, What's life to God, what's death death unto the Law. How first the Law, doth Man in bondage bring, How Christ his death hath ta'ne away the sting.lBut Brerely doubts if any "living wight" can possibly attain

to this high peak of perfection. He confesses that "this height of grace exceeds his skill."

But now of late (as I must needs confesse) To Gods great glory, and my shame no lesse I have been through the Tempters subtiltie Tost with temptations of inconstancie:Not in respect of our Religious ground, I ever doubted to be safe and soundBrierly, Of True Christian Liberty, p. 7.182But in regard of some particulars,About the which, have been so many jars: As whether there be any living wight, Who like to Gideon, walking in his mightDoth sin down right, like Midian's host destroy Whose heart God fills with such continual joy:In his great love, such strength against their sin,That faith in them hath long unshaken been.In which his love, their souls are so set free As they therein can walk at liberty.Such as that sin, can neither break their peace, Nor upright walking, confidence increase. This hight of Grace, do so exceed my skills I needs must say, that title it who will For mine own part, I utterly disclaim it; I mean the having, not the will to gain it.1Brerely agrees with the "Divines" that insist that good works are not the measure of certainty of assurance of election, but rather that election is God's free choice.However, without good works, there can be no assurance.

Hereof it comes that our Divines well say (Which words Lewd men may wrest another way)That if from works, or more or less, thou measure, Thy certainty, thou heapest copper treasure. Since God in Christ before all times and place By His Decree, determined our case,

Not from the good that we should after do But of free choice ordaining us thereto Then make not that a cause which th'effect Of God's dear love in them He doth elect. But whoso draws from Faith by true descent, The Pedigree of Works as consequent. May thereby judge if no such fruits appear That sound assurance is in no wayes there.For good and ill trees by their fruits are known And fruitful seed will spring where it is sown.

If faith is the root of all our good, "tis most true, that Unbelief is Mother of every sin, adulteries, thefts and other,"Brierly, Of True Christian Liberty, p. 9.183So then, lewd life and true faith are no kin For Christ is not the Minister of sin.01As for the Law, Brerely asserts the orthodox doctrine that "this ground of Faith it gaineth, That graceless men it civilly

restraineth. . . "2

It is the Spirit that is the root and ground of all good for the elect,

Even so, the Spirit, it is the root and ground Of all the Good, that is in any foundAs for example, into thy froward WillFlowes God, and doth its hollow cisterns fill Whereby such sweetness to thy soul it sendeth, As to its lure full buzimely it bendeth. Likewise he doth invest they inward sight And fills thy understanding part with light. 3

From the foregoing passages it would appear that Brerely was preaching the first type of antinomianism described in Stoever's essay, i.e., the one affirming that the moral law delivered in the Old Testament has nothing to do with justification, which is the result of grace alone: However, this concept of the Law, considering pre-destination, represents orthodox Calvinist doctrine, which, while denying any value in the Law in the process of justification, which is subject only to the arbitrary will of God, does have a value in controlling the reprobate, for "graceless men it civilly restraineth."

Brerely appears to have at least accepted the possibility

of human sinlessness, but only for those who had reached the highest degree of holiness. He confesses that he himself has not reached suchBrierly, Of True Christian Liberty, pp. 9-10. 2Ibid., p. 11. 31bid., p. 13.184

a peak of perfection himself, but he also doubts if any one

living ever has. Brerely's acceptance of the possibility of human perfection, even if it may occur only in some future generation, may place his thought in the category of Stoever's second type of antinomianism. Yet in his exposition of these two doctrines, Brerely seems to be exonerated from the charge, just as he was from similar charges by Archbishop Matthew. Brerely himself, is convinced of his own orthodoxy:

Not that I then did, or do look to find Some strange Religion of another kind.Than that, wherein I ever have been trainedSince first I from my mother's breast was wayned. For so to do, as I consider well,Were to make sure work, soon to get to HellBut even the same, say I, that hath been t1ught, Since God his Gospel into England brought.

As Gordon has already noted, heresies are "like little holes" in Christ's ship

Whereof enough examples might be yielded Of Heresies, of small beginnings builded As of Nestorius, Eutiches, and othersloose base born buds, and hateful brood of brothers Against the which good warnings well to arme In these worst times, I grant will do no harme.2

For Brerely, faith and love take the place of the Law, "works" must cease and the "Law of libertie" acquired in its stead:

God's Sons must once be of self works bereft When they as dung shall suffer all disgraceAnd faith and love take standing in their place And that the Heavenly Sabbath dawning is When we from our works rest, as God from his.Brierly, Of True Christian Liberty, p. 4. 2Ibid., p. 46.i85I do not such a resting here maintain As may cessation from duties gain. But such a ceasing as is from the LawA resting in our Saviour's yoak to draw.1The notion of the "Heavenly Sabbath" is a new concept within the framework of Brerely's thought, and will bear further analysis. It appears to be related to the imagery used by John Everard and may be traced to his influence.

Not that the Law is for its substance chang'd But to God's Saints in other order rang'd. Its nature now in Christ so qualifiedThat its grim face we better may abide.At least the while its glorie passeth byClose in the clifts of Christ his wounds we lye Whether like him, who once appeal did make From Philip sleeping to the same awakeFlying for refuge, we in safety beUnder that perfect Law of Libertie.2

The "new creature" walks in this perfect liberty, even as the angels and has little need of "rudiments," but ordinary men are frail and to these God affords the "means" of "prayer, publick, private, Sacraments, the Word, Temples, and Preachers, Times and Seasons fit." It is probable that Brerely's knowledge of human nature preserved his orthodoxy, since the notion that the regenerate soul is so transformed as to no longer need any outward forms or "meanes" is more characteristic of Familist and Quaker tenets than of those of Calvinism. But Brerely sadly acknowledges that these things are "not yet brought about" in him.1Brierly, Of Christian Liberty, p. 47. 2Ibid., p. 47.86I mean to finde Gods presence in the means For else the outward action little gains Which blessing yet I cannot look to find, Unless my self close to the means I binde. Yea when I feel my heart most backward bent Then most of all it needeth sore constraint (As often hardened heart and much unfitnesse In slacking duties bear me woeful witnesse) For things in me are not yet brought about That thinner man can bear the other out.1Even those who claim to have attained to this state of perfect liberty may "backslide" and thus the need for constant faith and repentance:

For want of this renewing oft a heartThat cooles in grace to works would backward start Nature and reason for the soul refiningTo make her worthy thereunto incliningThat so works might stifle and stop the breath And thrust themselves into the room of faith The part regenerate, that it might obtainIts ancient fellowship with God again.2But nature, reason, and works will not bring that perfect liberty, but only faith, and with it the indwelling of God's Spirit, for

It's not brain knowledge that doth make men free But where God's Sp'rit is, there is liberty In quantity as faith proportionableAnd other graces too are answerable.3This "holy liberty" is claimed by some who "turn God's graces into wantonness.4 Brerely thinks such perfection as attains to perfect liberty may perhaps be found some day in our posterity, in the millennium. The "strange opinion" of the possibility of human perfection in this life is held by the Familists.1Brierly, Of True Christian Liberty, p. 48.2Ibid., p. 57. 31bid., p. 57. 41bid., p. 57.87To censure strange opinions, which I know not I may not take upon me, no I do not, But this is blam'd in Familists I hear Which others also may have cause to fear. All I can say, is I would have me be Wise (as is said) after sobriety.(For he that faith's. proportion would exceed Looseth his labour and withall.his meed) Yet to beware too, then in no wise plead For backwardness and standing in a stead By these and like words, men no angels are Who love to climb, a fall let them beware. To dream of constant fellowship with God,

For weeks and months, is but conceits and odd.3Nevertheless, both the Law and the Gospel together serve to "quicken the dead" and the Law of Liberty, which Brerely holds to be the Law of love, comes into being:

But to end this, like brother with his brother The Law and gospel must be each with other With fire and hammer, that to break the rocks And this to quicken dead and withered stocks. Then afterwards, the Law of LibertyDoth follow both these necessarilyWhich I according to the Scripture hold To be the Law of love (as I have told)When as the love of Christ doth men constrain Duty and Love to yield to God again.Wherein because, the flesh is wondrous slow And doth unwilling to God's service goLet rules be urged strictly in Gods blessingYea, to good duties, let there lack no pressing .4

Brerely insists that there is no "real difference" between the teaching of those called Grindletonians and that of their accusers. His attempt to defend the orthodoxy of his congregation is interesting in light of the contemporary observation that some of them were "more1Brierly, Of True Christian Liberty, p. 57.2Ibid., p. 58. 3Ibid., p. 59. 4lbid., p. 61.88advanced" than he.

"Self Civil Var" - The Theme of the Double Heart

A common theme in Puritan literature is that of the "double heart." Drawn from the Pauline concept of the incessant conflict between the flesh and the spirit, Puritans were ever on the alert to discern man's hypocrisy in denying the "carnal" motives which govern our actions. The concept is drawn directly from St. Paul:

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evillies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body, of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ, our Lord! So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. Romans 7:21-25.

This body/soul dualism is evident in the poetry of Brerely's fellow Yorkshireman, Andrew Marvell (1621-1678). A passage from Marvell's poem entitled "Dialogue Between the Soul and Body" reveals the dichotomy:

0 who shall, from this Dungeon raise A Soul inslav'd so many wayes?

With bolts of Bones, that fetter'd stands In Feet; and manacled in Hands. Here blinded with an Eye, and there Deaf with the drumming of an Ear. A Soul hung up, as 'twere, in Chains Of nerves, and Arteries, and Veins. Tortur'd, besides each other part, In a vain Head, and double Heart.1Andrew Marvell, "A Dialogue Between Soul and Body." The Complete Poems, Edited, with Introduction and Notes by Elizabeth Story Donno (Hammondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1972) p. 103.89 Frank Warnke, in a penetrating essay on Marvell, comments on the poem:

What emerges from the debate is a kind of balanced scheme: an ideal world of pure Spirit toward which Soul is impelled, and an ideal world of pure, undifferentiated Nature (the "green world" of so many of Marvell's poems) toward which Body longs. Each constitutes an ideal order in itself, but man can find his rest in neither. He remains, to borrow again from Thomas Mann, the Herr der Gegensatze, the "Lord of the Counterpositions."1According to Christopher Hill, Brerely's only good poem is "Self Civil War." Based on the same theme as Marvell's poem, "Self Civil War" is not only an interesting piece of literature but reveals a great deal more of the personal religious struggle of the man himself than do his sermons or his long apologetic, "Of True Christian Liberty." The theme of the poem is the inner struggle of flesh and spirit, good and evil, heaven and hell:

Self Civil War

I sing not Priam, nor the Siege of Troy Nor Agamemnon's War, with Thestis Joy I sing my self my Civil Wars within The Victories I hourly loose and win. The daily battel, the continual strife, The Wars that end not till I end my life. And yet not mine alone, not only mine:But every on's that's under the honor'd Sign Of Christs his Standard, shall his Name inroul With holy vows of body and of soul. Vouchsafe, 0 Father, succour from above: Courage of Soul, comfort of heavenly love: Triumphant. Captain, glorious General, Furnish me Arms from thine own Arsenal.2Frank J. Warnke, "Play and Metamorphosis in Marvell's Poetry," Seventeenth Century English Poetry, Ed., WilliamR. Keast. (London, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1971) pp. 353-354.900 sacred Spirit, my Sp'rits assistant be, And in this Conflict, make me conquer me.lThe concluding lines of the poem reveal the impossibility of resolving the incessant struggle to which we are heir in this life:

Oh miracle begot by Heaven in Earth,My mind divine, my bodie brute by birth, I am not with my self as I conceive, Wretch that I am, myself, my self deceive: Unto my self I do my self betray, I from my self banish my self away. My self agrees not with my self a jot, Knows not myself I have my self forgot. Against my self I have mov'd wars unjust. I trust my self, and I myself distrust. My self I follow, and my self I fly, Besides

my self, and in my self am I, Myself am not my self, another same. Unlike myself, and like myself I am.Self sons, self furious, and thus way-ward elseI cannot live with, nor without my self.2Brerely's OrthodoxyBrerely's sermons and poems in general reveal a very solid orthodoxy in relation to the high Calvinism defined by the Synod of Dort (1619). But they also contain a suggestion of those deviations from orthodoxy which were identified with Familism.

There tends to be an exaggerated disdain for things "carnal" in line with the body/soul dualism of his Pauline theology. Because of this, Brerely may unwittingly have adopted the doctrine of the "celestial flesh," the notion that at the resurrection, the bodies of1Brierly, "Self Civil War," in A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing, and Comforting Truths, p. 9.2lbid., p. 10.91

the elect will not be our present ones, but rather, an "ethereal" body. This doctrine was a recurring Anabaptist tenet based on the Docetic Christology of one Melchior Hoffman, who taught that Christ's body was a celestial one. Brerely writes, in one of his poems

This may be cause why in our spiritual home Our bodies too shall spiritual ones become.lThere is also a suggestion that his concept of regeneration tends toward that of total transformation, rebirth, the new creature, deviating somewhat from the Calvinist concept of a moral change. Brerely's emphasis on the indwelling Christ is very Calvinist, but, again, while perhaps slightly exaggerated, is still far from the actual identification with Christ of the later radical Puritans such as Webster and Saltmarsh.

Let us examine Brerely's theology in relation to the five points of high Calvinism as defined at Dort:

1. Total Depravity. Brerely certainly teaches that the ravages of original sin have left mankind utterly depraved and unworthy of salvation.

2. Unconditional Election. It is only through the mercy of God that some are elected by Him to salvation. We can never do any thing to deserve election. Brerely is orthodox on this point. He does not exaggerate the "unconditional" aspect as do some of the later antinomians.1Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 50.923. Limited Atonement. Christ died for the elect only. For Brerely the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination is probably implicit, but it is not articulated as such in his sermons.

4. Irresistible Grace. Brerely's emphasis is on repentance as a component of faith rather than a "preparation" for it. Faith itself, is the arbitrary gift of God to his elect. Brerely is definitely orthodox in his concept of "free grace," but the term would later develop rather unorthodox connotations.5. Perseverance of the Saints. Brerely is quite orthodox on this point, as he provides comfort for those who backslide after the experience of regeneration and doubts the possibility of human perfection. Orthodox doctrine holds that while the regenerate may sin after justification, the free grace of God will inevitably bring about the perseverance of the elect to the end.Theological InfluencesBrerely, then, can be perceived as an orthodox Calvinist, but we have also seen that there is a suggestion of deviation on several points that imply an influence that is not recognizable within the Calvinist framework. The strongest influence on seventeenth century Puritanism was the thought of William Perkins (1558-1602) and Perkins's theology would probably have played a central role in Brerely's early training. Of equal importance in the formation of Brerely's theology was the influence of John Everard, of whom Brerely was said to be a disciple.93 William Perkins (1558-1602)

William Perkins was, in many ways, the "proto-Puritan" of the seventeenth century. His influence was enormous, both as a teacher at Christ's College, Cambridge and as a most prolific and widely read author. He was assailed by Arminius in his Examen of 1612 and Hobbes singles out his doctrine of predestination as virtual fatalism. Perkins was the great defender of the Calvinist "supralapsarian" position against the Arminian position of Peter Baro at Cambridge.lPerkins's systematic presentation of his thought is undoubtedly another factor in his wide influence. An example is his description of four opinions of the order of God's predestination, from the preface, entitled "To the Christian Reader," of his book, A Golden Chain, published in a second edition in 1597.

Christian Reader, there are at this day foure general opinions of the order of God's predestination. The first is of the olde and new Pelagians, who place the cause of God's Predestination in man in in that they holde, that God did ordaine men either to life or death according as he did foresee, that they would by their natural free will, either reject or receive grace offered.

The second of them, who Of some) are tearmed Lutherans, which teach that God foreseeing how all mankind being shut up under unbelief, would therefore reject grace offered, did thereupon, purpose to choose some to salvation of his meere mercie, without any respect of their faith or good workes, and the rest to reject, being moved to do this because he did eternally foresee that they would reject his grace offered in the Gospell.

The third, of Semi-pelagian Papistes, which ascribe God's predestination, partly to mercie and partly to mens foreseen preparations and meritorious workes.

H. C. Porter, Reformation and Reaction in Tudor Cambridge, (Cambridge:•Oambaridge University Press, 1958) p. 260.194

The fourth, of such as teach, that the cause of the execution of God's Predestination is his mercy in Christ, in them which are saved, and in them which perish, the fall and corruption of man, yet so as that the decree and eternal counsell of God, concerning the both, hath not any cause beside his will and pleasure.

Of the four opinions, the three former I have laboured to oppugne, as erroneous, and to maintaine the last as being a truth, which will beare weight in the ballance of the Sanctuarie.lThe fourth opinion, is, of course, the supralapsarian position adopted by the Puritans. God's decree precedes the fall of man. All men are corrupted by original sin, but some are elected, before all eternity, for salvation, although no man can merit it. On original sin Perkins believes that... we see that sinne is not a corruption of mans substance, but onely of faculties, otherwise neither could mens soules bee immortal nor Christ take upon him man's nature. All Adam's posteritie is equally partaker of this corruption: the reason why it sheweth not itself equally in all, is because some have the spirit of sanctification, some the spirit onely to bridle corruption, some neither.2The above is also a clear description of Calvin's concept of grace, sanctification involving prevenient or irresistible grace, given to the elect only; common grace given to bridle corruption; and for the reprobate, no grace. Following Augustine, Perkins retains a trace of traducianism in his doctrine of original sin.William Perkins, A Golden Chaine, or the Description of Theologie Containing the Order of the Causes of Salvation and Damnation, according to God's word. A view whereof is to bee in the Table Annexed. Written in Latin and Translated by R. H. Hereunto is Adjoined the Order Which M. Theodor Beza used in comforting Afflicted Consciences. 2nd ed. (Printed by John Legate, Printer to the University of Cambridge, 1597) p. 7.

2Ibid., p. 27.195

The propagation of sinne from the parents to the children is either because the soule is infected by the contagion of the bodie as a good ointment by a fustie vessell, or because God, in the very moment of creation an1l infusion of souls into infants, dooth utterly forsake them.

For Perkins the Gospel manifests that righteousness in Christ whereby the whole is satisfied and salvation attained and is the "conduit pipe of the Holy Ghost to derive faith in the soul." As in Calvin, Scripture, that is, the Gospel,

is the sole authority and faith the sole means of salvation, but it is the Gospel preached that begets faith, and this only with the assistance of the Holy Ghost.

The Gospel preached is, in the flourishing estate of Christs church, that ordinarie meanes to beget faith, but in the ruinous estate of the same, when as by apostasie, the foundations thereof are shaken and the cleare light of the word is darkened, then this word read or repeated, yea the verie sound thereof being but once heard, is by the assistance of Gods spirit extraordinarilae effectuall to them whome God will gave called out of that great darkness into his exceeding light.

The concept that Christ's church is in a state of apostasy is a common one among the Puritans. First applied to the Roman Church by early Lutherans and Calvinists, the apostasy was in this later period ascribed by the Puritans to the established church, the Church of England.Brerely's theology is in accord with the above doctrines which Perkins outlined, and which conform to Calvinist orthodoxy in the period. Now let us look at the more controversial elements in Perkins thought. For Perkins, can grace be extinguished by mortal sin?Perkins, A Golden Chaine, p. 27. 2Ibid., p. 125.96

The elect have after their very grievous fallings from God forthwith repented them of their sinnes, as we may see in the examples of David, Peter, etc., the which argueth that they had not quite fallen from grace and lost the Spirit of God. If grace be once utterly lost, the ingraffing [sic] of that party into Christ is quite abolished, therefore for such as repent there must needs succeede a second new ingraffing into Christ: and then it will also follow that they must of necesssitie bee baptized anew, which is absurd to think.

But for all this, we denie not but grace may in part, and for a time bee lost, to the end that the faithful may thereby acknowledge and know their weakness, and for it be humbled: but that there is any total or final falling from grace, wee utterly denie.1For Perkins, then, the elect never totally fall from grace, but may partially fall from grace as a result of sin, which grace is restored to them upon repentance. We may ask, then, if the faithful can be said to be perfect in this life. The answer:

There is a two-fold perfection, the one incomplete, the which is an endeavor or care to obey God in observation of all his precepts; the other is tearmed complete, this is that justice which the law requireth, namely a perfect and absolute justice according to that measure which man performed to God in his innocencie. In the first sense the faithful are said to be perfect, not in this latter. 2A man in this life then, for Perkins, can attain only to incomplete perfection by obeying all the precepts, and may not attain to the perfection of Adam before the fall. Brerely echoes the position of Perkins on these doctrines.

For Perkins, as for Brerely, the "elements of bread and wine are signs and seals of the bodie and bloud of Christ," affliction is inevitable and patient bearing of the Cross brings us to Christ."3Perkins, A Golden Chaine, p. 190. 2Ibid., p. 190. 31bid., p. 163.97For Perkins, every faithful man must believe that he is elected." Our adoption and so consequently, our election, is sealed unto us by the Spirit of God "2 And "the holie Ghost Both seale unto us our adoption morally by workes "3Norman Pettit, in his excellent analysis of the role of grace and conversion in Puritan spiritual life, points out that for Perkins, the "new and fleshy heart" is the gift of God. We can do "nothing but sin before regeneration." The conversion of a sinner is a "creation" and "no sinner can prepare himself to his own creation."4 For Perkins, man can do nothing to bring about his own conversion, thus holding the orthodox Reformed position, but he introduced the concept of "weak faith" in which men may believe the promise, but are "perplexed with many doubtings."5 The "seed" of grace which is a true faith, may not be a "strong faith." This intermediate stage in the process of conversion is further developed in Perkins' concept of

"composition."The 'beginnings of conversion,' he says must be 'distinguished.' Some are 'beginnings of preparation'; some are 'beginnings of composition.' Beginnings of preparation are 'such as bring under, tame, and subdue the stubbornness of man's nature without working any changes at all.' Of this sort are 'accusations of conscience,' 'fears and terrors,' and 'compunction of the heart '--1Perkins, A Golden Chaine, p. 192. 2Ibid., p. 193. 31bid., p. 193.4Norman Pettit, The Heart Prepared: Grace and Conversion in Puritan Spiritual Life. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1966) p. 62.5Ibid., p. 63.98

all arising from the ministry of the Law. Though they 'go before to prepare a sinner for his conversion following,' yet they are 'no graces of God' but merely 'fruits of the Law.' A 'reprobate,' says Perkins, 'may go this far.' 'Beginnings of composition,' on the other hand, are 'all those inward motions and inclinations of God's Spirit that follow after.' Here the will or desire to become fully regenerate is 'the effect of regeneration begun.'

Thus Perkins took into account man's affective nature before effectual conversion without diminishing the efficacy of the Law and without assigning "abilities" to man in his natural state. . . In 'preparation' man as 'reprobate' is seized by the Law; but in 'composition' he begins to prepare himself for saving grace with the help of the Spirit. Not yet effectually converted, his thirst for grace and his anticipation of the covenant promises allow him a part to play of his own. Indeed, he is able to "return unto the Lord" as Scripture demanded.l

The concept that a measure of preparation was required of the elect was a slight departure from the fully orthodox position outlined by Calvin and Zwingli, in which man can do absolutely nothing to prepare for God's saving grace. Thus Brerely's emphasis on repentance is in conformity with what was considered orthodox in his own time, and he undoubtedly saw "repentance" as part of the preparation for grace. Later, the antinomian controversies would revolve around the concept that election is "unconditional," and that all attempts at "preparation" are nothing but "workes" and therefore "carnal" and sinful.The concept of preparation was further strengthened in Puritan thought by William Ames, who, in "Cases of Conscience," published in 1631, gave the concept of preparation a genuinely secure position in Puritan thought.1Pettit, The Heart Prepared, p. 64.99Free GraceBrerely frequently uses the expression "free grace" to describe God's gifts to men. Examples from Brerely's Sermons suggest the meaning of the term.

All men, yea every Son of Adam, through Original sin and guilt of every heart are debtors to God and bound over to death and destruction which we must pay and suffer upless God's mercy and free grace in Christ do free us. Rom. 3:24

But the righteousnesse of Faith is another thing, viz., the righteousness of Christ made ours, standing in free remission of sins and the free grace of God. Therefore it is, that Christ is our Righteousnesse, as a thing out of man's self in another.2

The free grace of God is the fountain of life to man and when man is vile and nothing in himself, then is the power of God most shown. 3In these passages, free grace may be interpreted to mean that God gives his grace freely, without any condition, works or merit on the part of man, who is in himself vile and nothing. The expression is also used by William Perkins in A Treatise of God's Free Grace and Man's Free Wil1.4Perkins' doctrine of grace is well spelled out in this treatise, which was considered the model for Puritans. He outlines three kinds of grace:Brierly, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, p. 51. 2Ibid., p. 148. 31bid., p. 210.

4William Perkins, "A Treatise of God's Free Grace and Man's Free Will," in The Workes of that Famous and worthy Minister of Christ, Mr. William Perkins. 3 vols. Newly Corrected according to his own copies. (London: John Legatt, Printer to the Universitie of Cambridge, 1612) vol. I.1100

In the worke of our regeneration three graces be required, the preventing grace, the working grace, and the co-working grace. The preventing grace is, when God of his mercies sets and imprints in the minde a new light, in the will a new quality or inclination, in the heart new affections. The working grace is when God gives to the will the act of well-willing, namely (a) the will to beleeve, the will to repent, the will to obey God in his word. The co-working grace is when God giveth the deede to the will, that is, the exercise and practice of faith and repentance. The first gives the power of doing good, the second the will, the third the deede: and all three together make the work of regeneration.

For Perkins, the will of man, since the fall of Adam, cannot overcome the least temptation. Liberty of grace, that is, to "will well," is lost, extinguished, abolished, by the fall of Adam. What we put on in our conversion is what we lack by nature, for in regeneration we put on the new man created according to the Image of God. The concept of the regenerated man as a new creation is orthodox, but later the concept became distorted, leading to an interpretation of identification with Christ which would have scandalized Calvin.

For Perkins, the preventing grace required for this complete regeneration is irresistible, for

when God inwardly by his spirit turnes, renews, sanctifies, the whole man, and this worke cannot be resisted by the will of man, no more than Lazarus could resist the work of Christ when he was raised from the dead.

Man's will is free only in the regenerate; before that man has only the will of nature, which is in bondage to sin. But in the estate of regeneration,Perkins, A Treatise of God's Free Grace, p. 736. 2lbid., p. 735.101

the will of man renewed hath in it a three-fold liberty. The first is the libertie of nature to will or nill, which is in all men. The second is libertie of sin whereby the will, when it willeth any evil, willeth it freely. And this libertie is diminished according to the measure of grace which God bestoweth. The third is libertie of grace to will hat which pleaseth God and it is restored in part in regeneration.

For Perkins, "perfect libertie of will is to-will onlie what is good."2 Can the will, after it is renewed, bring forth good workes itself? It cannot unless God give a double grace. The first is

"Assisting Grace" which consists of the preservation, confirmation, and protection of the will of the regenerate 'man. The second is "Exciting Grace" in which God "stirs the will to do the deede."3 Perkins insists that "all good workes done of us proceede from the vertue and merit of Christ crucified." He expounds the Calvinist doctrine of the distinction between "common grace" and "saving grace,"

There is a grace which is sufficient to the conviction of a sinner which is not effectual to salvation and againe there is a grace which is sufficient to the leading of a civill life, which is not effectual to salvation: yet the grace which is indeed sufficient to salvation is also effectual, namely the gift of regeneration in which God give not only the power to be converted, but the will and the deede.

Perkins' doctrine of grace, then, contains slight deviations from

the orthodoxy of Dort. The deviations appear to have consisted in a more pietistic concept of regeneration and in the concept of "composition" in which a measure of preparation was suggested, over against the original Calvinist doctrine of unconditional election. ArminianPerkins, A Treatise of God's Free Grace, p. 736.121bid., p. 735. 5lbid., p. 742.31bid., p. 737.4Ibid., p. 631.102views are refuted with the same vigor with which he opposes all "Romish" positions on free will.

For Perkins, the Christian must fulfill all his duties without regard to reward or punishment after this life.

The people of God that are turned and guided by the free spirit of God must be a voluntarie people and with all alacritie and cheerefulnesse, doe the duties that pertain to them of a readie mind, even as if there were neither heaven nor hell, judge nor judgment after this life. The Spirit of life that is in Christ must be a law unto them.

One is reminded in the above of the 14th charge against Brerely by the High Commission (See Appendix I), "A soule sanctified must soe aime att gods glorie as he must never thinke of salvation!"

Influence of John Everard

While there can be no question of the importance of the influence of Perkins's thought on that of Roger Brerely, it is that of John Everard that contributes the element of "enthusiasm" or, one might say, "pietism" to his theology.

John Everard was born about 1575, educated at Cambridge, from which he received the Doctor of Divinity degree in 1619. Everard appears to have been a fiery preacher as well as a good scholar and his sermons on the unlawfulness of "matching with idolaters," who were, one assumes, the Anglican clergy, kept him in jail for most of his adult life.

The frequency of the appeals for the royal pardon attracted the attention of James I, who is reported to-have lid, 'What, is this Dr. Ever-out? his name shall be Dr. Never-out.'1Perkins, A Treatise of God's Free Grace, p. 739. 2DNB, s.v. "Everard, John," by Alsager Vian103 Everard's thought is best known to us through his published sermons,

in a volume entitled "The Gospel Treasury Opened" (1653). The volume contains all the sermons extant which were not confiscated by the bishops during his lifetime. In the Epistle Dedicatory to the "Gospel Treasury," Rapha Harford pays this tribute to Everard:

And of this Author we may say, he was one that sought after wisdom and found it, for he knew the merchandise of it to be better than the merchandise of silver and the gain thereof than fine gold (Prov. 1:4 and 8). And he would often say that he desired to be acquainted with men who had experience of Christ rather than men of notions or speculations, that desired to act more than to talk, and he did in his publick preaching averr it, that though they were never so mean, poor, and despised by the world, yet if they were but acquainted with such experimental truths as these, they were more welcome than so many princes and potentates.)

Included in "The Gospel Treasury" are the first English translations of the Mystical Divinity of Dionysius the Areopagite, some excerpts from Denck, Sebastian Franck, John Tauler, and Nicholas of Cusa. Everard is also credited with the first English translation of the German Theology and the Divine Pymander of Hermes Trismegistus. Some of these translations are included in the 1657 edition of "The Gospel Treasury."Everard was a mystic, highly influenced by the thought of Tauler and the German theology, as was Luther himself. In Everard's thought1John Everard. The Gospel Treasury Opened or The Holiest ofall Unvailing: Discovering yet more the Riches of Grace and Glory to the Vessels of Mercy. In several sermons preached at Kensington and elsewhere. Whereunto is added the.Mystical Divinity of Dionysius the Areopagite spoken of in Acts 17:34, with collections out of other divine authors, translated by Dr. Everard never before printed in England. (London: John Owsley, 1657). Epistle Dedicatory, by Rapha Harford.104

the mystical concepts of medieval Christianity appear to have been imposed upon the orthodox Calvinism which he professed, and it is perhaps to Everard that we owe the tradition of pietism among the Puritans, several generations before the advent of German pietism.

Everard strongly emphasizes the Calvinist concept of double predestination while, like Calvin, insisting on the goodness of God:

... for God is all power, all act, and no creature stirs or moves but by him; he is their act and their being, though not of evil: for though God be the orderer

of evil, yet he is not the Author: but men would hence lay *the fault on God, and excuse themselves: and very strange conclusions men have made through mistake, that because there is in God an active, positive, consulted and deliberate reprobation of certain men before their sins were committed, yea before the creation: and because also tis said we can do nothing without him (for in him we live, move, and have our being) therefore they conclude that the evil of action as well as the Action belongs to Him, not understanding to distinguish between the Act and the Evil of the Act.lIn two sermons preached at a private meeting in Kensington, Everard asserts the authority of the Holy Spirit in the interpretation of Holy Scripture:

Beloved, there are such things In-wrapt and folded up in the Sacred Scriptures of God almighty, which being once known, he that knows them in a right way, he need not with the Apostle here being taught by the Holy Spirit, desire to know anything more.

And because the treasure that is in these words and also in all the words of God is so fast lockt up so that no natural man can come at them, he knows nothing of them, for he perceiveth not the things of God, neither can he, for they are spiritually discerned.2For Everard, the history of Jesus' life on earth, his crucifixion, and1Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, p. 23. 2Ibid., p. 39.105 resurrection, are the bare letter of the Word and in themselves do us

no good, but "without the History we cannot have the Mystery, for we cannot come to Believing without Hearing: for how can they believe him of whom they have not heard?"1 The Puritan dichotomy between the "carnal" and the "spiritual" is carried over into the function of Scripture itself. But Everard is not discarding the "letter" of Scripture, he is simply imposing the authority of the Spirit over that of the "letter."

We must not therefore cast away the letter because that is the Book which brings us the Word: though they (those letters) be not the living word and in themselves do us no good, we go no farther; yet we cannot have the kernel without the shell. These outward letters to the eye and to the ear are a means to convey the True word to the heart. And therefore if you think you have God's Word, when you have gotten the knowledge of the letter, or of whatsoever'the outside or the letter bears, without the mind and meaning, you are deceived. This knowledge will deceive you, it will be but a broken reed, that whosoever he be that relyes thereon, it will run into his hand, deceive and destroy him. This is the Truth (if ye will believe it from our Saviour's own mouth. The flesh profiteth nothing it is the Spirit (the mystery) the marrow that giveth life. (John 6:63). It is the mystery, the Spirit, that is eternal life; The letter and the shell cannot nourish, it must be the mystery and the marrow.l

For Everard, our knowledge of Jesus Christ is internal:

Our knowledge of Jesus Christ must be internal, spiritual, and experimental, to live unto him that dyed for them: if a man be not (as the Apostle saith in the succeeding verses (2 Cor. 5:15-17) made a new creature, altered and changed according to Christ in the inward man, so that he lives no longer to himself, but to him that dyed for him, so that 211 old things are past away and all things are become new . . .

The regenerate man is not only a new creature, but Christ himself must be1Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, p. 46. 2Ibid., p. 48.106born within him. Everard places the strongest possible emphasis on the importance of the indwelling Christ, a concept which is equally emphasized in Brerely's spirituality. For Everard

They that would have any benefit by Jesus Christ, they must have him in their hearts, Born within them; not only to know that Christ was born at Bethlehem, but born in them, and not to know only that Christ dyed at such a time, so many years ago, this will do you no good, except you experimentally find and feel, how he is crucified, dead and buried within you.

Let no man (what ever he be) delude you, and make you believe that any other Christ will save you. Let no man upon pain of salvation and damnation of his soul once dare to think that any other Christ will do him any good, and that he experimentally feel Jesus Christ risen again within him and all other actions that ever he did that still he finds him doing the same in him: as Saint Paul saith, My beloved, of whom I travel [travail] in birth till Christ be formed in you (Gal. 4:19): not Christ divided and by halves, but whole Christ formed in you.When you begin to find and know, not onely that he was conceived in the womb of a Virgin, but that thou art that virgin, and that he is more truly and spiritually and yet as really conceived in thy heart so that thou feelest the Babe beginning to be conceived in thee, by the power of the Holy Ghost, and the most High overshadowing thee, when thou feelest Jesus Christ stirring to be born and brought forth within thee; when thou beginnest to see and feel all those Mighty powerful, and wonderful actions done in thee, which thou readest he did in the flesh: For Christ is not divided (saith the Apostle (Heb. 13:8) but yesterday and today and the same forever. There is not one Christ without us and Another within us, but that same Christ that was then upon the earth, must be spiritually in us, growing and increasing and doing the same actions still.'The concept of the indwelling Christ is possibly derived from Tauler, but there is a fine line of distinction between Tauler's practice of the presence of God as described in Tauler's A Most Clear Glass, which Everard translated into English, and Calvin's concept of the indwelling Spirit. Tauler has drawn his conception from a trinitarian theology'Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, pp. 53-54.1107 based on that of Dionysius the Areopagite, which sets forth the utter

transcendence of the Father, beyond being itself, and the eternal generation of the Son from the Father. This trinitarian doctrine is not Augustinian and is not that of Calvin, who follows Augustine. But Everard appears rather to have adopted the Dionysian trinity:

God the Father is Unknowable, Unspeakable, Unnameable, neither creating nor being created. There is Jesus Christ the Son of the Father, first begotten of all creatures, the Heir of all Things, He is the Word, the Mediator, "All things in him had their ideal form." Christ is equal to his Father in all things. The Hlly Spirit is the Bond of Love between the Father and the Son.

The doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, so central to Eckhart and other mystics, may have been taken out of this trinitarian context, and imposed on the Calvinist doctrines of the eternal predestination of the elect and the indwelling Christ, thus tending to an actual identification with Christ such .as in the cases of William Hacket, and James Nayler, an identification of which even the suggestion was blasphemous to Calvinists.

The notion of the indwelling Christ in Everard is very close to identification, and he has broadened his concept of faith accordingly:

Now, Beloved, here is a Christ indeed, that will save you; here is a Christ, a real Christ that will do you some good: this is The Christ which indeed, Alone, and Onely will bring you to heaven.

If your faith hath wrought and formed such a Christ in you, then you may have boldness through him . . . Whatever other faith you have, believe as strongly, and as confidently as you will or can do, be sure it is but head-knowledge of Christ: it is but a bold unwarranted presumption, and no faith.2Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, pp. 83-84. 2lbid., p. 55.1108

Everard's emphasis on the indwelling of Christ as a component of faith parallels in some ways the doctrines of the Continental Spiritualist of the sixteenth century, Caspar Schwenckfeld. George Huntston Williams describes Sehwenckfeld's conception of faith as a "substantial, a physico-spiritual bond between the righteous celestial Christ and the formerly sinful but now regenerated believer.ilSchwenckfeld's concept of regeneration also resembles a complete transformation, and opposes the view of Luther. Williams asserts that Schwenckfeld would not tolerate Luther's definition of the Christian as "simul Justus et peccator."2 Schwenckfeld drew his concept of the indwelling Christ from his Eucharistic theology, which involved this bond with the regenerated soul, and which saw the communion between Christ and the believer as perpetual. Like the Seekers of the seventeenth-century, Schwenckfeld had advocated a suspension (stillstand) of all the sacraments, including the Eucharist, which he saw as a spiritual communion in faith. Williams describes Schwenckfeld's concept:

Eating means . . . partaking of the nature (natur) of Christ through true faith. The bodily food is transferred into our nature, but the spiritual food changes us into itself, that is, the divine nature, so that we become partakers of it (II Peter 1:4).3If Everard's concept of the indwelling Spirit of Christ was possibly influenced by that of Caspar Schwenckfeld, his emphasis onWilliams, The Radical Reformation, (Philadelphia: Westminster. Press, 1962) p. 1102Ibid., p. 110. 31bid., p. 114.109the authority of the Spirit in the interpretation of Scripture appears to echo that of John Denck, whose work Everard not only admired, but also translated into English. The equal role assigned to both the Spirit and the Word in interpreting Scripture in Calvin's theology is abandoned by Everard, following Denck, in favor of an assertion of the authority of the Spirit over the "killing letter" of the Word. For Everard, it is Christ himself, dwelling within the Christian, who interprets Scripture.There seems little doubt of the impact of Everard's theology on the thought of Roger Brerely. The strong emphases on the authority of the Spirit in interpreting Scripture, on the indwelling Christ, and on the transformation brought about by regeneration are evident enough in Brerely's sermons to confirm that Brerely was indeed a disciple ofEverard, as Rufus Jones has claimed) Jones attributes to Brerely a tendency to Seekerism like that of Everard, whom he calls the "Founder of the Seeker Movement in England "2What Brerely has accepted from the structure of Everard's thought, however, has been imposed upon a Puritan and Pietistic Calvinism that is based on the theology of William Perkins. Indeed the notion of the complete metamorphosis or transformation of the regenerate into a new creature, as taught by Perkins, may have1Rufus Jones, Mysticism and Democracy in the English Commonwealth. (Cambridge, Maas.: Harvard University Press, 1932) p. 65.

2Ibid., p. 81.110provided the seed for the notion of the Christ born within the Christian as taught by Everard, following Tauler and perhaps Schwenckfeld.

Brerely himself, however, appears to take his theological place between the two. His thought is not as radical a departure from orthodox Reformed theology as that of Everard, but he does appear to have crossed over the threshold toward a more mystical religion than that of Perkins.

Brerely's thought then, as analyzed from his sermons and poetry, is thoroughly imbued with Reformed theology. His ecclesiology follows the long line of the Swiss theologians starting with Zwingli, and it may have been this Zwinglian denial of the

efficacy of outward forms that Jones perceived as a leaning toward Seekerism. But I do not believe that Jones can be supported on this point, since while Brerely minimized the role of the sacraments, ceremonials, prayer, etc., he did not deny them the function of "meanes" of grace, perhaps as a kind of preparation for its reception. And unlike the Seekers, Brerely was not a Separatist; his efforts were always directed toward furthering unity and harmony among all believers. William Self Weeks quotes Canon Raines' opinion of Brerely's sermons in his article on "Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century,"

I have read the sermons and they seem to me altogether freefrom anything of a sensational character, and to contain nothing to which any one at all in sympathy with the Puritan view of religion could object, and there is an absence of that violence and fanaticism to be found in some of the sermons of John Webster, author of the "Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, in the days before111he gave himself up to the practice of medicine.lBut while we now can, along with Archbishop Matthew, exonerate Brerely from the fifty charges raised against him, we are not yet ready to exonerate his "hearers", some of whom were alleged to have been more "advanced" than he.1William Self Weeks, Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century, Reprinted from the "Clitheroe Advertiser and Times." (Clitheroe Advertiser and Times Co., Printers and Publishers, 1928) p. 175.CHAPTER IIIBRERELY'S CONGREGATIONSDuring the sixteenth century, the northern hills of England, with their isolated towns and villages, provided a safe refuge for the survival of late Lollardy, for Continental Anabaptists fleeing from European persecutions and seeking employment in the growing textile industry in the north, and for the more radical types of Puritanism. Few of the members of these groups were educated; even the ministers, as we have already seen, were not always well educated. Among these groups, the religious doctrines tended toward various combinations of old Lollard tenets, Anabaptist and Familist doctrines, and Calvinism. Added to these, a pervasive millenarianism provided an immediacy to all religious aspirations.This background was the heritage of the common people of the northern counties, the people who made up the congregations of ministers such as Brerely. In order to understand why Brerely's preaching had such an impact on his "hearers", it will be helpful to examine the particular tenets of Lollardy and Familism as well as the millenarian climate of seventeenth-century England.113 LollardyThe Lollard movement was the popular result of the teaching of John Wyclif (1328-1384), who has been called the "Morning Star of the Reformation," because he anticipated in so many ways the

ideas of Luther and Calvin. But the radical aspects of Wyclif's dissent have long been overlooked by English historians who apparently wished to identify him with the mainline reformers.For Wyclif, the Gospel is the touchstone of all knowledge and conduct. Faith in the Bible is grounded on inner conviction, and no man can understand Scripture unless he is enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Basing his theological teachings on those of St. Augustine, Wyclif, like Calvin, taught the concept of double predestination; but in his doctrine of the church, he denied the authority of any visible church, asserting the efficacy of the invisible church of the predestined elect alone. For him, the reprobate and the elect are separated from the outset. He pushed the Augustinian concept of prevenient grace to the extreme, insisting that the predestined could stand with mortal sin without impairing their status as the elect, thus setting an early precedent for the antinomianism we confront in the seventeenth century.In violent attacks on the corruption of the clergy, Wyclifcondemned the Pope, prelates, and parish priests for not conforming to the precepts and practices of Christ in the Bible. He asserted that•the clergy should live in voluntary poverty so that they might better emulate114the life of Christ.But Wyclif was a champion of royal authority; the king, he insisted, is God's vicar. He is the image of Christ as God and property for him is the badge of office; the entire church is subject to the king. On the other hand, the priest is the image of Christ as man, and for him the possession of property is a sin. Therefore, Wyclif proposed as remedy the disendowment of the church and advocated that the king should expropriate it and withdraw its civil rights. His argument prevailed under Henry VIII with the dissolution of the monasteries and the separation from Rome; but, as with so many other criticisms originally leveled against the Roman church in the sixteenth century, they were revived against the established Church of England by the Puritans in the seventeenth century.Wyclif criticized ceremonies as sensuous, disapproved of pilgrimages and saint worship, denied the church had any authority for canonization, and condemned the veneration of relics. For him, Christ is the head of the church: no human mediation is necessary. Grace comes direct from God "as hevene scaterith reyn," and goodness of life is the only criterion for election. Holy Scripture is infallible, since it is the word of Christ and contains God's laws. No other law is necessary. To it alone obedience is due. But without institutional mediation, the individual, left on his own, lived in a constant state of insecurity, not ever knowing whether either his "inner conviction" or his outward good works assured him membership in the elect. This was the exact dilemma which seventeenth-century115 Puritans confronted in the antinomian controversies, as we shall see.Wyclif's exaltation of preaching as the vehicle of salvation led him to minimize the sacraments. Grace may be conferred by the sacraments, but not election, and the elect did not need their mediation. In his Trialogus (1382), he claimed that the sacraments are essentially signs. Sacraments are not limited to the conventional seven, but rather there are a thousand signs, including preaching, which are as truly to be regarded as sacraments as the orthodox

seven. In this way Wyclif stripped the sacraments of their Augustinian meaning as channels of grace, and therefore as necessary for salvation.Wyclif denied the concept of transubstantiation and advanced instead the concept of consubstantiation: the bread after the consecration co-exists with Christ. He did not believe that the sacrament of baptism was necessary for salvation, since he seems to have abandoned the Augustinian concept of original sin. But his rigid predestinarianism lends a new aspect to the concept of free will, one that parallels that of the high Calvinist position against Arminius in the seventeenth century. In De Dominio Divino, Wyclif states that Deus sapientissime creavit hominem iustum cum libertate arbitrii; only the just man, the predestined elect, has free will. The man whose will is directed to evil is predestined to damnation and will continue to sin to the end. Wyclif opposed the sacramental form of marriage and the practice of private confession, and against Holy Orders he . taught the priesthood of the elect. He was opposed not only to116 contemplative prayer, but to the recitation of the office, and to all

singing. The paternoster was the most efficacious prayer for the profit "bothe of soule and body," it passeth alle othere preieris in auctorite" because "oure lord ihu crist, god & man, made it & comaunded cristene men to seie it, but othere preeier is ben made bi men."For Gordon Leff, "Lollardy is the outstanding example in the later middle ages of popular heresy as the direct outcome of learned heresy."

What Wyclif transmitted to his followers was dissent ready-made. Its subsequent evolution as Lollardy made it more extreme and violent. It moved farther and farther away from Wyclif's outlook so that he would certainly have disowned it by the time of Oldcastle's rising in 1414 if not before, as he had denounced the violence of the Peasant's Revolt in 1381. Nevertheless he was its progenitor and its inciption, though not its subsequent development, was from him.

The learned teaching of the Oxford Master was now translated into the vernacular of the poor preachers who formed the Lollard conventicles. The subtleties of Wyclif's thought tended to be overlooked. This may have been the result of Wyclif's penchant for poverty. Wyclif's "poor priests" were often too ignorant and simple, for Wyclif had connected his concept of religion with the absolute ideal of apostolic poverty. Lollard preachers tended, as time went on, to be drawn more and more from the lower and uneducated classes, who had nothing to lose by renouncing possessions.Gordon Leff, Heresy in the Later Middle Ages, 2 vols. (Manchester University Press; New York: Barnes and Noble, 1967) Volume II, p. 605.1117Leff describes Lollardy as a militant spirituality which looked to naked force for the physical overthrow of the existing church and opposed to it not another church but purity of heart and personal example. However, with the State united with the Church to exterminate them, Lollards soon became seditious as well as anti-ecclesiastical. In the decade that followed Wyclif's

death in 1384, the movement flourished, supported by knights and local gentry who were sympathetic to the confiscation of church property. In 1395, the Lollards issued an appeal to Parliament, the so-called Lollard Twelve Conclusions, which they nailed to the doors of Westminster and St. Paul's, calling for the disendowment of the Church. The Church in retaliation appealed to the king to extend the death penalty to the Lollards, and in 1401 Henry IV issued the statute De heretico comburendo; those found guilty of heresy were to be handed over to the lay power and burned. In 1409, a ban was placed on vernacular translations of the Bible. In 1414, Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham, was arrested and accused of heresy. After condemnation he escaped, went into hiding, and set about plotting to seize the king and overthrow the government. Thus, out of the climate of ecclesiastical and civil tyranny came that basic resistance to the authority of both king and church which in the seventeenth century motivated the Leveller movement. Oldcastle's plot failed, but the Lollards were thereafter accused of sedition.An element of apocalyptic is evident in the statementsof Oldcastle's followers who were arrested after the attempted plot;118elaborations on Wyclif's identification of the Church as Anti-Christ were developed by corresponding the hierarchy to the different parts of the Beast. By the 1490's millenarianism was apparent in the testimony of some Lollards arrested at Newberry. One of these claimed that victory of the Lollards over the Church would come within two years. Another, less optimistic, set the date as within ten. The records also show evidence of a mingling of witchcraft among the tenets they held.Leff believes that there were two levels of Lollardy--the one politically subversive, the other true to its theological inspiration. The politically subversive level disappeared by 1431, but the theological basis of Lollardy survived into the Reformation as acurrent of beliefs.l Dickens writes of a neo-Lollard revival beginning about 1490. Unlike earlier scholars, Dickens acceptsthe accounts of John Foxe concerning the Tudor martyrs, although he regrets that Foxe did not document his accounts more thoroughly. But Dickens himself has verified accounts of episcopal records between 1490 and 1530 and finds that every one contains cases of Lollardy. Between 1506 and 1507 alone,.he notes, sixty Lollard heretics were prosecuted in Lincoln and twenty in Buckinghamshire. As late as 1521, Bishop Longland attacked Lollard heretics on a large scale and over 350 persons were accused and six executed. A large and active group seems to have existed in London, where there were booksellers withLeff, Heresy in the Later Middle Ages, p. 605.1119Lollard connections selling the Bibles printed on the continent.Foxe, the Puritan martyrologist, claimed that it was impossible that the Lollards should have believed that infant baptism was unnecessary; yet John Thomson, in his study, The Later Lollards, claims that the evidence of various trials shows that there were Lollards who believed precisely that.l This stems

from the fact that Foxe insisted on a kind of orthodox Protestantism in the Lollard movement; but as we have seen, the basis for Anabaptist rejection of infant baptism is present in Wyclif's thought. Indeed, Wyclif's theological paradigm could easily absorb many of the Anabaptist concepts, and for this reason it is difficult to assess the impact of Anabaptist influence from abroad in relation to those doctrines inherent in Wyclif's system. Thomson believes that Lollardy became something of a melting pot in its latter days and that the reception of other ideas by the Lollards may have preceded the Reformation. But by 1530 foreign elements began to merge with Lollard ideas and both Lutheran and Anabaptist tenets are recognizably mingled with Wyclif's ideas. Dickens writes that "the only major doctrine of the sixteenth century Reformers which Wyclif cannot be said to have anticipated was that of justification by faith alone."In 1528 Bishop Tunstall coupled Lutheran and Lollardtogether. "There have been found certain children of iniquity who are endeavouring to bring into our land the old and accursed WycliffiteJohn A. F. Thomson, The Later Lollards 1414-1520 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965) p. 241.1120

heresy, and along with the Lutheran heresy, foster-daughter

of Wyclif's " Five years later he wrote to Erasmus: "It is no question of pernicious novelty, it is only that new arms are being added to the great crowd of Wyclifite heresies."lBetween 1530 and the death of Henry VIII, at least nine Wyclifite treatises are known to have been set forth in print by publicists who preceded Foxe in realizing the usefulness of a religious pedigree, especially one of an all-English character, as Dickens has observed.2

The late survival and strength of the Lollard movement well into the sixteenth century is an important factor in tracing the origin not only of English Protestantism but of English Puritanism. While Puritanism is basically a Calvinist development, there can be no doubt that among the less educated, the groundwork was laid in these Lollard beliefs. Dickens notes that

The communities which displayed the most marked Lollard-Protestant tendencies before 1558 proceeded in each case to develop Puritan tendencies in Elizabethan and Jacobean times. The fact cannot be purely coincidental; at the very least, the social atmosphere and connexions of the Yorkshire ports and weaving towns showed themselves equally hospitable to both ideologies. It might be rash to call the Lollard wing of the movement the ancestor of Independency, yet the two appealed to the same sorts of people for similar reasons.3This "secret multitude of true professors," as Foxe called them, the1A. G. Dickens, The English Reformation, (New York: Schocken Books, 1964) p. 37.

2Ibid., p. 37.

3Dickens, Lollards and Protestants in the Diocese of York 1509-1558. (London: Published for the University of Hull by the Oxford University Press, 1959) p. 247.121 "known men" or the "justfast men," continued in certain areas during

and beyond the first three decades of the sixteenth century. Dickens concludes that

Scholars who seek an historical understanding of the English Reformation would be wise to think a little less about Bucer, Bullinger, and even Cranmer and somewhat more in terms of a diffused but inveterate Lollardy revivified by contact with continental Protestantism.1The ideology of this "inveterate Lollardy" provided fertile ground for the acceptance of the concepts of the mainline Reformers, as well as for the development of Anglicanism (Wyclif had insisted on the autonomy of the English ecclesia) and of Puritanism. But the Lollard concepts also provided fertile ground for the development of radical dissent, and in the study of the seventeenth-century sects, including the Seekers, Diggers, Levelers, Ranters, as well as the Grindletonians, one might find'the seeds in Lollardy.

Wyclif, as we have seen, may also have provided a rationale for both perfectionism and antinomianism, for the concept of an invisible church, and for other doctrines of the Anabaptists. Of the charges leveled against the Grindletonians (Appendix I), numbers 3, 5, 7, 17, 32, 33, 34, and 35 might be said to apply equally to Lollard heresies, which may have persisted among the congregations at Grindleton and the surrounding parishes. But by the early part of the seventeenth century, other elements had fused with the Lollard tenets, including Anabaptist and Familist doctrines, which in turn werep. 243.1Dickens, Lollards and Protestants in the Diocese of York,122affected by the millenarian climate of pre-civil war England. The Grindletonians were called "Familists." A brief review of the background and tenets of the so-called "Family of Love" will clarify the analogy and reveal the nature of the polemic against Brerely and his "hearers."

The Family of Love

The Family of Love first comes to attention in England about the middle of the sixteenth century, when Archbishop Cranmer had his attention called to "a sect newly sprung up in Kent," which Strype believes may have been the Family of Love. In 1579, John Rogers published The Displaying of an Horrible Secte of Grosse and Wicked Heretiques Naming Themselves the Family of Love. In his introduction, Rogers charges that they "claim that truth hath nowhere bene taught in the worlde since the Apostles time and that nothing

they taught nor published but that which they affirmed to receive from God by revelation." As a preface to Rogers' tract, a certain Stephen Bateman adds a note to the "gentle reader" warning of another Munster:

It behoveth therefore all reverend Elders, bishoppes and preachers to seek at the handes of our sovereigne, authorite to redresse the same, or else will assuredly follow the like plague on us as was at Munster in Germany by David George, John a Leede, Knipper Dolling and others, the seede whereof is H.N., Henry Nicholas, now of Colone, his disciple here in England, Christopher Vittel the Joiner, and many more.1J. R. (John Rogers) The Displaying of an Horrible Secteof Grosse and Wicked Heretiques Naming Themselves the Family of Love. (Imprinted at London for Geo. Bishop, 1578) To the Gentle Reader by Stephen Bateman.123Henry Nicholas (or Niclaes) was a Dutchman, born in 1502, the son of a Munster merchant who was a devout Catholic. From the beginning the boy gave evidence of precocious religiosity and claimed many visions and revelations. It was not, however, until his thirty-ninth year that he received the revelation which made him the founder of the Family of Love. Suddenly one day,

my heart became lighted with clearness, and my whole inward minde was pierced thorow with winds of life and delectable sweetness. Furthermore, out of this same light and sweet winds of life, there appeared unto me, a great, mighty, and glorious beeing; the same opened my heart, and spread forth my inward minde (with it self) very wide and broad; yea so wide that the whole heaven and the universal earth stood comprehended therein.

After that, Nicholas beheld the Lord himself, who "filled the whole heaven," and who showed him "many and manifold things" of heaven and on earth. In a second vision, he was told to spread abroad over the universal earth "all that he has seen and heard."2

From that time on, Henry Nicholas always used the initials "H. N.", which stands for Homo Novus (New Man) as well as for his old name. The group spread through Holland, Brabant, Flanders, and later into England and France. It was the purpose of Nicholas to raise the entire membership of the "House of Love" to full-grown men in Christ,H. N., Revelatio Dei, The Revelation of God and his Great Prophesie, Which God now (in the last day) Hath shewed unto His Elect. Set forth by H. N. and by him perused anew, and more distinctly declared. Translated out of Base-Almaine (London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the sign of the Black-Spred Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1649) pp. 3-4.

2lbid., p. 120.1124

so that each member should be a "begodded person." Nicholas' writings were all originally written in Low German, but nearly all were translated into English by the latter part of the sixteenth century. He was a prolific writer, but many of his works are extremely rare now. Chief among his works were The Glass of Righteousness, An Introduction to the Glass of Righteousness, The First Exhortation of H. N. to his Children, The Evangelium Regni, Epistles, Cantica, and Terra Pacis or Spiritual Land of Peace.The central theme in Nicholas's writings is his insistence on real holiness among his followers. Real righteousness in the person himself bears witness to a new life born out of the spiritual incorporation of the person into the life of God, so that the person becomes "godded" or made conformable to Christ. For Nicholas, "God is a living God, a perfect, clear Light, and Love itself. This God manneth himself and we may become likewise, through His godly Light, sodded and made a conformable willing spirit with Him."1For Nicholas, it is through Jesus Christ that we are renewed in our human spirit and brought to "a goodwilling" life. But only when we become "incorporated" with him does He become our Saviour. We must follow after Christ even to His death on the Cross, in obedience1H. N., The First Exhortation of H. N. to His Children and to the Family of Love. By him newly Perused and more distinctly declared. Likewise H. N. upon the Beatitudes and the Seven Deadly Sins. Translated out of the Base Almayn into English (London: Printed for Giles Calvert, at the Black-Spread Eagle at the West End of Pauls, and John Allen at the Rising Sun in the New Buildings in Paul's Church Yard, between the two North Doors, 1656) pp. 27-31.125 to His Spirit, so that sin, death, and Hell are vanquished in us, alliniquity buried, and our old nature completely destroyed. "Those that do not even so become baptized in His name and do not bear in their inwardness the death of sin through the death on the Cross of Christ, are no Christians."1In these concepts of the indwelling Christ, of the divinization of man, the experience of illumination, we can see the seminal ideas which were to form the basis of Quaker beliefs and which seem to have taken root among the congregations in the north of England which were labeled "Grindletonian." The concept of human identification with Christ and therefore of human perfection, called forth a torrent of polemic from the Calvinists, and most of our knowledge of the Family of Love is based on their accusations and invective. But, relying on the writings of Henry Niclaes himself, it would appear that for the Family of Love, not only ceremonies but all works are "vain husks," without the experience of participation in Christ and the Spirit, and this experience transforms the man so that in all his actions he reflects the righteousness of God. Despite all charges of libertinism and antinomianism by contemporaries, there is no basis for them. Niclaes asserts that no one is released from the law. The law is not abolished, it is fulfilled in Love. And no one ever transcendsH. N., First Exhortation, pp. 35-37.1126righteousness, "for the entire work of God toward salvation has been making for the fruits of righteousness."1

Like the Anabaptists and the Quakers, Niclaes called his followers away from oaths and war and capital punishment:

In the House of Love men do not curse nor swear; they do not destroy nor kill any. They use no outward swords or spears. They seek to destroy no flesh of man; but it is a fight of the cross and patience to the subduing of sin.2Scripture teaches us by figures, shadows, parables, words and written letters, but Niclaes warns his followers not to be led astray by those who are only "Scripture learned." Scripture is not the teacher, the Spirit is. Rites and ceremonies are only shadows and figures for a low stage of religious progress. Niclaes' sacramentarianism is clear:

Not in anything whatsoever that is visible or feelable, nor in any .factious God-services or ceremonies which are observed with men's hands in contention and which do not require any life of righteousness, consisteth either salvation or condemnation before God, nor can they bring any vantage or damage at all into souls. . . j

Let no man bind his heart unto any outward thing, for here is the sum of perfect Righteousness. It is a humble heart that departeth from all earthly and corruptible things and with a lowly and meek spirit is incorporated with God in pure love, according to the Spirit, liv$ng in the form of Jesus Christ, in an unspotted conscience.1H. N., Introductio, An Introduction to the Holy Understanding of the Glasse of Righteousnesse, Wherein are uttered many notable Admonitions and Exhortations to the good life, also Sundry discreet Warnings to beware of Destruction and of wrong conceiving and misunderstanding or censuring of any Sentences. Sett-forth by H. N. and by him perused-a-new and expressed more playnly. Chapter ii, Section 1-5.2Ibid., chapter XI, p. 20. Ibid., chapter XII, p. 25.3Ibid., chapter XVI, section 35.127 Like George Fox, Niclaes encourages quiet waiting in silence. "Grow

up in stillness and singleness of heart, praying for a right sight of the truth, for that shall make you free." He urges his Family to break spiritual bread together "in stillness, abiding steadfast in prayer, till all covering wherewith their hearts, after the flesh, are covered, is done away."lThe Family of Love was millenarian. Niclaes believed his church to be the only true church, the House of Love was God's latest stage of revelation. It was, its members believed, the fulfillment of God's Covenant of Grace and the beginning of the religion of the Spirit, thus manifesting the Joachimite tendencies so prevalent in the period among the Anabaptists. Niclaes wrote that:

Now in the last time through the appearing of Christ, God hath raised up His community of holy ones, the only true seed and witness of Jesus Christ in the world. . . the stool of Grace to an everlasting remission of sins.'

John Rogers, in his Displaying of an Horrible Secte, claims that there were at least one thousand Familists in England in "divers parts of the realm" at that time (1578). He accuses them of Pelagianism and of papistry, but reserves his worst ire for H. N. himself:

H. N., he followeth his father in like blasphemie, avoucheth that he hath talked with God, not by inspiration or revelation, but by giving forth his sound and voyce. Then placeth himselfe in Christes stead and office in judging the children of God. . .1H. N., The Glasse of Righteousnesse, chapter XVIII. 2H. N., First Exhortation, pp. 75-78.128

If these be not luciferian voices I am much deceived. Then he saith that what the Prophetes and Christ have written, that must be fulfilled in him, and with him and that all the generations of the earth must submit themselves unto the mercy seat and godly majesty which is in him. Thus I suppose my coniecture standeth firme, where I saide that David George was the hatcher of this heresie and layde the egg, but H. N. brought forth the chickens.l

David Joris (or David George as the English called him) of Delft, was an Anabaptist, a group of whose followers formed the nucleus of the Family of Love in England about the year 1540. Rogers accuses one Christopher Vittel of continuing the spread of the doctrine of H. N., but complains that it is difficult to identify a Familist, "for it is a maxima in the Familie to denie before men all their doctrine, so that they keepe the same secrets in their hearts." Vittel, however, apparently was a great success as an "elder" in the Family, the hierarchical order of which conformed rather more closely to Roman Catholicism than to Calvinism.

A great deal of information about the Family of Love available to us is pejorative, an example of which is contained in

A Confession Made of Two of the Family of Love, from the text of

The Displaying of an Horrible Secte. Rogers lists fifty-three charges of error against the Familists, including,

22. They hold, that he which is one of their congregation is either as perfecte as Christ or else a verse devell;1Rogers, Displaying of an Horrible Secte, [pages unnumbered].129

23. They holde it is lawfull to doe whatsoever the higher powers commaunde to be done, though it be against the Commandments of God and for that they alledge the words of St. Peter: Submit yourselves to the ordinaunces of the higher powers.

24. They denie that Christ is equal with God the Father in his Godhead, uppon this place of Scripture, My Father is greater than I.26. They denie the Trinity scorning them that say God the Father, God the Sonne and God the Holy Ghost: as though by saying these words they shoulde affirme to be three Gods.

27. They holde that no man should be baptized before he be of the age of thirty (XXX) years. And therefore have divers of them been baptized at those yeares and upwardes.

29. They say that as Christ raised the dead, cleansed the lepre, gave sight to the blind and walked on the waters, so do they.

30. They holde, that heaven and hell are present in this worlde amongst us and that there is none other, and for pruf thereof they alledge the chapter of Matthew, of Christes transfiguration, that as the cloude removed, Peter did see Elias and Moses: so if the cloude were removed alway, both heaven and hell should be visible to us.40. They hold, there ought to be no Sabbath Day but that all should be like; and for that they alledge the Son of Man is Lord over the Sabath Day.

41. They hold themselves to be Maries: and say that Christ is come forth in their flesh, even as he came forth of the virgin Mary.43. They hold that there was a worlde before Adam's time as there is now.45. They holde that no man should be put to death for his opinions and therefore they condemne Maister Cranmer and Maister Ridley for burning Joan of Kent.

51. They have certaine sleightes amongst them to answer any questions that shall be demaunded of them, with deceiving the130demaundant: as for example if one of them be demaunded how he beleeveth in the Trinitie, he will answere, I am to learne of you: and so provoketh the demaundant to shew his opinion therein, which done, he will say then, I do believe so: by the which wordes he meaneth that he believeth the demaundant saith as he thinketh, but not that he thinketh so.1Besides the fifty-three charges, Rogers' Displaying of an Horrible Secte reveals also the "manner of shrift used in the Familie"

It is expedient that they make manifest their whole hearts, with all their counsells, myndes, willes and thoughtes: together with all their doinges, dealings and exercises, naked and bare, before the Eldest in.the Familie and not to hide anything (be what it is) and all what their inclination and nature draweth them unto, and all thing wherewith they become tempted in their hearts. If ye chaunce to offend or commit sinne, conselle and the same beforethe priestes your Elders and let all appeare nakedly apparent before them. 2In 1579 John Knewstub, who was a Cambridge Master of Arts and a famous divine with strong Puritan leanings, published A Confutation of Monstrous

And Horrible Heresies, Taught by H. N and Embraced of a Number Who Call Themselves the Family of Love. Knewstub

makes the famous statement in this document which Christopher Hill has borrowed for the title of his study of radical religious dissent:

"H. N. turns religion upside down. He3 buildeth heaven here upon earth; he maketh God man and man God.1Quoted in Rogers, "A Confession Made of Two of the Family of Love before a Worthie and Worshipfull Iustice of Peace the 28 of May 1561 Touching the Errours Taught Amongst Them at their Assemblies,"from the text of The Displaying of an Horrible Secte [pages unnumbered].

2lbid.

3John Knewstub. A Confutation of Monstrous and Horrible Heresies, Taught by H. N. and Embraced of a Number Who Call Them-selves the Family of Love (Imprinted in London at the three Cranesin the Vine tree, by Thomas Dawson for Richard Sergier, 1579) Epistle Dedicatory, [p. 5].131Knewstub also asserts that Henry Nicholas says that "God hath raised him from the dead and anointed him with the Holy Ghost, and chosen him to be a minister of the Word under the obedience of Love." Again he argues that "H. N. makes Christ no one man, but a state and condition in men, by the reception of which state and condition men grow into perfection and so sin no more. This state he calleth the True Light or Being, or Perfection." It is interesting to note that Knewstub claims that the Familists understand the transgression of Adam to have been in the will, and this is evidence that we are dealing here with the Pelagian denial of the ravages of original sin in the Reformed sense. The Pelagian position allowed also for the possibility of perfection, but the Familists went much further than Pelagius in asserting that their illuminati were sinless. Knewstub is shocked to learn that the Familists believe that "their illuminate Elders do not sinne and whatsoever they commit, it cannot be sincere (yea, if they fall into any act, be it never so ungodly, it cannot be counted sinne, as it proceedeth from them) because they are Deified." This then is very clearly both perfectionism and antinomianism, if Knewstub's charges are true.In the same year (1579), William Wilkinson published his tract, A Confutation of Certain Articles Delivered Unto the Family of Love. Wilkinson claims that the chief Elders of the Familists were "weavers, basketmakers, musicians, bottlemakers and such like. "He declares that132 they "swarm and dayly increase in the Isle of Ely." This description

of the occupations of the Familist groups provides us with possible evidence of their proliferation among the weavers and basketmakers in the growing textile industry in England during this period and of a possible source among the Dutch weavers, fleeing from the debacle at Munster, and seeking refuge

and employment among Lollard sympathizers in the more remote counties of England.

With them, the Dutch Anabaptists may have brought some of the "strange opinions" which characterize the Grindletonian variety of Familist doctrine, such as that held by some of their members "touchyng the humanitie of Christe." One of the distinctive views held by early Anabaptists in the Low countries as well as by certain leaders at Strassburg, was the so-called doctrine of the celestial flesh of Christ. According to this view, Christ at his incarnation did not partake of the body of Mary because of her sinful nature, but received a human body as a divine act. Caspar Schwenckfeld was an early exponent of this doctrine during the 1520's at Strassburg. It was emphasized by Melchior Hoffmann, the founder of Anabaptism in the Netherlands, and his teaching influenced the early Dutch leaders. In 1549, Joan of Kent was burned at the stake in England for heresy. The charge brought against her wasThat you beleve that the word was made fleshe in the virgyn's belly but that Christ toke fleshe of the virgyn you beleve not,I133because the flesh of the virgyn being the outward man synfully gotten, and bourne in synne, but the wore by the consent of the inward man of the virgin was made flesh.

Another Anabaptist "opinion" which found its way into Familist ideology was the concept of "spiritual abstinence", which made it possible within doctrinal limits for Anabaptists to recant in order to secure the king's pardon, and most of those who recanted returned immediately to their beliefs. The concept entailed a separation of the inner and outward man which may have developed later into that exaggerated cleavage between flesh and spirit which characterized the antinomian controversies.Of the entire Anabaptist paradigm of heresies, none antagonized the Calvinist Reformers more than their insistence on man's free will. The free will theology of the Anabaptists anticipates by almost half a century the Arminian controversies that rocked the Protestant sects in the early part of the seventeenth century. Balthasar Hubmaier had worked out a coherent theology of the freedom of the will, and his work was known in England at a very early period. Melchior Hofmann debated with Martin Bucer in Strassburg in June 1533 defending freedom of theIrvin Buckwalter Horst, The Radical Brethren:Anabaptism and the English Revolution to 1558. The Hague: Nieuwkoop, 1972) p. 110.1134will. While the Pelagian view of man's free will is characteristic of English Anabaptist sects, neither re-baptism nor separatism were marks of Anabaptism in England. Bainton believes that the non-separatist character of English Anabaptism is what made it unique and, while the movement was finally crushed in continental Europe, it nevertheless survived in seventeenth-century England.

Henry Harte, a leader of the Kentish sectaries and one of

the first Separatists, held "opinions of the Anabaptists" and was brought to court in 1551. Burrage records these statements:

Henry Harte, it is said, stated that God did not predestinate men to election or reprobation, but that their position in relation to these two states depended entirely upon themselves. It is also reported that Harte claimed that learned men were the cause of great errors and that Cole of 11aidstone had affirmed that children were not born in original sin.

Against this background, Arminianism would later gain many adherents already conditioned by these English Anabaptist tenets, and among the dissenting sects, a strong element of anti-intellectualism

was inherited as well. Harte wrote that "Truly knowledge is dangerous where love and obeyance is lackynge, for it tyckelyth the mynde of folles, and lifteth them up with vanity. But such as seke to increase incertu walke surely."2 Along with anti-intellectualism went a strong emphasis on the power of the Holy Spirit. For them the "kingdome of God1Champlin Burrage. The Early English Dissenters inthe Light of Recent Research (1550-1641). 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1912) Volume I, p. 52.

2Horst, Radical Brethren, p. 128.135standeth not in words (as ye wel know) but in power and workynge." George Huntston Williams observes that in the third quarter of the Reformation era:

England's Anabaptism was exclusively Melchiorite, that its Spiritualism was likewise of Netherlandish origin (Libertinism, Familism), that its anti-trinitarianism seems to have been proportionately more prominent than in the Netherlands, and that except for the still unclarified relationship with indigenous Lollardy, the radical trends in England appear to have largely been an importation and as such an extension of the radical movements engendered in the Hanseatic zone of Low German speech.l

Williams is, of course, correct in emphasizing the importance of the influence of Dutch spiritualism on the English Familists, but our review of the doctrinal background of Lollardy and its similarity with the tenets of Anabaptism and the spiritualists suggests that the Lollard background was of more importance in the development of the sects than Williams might allow.

A distinctive practice of the English Baptists was that of having women preachers. This custom may not have been prevalent in the Family of Love, but it does seem to have been accepted by the Grindletonians, including, of course, the celebrated case of Anne Hutchinson in New England, whose

doctrines we will describe later. Thomas Edwards, in Gangraena describes the custom:

Among all the confussions and disorder in the Church, matters both of opinions and practices, and particularly of all sorts of mechanicks, taking upon them to preach and baptize as smiths, taylors, shoomakers, pedlars, weavers, etc., there are alsop. 24.1George Huntston Williams, The Radical Reformation.136some women preachers in our times, who keep constant lectures, preaching weekly to many men and women in Lincolnshire,in Holland and those parts (i.e.) the parts about Holland in Lincolnshire), there is a woman preacher who preaches (it's certain) and 'tis reported also she baptizeth, but that's not so certain. In the Isle of Ely (that land of errors and sectaries) is a woman preacher also; in Hartfordshire also there are some woman preachers who take upon them to expound the scriptures in houses, and preach upon texts as on Rom. viii.2. But in London there are women who for some time together have preached weekly on every Tuesday, about four of the clock, unto whose preaching many have resorted. I shall particularly give the reader an account of the preaching of two women (one a lace-maker that sells lace in Cheapside, and dwells in Bell Alley in Coleman Street, and the other a major's wife living in the Old Bailey), who about a month ago, the second Tuesday in December (as I take it) did preach in Bell Alley in Coleman Street, the manner whereof is as follows (as I had it from a godly ministef of this city who was there present, an eye and ear witness of it.

Edwards goes on to describe the seating of the three women and how they began to preach that God would pour out of His Spirit upon the handmaidens, then led the group in a half-hour of prayer, and after the prayer expounded the text, "If ye love Me, keep My Commandments." On another occasion Edwards writes,

One Mrs. Attaway, the woman who before preached in Bell Alley (as described above) delivered many and dangerous doctrines: As (1) that it could not stand with the goodness of God to damn His own creatures eternally. (2) That God the Father did reign under1Thomas Edwards, The First And Second Part of Gangraena or a Catalogue and Discovery of the many errors, Heresies, Blasphemies, and pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of this time, vented and acted in England in these four last yeers. Also a particular Narrative of divers Stories, Remarkable Passages, Letters; and Extracts of many Letters all concerning the present Sects, together with some Observations upon, and Corollaries from all the fore-named Premises.By Thomas Edwards, Minister of the Gospel. Third Edition, corrected and much Enlarged (London: Printed by R. R. and E. M. for Ralph Smith at the sign of the bible in Comhill [sic] near the royall Exchange MDCXLVI) Second Part, p. 29.137

the law; God the Son under the Gospel; and now God the Father and God the Son are making over the Kingdom to God the Holy Ghost, and He shall be poured out on all flesh. (3) That there shallbe a general restauration, wherein all mfn shll be reconciled and saved; and (4) That Christ died for all.

From Edwards' account of Mrs. Attaway's "dangerous doctrines," it is evident that this was a meeting of the General Baptists, denying double predestination, asserting universal salvation and articulating the Joachimite theory of the three states of revelation.

The Baptists as well as the Familists of the seventeenth century inherited these concepts, which by the early 1600's tended to receive greater or less emphasis depending on the congregation which espoused them. Evidence of this lack of doctrinal unity is revealed in a sermon preached by Stephen Denison entitled The White Wolf in 1627. The sermon, preached against John Hetherington, a prominent Familist teacher in London, separates "Famistical wolves" into four "packs," the two most important of which are "those that hold that the law of God may be perfectly fulfilled in this life and those that hold that the Spirit is above Scripture, that all days are Sabbaths, that when God dwells in a soul He fills the soul so that there is no more lusting." Denison lists seven types of Familism which had developed by 1627, the year of his sermon, each of which groups castigated the other:

1. Castalian Familists: outward conformity; term themselves eagles & archangels; affirm pagans can be saved,1ddwards, Gangraena, Second Part, p. 29.138

2. Gringltonian Familists: de-emphasize scripture, sabbath, repentance, assert priority of spirit; no motives, only "motions"; no more sin or temptation; cast off prayings; scoff at "works,"

3. Familists in the Mountains: say they have vanquished the devil, are pure from sin

4. Familists in the Vallyes: weep constantly,

5. Familists of the Scattered Flock: they fear the Lord when they are nothing less,

6. Familists of Caps

7. Hetheringtonian Familists: John HetheringtonlAn example of the type of mutual recriminations among the different Familist factions is offered by Denison himself.

In 1623, Edmund Jessop attacked the Family of Love as "the most blasphemous and erroneous sect this day in the world." Jessop charged, in his tract, A Discovery of the Errors of the English Anabaptists, that

they teach that the same perfection of holiness which was in Adam before he fell is to be attained here in this life, and affirm that the members of their Family are as perfect and innocent as he. They say that "the resurrection of the dead, spoken of by St. Paul in I Cor. 15 is fulfilled in them, ad they deny all resurrection of the body after this life.1Stephen Denison, The White Wolf, p. 38

2Edmund Jessop, A Discovery of the Errors of the EnglishAnabaptists, As also an Admonition to all such as are led by the like spirit of error. Wherein is set downe all their severall andmaine points of error which they hold, with a full answer to every one of the them severally wherein the truth is manifested. By Edward Jessop who sometime walked in the said errors with them (London: Printed by W. Jones for Robert Bird, and are to be sold at his shop in Cheapside at the signe of the Bible, 1623).139 Denison claimed that Edmund Jessop pretended to turn from Anabaptistto the Church of England, but actually followed Hetherington; Hetherington himself was said to condemn H. N. and his Familists as well as the Castalian Familists.l Hetherington replied to Denison's White Wolf Sermon from prison in 1627 with A Defence Against, Stephen Denison which was published in 1641.Perhaps the most bitter attack on the Familists was thatmade by Samuel Rutherford, from whom we learn that many Familists were in jail at the time, that they regarded outward worship and ordinances as traditions, and that they were spread through twelve counties of England. In Rutherford's Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist, he writes, "Would they were few in number, yet they are pestering twelve counties of England."2Denison, The White Wolf, p. 45.

2Samuel Rutherford, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist: Opening the Secrets of Familisme and Antinomianisme in the Anti-Christian Doctrine of John Saltmarsh and will. Del, the present Preachers of the Army now in England and of Robert Towne, Tobias Crisp, H. Denne, Eaton, and others. In which is revealed the rise and spring of Antinomians, Familists, Libertines, Swenckfeldian Enthysiasts. The minde of Luther a most professed opposer of antinomians, is cleared and diverse considerable points of Law and Gospel, of Spirit and Letter, of the two Covenants, of the nature of free grace, exercise under temptation, mortification, justification, sanctification, are described. In Two Parts. (London: Printed by J. D. and R. I., for Andrew Crooke, and are to be sold at his shope at the Green Dragon in Pauls Churchyard, 1648).1I140

By the latter part of the seventeenth century the Family of Love had dwindled considerably. On June 16, 1687, James II received an Address from some of the Family of Love:

His Majesty asked them what their party might consist of; they told him their custom was to reade the Scripture and then to preach, but did not give any further account, onely sayd that for the rest they were a sort of refined Quakers, but their number was very small, not consisting as they sayd, of above three score in all, and those chiefly belonging to the Isle of Ely.

A remnant of the Family of Love lingered on into the opening of the eighteenth century in England, but by that time most of their members, as well as their religious ideas, had been absorbed into the Seekers, the Ranters, or the Quakers.The similarity between the thought of John Everard and that of the Familists is striking, and suggests a common origin for many of the concepts, perhaps in the mystical tradition of the medieval church. The difference is that the Familists originally were not Calvinist, and Everard was not only a Calvinist but a Puritan and an Anglican clergyman as well. Christopher Hill sees evidence of Familist leanings in Everard's The Gospel Treasure Opened (1659) andnotes the friendship between Everard and Roger Brerely.2 Hill says of Everard:He thought God was in man and nature, located heaven and hell in the hearts of men, and allegorized the Bible. The 'dead letter is1Petition of the Family of Love to James II, May 16, 1687, in Jones, Studies in Mystical Religion, p. 447.2Hill, World Turned Upside Down, p. 149.141

not the Word, but Christ is the Word,' he said. 'Sticking in the letter' has been 'the bane of all growth in religion,' the cause of controversies and persecution. God's kingdom is come and his will done, 'when Christ is come into thy flesh.' Miracles have not ceased, 'but our eyes are blinded and we cannot see them.' Everard was warmly praised by John Webster. Everard's preaching was aimed especially at 'beggarly fellows,' those who were 'mean, poor, and despised by the world'; such were 'more welcome to him than so many princes and potentates.' Yet he was for a long time an Anglican clergyman. His friend Roger Brearly, theGrindletonian, lived and died one. It would be interesting to know more about the links between them.lThe links between the thought of Everard and that of Brerely are evident. But the background of Lollard concepts, as well as the infiltration of Familist doctrines, was probably the basis of the distinctive religiosity of his congregations, who may not have had access to Everard's preaching. The more mystical and spiritualist aspect of each, came from two different but similar sources. This would explain the relative orthodoxy of Brerely's preaching over against what was called the "more advanced" spirituality of

his "hearers." And it would explain the nature of the fifty charges, all of which can be related to Lollard, Familist and other Anabaptist concepts.

MillenarianismAdding historic immediacy to the quest for reform among all the factions in seventeenth century England was a pervasive millenarianism, a heightening of chiliastic hopes brought on by the religious and social upheaval of the Reformation, and aided and abetted by men such1Hi11, World Turned Upside Down, p. 149.142 as John Foxe.

The Book of Revelation, the authorship of which was in the early years of Christianity attributed to St. John the Evangelist, is an outstanding example of the apocalyptic literature of the first century. Filled with symbolism, this description of the last days has always been subject to reinterpretation according to the particular politics of the day. For the Reformers, the identification of the Roman Catholic Church with the Beast of the Apocalypse was a rediscovery of the ancient polemic against Rome with a new interpretation. The Roman Antichrist now became the Pope.

The significance of this new interpretation was very great. Luther succeeded in identifying Antichrist with a certain institution: the papacy. We are, therefore, he concluded, in the last days. His interpretation of the history of the City of God is optimistic but otherwise he does not hold out much hope for the present world. The millennium is in the past: there is nothing for the true believers but to steel themselves for the steadily worsening blows to come, making sure that, whatever happens, they are not lured back into the fold of Antichrist. Thus by trials and persecutions the chosen people undergoes purification.)William Lamont has pointed out that English Calvinists did not learn chiliasm from Calvin, but that "in England it was first Wyclif, then Bale and Bullinger who developed the idea that the Book of Revelation foretold the destruction of the Roman Antichrist.2 The Geneva Bible, on which Englishmen were nourished from childhood, was published in1Ernest Lee Tuveson,Millennium and Utopia, A Study in the Background of the Idea of Progress (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949) pp. 25-26.2William Lamont, Godly Rule, Politics and Religion, 1603-1660 (London: Macmillan, St. Martin's Press, 1969) p. 23.1431560, with marginal notes which identified the Whore of Babylon with the Pope. In the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible on Revelation 17:

This woman is the Antichrist, that is, the Pope with the whole body of his filthie creatures as is expounded.lThe marginal notes on Revelation 9:3 identify the locusts:

Locusts are false teachers, heretikes and worldlie fuetie Prelates with monks, freres, cardinals, patriarkes, arekebishops, doctors, Bachelgrs and Masters which forsake Christ to maintain false doctrine.

John Whitgift, (1530-1604) later Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote his doctoral dissertation on the thesis that the Pope was Antichrist. Lamont notes that we are not accustomed to the idea that in the age before Cromwell, kings and archbishops were deriving spiritual (and political) comfort from the Apocalypse.3 As a young man, James I, then James VI of Scotland, wrote A Fruitful Meditation, Containing a Plaine and Easie Exposition of Laying Open of the VII, VIII, IX and C Verses of the 20 Chapter of the Revelation in Forme and Maner of a Sermon. The king claimed that

As of all Bookes, the holy Scripture is most necessary for the Instruction of a Christian, and of all the Scriptures, the Book of Revelation is most meete for this our last age as a Prophecie of the latter times. . . The Church was in a happie estate from Christ's own time "to4the dayes of the defection or falling away ofAntichrist ."1Geneva Bible, A Facsimile of the 1560 Edition,Introduction by Lloyd E. Berry. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969) Notes on Rev. 17.

2Ibid.3Lamont, Godly Rule, pp. 21-22. 4Tuveson, Millennium and Utopia, p. 52.144In England, the heightened expectancy of Reformation chiliasm was nationalistic and royalist. William Haller has argued well and convincingly that Foxe's Book of Martyrs (Acts and Monuments) conditioned generations of Englishmen that England and its monarch had been elected by God to carry out the completion of the Reformation and to prepare the world for the Second Coming. But the leadership of English monarchs proved disappointing to these religious hopes. So much had been expected of Elizabeth that her practical politics were not felt to be in conformity with her sacred office. The Elizabethan "settlement" left much to be desired in the way of Reformation. The renewed hopes which centered around James I were dashed for English Puritans at the Hampton Court Conference (1604). Almost immediately reaction set in. In 1611 Thomas Brightman published in Amsterdam his Revelation of the Apocalypse, a tract which was anti-royalist, and suggested a kind of Protestant imperialism. Michael Walzer has pointed out the shift in Puritan rationale:

The victory (over the Pope) being obtained, the souls gather to the prey and do fill themselves with the spoils. . . Thatwhole late popish nation shall be subject afterward to the Reformed Church. Every country being a nourrison of the purer truth, shall have some part of the regions, before time given up to superstition, made subject to them.lIt was this kind of millenarianism that set the stage for the Puritan Revolution. In Joseph Meade's Clavis Apocalyptica, which

1Michael Walzer, The Revolution of the Saints, A Study in the Origins of Radical Politics. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965) p. 291.145

appeared in 1627, the king now takes on the characteristics of the Antichrist.

Lamont's thesis that Archbishop Laud was also a millenarian has raised a storm of controversy, but Laud's position in defense of the iure divino of episcopacy over that of the king was a strong reassertion of the Augustinian concept of the church as the City of God, but this time it was, of course, the English Church. The concept outraged the Puritans, whose millenarianism, as we have seen, had grown quite nationalistic.

Laud's emphasis on the uniqueness and worthiness of the English church was a nationalist counterblast to the Puritans, who had always stressed England's mission as the chosen race, the leader of European Protestantism: in place of the Elect Nation, Laud offered the Elect Church.lUnder Laud, the High Commission and the Star Chamber came to be instruments of Church power and control.greater than ever before. The polarization was complete, the Puritans revolted, and Laud was

executed in 1645 and Charles I in 1649. Another facet of millenarianism had manifested itself.

The concept of the elect nation appealed to orthodox Puritans and was indeed a major factor in the civil war, but for the spiritualist groups, another eschatology had carried over from earlier centuries and continued to pervade the radical ideologies, that of Joachim of Floris (1145-1202).1Lamont, Godly Rule, p. 67.146

Joachim's originality lay in his affirmation that the threefold pattern of history was as yet incomplete and that the work of the Holy Spirit, the third Person, must shortly be made manifest in a further stage of spiritual illumination. Recasting the traditional Pauline pattern he expounded his famous doctrine of the three stages in history: the first beginning in Adam and ending with the Incarnation, has been characterized by the work of the Father; the second, beginning back in the Old Testament (to overlap with the first) and continuing until Joachim's own day, belonged to the Son; the third with a double origin in the Old Dispensation and the New and about to come to fruition in the near future, would see the full work of the Holy Spirit completed. . . .

The Age of the Father had been lived under the Law, the Age of the Son under Grace, but the Age of the S9irit.would be lived in the liberty of full illumination. . .

The Age of the Spirit was to be the completion of the word of the Trinity-within history, a "Sabbath Age." In this final age, men would have no need of church, sacraments, wealth, property, etc.

but there would be only a community of perfected human beings endowed with "ethereal bodies."The effect of the heightened millenarian expectancy of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was often very ugly.

It has been said that the resilience of the witch craze was due to the fact that it complemented, rather than challenged the mind of the age. It was accepted that the world was engaged in the last struggle with Satan and the forces of Antichrist, all of whom made war on humanity by means of demons and witches.1Marjorie Reeves, "The Development of Apocalyptic Thought: Medieval Attitudes," The Apocalypse, C. A. Patrides and Joseph Wittreich, editors. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1984) pp. 1W-72.147 Millenarianism was the spirit of the age. Lutherans, Calvinists,.Anglicans, Puritans, and Spiritualists all write that they are in "the last days." An often overlooked facet of sixteenth- and seventeenth century millenarianism is that the various eschatologies were "post-millennial," as Lamont has pointed out. In this they follow the Reformation rationale that the millennium is past or almost over and the last judgment is at hand. This helps to explain aberrations like the Munster affair and even the extreme radical practices of the Seekers, the Ranters, and the early Quakers. It is important to bear in mind that, in the seventeenth century, not only was everyone a millenarian, but they thought that the millennium was over and that the final hour was at hand!Summary-Brerely's CongregationsIt is doubtful if the theological thought of Perkins or Everard was interpreted by the common people in the same way as it was presented by Brerely. Much more likely was the influence of a traditional anti-clericalism of Lollard origin, reinforced by Reformation perspectives, and the wave of Anabaptist refugees which made people co-conspirators against persecution by the Anglican factions. The old Lollard and Familist tenets, combined with a millenarianism that saw the seventeenth century as the "last days," encouraged a type of religion in line with the Joachimite concept of the Age cf the Spirit. In this context, St. Paul's teleological suspension of the Law would have taken effect, and combined with the perfectionist notions of the Familists, and the148predestinarianism of Calvinism, encouraged not only antinomianism but also perhaps the development of a more ecstatic type of religion appropriate to the "Age of the Spirit."The prejudice against learning, that is, the type of education offered in the schools and universities, had an appeal to these congregations in Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire, but their lack of education may have contributed to misinterpretations of the flood of conflicting theological ideas to which they were exposed.

In addition, there is ample evidence of the strength of Roman Catholicism in northern England during this period, particularly in Lancashire, and one can reasonably surmise that the tradition of medieval mysticism also survived among these congregations, a type of spirituality which cut across all educational and social boundaries and was available to the most humble of men, the only criterion being that of a high moral and interior life. The doctrine of the indwelling of Christ and the complete transformation of the sinner into the saint had its roots in the medieval English mystical tradition in the thought of such men as Walter Hilton, but the Calvinist emphasis on the indwelling of the Spirit added a new dimension to these concepts.Brerely's congregations do not appear to have been libertine in any sense. The antinomianism with which they were charged was a theological position. Contemporary writings reveal that Brerely's congregations were "more advanced" than he, and the fifty charges brought against him and his "hearers" reveal a far more "advanced" spiritualist position than is found in Brerely's sermons. Therefore149one must conclude that while Brerely himself was a relatively orthodox preacher of spiritualist doctrine, drawing some mystical concepts from the thought of John Everard, his congregations were far more susceptible to the traditional concepts of the Lollards and the Familists. The fifty charges show strong evidence of Lollard influence as we have pointed out. Twenty-five of the charges are characteristic of Familist doctrines (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 30, 33, 39, 40, 41, 46, and 47), and suggest the spiritualist and perfectionist tendencies we have discussed. Charges 5, 6, and 14 are orthodox Calvinist tenets. Five of the charges ( 10, 11, 12, 29, and 31) reveal the development of the "free grace" doctrine which would later be associated with the antinomian movement. The Puritan prejudice against cross and surplice is evident in 35.The charges themselves, then, are the best evidence we have that Brerely's "hearers" held doctrines that appear to be more radical than his, doctrines which leaned far more heavily on old Lollard and Familist ideas than they did on Calvin. That is the reason given by "J.C." for their adversaries naming the doctrines of Brerely's "hearers" for Grindleton, the town where he practiced his ministry, since "they could not well stile them by the name of Breirlists, finding no fault in his Doctrine."1Brerely, A Bundle of Soul Convincing Truths, Preface to the Reader by J. C.1CHAPTER IV

JOHN WEBSTER (1610-1682)

Far more "advanced" than Brerely was his spiritual successor, John Webster. Webster's sermons reveal the impact of John Everard's thought more clearly than do Brerely's sermons, although Webster's "conversion experience" of 1635 has been attributed to the influence of Roger Brerely.John Webster was born at Thornton-in-Craven on February 3, in either 1609 or 1610. He writes of Cambridge as though he had received his education in

that university, although no record of his attendance can be found in the university records. Sometime after July, 1632 he was ordained a priest by Morton, Bishop of Durham, and in 1634 he was curate of Kildwick-in-Craven, the parish in which John Wilson and Roger Brerely had preceded him as curate. Perhaps it was the association with Brerely that led Webster to change his religious views in 1635 and to abandon the ministry of the Established Church. Webster describes his experiences prior to his conversion in "The Judgment Set":I have joined myself to the Presbyterians, and I have found their way too short, that would not do. I have come over to the151

Independents and thought that way seemed before, a better and more refined way, yet it is too narrow, I cannot wrap myself in that covering. Well, sayes my heart, is there no other nor no better Physicians--so I could but secure myself and prevent this fire and this burning, I would be content to do anything, and take up every yoke, and submit to the strictest forms. Then, say the Anabaptists, come over to us and we will give you satisfaction: we have the true Baptism according to the word---none so near the word of God as we. But when thou hast done all these things to find rest, and to quench the fire which began to burn, and tohide thy deformities from men, dost thou think there is anything of Christ in all this? is not this rather to run away and turn thy back on Christ and to live by thy own power, meerly to prevent death and destruction and the losing of thy own wisdom and righteousness and that thou mayest not come into the light of God lest it should discover thy darkness and blacknesse.lHaving discovered through his conversion that all external forms are impotent, Webster describes the reaction of the orthodox ministers to his discovery:

the Lord . . . in his wonderful mercy, brought me to the sad experience of mine own dead, sinful, lost and damnable condition in nature. . . . This no sooner appeared. . . . but the power of Babel in the Ministers of Satan, transforming themselves into Ministers of Righteousness, then in the Episcopal and Prelatical form, pouring forth all their malice and spite against the truth and those in whom it appears: then throwing dirt upon us in and under the terms of Puritans, Separatist, Grindletonians and Antinomians.2Webster appears to have studied chemistry under John Huniades, probably in the course of medical study. In 1643, he was Master of the1John Webster, The Judgment Set and the Bookes Opened,In severall Sermons at alhallows Lumbard Street. By John Webster, A Servant of Christ and His Church. (London: Printed for R. Hartford at the Bible and State Arms in little Britain; and N. Brooks at the Angel in Cornhill, 1654) p. 243.John Webster, The Saints Guide, or Christ the Rule and Ruler of Saints. Manifested by way of Positions, Consectaries and Quaeries. By John Webster, Late Chaplain in the Army (London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the Black-Spread Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1654) Author's Preface, [p. iii 7.2

152free grammar school in Clitheroe. During the civil war, he acted as chaplain and surgeon in the Parliamentary Army, and in 1648 he was a surgeon in Colonel Shuttleworth's regiment. Toward the end of the civil war he "was intruded by the governing powers" into the vicarage of Mitton in Yorkshire and thence preached sometimes "gratis" at Grindleton, four miles distant.l Although still at Mitton in 1654, he apparently preached also at All Hallows, Lombard Street in London, for in the week beginning October 12, 1653, he and William Erbery had "a very famous dispute" with two ministers whose names are unknown. Details of the dispute are to be found in Erbery's A Monstrous Dispute and in Webster's The Picture of Mercurius Politicus.In 1654, Webster published his Academiarum Examen, in which he asserts that he intends not "to traduce or calumniate the academies themselves, but only the corruptions that time and negligence hath introduced there.n2 Webster was a well known preacher of established reputation during the years of the Commonwealth, but his attitude toward "humane learning" or the type of education being offered at Oxford and Cambridge at the time was much misunderstood. In the Examen, Webster combines the prejudice against scholasticism of all the Reformers, the egalitarian prejudice against any "book learning" of the common man and the mystic, and the need for educational reform of a man of science in the early stages of the Enlightenment.1DNB, s.v. "Webster,John," by Bertha Porter. 2lbid.153In 1657, Webster was residing at Clitheroe and the following year (1658) his books were seized and taken away from him. We do not know the reason why. After this, Webster appears to have given up the ministry and to have devoted the rest of his life to the study of metallurgy and the practice of medicine. It was at this time that he published his Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft (London, 1677) in which he attacked the credulous and superstitious views of Meric Casaubon, Joseph Glanville, and Henry More, members of the group known as the "Cambridge Platonists."Webster died on June 18, 1682 and was buried at Clitheroe. Bertha Porter, writing in the Dictionary of National Biography (DNB) notes that "his works show that his active, impressionable mind passed through many phases of religious conviction and it is difficult to reconcile the authorship of The Judgment Set with that of the Examen, or the Displaying."1 But a brief glance at the turbulent religious history through which he lived sheds a good deal of light on what appear to be two distinct phases in his life. The period of The Judgment Set is the earlier period, and the publication is a collection of Webster's sermons; the Examen and the Displaying are works of the period following the civil war and reflect the man of "Reason" of the Enlightenment.Webster's earlier works include The Saints Guide and The1DNB s.v. "Webster,John," by Bertha Porter.154The Judgment Set, both of which were published in 1654 and reflect the early influence of his conversion, of the influence of Roger Brerely and of John Everard, and reveal a development toward the Seeker position. Webster's Academiarum Examen, published in 1654 expounds the typical Seeker distrust for scholastic learning, but replaces it with a model for the reform of

the university methods of education. This is the work of a man who is both an educator and a scientist at the dawn of the Enlightenment, who is an admirer of Descartes, Bacon, Harvey, etc. At this period, Webster was a chaplain in the Army and a surgeon. Older and wiser, returning to Clitheroe to practice medicine, he must have run into trouble with the Law again, because his books were seized. The Epistle Dedicatory of The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft offers Webster's gratitude to several of his friends, and to the "Justices of the Peace and Quorum in the West Riding of Yorkshire" who assisted him in "wronged innocency though besmeered over with the envious dirt of malicious scandals."l Webster appears to have retired as a country gentleman in Clitheroe.1John Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft,Wherein is affirmed that there are many sorts of Deceivers and Impostors and Divers persons under a passive Delusion of Melancholy and Fancy. But that there is a Corporeal League made Betwixt the Devil and the Witch, Or that he sucks on the Witches Body, has Carnal copulation, or that Witches are Turned into Cats, Dogs, raise Tempests, or the like is utterly denied and disproved. Wherein also is handled The Existence of Angels and Spirits (London: Printed by J. M. and are to be sold by the Booksellers in London, 1677) Epistle Dedicatory.155

According to Weeks, his name appears many times in the Clitheroe Borough records, in the earlier period as "Clerk," and in 1649 he was admitted as a Burgess of Clitheroe. He appears to have made his peace with the ecclesiastical authorities by 1657, when he retired to the practice of medicine.l

Weeks describes Webster's preaching as violent and fanatic in his early days as vicar of Mitton. While he had a considerable reputation as a preacher, he was a very different man than Brerely, using violent language and extreme epithets in defense of his views.

Webster seems to have been oblivious to the fact that the language he used could scarcely be considered to come within the canon of toleration which he lays down for the Civil Magistrate; for to call the regularly trained ministers, appointed to the various churches throughout the country, "Baal's Priests," "Idol Shepherds," "Thieves and Robbers," "Ministers of Satan and fierbrands of ell," was sure to speak things "tending to a breach of the peace."

But Webster's language is not unusual in Puritan writing of the period and it was quite common for the Puritans to have equated the Anglican clergy with Antichrist, as we have pointed out, especially in the period just before the civil war during Laud's primacy. Moreover, the Puritan contempt for ceremonies and sacraments as "carnal" made the Anglican predilection for these "papist" practices "idolatrous." But there is no question but that the fiery quality of Webster's preaching is revealed in his sermons.1Weeks, Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century, p. 177. 2Ibid.156 Webster's Theology

The Authority of the Spirit

In the interpretation of Scripture, Webster goes further than Brerely in emphasizing the difference between the "letter" and the "mystery," which can only be revealed by the Spirit. He also goes beyond Brerely in a tendency to minimize the role of the historic Jesus and to emphasize the soteriological function of the "Indwelling Christ."

This is a portion of Scripture which in the Letter and History is apparent to all that hear or read it, and everyone knows the meaning thereof. But what is the mind, the mystery and the meaning of the Holy Ghost, is only made known to them that are taught of God. (John 6:45) and making no question, that those who have the spirit of God will own the mystery and divine sense, we will through his assistance proceed to open them to you "for to them it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom but to all others they are parables anq paradoxes which they neither will nor can understand. (Mark 4:11)

Webster here echoes Everard's division of the "outward letter" and the "mystery" when interpreting Scripture. Those who perceive only the "letter" Webster compares with the universal choice by men of Barabbas over Christ;

All the sons of men cry out for a Barabbas, so the wisdom of the flesh and the power of man may be established and that that everlasting, righteous Son of God, which would be working, living, reigning in man, may be crucified and utterly destroyed: this they may do, and doe do, and yet may talk much of an outward and external Christ, which once dyed at Jerusalem, and pretend much to love him. Never any of the sons of men ever received that true Christ we speak of (though much cryed up in the world) for neverWebster, The Judgment Set, p. 29.1157

any received him but to them he gave power to become the sons of God. Never any received him nor followed him but he denyed himself and took up his Cross: which never any man did that is not emptied of himselfe, made nothing in his own sight, that is not stript of all his power, wisdom, parts, righteousnesse, and whatever man (as man) adores. All true Saints are brought to see this, in experience they see all the world seeking themselves, following after the gods that they have made, and crying up their Diana. They see all the whole earth alwaies and continually crying out, Not this man, but Barabbas. And they know them to be Thieves and Robbers.)

External things are but patterns and similitudes, Webster exclaims,

a statement which suggests the prevailing Platonism behind this concept of Scripture:

For the dead letter is not the life, but all things that the eye sees and the ear heares, are things that must passe away, they must remove so that the heavenly things may come in the room thereof, even those things of which all external things are but the patterns and similitudes.2The historic Christ did no good for men spiritually,

But by his coming in the flesh, and by his holy life and cruel suffering and death, or by his external presence or company or eating and drinking with him, or handling or touching him, or external beleaving on him, by nothing of this nature was any good done spiritually upon the souls of men, nor had any one his nature changed or regenerated; no, no; But the true comming of the Messiah and the fulfilling of all the promises concerning hit, was by being made Immanuel to us, and being brought forth in us.

The concept of Christ born in us, of rebirth and transformation follows closely that of Everard. For Webster, only the Christ Within is of avail:Wherever Christ is, he brings a new birth, works a change upon the whole man, this did not, nor does Christ do, by any of his actions that he did at Jerusalem, neither by his holy life, nor his1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 91. 2Ibid., p. 136. 3Ibid., p. 234.158meritorious death: For was ever any of the sons of men conformed to him by that act? Tis true, his death was infinitely meritorious, and one act in him, as being God, equal with his Father, was a sufficient sacrifice and atonement to pacifiethe infinite wrath of God. But yet know that Jesus Christ is not only a Sacrifice for an hour or two, only for the time he suffered in the flesh under Pontius Pilate, but He is that One Eternal, everlasting Sacrifice, which is continually offered up to the Eternal Father in the behalf of all the Elect. And also we grant that by that Act, the Eternal purpose and decree of God was fulfilled in bringing forth the true Immanuel, God and Man in one person.1The Inner Light

Before the experience of regeneration, man lives in a cloud of darkness and blindness until the Lord shows him a light. The important Quaker concept of the Inner Light is stressed in Webster's paradigm:

The Lord chooses his own time to lift the cloud. While man is in this condition and in this night of blindness and darkness, and land of death and drought, he knows not his way until the Lord shew him a light, till He remove the cloud there is no finding the place of rest nor any feeding on the Hidden Manna nor drinking at the Wells of Salvation. When man is in the.dark night, how can he arise? but if he sit still as to all his own powers, really seeing his owne weaknesse and utter inability, then this light in due time will shine forth.2The Inner Light is the only guide and teacher

And now this light being in thee, this is to be thy guide, this is to be thy teacher, thy Master, and no other can be, till this come in, the Scriptures themselves, nay Christ in the flesh, and all thing whatever ye can name, are

but dark lanthorns without these divine teachings; for he only is a light and a guide, a Master and Ruler unto spiritual men, and only is Riches, Peace, Power, Love, Glory only Into these men31Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 234. 2Ibid., p. 75. 31bid., p. 80.159 .The Inner Light is Christ dwelling within the soul.

He that is guided by any other light or by any other teachers, he forsakes the light, the life and glory of Christ, and goes down into Emptiness, darkness, Misery, Sin and the delusionsof his own heart. He that thinks the Scriptures to be a light and a teacher or a rule or a guide without this Heavenly and Divine . Teacher in him, he depends upon that which can never teach nor guide aright without him, and therefore when men talk so much of the Scriptures and miss this light, they are but in darkness and meerly delude themselves and others.1It is only Christ Himself, the Inner Light, who heals our fallen nature and which brings us eternal life, not externals like sacraments:

This light (of Christ) would curb every wicked act, every desire of the flesh, this alone is the means to crucifie and kill thy vile nature and not any outward external thing by washing or dipping in water or eating such a poore, empty, carnall thing as a bit of bread, or drinking a sup of wine; this thing never did nor never will doe it, but to eat and drink that which Christ gave, which was not a little bread and wine onely, but Himself, and by feeding on Him, eating h s body and drinking his blood, this will nourish to eternal life.

Webster here implies, unlike Brerely, that "means" are unnecessary for those reborn souls in whom the Inner Light already shines.

Webster's concept of the Inner Light is far closer to the Quaker doctrine than is Everard's. Everard uses the imagery of fire in The Gospel Treasury Opened. For him Christ is fire in three ways: burning, heat, and light. The burning consumes the works of the old man, the heat breathes into us a gentle warmth of his own Spirit to1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 81. 2Ibid., p. 152.160revive us, and the light then shines in our soul to bring us out of darkness.l For Webster, the Inner Light does all of these. Webster's Doctrine of Man

Webster retains the Calvinist doctrine of the utter depravity of man in his fallen state, and his utter helplessness to change.

Tis certain, man's misery and fall is so deep and so great that nothing but infiniteness could recover and fetch him up again; he is fallen into an INFINITENESS of Nothingnesse, from whence all the creatures, Angels, or Men could not redeem one soul, but it must be the infinite work of the Creator: man by sin hath thrown; himself into a worse condition than any other creature and below the whole creation, and he that sees it not thus really, never yet knew what it was to be delivered: and he that thinks that

lesse than infiniteness will redeem him, he undervalues sr circumscribes the Death and life of the Son of God.

And again

He that sayes there is any good thing in man, any righteousnesse, wisdome, power, any endeavors after any good or the like, he is no other but a most abominable blasphemer.3As do other Puritans, Webster sees both Christ and Antichrist dwelling in man, and "the flesh alwayes lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh." (Gal. 5:17)4 There is a "vail" on our hearts by which the devil deludes and deceives us.

It is that earthly, sensual and devilish wisdom in the hearts of the Sons of Men, persuading them to be that which they are not: that they are holy and just and good, that they have goodness and1Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, p. 5. 2Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 281.31bid., p. 36. 4Ibid., p. 179.161holiness and wisdom and power, etc., and if they improve these (say they as they may) they may bring themselves into a happy and safe condition and conclude that they can forsake sin and they can be righteous and holy.lIf all heaven is within, in the indwelling Christ, hell is also within:

You know we use vails, that the defects and deformity of things may not appear, and so man doth by his own heart; he would by no means see the ugliness, the monstrous deformity thereof, he would by no means once think that hell and the bottomless pit is in him, he would by no means gee the smoak of that bottomless pit arise out of his own heart.

But when the soul turns to the Lord, it sees and acknowledges its misery and darkness, "then is the Caul of his heart rent, then is hell laid open in him and the bottomless gulf seen in himself."3Man cannot repent of his own volition. Faith and repentance are God's gift, and all priests and ministers who tell you to "repent and believe" are "idol shepherds," since only God can bring this about.4

Webster, like Brerely and Everard, opposes the Arminian doctrine of free will, for to assert that man has free will implies that man might not have fallen so low as he actually has.5 But while man in his sinful state cannot help himself, in his regenerate state, he is free. For Webster the nature of this freedom

is not any external nor outward freedom, but it is spiritual and inward, it sets the soul free, and delivers from all captivity and bonds and taskmasters within, it does not teach thee to deny to pay1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 25.2Ibid., p. 26. 31bid., p. 26. 41bid., p. 272. 51bid., p. 114.162

tribute to Caesar and submission to external laws. Itpromises nothing of external Kingdoms or Thrones, or that the Saints shall rule upon earth, and the like, and that they shall sway scepters and be raised up to worldly dignities or honours. No, nothing of this nature, for Christ saith plainly, My Kingdom is not of this world, for then would my servants fight: These are not those things which they are to contend for; but for righteousness, for peace, for joy in the Holy Ghost, to be delivered from themselves and from the powers of Darkness, to be freed from the Oppressor WITHIN: this is the Freedom of-the Saints.lWebster's concept of the freedom of the Christian is classic doctrine common to Calvinist and Lutheran theology, as is his concept of the bondage of the will of the unregenerate. Who is free?

He who is delivered by Jesus Christ, he onely hath true freedom, and he is the true free man, all other, however they talk of freedom and boast of freedom, if Christ does not set them free, they are still bondsmen, they are still in snares and lockt fast in their fetters: for, who else can deliver and set free the souls of man but he that is Lord of all, and is subject to none? He alone bath the keyes of Hell and death and He alone is the soule's Captaine and deliverer. This is that which all the Saints have experience of, when they find themselves delivered from the bondage of flesh, of selfe, of the world, if they feel this work done within them, they know experimentally tis the very finger and power of Christ, and that he is the only Christs' free man, that none hath brought it to pass to set them at liberty to knock off their chains, and lead them out of prison and set their feet upon a rock but only the Almighty power and weer mercy of the Lord Jesus, they know that it bath been he that hath opened their eyes and their eares, that hath raised them from death and given them feet to walk; and there is none know this truly, but only those that feele it done in themselves.2

PredestinationThe Thirty-Nine Articles of the period do not emphasize the doctrine of double predestination. The "dread decree" is not even1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 276. 2lbid., p. 278.163

mentioned. A softening in the original doctrine of absolute double predestination was under way due to the effects of the Arminian controversies. But, while Webster does not emphasize the doctrine,

he often equates the reprobate with those who pursue salvation in outward forms. In the following passage the soul in which Christ dwells sees itself as wounded and sick, but the condemned finds help in men and means.

Thou seest thou canst not so much as move hand or foot to help thyself: All thy tears, thy prayers are nothing but as Jesus Christ prayes and cryes in thee

by his spirit, with groans unutterable which cannot be expresst (Rom. 8:26). This take as the first difference and examination between those that are wounded and sick, and (those who are) condemned; the one, he is so and he can go to no other but only to Jesus Christ to be healed and saved. The others (the condemned) when they are so, they canfinde help and rest in men, in means, in ordinances, in fellowships, in reformations, and better ordering of their lives, by their own power. lPerfectionism

While the elect have acquired perfect freedom that is, they are released from the bondage of the will inherent in the reprobate-it appears that for Webster, as for Perkins, the regenerate soul cannot sin:

All that are once made free by Christ, they cannot be servants to men, that is, to those things men are so subject and yield obedience to: they not only ought not but cannot serve those lusts that men serve, when Jesus Christ has set the soul Free, they will be onely servants to him: They will not be servants to the world, nor servants to their own will, they cannot go where they list, but they are guided to wait upon the will of their Master.21Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 231. 2lbid., p. 44.164In even stronger terms, Webster insists that the regenerate soul in whom Christ dwells cannot sin:

If all that we do be anything but what Christ does in us: If all we teach be not Christ his teachings in us: if all our works be not from the new man, born of God, which cannot sin, if all be not they work of Christ in us,. . . all must be pulled down and scattered.

The parallel concept of perfectionism is found in Everard, the origin of which may be John Denck, translations of whose thought by Everard appear and are included in the volume of The Gospel Treasury Opened under the heading, "The Sayings of a Certain Divine of Great Note and Name, John Denqui." Denck urges the Christian to

Be Regenerated and born again of God and his word: and then Thou wilt be Fit to do all Things which that New-birth will teach thee, which Cannot Sin: and whatever thy hand shall find to do, thou shalt do it well. . .2Webster's assertion of the doctrine of the perfection of.the reborn soul marks a decided development from the doubts and ambiguity of Brerely's thought and appears to form the theological link with actual identification with Christ found in Nayler and other early Quakers. Ecclesiology

For Webster, nothing else in the world but the Holy Spirit can draw men to Christ:

First, if the immortal Spirit onely draw the soules of men unto Christ, that is, unto himself; for he is the love of the Father made out unto us, for Christ was God dwelling in flesh. Then if it

1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 44.2John Denqui, "The Sayings of a Certain Divine of Great Note and Name, John Denqui," included in John Everard, The Gospel Treasury. Opened, p. 441.165

be so, then Man considered (as Man)'cannot be any wayes drawnor driven or can come to Christ. Not any power of man (as mad) or the power of the whole Creation is able to draw man unto Christ but onely the power of the Father.lSince only the Holy Spirit draws men to Christ, there is no need for a visible church; the true church is invisible and is composed only of "believers."

Without question the meaning of the apostle is not to be taken literally of a material Church, nor tis not meant of a congregation of men and women assembled or congregated together (as the wisest of men take it) for this in the Scripture sense is not called A Church, much lesse in a low and vulgar acceptation, of a meeting place built of bricks or wood or stone. but the Church is the Temple of God, the House of God, the Body of Christ in which the Lord discovers his Riches, Glory, Wisdome, Bounty, and the Treasures of Wisdome and Knowledge, and his everlasting power and goodness, to the soules of Believers.2 Sacraments are mere patterns and shadows:

How many Churches partake of the patterns and shadows and whatever they say, they conclude from thence they are the Church of God: because say they, we have the right use of the Sacrament, which is a sign of a true Church, because they have the patterns, types and shadows, observing only outward rules, forms and carnal ordinances, which all perish with the using?3Admit, I say, that breaking of bread, as it is in the External use of it, and admit that using of water-Baptism, were used by Christ, which is hard to prove, they were never or could be anything else but the pattern of the Heavenly things and of the spiritual baptisme, else that Text also tells a lye, that saith there was never any but one baptism, which is that of the Spirit.+ The theology behind Webster's sacramentarianism is clear

... for though God of his good pleasure gave patterns of heavenly things, yet they were not those heavenly things themselves, but are onely the type and shadow of that divine heavenly Tabernacle which God did pitch and not man. And Hence it apparently appears, that the power, life, and the meat and drink1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 59.2lbid., p. 84. 31bid., p. 103. 4Ibid., p. 106.166of a child of God is onely and alone Jesus Christ, for he never eats and drinks nor moves out of God; for he eats and drinks and doth all in God and thus he is come to that which is perfect, to the fountain of all fulness, to the Mount that cannot be shaken, now he is gone over and passed by all the similitudes and shadows and patterns and is come to that living fountain of the water of life it selfe, of which whoever drinks shall live for ever and it shall be in qim a well of water springing up to eternal life. (John 4:14)

Webster calls for no outward forms at all, that is, no visible church at all:

And as the world is deceived in their Forms and their notions, thinking they shall help and save them, So likewise they take a great deal of satisfaction to themselves in making of books and catechisms, and prescribing rules, in mending this way and the other form and are still in mending and altering and making their ways and forms better and more reformed (as they think) whenalas, all this is nothing but man taking upon himself to out, pare, and mend the worship of God: This man he thinks to cut out a neater way than his neighbour-gathered-church, and another he thinks to mend and make his way more handsome than he, and another than both. Everyone hath a Doctrine, a Psalm, hath a Tongue, hath a Revelation, hath an Interpretation, and none done to the edifying of the body of Christ. For all this is but to rend and tear the Seamlesse coat of Christ: in that man would fain be something, do something by his own wisdom and power and his righteousnesse must not be sleighted nor vilified nor all his glory must not be laid in the dust: all these Worshippers and pretenders to Christ, they live on the shadow and rely on the shape and form of Christianity, but not on the life and power. How have men beat their wits and layd their counsels together to form and model Religion, to make it passe for current in the world.2Thus Webster has, to all intents and purposes, passed out of the confines of Puritanism in his ecclesiology. For him, it is only the Spirit of Christ dwelling within that brings salvation; anything external is idolatrous.1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 107. 2lbid., p. 239.167

Therefore we may conclude that whatever Spirit goes out any other way or to any other thing to find Rest or Liberty or Redemption but only by Jesus Christ, he is deceived, for 'tis only in Immanuel, God witt? us, there is no Redeemer, no Deliverer, no Saviour but only He.Rather than in a sacramental eating of bread and drinking of wine, the true believer constantly eats and drinks of the Christ dwelling within him and becomes one with the others in whom Christ dwells in a Communion of Saints:But those who eat of the true bread, they are one.body and one bread, for they are all partakers of that one bread. With them there is a unity and a uniformity, and nowhere else there can be, of which men have heard a talk and report, and they speak of such a thing. But they know not what it means nor how to come by it, for none can come at it but those to whom this bread is given, and they onely can say experimentally his body is bread indeed and his blood is drink indeed. And they only can give witness of the True Communion of Saints and know the happinesse and true pleasure thereof. And what heavenly sweetness is therein, all harmonizing, and giving testimony to This One Alone Great Deliverer and this wonderful None such Deliverance. No unity like this unity, nor love, nor peace like his peace, which they have in Jesus Christ, their only Deliverer.

Obviously, Webster has not only passed beyond the confines of Puritanism with this ecclesiology, but also beyond the position of the Seekers, who, believing the present church to be in a state of apostasy, were "waiting" for a new ordinance to appear. Webster fits best into a category called "Finders", where George Johnson has placed1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 240. 2lbid., p. 251.168 him.1 A "Finder", one might speculate, was one who had already found

the indwelling Christ, and no longer waited for a new dispensation. Webster, however, may have considered himself a Seeker.

The Role of the Preacher

If, as Webster believes, all outward forms are to be abolished, what is the role of a preacher? For Webster, the preacher is only an instrument, but only as he is an instrument of the Holy Spirit within him, for

notwithstanding all that I can say and speak, if the eternal sense and mind of the Spirit be not at the back of it and goe home with it, it will be but a parable, a History, and a Paradox to you. Saith Christ, to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom (Matt. 13:11). So the it is onely the immortal Word of the Lord that draws the soul.

Webster perceives the role of the minister as like that of John the Baptist, a messenger preparing the way of the Lord.

I am but the forerunner to the Bridegroom. I have nothing to give, nor I cannot direct thee where to get that thou seekest before he comes or before his pleasure is to bestow it: whoever he be that undertakes to be any other but a Messenger, as John the Baptist was, crying I am not he, but I am the voice of one crying, Prepare ye the way of the Lord: I baptize with water, but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. He cries, there is no teacher but Jesus Christ, no prophet but he, we have nothing to give, there is no riches but His.1George Arthur Johnson, "From Seeker to Finder,"(Unpublished dissertation for the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, 1948).

2Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 58. 31bid., pp. 272-273.169Only Christ can call those "he hath separated for the ministry,"

and these must not be hindered from speaking of what God has revealed:

That Christ by his Spirit manifesteth the mystery of the Gospel unto such as in his own purpose and decree he hath separated for the ministry, and sends them forth in the power and evidence of the same Spirit; and all-that men have done in appointing and setting up of a Ministry is of man and not of God:

onely those that have had experience of the same truth, have sometimes used to give their evidence or witnesse to the truth in others which was not their calling, but a testimony from others that such were already called. And no humane power hath any legal right to forbid or hinder that such may not speak what God hath revealed in them and unto them.

The concept that anyone called by the Spirit may speak or preach is very close to that of the Quakers, a practice drawn from the Baptists and practiced among those called "Grindletonians."

The Call of the Spirit is the only criterion for authentic ministry:

And he that cannot evidence his Calling to be immediately from and by the Spirit of Christ, both by the witness of the same Spirit in his own Breast, the power and authority of the speakings of God in him, and by the Seal of his Ministry, the Conversion and Confirmation of Souls, is nothing else but a thief and a robber, a deceiver, and an hierling and never was sent of God, but came of himself and had no mission but from the Devil and Man.2In fiery terms Webster condemns the state's appointment of ministers:

Then are all Licenses and Commissions from men to authorize others to preach and teach, vain, corrupt, and abominable and men that pretend to derive their power from these are no less than Ministers of Satan and firebrands of Hell, and by their fruits ye may know them.3

For Webster, ministers should not be supported by tithes and oblations as the Levites under Jewish law, nor by a compulsory law made by a1Webster, The Saint's Guide, pp. 6-7. 2Ibid., p. 22. 3Ibid., p. 22.170

commonwealth or national power, in giving or settling a national maintenance, but rather "from the free gift and contribution of those individual persons wrought upon by that man's Ministry, to whom they are to communicate their temporal things and the proportion such as God shall move their spirits to bestow."1

An echo of Wyclif's ideas and of Lollardy is suggested by Webster's reminder that. . . Our Saviour's command to his Disciples when he sent them into the world was not that they should have Lands and Livings, Lordships and Dominion, Tythes and Augmentations but only food and raiment and therewithal they were to be content.

Rather than the requirement that ministers should hold academic degrees, the monies spent'on educating the clergy might be put to better use to enable men in the Arts and Sciences to fit themselves for civil employment.3 For the ministry, Webster points to the biblical "laying on of hands," in which the Holy Ghost is received. Church and State-A Plea for Tolerance

Because the church was administered by the government, the magistrates had legal power to enforce the practice and the doctrine of the prevailing ideology. Webster makes a strong statement in favor of tolerance for religious dissidents on the part of the magistrates.1Webster, The Saints bide, p. 23.2Ibid., p, 24. 31bid., p. 30. 4Ibid., p. 17.171I never read that the Disciples or Christians in their days did desire the Magistrate to punish, kill, accuse, condemn, orimprison any that received not their doctrine: no, they were but to shake off the dust of their feet as a witness against them.lThe Civill Magistrate hath not any positive power to punish any man or restrain any, for their light judgment, conscience, opinion, or way of worship, if so be they act or speak nothing that is seditious.

In one of the earliest articulations of the concept of the separation of church and state, Webster asks what power magistrates have in spiritual things. He finds that the Apostles held and practiced two things:

1. They never required anything of the Magistrate (as they were Christians) but only liberty to speak out the things that Christ had manifested unto them, and quietly to meet together to break bread and pray, baptize, edifie or communicate to the of one another.

2. Nothing that they spake or did (as Christians) was any way injurious, contrary, hurtful, or obstructive to the Civil Laws either of the Jews or Gentiles.3Thus we can say that Webster stood in that line of English religious dissenters who were among the first to plead for religious freedom, a concept that was to be formative for the new nation in the New World which would be born in the following century.

Mysticism in Webster's Thought

The sermons published in Webster's The Judgment Set are the most revealing of his theological system. The content of the sermons show a close parallel with the thought of John Everard in his explication1Webster, The Saints Guide, p. 31. 2Ibid., p.32. 31bid., p. 29.172of the "Way" of the Christian soul. The ascent to the holy mountain for both Everard and Webster represents the classical mystical theology, the "via negativa" of the great medieval mystics, imposed upon the basic Calvinist doctrines of double predestination, the depravity of man in his fallen state, and the perseverance of the elect.Most of the pre-Reformation mystics taught the "via negativa," advanced for centuries in the mystical theology of Dionysius the Areopagite, in which the Christian soul must by stages leave behind all things that are not God. This

includes attachment to all material and sensual things, all creatures, all comforts, and ultimately, even the loss of one's own self and will. All men are called to this Christian perfection, but few respond to the call, and fewer still attain the highest level, union with God. The pre-requisites for attempting this ascent are a good and holy life, great love, and profound humility (Tauler).1For Calvinist mystics such as Everard, only the elect are called to this union with God, the call is manifested in faith and repentance and it is faith that brings about the indwelling of Christ, without any human "works." Realization of our own weakness and corruption brings about the profound humility and love which initiates the ascent. Once having attained to this union, however, Puritan1 John Tauler, The Sermons and Conferences, Being his Spiritual Doctrine.

Introduction by Walter Elliott (Washington, D.C.: The Apostolic Mission House, 1910) pp. 11-13.173mystics differ on the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. For Everard and for Webster, the antinomian aspect is supported by their insistence that the elect can attain perfection and that after regeneration, they cannot sin. Others, like Francis Rous, assert that the elect can sin, but that God's elective grace will never fail them, so that in the end they will be glorified.1 The fine line ofdistinction between union with God, the indwelling of Christ, and actual identification with Christ remains somewhat uncertain in some. But for Everard, the ultimate union is what he calls "Deiformity, when indeed we are no longer men but gods.n2Let us examine the six steps of the ascent of the holy mountain put forth by Everard, and then compare them with Webster's "Way." For Everard "there be six steps or degrees which we must ascend before we can sit down with Christ upon his throne of Rest and peace."1. The first is Condemnation of ourselves, Confessing and acknowledging one's own sinfulness and wickedness, condemning and abhoring ourselves really in the sight of God, upon true sight of our own vileness.2. Secondly, Annihilation of ourselves, accounting ourselves Nothing, worse than nothing, and as it were, beating ourselves to dust in our own esteem.3. Thirdly, Abdication or forsaking all things in the world, of what nature or condition soever, using the world as if we used it not.1Jerald Carl Brauer, "Francis Rous, Puritan Mystic,1579-1659: An Introduction to the Study of the Mystical Element in Puritanism." (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Chicago Divinity School, December, 1948) p. 212.

2Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, p. 133.174

4. Fourthly, Indifference to all things, to all conditions, whether to riches or poverty, to honour or dishonour, to health or sickness, to ill report and good report, to liberty and imprisonment, to praise or dispraise, to peace or to war, to fair weather or foul. When all conditions are alike to us, whether God makes us sad or merry.

5. Fifthly, Conformity to Christ our head, following him as our pattern, that in what condition soever we are in, whatever in such a condition Christ himself would do, were he in our case and condition, the same do we.

6. Sixthly, Deiformity, when indeed we are no longer men but gods: mistake me not, that is, when we act no longer ourselves, but God acts in us, that if we do anything yet we see and feel and confess it is God that doth it, that if we speak, it is Christ that speaks: if we think; it is Christ that thinks; if we go it is Christ that goeth; that it is no longer I that act anything, it is Christ that dwelleth in you and you and the members of your body are given up to him a living sacrifice and as instruments of righteousness (Rom. 6:13). These are things the Old Man cannot indure to hear of. They are terrible to flesh and blood, the flesh cannot indure to hear of Whippings and Rackings, fire and faggot. But let me tell you these things are farr short of these spirituall sufferings. These are a thousand fold more hard to undergoe, as those can witness who have experience in them.'

For Webster, the "Way" involves a "dark night of the soul,"

And this way is, Christ in man bringing forth the light of God, to empty, kill and destroy the glory and wisdom of man, to make a man as poore as Job, having lost all, and lying upon the dunghill full of boils, scabs, and sores from the crown of the head to the sole; of the feet; and as miserable as Lazarus with his sores, whichthe dogs came and licked and to make them lie begging for the smallest crumbs to relieve them. Whatever thou art, if thy deliverance be not wrought this way, let me tell thee freelythou wert never yet delivered, however thou flatterest thyself to the contrary.

Webster goes on to castigate those who believe that outward forms are the "Way", and continues1Everard, The Gospel Treasury Opened, pp. 132-133. 2debster, The Judgment Set, pp. 248-249.175

.... without this Baptism of the Spirit he holds forth a lye and a delusion and misery and wrath and desolation of spirit will come in the end, for this is that one and only way which Jesus Christ hath used in all the Saints from the beginning of the world and will doe to the end to bring man low in himself, that he alone may be exalted.lThe Father draws the souls of the elect to Christ with irresistible grace:

Draw them; how is that? with such a drawing as must be effectual. As the Rain falleth not in vain, but the earth bringeth forth fruit meet for them for whom it is appointed. So the eternal word and power of the Father made out through the flesh of Christ to the soul, calls, invites, draws and works effectually and brings home the soul; and this drawing of the Father is the

eternal and everliving power of the Godhead or Spirit that wonderfully draws the soules of men, andwhen they are drawn, they cannot but follow, and being thus drawn by him, this is the joy, life, wisdom and righteousness of the soule, here it dwells, rests, recreates itselfe, having lost its own life, it lives and receives full satisfaction in the life and power and wisdom of Christ.lDrawn by the power of the Father to Christ through his spirit, the elect soul must leave behind all. fleshly things and begin the ascent:

All the glory of man, all the excellency of nature, all the holinesse of man, the wisdom of man, all must be left below with the Asse (which is) the flesh, at the bottom of the hill, and there must be a going out of ourselves or loosing of ourselves, that we may goe up to the mountain, and there be feasted, and there see visions, there see strength, there see glory, there see power, there see riches, righteousnesse, and all good things, then man shall see how he called evil good and good evil, darknesse light, and light darknesse, there he shall be feasted with all delights, there he shall see how wisdom hath furnished her table, there the scabs are removed, here he beholds Jacob's ladder, here is the valley of Achon, here he enjoys his hopes, here sees visions and tie third heavens opened, and here he feeds on the hidden manna.However, this does not happen at the same time, but rather by degrees:1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 50. 2Ibid., p. 16.176

But know this, that all these things are not done at once but by degrees; as man leaves the Asse behind, so he ascendsthe mountain; as man goes out of himself, so he enjoys Jesus Christ, and is made one with him, as man is made nothing, so Christ comes to make all, man becomes all in Christ and nothing in himself.'

For Webster, a period of aridity should not induce the saint to think to come again to the light by prayers and holiness, but "in this condition it is best to sit still."2 Even in the time of a Saint's greatest light, "there is still a cloud upon the Lord's Tabernacle at the greatest height of light, liberty and enjoyment to his own feeling and apprehension especially immediately after such a great light. . . why? to let man know thus much that he must not live upon the Gift but on the Giver."3

If outward works of any kind are negated as ineffectual, may

the saint pray? Yes, Webster asserts, but it is not he, but the Spirit within him that prays:

No man ever truly prayed but out of a sense of want, if thou wert brought into a true sense of thy empty, naked and lost condition, of thy poverty, begging and starved condition, then Christ and his spirit would pray in thee with sighs and groans unexpressible (Rom. 8:26), then thou wouldest pray indeed and couldst not but cry and pray and groan indeed: and this is true prayer. Prayer

is not to get together many fine smooth words, and to collect this fine expression and the other and observing this and that time and that hour, but prayer is words or sighs from so deep a sense of misery and want that we verily see we starve and die except we prevail. . .'Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 16. 2Ibid., p. 116. 3Ibid., p. 117.177

But if men be really in misery, in hell, in bitternesse, they cannot chuse but cry and pray and beg. I'll warrant you you need not bid them, for you cannot keep them from it, nor will they ask, shall we not pray or hear and the like? For they pray by the power of the Spirit and that speaks in them with groans which are unutterable and beyond all expression of words.lThus prayer, in the traditional sense, is denied as of any avail by Webster, but in his deepest affliction, the Spirit intercedes for man. Faith, Law, and Gospel in Webster's Theology

In a small volume entitled The Saints Guide, Webster sets forth his principal themes on the basic relationships of Faith, Law, and Gospel. Concerning the Law

By this word Law I understand a Light, discovering what should be done and what ought not to be done, commanding the one, and prohibiting the other, and this (according to the tenor of divine Truth) I find to be threefold:

1. Internal, and impressed upon the souls of all men naturally, and therefore commonly called the Law of Nature . . . . And under this law were, and are, all men, even as they are man.

2. Externall, even as the Decalogue, commonly called moral, ingraven in the Tables of Stone, given unto Moses and obligatory unto all the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and all the Jews were under this Law and it was their light and rule.

3. There is another Law which is internal, spiritual and eternal, the Law of the Spirit of Life, as sayth the Text: For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of Sin and Death: and this is also called the Law of Faith and the perfect Law of Liberty, and under this are all Saints and true believers.21Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 268. 2Webster, The Saints Guide, pp. 6-7.178

For Webster, the definition of faith has been broadened to mean the indwelling Christ, the Inner Light, which is the rule and guide of the believer, "and the Gospel is interpreted by that Spirit, his Rule and Guide; and no Law besides whatsoever, which is evident from these grounds,"

Because if he be Christ's, he is led by the Spirit of Christ, and if a man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his, and it is this anoynting that teacheth a Believer all things and leads him into all truth, and he needeth not that any man should teach him, for he is taught of God. And this is that Spirit that searcheth all things, yea, even the deep things of God, which every Believer receiveth in some measure (and not the Spirit of the world) that he may know the things that are freely given to him of God. So that this Spirit both searcheth out and teacheth those deep things that no Law could ever discover or finde out.

And it is clear that the Gospel is his Rule, wherein his way is perfectly pointed out: The just shall live by Faith and without faith it is impossible to please God, and whatsoever is not of Faith is sin; and the life that a Believer now lives is by the faith of the Son of God, who loved him and gave himself for him. Therefore faith being the way he should walk in and the Rule he should go by, it is manifest the Law is not his rule, because not of Faith.)

In the 1654 edition of Webster's The Judgment Set, he has printed "A Response to Certaine Pretended Arguments Against My Book Called The Saints' Guide." The arguments were presented in a book called, The Modern Statesman, by a certain "G. W., Esquire." Webster thinks the anonymous author might be Armiger, who uses epithets that are "neither gentlemanly, moral, nor Christian" in answering to some objections against learning printed in The Saints Guide. Webster then defends his assertions on irresistible1Webster, The Saints Guide, p. 10.179grace, the necessity that Christ dwell within us, the inefficacy of the historic Christ without the Christ within, and the lack of need of any outward forms, rules, sacraments, etc. "A true Seeker of deliverance, and a true waiter will scorn all other Deliverers but only this Only Deliverer, Jesus Christ," Webster insists, "nothing less, nothing more than him."1From Puritan to SeekerIt is evident then, that Webster had "advanced" quite far beyond the basic Calvinism of the Puritans. Let us examine how far he had deviated from the five points of high Calvinism elucidated at the Synod of Dort.1. Total Depravity. Webster's sermons reveal that he is preaching the doctrine of man's complete and total corruption as a result of the fall.2. Unconditional Election. There is no question that "works," "rules," "ordinances," etc. play no part in God's predestined election for Webster. Election is unconditional.3. Limited Atonement. For Webster, Christ's atonement for sin is limited to those whom he has predestined to election, but his doctrine of regeneration changes his concept of atonement. For Webster, as for Osiander (1498-1552), a century earlier, it is the indwelling Christ who justifies the elect. Calvin himself explains:1Webster, The Judgment Set, p. 66.180

"He (Osiander) says that we are one with Christ. We agree. But we deny that Christ's essence is mixed with our own... . Although he may take the excuse that by the term "essential righteousness" he means nothing else but to meet the opinion that we are considered righteous for Christ's sake, yet he has clearly expressed himself as not content with that righteousness which has been acquired for us by Christ's obedienceand sacrificial death, but pretends that.we are substantially righteous in God by the infusion both of his essence and of his quality.1For Webster, as for Osiander, a different concept of regeneration than that of Calvin is involved. In Webster's theology, the historic Christ died once for the sake of the elect, but this redemption is not imputed to the sinner until Christ himself is identified within the souls of the elect, and when the afflictions of Christ in his suffering and death are participated in. Identification with Christ and participation in his afflictions are therefore part of the process of regeneration.4. Irresistible Grace. Webster holds to the concept of prevenient grace. Man cannot resist the will of God for his elect.

5. Perseverance of the Saints. Webster certainly subscribes to this doctrine, but his concept of regeneration has led to antinomianism.

Thus it is evident that, while Webster retained much of basic Calvinist doctrine, his concept of regeneration and atonement was

a major deviation, he had pushed the idea of the perseverance of the saints over into antinomianism, and above all, had completely departedJohn Calvin, Selections From His Writings. Ed. John Dillenberger (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press for the American Academy of Religion, 1975) Book III, Chapter XI, Justification by Faith, p. 428.1181from Calvinist ecclesiology, and was preaching the kind of

spiritualist doctrine identified with the Seekers.

What Influences Led Webster to the Seeker Position?

We have already seen the analogies in the doctrines of John Everard with those of Webster. Confirmation of Webster's admiration for Everard's thought is found included in The Judgment Set, under

the title, "A Testimony Freely Given by Mr. Jo. Webster of Dr. Everard's late printed Sermons in his publick speaking in the meeting place at Alhallows, Lumbard Street."

And therefore I cannot but take notice and I much wonder at the precious Book lately printed, which it may be, many of you have not taken notice of,

being Sermons preached by Dr. Everard, call'd Gospel Treasures Opened; wherein, he among other Divine things expresseth this point in several of his Sermons, most Divinely and Elegantly; and I could not but recommend it to you, having myself found so much sweetness in it; and I wonder much at the Heavenliness and sweetness of his Spirit, for to me it is as clear a piece as any I know extant, Setting forth (as to this particular) the infinite and deep condescension of the Son of God, being God equal with his Father, yet to stoop lower and beneath the unexpressable misery of man, to bring him up again.

Webster continues, praising the work of Everard, from whom he has apparently drawn the concept both of identification with Christ, of the necessity of participation in his sufferings, as well as the notion of human perfection:

He there shewing that herein lay the great and unconceivable sufferings of Christ, far beyond his external sufferings of whipping, reviling, spitting upon, crowning with thorns or his crucifying upon the Crosse, and the like, all being far below and not worth the naming the same day with these sufferings. And shewing also how these things are to be also in every Christian.. And that this Liberty purchased by Christ, is not to encourage the flesh, or purchase liberty for it, but tis for the inward man and the Spirit, and how, he once having such a principle of life, he182cannot give way to sin, but sin is his bondage, and how the power of Christ in him stayes all fleshly actings in the love of them. And that all things of man shall be slain and crucified in him by the death of the Son of God, and that these are the things which shall be burnt up for ever and ever with unquenchable fire .. .1And so it may now perhaps be said, that John Everard is not only the "Father of the Seekers" as Jones has claimed, but may also perhaps be said to be the "Father of the Grindletonians."

Influence of Jacob Boehme (1575-1624)

Another major influence on Webster's thought, a system which was in very many ways compatible with Everard's thought, was that of Jacob Boehme, the mystical shoemaker of Gorlitz in Silesia. Born in 1575, Boehme was the recipient of a new revelation in which he claimed, "I am only a very little spark of God's Light but He is now pleased in this last time to reveal through me what has been partly concealed since the beginning of the World." English translations of his writings were available as early as 1644, but the most important work was the English translation of the complete works of Boehme by John Sparrow and John Ellistone during the years 1647 to 1662. Through these translations the structure of Boehme's thought penetrated the religious life of England, especially in the radical movements, influenced the

Cambridge Platonists, especially Henry More, and in a later period, the thought of William Law.1Webster, "A Testimony Freely Given by Mr. Jo Webster of Dr. Everard's late printed Sermons in his public speaking in the meeting• place at Alhallows, Lumbard Street,The Judgment Set pp. 311-312.183

The parallels and analogies between the thought of Jacob Boehme (who was known in England as Jacob Behmen) and that of John Webster are evident in Webster's concept of the Inner Light, of sacraments and ordinances as "shadows," and of the invisible church.

Boehme's thought appears to have been influenced by that of

of Sebastian Franck, Valentine Weigel, and Paracelsus, as well as by the Lutheran background in which he was raised. His Way of Salvation is in direct line with the central ideas of Denck, Bunderlin, Entfelder, Franck, Schwenckfeld, and Weigel. For Boehme, the outward world is a "figure" of the inward and eternal world:

. . . the visible world is a manifestation of the inward spiritual world [come] out of the eternal light & out of the eternall darknesse, out of the spiritual weaving [twining and connection] and is an object or resemblance of eternity; wherewith eternity hath make itself visible.'

For Boehme, as for Webster, the historic Christ is ineffective for our salvation and the written Word is but an instrument of the Spirit:

The written Word is but an instrument whereby the Spirit leadeth [us to it selfe within us]. That Word which will teach, must be living in the literall Word: The Spirit of God must be in the literall sound, or else none is a Teacher of God, but a meere Teacher of the Letter, a ,knower of the History, and not of the Spirit of Goa in Christ.'Iacob Behmen, The Way to Christ Discovered, The FourthBook. "A Dialogue between A Scholar and his Master, Concerning the Super-sensual life," Written in the German Language, Anno 1624 by Jacob Behmen. Alias, Teutonicus Philosophus. (London: Printed by M.S. for H. Blunden, at the Castle in Corn-hill, 1648). Chapter VII, 44, p. 32.

2Ibid., The Third Book. "Of Regeneration or New Birth," p. 99.1184

Boehme, like Eckardt, believed that Christ must be born within the soul, in which, by this indwelling a new will and new desire are born in the soul. It is the actual inward process that is salvific. The new birth is brought about by man's perception of his own

nothingness. For Boehme, the Dionysian concept of the eternal generation of the Son seems to be the dynamic in which he conceives of the indwelling Christ. Boehme's concept of the Trinity also appears to be Dionysian, and therefore at odds with orthodox Reformation theology. For Boehme, as later for Everard,

This birth must be wrought within you. The Heart, or the Son of God must arise in the birth of your life, and then you are in Christ and He is in you, and all that He and the Father haveis yours; and as the Son is one with the Father, so also the new man is one with the Father and the Son, one virtue, one Power, one light, one life, one eternal paradise, one enduring substance, one Father, on, and Holy Ghost, and thou His child.lLike Webster, Boehme advocates no visible church at all. A Christian in the life belongs to no sect, he ceases to dispute over opinions and keeps above all controversies and contentions. He does not like churches, but believes the body of Christians united in Christ to be the real Temple. Sacraments are only symbols, "signatures." The sacraments do not take away sin. Blessedness lies not in anything outward but in the life and power of the inward spirit.2

The concept of the heaven and hell within, so ubiquitous in1Jones, Rufus, Spiritual Reformers of the 16th and17th Centuries. (London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1928) p. 197.2Behmen, The Way to Christ Discovered, "The Third Book of Regeneration or New Birth," pp. 95-99.185

seventeenth-century thought, can be traced in Boehme. The soul has heaven or hell in itself, formed out of its own substance as it turns toward light or darkness.The eternall darknesse of the soule is hell, viz., an aking source of anguish which is called the anger of God; but the eternall light in the soul is the kingdome of heaven, where the fiery anguish of darknesse is changed into joy.

The concept of predestination was not part of Boehme's system and he insisted on the place of man's free will in choosing the way of love or hate, heaven or hell. And for him,. it is faith which activates the will to desire the new birth in Christ which conforms the soul to Him. But even after regeneration, man's sinful nature remains. There is no human perfection in this life for Boehme.

Boehme uses the word "Seeker" hundreds of times in his writings, describing himself as having gone through a long and earnest spiritual struggle to find the heart of Jesus Christ and to be freed and delivered from everything that turned him away from Him.

Influence of William Erbery on Webster's Thought

Another possible influence on the development of Webster's theology was his friendship with William Erbery, the so-called "champion of the Seekers."J. F. McGregor insists that the Seekers were not, strictly speaking, a sect, but rather were groups of people "alienated" by theBehmen. The Way to Christ Discovered, The Third Book of Regeneration, p. 9.1186prevailing religious and political climate.1 Edwards writes, in Gangraena (1646), that "Seekers are swallowing up all the other sects of Independents, Brownists, Antinomians and Anabaptists."2 Seekers were even found among those who nominally remained inside the Church.

William Penn writes of "those who left all visible churches and societies and wandered up and down as sheep without a shepherd and as doves without their mates; seeking their beloved, but could not find Him (as their souls desired to know Him), whom their souls loved above their chiefest joy. These persons were called Seekers by some and the Family of Love by others.3It is probable that there were Seekers among the Familists and among all the religious societies of the time. Seeker tendencies may have reached England through the Anabaptists. Champlin Burrage describes Seeker views prevalent early in the seventeenth century:

The Seeker believed that since Antichrist had ruled so long over the Church, no true church and true church-officers existed any longer in all the world, and furthermore that they could not be secured until God sent new apostles or prophets to ordain new elders and establish entirely new churches. They claimed also that it was undesirable for any man to seek to hasten God's own peculiar business - an opinion of course, which was particularly distasteful to those English Separatists who saw no need of delaying the preaching of the Gospel and the organization.1J. F. McGregor, "Seekers and Ranters," Radical Religion in the English Revolution, J. F. McGregor and B. Reay, Editors. (Oxford: At the University Press, 1984) p. 129.

2Edwards, Second Part of Gangraena, p. 11.3Jones, Studies in Mystical Religion (New York: Russell & Russell, First Published 1909. Reissued, 1970) p. 452.

Champlin Burrage, The Early English Dissenters, Vol. I, p. 2144187John Saltmarsh, who has been called the "consummate flower of the Seeker movement," described the Seekers in his Sparkles of Glory (London, 1648) thus:

The Seekers find that the Christians of Apostolic times were visibly and spiritually endowed with power from on high and with gifts of the Spirit, and

so were able to make clear and evident demonstration of God in the Churches, and all who administered in any office were fixibly gifted. All was administered in the anointing or unction of the Spirit clearly, certainly, infallibly, they ministered as the oracles of God. But now, in this time of apostasy of the churches, they (the Seekers) find no such gifts:, and so they dare not meddle with any outward administrations, dare not preach, baptize, or teach, they find in the churches nothing but the outward ceremony of all administrations, as of bare water in baptism, bare imposition of hands in ordination, etc. Therefore, they "wait" for power from on high, finding no practice or worship according to the first pattern. They wait in prayer, pretending to no determination of things, nor to any infallible interpretation of Scripture. They wait for a restoration of all things and setting up of "Gospel Officers," "Gospel Churches," "Gospel Ordinances," according to the pattern in the New Testament. They wait for an apostle or some one with a visible glory and power, able in the spirit to give visible demonstration of being sent.

They urged too, that miracles should attend true ministry, as in apostolic times, and that until such demonstration and power appeared, the perfunctory performance of outward rites, and the utterance of mere words were vain and hollow. There was nothing to do but wait.lEphraim Pagitt, in Heresiography , claims that

Many have wrangled so long about the Church that at last they have quite lost it, and go under the name of Expecters or1John Saltmarsh, Sparkles of Glory, or Some Beams of the Morning-Star Wherein are many discoveries as to Truth and Peace. To the establishment, and pure enlargement of a Christian in Spirit and Truth, by John Saltmarsh, Preacher of the gospell. (London: Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at the Black-spred Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 16471188

Seekers, and do deny that there is any church or any true minister or any ordinances; some of them affirm the Church ti be in the wilderness and they are seeking for it there... .

Edwards, in Gangraena, castigates three Seekers, Lawrence Clarkson, William Erbery, and Clement Wrighter. Another hostile witness to the Seekers was Richard Baxter, who describes the Seekers as those who taught that Scripture was uncertain, that miracles are necessary to faith, the present ministry is null and void, and ordinances vain. They now are seeking the true Scripture, ministry, and ordinances. There were two types of Seekers, a rationalist group, under the leadership of John Jackson, and a radical group. Jackson describes the purpose of Seeker meetings in A Sober Word to a Serious People. Seekers come together,

First, That they may be Instruments in the hand of the Lord to stir up the grace of God in one another, by mutual conference and communication of experiences. . .

Secondly, That they may poure out their complaints to the God and Father of Spirits for the further revelation of himself. . .

Thirdly, That they may keep alive, and hold out in their measure their witness and testimony against the false, and waite for the manifestation of the rue Lord Jesus, in his pure Ordinances of Ministry and Worship.Ephraim Pagitt, Heresiography, or A description of theHereticks and Sectaries of these Latter times. The Fourth Edition with some Additions (London: Printed by W. W. for William Lee, and are to be sold at his Shop in Fleet Street, 1647).John Jackson, A Sober Word to a Serious People or, A Moderate Discourse Respecting As Well the Seekers (so-called) As the present Churches. Therein the Difference between them touching Visible Administrators is Discovered and Discussed. By a lover of Truth and Peace. (London: Printed by J. Cottrel for James Noell in Foster-lane, and are to be sold by Giles Calvert-at the black Spread Eagle neer the West end of Pauls, 1651).12189 Certainly the description of the Seeker meeting described by Jackson

is characteristic not only of that movement, but of the Quakers. Fellowship is strongly emphasized, through which the communication of the Spirit of God from one vessel to another is accomplished, and allare refreshed, comforted, quickened, and strengthened.1 Vendettuoli categorizes the Seekers as Spiritualists and separates Spiritualists into three sub-groupings: Evangelical, Rational, and Revolutionary.

He describes rational spiritualism as "grounded more in the "spiritus" of man than in the Spiritus Sanctus because of a teaching that

. . . . emphasizes the universal aspects of Christianity and may go on to a contemplation of the order of nature. . . . it tends to dissolve ecclesiastical institutions from within and allegorizes the doctrines and even the practices of apostolic Christianity. . . .2Jackson then, fits into the typology of the rationalist spiritualist or rationalist Seeker. Webster's friend, William Erbery, however, was not of this type. His Seekerism was of the more radical type and he was often accused of Ranterism. George Johnson, in a 1948 article in Church History, separates Erbery and Webster, as well as Harry Vane, William Dell, John Salt marsh and others, from the Seeker movement into a category he calls "Finders," a group which Johnson asserts are the direct antecedents of the Quakers.31James Vendettuoli,Jr., "The English Seekers: John Jackson. The Principal Spokesman," Unpublished Doctoral Disseration, Harvard University, 1958. p. 54.2lbid.3George Johnson, "From Seeker to Finder, Church History, Vol. XVII, No. 4, December, 1948.190

William Erbery (1604-1654), whom Johnson categorizes as a "radical spiritualist," was born in Roath Dagfield in Glamorganshire and educated in Brazen-nose College, Oxford. After finishing his education, he entered the ministry and subsequently became vicar of St. Mary's in Cardiff, Wales. Always schismatically inclined,

he preached in conventicles and refused to read the king's declaration for sports on the Lord's day, and consequently was brought before the High Commission many times, but was finally forced to resign his vicarage in 1638. He probably went about the country preaching from place to place against the bishops and ceremonies thereafter, as did his countrymen, Wroth, Cradock, and Powell. Thomas Edwards gives the following account of Erbery in his Gangraena:

There is one Mr. Erbery that lived in Wales, who in the beginning of the Parliament was an Independent, but by degrees is fallen to many grosse Errors, holding universall Redemption, &c. and now a Seeker and I know not what. This man was a chaplain in the Earl of Essex's Army a great while, and did broach there many Antinomian Doctrines, and other dangerous Errors, but having left the Army a good while since, he was about London and did vent his opinions there, but about Spring last, he hath betaken himself to the Isle of Ely for his ordinary residence, from whence he takes his progresse into one county or another in private houses, venting his opinions amongst well affected people under the habit of holinesse. In July last he was at Berry [Bury] where he exercised in private some forty persons being present, he declared himself for generall Redemption, that no man was punished for Adam's sin, that Christ died for all; that the guilt of Adam's sin should be imputed to no man. He said also, that within a while God would raise up Apostolicall men, who should be extraordinary to Preach the Gospel and after that shall be the fall of Rome. He spoke against gathering Churches, the Anabaptists Re-baptizing and said men ought to wait for the coming of the Spirit as the Apostles did; look as in the Wilderness they had honey and Manna, but not circumcision and the Passeover, till they came into Canaan; So now we may have many sweet things, conference and Prayer, but not a Ministery and Sacraments. And then, after the fall of Rome, there shall be new Heavens and new earth; there191shall be [a] new Jerusalem and then the Church shall be one, one street in that city and no more. Not long after he had been at Berry [sic] he went into Northampton-shire, and came to Northampton, where in a private meeting the main scope of his Exercise was to speak against the certainty and sufficiency of the Scriptures, alledging there was no certainty to build upon them, because there were so many several copies; he was also at Oundel, Newport Pagnel, and appointed shortly to return again to Berry.lChristopher Hill notes that Erbery, as an Army Chaplain, led other ranks in criticism of Presbyterian ministers, tithes, and persecution, and quoted Boehme with approval.2

After the surrender of Oxford in 1646, Erbery, although still a chaplain in the army, was sent there, and according to Wood, "he kept his conventicles in a house opposite to Merton College church, and used all the means in his power in opposing the doctrine of the presbyterian ministers who were sent by the parliament to preach the scholars into obedience."3 Erbery was engaged in several public disputations and debates while at Oxford. In one of them

Erbery maintained, among other things, "that the saints shall have the same worship, honour, throne, and glory as Christ now hath; and shall be endowed with a greater power of working miracles than Christ had1Thomas Edwards, Gangraena, Or a Catalogue and Discovery of many of the Errours, Heresies, Blasphemies, and pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of this time, vented and acted in England in these last years. (London: Printed for Ralph Smith at the Signe of the Bible in Corn-hill near the Royall-Exchange, MDCXLVI), pp. 77-78.

2Hi11, World Turned Upside Down. 154.3Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume III, p. 187.192 while on earth.) An account of this dispute was afterwards publishedby the adverse party, entitled A Relation of a Disputation inSt. Mary's Church in Oxon, between Mr. Cheynel and Mr. Erbery, 1646Erbery saw God "in the Army of the Saints" and the Army as the instrument of His will in destroying the power both of the king and the power of the Presbyterian Parliament, against which he railed continually. A millenarian of the most radical type, he equated "Popery, prelacy, and Presbyter" with the three Beasts of the Apocalypse, and saw the state church of the Commonwealth as the last Beast, or the church state. Erbery never approved of the Ranters, who blasphemed, cursed, and led licentious lives. When Erbery was accused of Ranterism, Webster defended his friend, noting that by "some weaker spirits," Erbery's doctrine concerning "the restitution of all things, the liberty of creation. . . the saints' oneness in Christ with God" was misunderstood or led to practices which Erbery regretted. Christopher Hill comments that Erbery could easily have been misunderstood, for "even in print Erbery was often very rude and coarsely jocular about what others might regard as sacred subjects. He thought that holy communion should be a full meal, with lots of drink." "Why do they not say their prayers before a pipe of tobacco, a good creature."2A close friendship between this fiery radical and John Webster must have developed, perhaps during the period of the civil war when1Brook,Lives of the Puritans, p. 187. 2Hill, World Turned Upside Down, p. 159.193 both had been chaplains in the army. At any rate, in 1653 we have an

account of A Monstrous Dispute, which took place in Lumber [Lombard] Street between Erbery, Webster, and three antagonists, a "Presbyter, an Independent, and an Anabaptist." Erbery would not name these opponents, "because they were sham'd enough at the Dispute." The dispute apparently revolved around the recent publication of Webster's The Judgment Set, which as we have pointed out, contains most of Webster's theological views, and

concerning which the three ministers wished to argue with the author. Erbery's role in the dispute was, it seems, to support Webster. In Erbery's own account of the dispute he relates thatMr. Webster, the Respondent, had published a book and publickly preached for the exalting of God alone, and of Christ in the Spirit: Christ being the onely Ordinance or means to bring men to God, and the spirit alone the teacher of his people; Christ the way to the Father, and none knowing the Father but the Son (in us) neither any able to say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Spirit, etc. To such spiritual Truths, two professed Ministers came publickly to oppose though pretending some errors. I shall not name the opposing Ministers, because they were sham'd enough at the Dispute, and therefore will not strip them bare before the world, because I know them both, especially one of them, my worthy friend. There was also a third, that is, a Presbyter, Independent, anti Anabaptist, three against one, but one was too many for three.Erbery expands on one of his favorite themes, the "apostasy of the churches," in these last days:William Erbery, A Monstrous Dispute, or the Language of the Beast in Two Men Professing Themselves Ministers of the Gospel, both proved at a Publick Dispute in Lumber [sic] Street, Oct. 12, 1653. (London: Printed by J. C. for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at his Shop at the Black-Spread Eagle, at the West End of Pauls, 1653), p. 1.1194

Onely because to me, they publickly resisted the Spirit that is now breaking forth in the Saints, and seemed to spare the flesh: yea to defend that which the Lord God is about to destroy; therefore I could not but tell the world that the wisest Ministers, and purest Churches this day are so befooled, con-founded, and defiled also with their natural Reason, and humane learning, that such things are as much set up by these men in the things of God as by Papists or Prelates.1The main arguments centered around Webster's concept of the Ministry, his opinion of "humane learning" and man's natural Reason, and last but not least, the question of tithes, which the Independents had established, a contradiction of their original idealism concerning a "hireling ministry." The dispute was evidently a fiery one, for Erbery reports that

Truely there was no fighting, nor blows at the Dispute (as 'twas reported at Westminster) but the Dispute was so confused without any form or order, without method or matter indeed, that I never saw less Reason or Learning in rational men and Scholars,. lessReligion in Saints, who came to catch not to finde the truth, but to seek out errors and set up snares in which themselves fell at last.2Erbery's attitude changed after the failure of the Barebones Parliament in December of 1653, three months after the aforementioned dispute had taken place. He seems to have abandoned hope of a political solution in his lifetime. By 1654 he had decided that

• the people of God should not meddle at all with state matters. Over against the Fifth Monarchists, he now believed that Christ's kingdom is not of this world. The English churches "do live in1Erbery, A Monstrous Dispute, p. 1. 2Ibid., p. 1.195Babylon. And there not they only, but all the scattered saints this day do dwell, and I also with them waiting for deliverance.n1 Erbery died in 1654.

A posthumous tribute was paid to Erbery by John Webster which was published as a Preface to Erbery's The Great Earthquake (1654). Webster addresses the following, To the Christian Reader:

The Author of the ensuing Discourse, was the person raised up by the Lord to bear his testimony against all formal and traditional wales of Religion, Ordinances and Government in the (so Called) Christian world.

The same measure (of persecution) was meeted to this our Author, who in simplicity of spirit, and love to all the saints, bewailing the bondage of the whole creation, did cast in his mite for the deliverance and relief thereof, how he was scandalized by some professors of all sorts, having various reproaches heaped upon him to render him the more unserviceable for the great work he was upon; hence it is, that we have heard the brand of a loose person, or a Ranter, an Apostate and Blasphemer, an Anti Scripturist, anti-ministrist, an Anti-ordinancist, an Ansitrinitarian, Universalist, and what not inured upon him.

Webster's Preface consists of a defense of Erbery against the above eight charges. Webster insists that Erbery was not loose and "bore public testimony against licentiousness," and therefore was not a Ranter. He was not an Apostate, but rather a "presser forward." He was not a Blasphemer, for a blasphemer speaks evil of dignities, but "as for our Author, his thoughts of God were raised together with his1Hill, World Turned Upside Down, p. 158.

William Erbery, The Great Earthquake, Revel. 16:18 or, Fall ofAll the Churches. Discovering the apostasie of purest Churches, not yet sensible of their spiritual Whoredoms, Ezek. 43:9-10, etc. (London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the Black Spread Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1654) Preface.196 discoveries of him, he owned truth in the power of it, 'twas only the

traditional customs in which many place their Religion, which our Author did decry." He was not an Anti-Scripturist, since "the Scriptures were owned by him as given by inspiration, yet the bare letter not rested in, but the truth and power being the treasure hid in the field, sought after." He was not an Anti-ministrist, but wished for a more perfect ministry according to the Gospel and "especially since the gifts which accompanied the first Ministry are ceased, and our Author was of this mind, better no Ministry than a pretended one."

"After ministry follow Ordinances, which our Author acknowledged he was not against or above, but under and below, as not perceiving the power of those primitive institutions exerting themselves in the performance of Christians now a daies."1

Webster admits that the doctrine of the Trinity was

"not perfectly owned" by Erbery and his explanation of Erbery's concept reveals how his doctrine of the Trinity affected Erbery's theory of the atonement, a theory which influenced Webster's own doctrine of the atonement, as we have seen. Webster defends Erbery against the charge of Anti-trinitarianism as follows;

.. . . The Doctrine of the Trinity, as explained by the Schools in personalities, subsistences, etc., was not perfectly owned by him. One Faith, one Lord, one Baptism, were the three great articles of his belief: neither did the Lord contain himself _ within himself, but was made manifest in the flesh of Christ, according to that (God was in Christ reconciling, etc.) and doth continually work in the hearts of his people by his Spirit. Neither could he see how the Doctrine of these distinctErbery, The Great Earthquake, Preface by John Webster.1197

personalities and subsistences could accomodate their design, who first broached them in order to the clearing (as is supposed) the Doctrine of Christ's satisfaction to the Father in that sense as they define it. For if God were in Christ, that God was the Father, for God is one, it is not one divine nature in Christ satisfying another in the Father satisfied, but the Father in the Son. And if the essence be the same, how can the personality make a difference? 1Webster hedges around Erbery's defense against the charge of the Universalist heresy, a very serious deviation from the orthodox Reformation doctrine of predestination, much less the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination. Webster notes that threefold differences of opinion are held on redemption:

1. Some affirming it to be sufficient for all but intentionally only for a few.

2. Others intentionally, as well as sufficiently for all, but actually, to some only.

3. Others intentionally, sufficiently, and also actually for all, of which opinion Origen was the chief, viz., That the whole creation should be redeemed from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the Sons of God, that as the whole creation came forth from God, so at last after the rebellious part of it had been punished for a season for its misdeeds, it should be released, and taken up into the same glory, that the Saints or obedient part had entered

into before; so that everlasting fire and everlasting perdition were expgunded by him, not for a perpetuity, but a long duration of years.

The idea of universal salvation or the restitution of all things (Acts 3:21) was taught by John Denck and the concept is prominent in several of his works. Webster remains non-committal on this doctrine, and even attempts to exonerate Erbery somewhat:1Erbery, The Great Earthquake, Webster's Preface. 2Ibid., Webster's Preface.198

Our Author (Erbery) had not discovered much of his mind in this latter opinion, which if it be not true, yet is in itself desirable, in regard of a good, the larger it is, the better, and Plato could say, That God being a supreme good, there was no envy in him to any of his creatures but rather a desire that all should be made like him.1Whether Webster ever embraced the Universalist doctrine

in later life we do not know, for he appears to have followed the example of Erbery about 1657 when he settled down to the practice of medicine. But the important fact for our thesis is that the Seeker position embraced by both Erbery and Webster marks the line of departure from many elements of Calvinist doctrine, and we can now see more clearly the development toward the Quaker position.

Webster and the Enlightenment

An entirely different facet of Webster's thought is contained in his last two publications, the Academiarum Examen in 1654, and the Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft in 1677. The style of these two works is entirely distinct from that of The Judgment Set, which is perhaps inevitable, since The Judgment Set is a collection of Webster's sermons, meant to be delivered orally. The Saints Guide is a small work merely containing questions and answers to Webster's more controversial theories as set forth in the sermons. But not only is the -style of these two works different: the approach is different. Instead of the fiery charismatic preacher of the sermons, we have for the most part a scholarly approach, dominated by an admiration forErbery, The Great Earthquake, Webster's Preface.1199Reason, and argued with "logick" and cogency. The effect of the "new learning" on the religious thought of the latter part of the seventeenth century is beyond the scope of this paper, but it will be of interest to review briefly Webster's two publications, which, because of their distinctive style, have, as we have already mentioned, sometimes been attributed to another author."Academiarum Examen"If one remembers that Webster was an educator as well as a minister, having been master of the free school at Clitheroe before the civil war, his authorship

of the Examen is more credible. A close reading of the text reveals many of the same perspectives we have pointed out in the sermons, although certainly couched in cooler language. The Examen was published in 1654, the year that Erbery died and the year of the failure of the Barebones Parliament. It may well be that Webster had decided to follow Erbery's example and no longer meddle with politics and state affairs.The Examen is a learned work and Webster quotes from classical, patristic, scientific, and philosophic sources with facility, as well as the usual Scriptural quotations. Philostratus, Chrysostom, Augustine, Cusa, Hugo of St. Victor, Francis Bacon, Jacob Boehme, Aristotle, Plato, Descartes, Paracelsus, Galen, Pico della Mirandola, Kepler are called upon frequently to support his arguments, which are well organized and logically presented. His theories on thereorganization of the educational system in light of the new science200

are as relevant to his time as such a reorganization of the educational system in our time with regard to the nuclear age.

Webster argues that in the English universities, men have designed educational systems for their young for two purposes: first, to fit men for their undertaking in the Commonwealth, secondly to fit them for the service of God in the ministry. The first purpose he sees as good, the second as useless, "for the teaching of spiritual and gospel knowledge is onely and peculiarly appropriated and attributed unto the Spirit of God."1

Promoting the use of symbols, since he sees the signs of God's presence in nature, Webster speaks of Boehme's book of the Threefold Life of Man:I cannot (howsoever fabulous, impossible, or ridiculous it may be accounted of some) passe over with silence, or neglect that signal and wonderful secret (so often mentioned by the mysterious and divine-inspired Teutonick, and in some manner acknowledged and owned by the highly illuminated fraternity of the Rosie (rosse) [probably Rosicrucians] of the language of nature; but out of profound and deep consideration, must adumbrate some of those reasons, which perswasively draw my judgment to credit the possibility thereof.2The best summary of Webster's critique and his proposed remedies

for the universities is found in the reply to his Examen by Seth Ward, Bishop of Salisbury, under the signature H. D., the final letters of1John Webster, Academiarum Examen, or the Examination of Academies. Wherein is discussed and examined the Matter, Method and Customes of Acade mick and Scholastick Learning, and the insufficiency thereof discovered and laid open (London: Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at the sign of the Black Spread Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1654) p. 4.

2Ibid., p. 26.201

both his names, with a prefatory epistle by John Wilkins, Bishop of Chester, also signed with the final letters, N. S.1 Ward's response is entitled, appropriately, Vindiciae Academiarum.Curiously, among all the epithets cast on Webster, that put forth by N. S. in the prefatory epistle is the most outlandish, for N. S. reports, "I have heard from very good hands that he is suspected to be a Friar, his conversation being much with men of that way."2 N. S. includes Webster as one of three adversaries of the universities, the other two being Hobbes, who has "good ability, solid parts, but is highly magisterial" and Dell, an "angry fanatical man who lacks academic learning." He accuses Webster of having only "a smattering of superficial knowledge."Arguing against the emphasis on Aristotle in the universities, Webster complained that "Naturall Magick is abominated, the sublime science of Chymistry is neglected, Medicine is turned to flattery and the Galenical way not advanced," nor discoveries in Anatomy properly advanced. The Schools are ignorant of "Meteorologicall, Minerallogical, Botanicall, and Anthropologicall" studies, of the "three great Hypostaticall soule-ravishing Principles - Salt, Sulphur,1DNB, s.v. "Webster,John," by Bertha Porter.

2Seth Ward, Vindiciae Academiarum, Containing some briefeAnimadversions upon Mr. Websters Book, Stiled The Examination of Academies, Together with an Appendix concerning What M. Hobbs, and M. Dell have published on this Argument (Oxford: Printed by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University, for Thomas Robinson, 1654) p. 6202and Mercury," and equally ignorant of "Magneticall Phylosophy and Atomicall Learning."1In harmony with his theological system, Webster is opposed to the study of "metaphysicks" "because it brings no better instrument for the discovery of truth than the operations of the intellect, it contains no certain principles such as "Cogito ergo sum," and is not only useless but actually obscures the truth and has produced "some frivolous opinions concerning God."Webster opposes the study of Aristotle's "Ethicks," since Aristotle was a heathen, and placed the summum bonum in the exercise of virtue, but the summum bonum is not attainable in this life. Aristotle's "Ethicks" are unjustly preferred before Socrates, Plato, Zeno, Seneca, Epictetus, who contain more precise treasure.In "Politicks," Plato, Bodin, Machavell are as good as Aristotle, and too much time is spent upon ornamental oratory and poetry in the study of "Rhetorick."Webster opposed the use of the Latin tongue in all the exercises of the universities, and advocated the use of English, at the same time encouraging the study of languages.Webster believed that Scripture should be set apart from scholastic studies, since it cannot be understood by natural means. Rather, the discoveries of God by "naturall Reason" may be a part of "Naturall Philosophy." In teaching "Logick" he believed that the firstWard, Vindiciae Academiarum, p. 34.1

203remedy would be to find out what Reason is in its intrinsic nature and operation, and to see where man's reason exceeds the reason of "other Animants." He thought that some prevalent way should be found out for discovering and rectifying the fallacies of the senses andfor abstracting adequate notions and giving "opposite" demonstrations to them. He wishes well to Copernican Astronomers and in Naturall Philosophy advocates that Bacon's way be embraced - that axioms be evidently proved by observation and no other admitted. For "Chymistry" he believed that youth should put their hands to labor and their fingers to furnaces that the mysteries discovered and wonders brought to light by Chymistry be familiar to them. His remedy for Metaphysick was that all men read Descartes. He believed there should be more liberty in choosing the methods of study and that there should be no set time for taking degrees. Last, but not least, he thought that all men should learn a trade--to work with their hands.)Ward's Vindiciae Academiarum, includes "An Appendix Concerning What Mr. Hobbs and Mr. Dell Have Written Concerning the Universities." Ward accuses Hobbs of wanting to regulate the world according to the model of the Leviathan, that is, according to Reason. Ward is responding also to Dell's Trial of Spirits. Apparently Dell is arguing for the same reforms in the educational system that Webster recommends. He wants the classes conducted in English and wants students to spend part of each day learning a trade. But he alsoWard, Vindiciae Academiarum, pp. 34-48.1204

advocates the establishment of a university in each of the great towns of England, so that people might maintain their children at home while they learn, and accuses Cambridge and Oxford of encroaching on the Law of Love by monopolizing education.)*The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft°

If the Examen is the voice of Webster as an educator, the Displaying is Webster's effort as a "Practitioner in Physick," as he describes himself on the title page of his book. Published in his 67th year, the work is dedicated to five of his friends and to "his Majesties Justices of the Peace and Quorum in the West Riding of Yorkshire."

The Justices apparently had assisted Webster in "wronged innocency," and Webster, in his Epistle Dedicatory, offers "this treatise" in gratitude to them. The book is intended as a guide for those magistrates who must deal with the legal aspects of those accused of witchcraft as well as their accusers.

To help magistrates distinguish betwixt those that are Impostors, Cheaters and active deceivers, and those that are but under a mere passive delusion through ignorant and superstitious education, a melancholy temper and constitution, or led by the vain credulity of inefficacious charms, pictures, ceremonies and the like, traditionally taught them.1

Webster asserts that the first sort ought to be punished . . . "but the1Ward, Vindiciae Academiarum, pp. 51-62.

2Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, Epistle Dedicatory.205 other sort rather merit pity and information, or the Physicians help,than any punishment at all."1 He warns the magistrates to "take heed of accusers, who are often more worthy of punishment than the accused.n2For many, forth of a meer deluded fancy, envious mind, ignorance and superstition, do attribute natural diseases, distempers and accidents to Witches and Witchcraft, when in truth there is no such matter at all. And sometimes they counterfeit strange fits and diseases, as vomiting, of preternatural and strange things, which if narrowly lookt into and examined are but Juglings, and deceitful confederacies, and yet for malice, revenge or some other base ends, do accuse others to be causes of them.

Webster goes on to deny all the supposedly diabolical transformations and other imaginary phenomena associated with witchcraft and states his purpose which is to prove

by the word of God, the true grounds of Theologie and sound reason, that there never hath been any such Witch existent in rerum natura and so you may know what credit may be given to such Fables and Impossibilities.'

Can this be the same John Webster of The Judgment Set, some twenty-odd years later relying on "theologie and sound reason" to support his case? Yes, for we have seen in the Examen the growing influence of Enlightenment ideas on Webster's thought. By the middle of the seventeenth century, the work of Francis Bacon, of Hobbes, and of Descartes had been published and the new interest in nature and the method of "sound reason" applied to the substances of nature.2lbid.31bid. 'Ibid.'Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, Epistle Dedicatory.206Descartes' suspicion of scholastic learning was shared by many and replaced with the concepts of Platonism and neo-Platonism. Theology was reduced to the Reformed concept of the authority of Scripture, "the word of God the true grounds of Theologie." Revealed mysteries transcend the comprehension of the human mind, and the only proof of revealed truth was in the Scripture itself. The cleavage between philosophy and theology was established, and philosophy itself began to be divided among the various physical sciences. British philosophers developed a decided interest in the study of psychological questions.1It is out of this milieu that Webster is responding to publications by Meric Casaubon and Joseph Glanville, in which the existence of supernatural phenomena was supported, viz., A Treatise Proving Spirits by Casaubon, and A Blow at Modern Sadducism, by Glanville.Webster argues "with the clear strength of reason" throughout the work, denying the existence and reputed activities of evil spirits except as revealed in Scripture. Even here, he notes that descriptions of monsters and other

weird creatures in the Scripture are often the result of mis-translations of the Hebrew. But there is one concept that is decidedly distinct from traditional ideas of the nature of man, and that is his notion of an "astral" or "sensitive"1Frederick Copleston, S.J. A History of Philosophy. (Garden City, New York: Image Books, A Division of Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1963) Volume IV, Descartes to Leibniz, Introduction, p. 23.207soul which is corporeal and may exist by itself for some time after the body is corrupted and dispersed.Webster argues that there are in man three parts, body, soul, and spirit. He defines Spirit as "the rational, immortal, incorporeal soul (which] doth return to God who gave it, that is, not to be annihilated or to vanish into nothing, but to abide and remain foreveror eviternally."l The astral Soul, as already described, is corporeal; the Body is defined as the gross body which, separated from the immortal soul, exists only until consumed in the grave.The concept of the "astral soul" as well as the entire theological paradigm from which it is drawn appears to have been taken from the thought of Valentine Weigel. Weigel accepted from Paracelsus the notion of the astral soul, which he calls the "astral body." Copleston explains that for Weigel, "Man has a mortal body, which is the seat of the senses, but he has also an astral body, which is the seat of reason. In addition he has an immortal soul or part to which belongs the Funklein or Gemut, the oculus intellectualis or oculus mentis."2 Several of the other concepts so central to Webster's thought may have their source in Weigel's theology, concepts such as the indwelling of both Christ and Antichrist and the idea of the heaven and hell within. Copleston writes that Weigel1Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 318 2Copleston, A History of Philosophy, Volume 3, Part II, p. 79.208

Attempted to combine the mystical tradition with the philosophy of Nature as found in Paracelsus. He followed Nicholas of Cusa in teaching that God is all things complicite and that the distinctions and oppositions which are found in creatures are one in Him. But to this he added the curious notion that God becomes personal in and through creation, in the sense that He comes to know Himself in and through man, in so far as man rises above his egotism and shares in the divine life. All creatures, including man, receive their being from God, but all have an admixture of not-being, of darkness, and this explains mart's power of rejecting God. The being of man tends necessarily towards God, turning to its source and origin and ground; but the will can turn away from God. When this happens, the resulting inner tension is what is known as "hell."1Paracelsus' ideas were developed by John Baptist van Helmont, a Belgian chemist and physician (1577-1644) and both are often quoted in Webster's work. Thus, in Webster's new anthropology, the seventeenth-century heritage in both medicine and chemistry are apparent,

So that it is most evident that there are not only three essential and distinct parts in Man, as the gross body, consisting of Earth and Water which at death returns to the earth again, the sensitive and corporeal soul or astral spirit, consisting of Fire and Air, that at death wandereth in the air or near the body, and the immortal and incorporeal Soul that immediately returns to God that gave it: But also that after death they all three exist separately; the Soul in immortality and the body in the earth, though soon consuming; and the Astral Spirit that wanders in the air, and without doubt doth make these strange apparitions, motions, bleedings, and so we conclude this tedious discourse.2

Webster denies that charms or incantations or the like can be effective in themselves, but allows that they can work on the astral or corporeal soul through the force of imagination:1Copleston, A History of Philosophy, Volume 3, Part II, p. 79. Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 320.209

And if the Soul, as Helmont laboureth to prove, by the Prerogative of its creation can, when suscitated by strong desire and exalted phantasie, operate ear nutum, then it must needs follow, that it may work upon other bodies than its own, and so, using Words, Charms, characters and Images, may bring to pass strange things. But if these three conclusions be certain and true, written by the pen of a most learned, though less vulgarly known Author, to wit:

1. The Soul is not only in its proper visible body, but also without it, neither is it circumscribed in an organical body.

2. The Soul worketh without, or beyond its proper body commonly so called.3. From every body flow corporeal beams, by which the Soul worketh by its presence, and giveth them energie and power of working; And these beams are not only corporeal, but of divers parts also.

If these, (I say) be certain, then doth the imagination work at a distance by means of those beams, and consequently Words and Charms, and such like may be the means and instruments, by which the imagination (being the principal power of toe sensitive Soul) may operate strange things at a distance. . .

Webster seems somewhat reluctant to support the above theosophical concepts, but in setting them forth, he does appear to allow for the possibility of an astral soul, corporeal beams, and the power of the imagination to influence the minds of others.

While not effective in themselves, charms may have a practical use. Webster gives us an insight into his life as a "Practitioner of Physick" in the following account of his use of charms:

And we ourselves having practiced the art of medicine in all its parts in the North of England, where Ignorance, Popery, and superstition doth much abound, and where for the most part the common people, if they chance to have any sort of the Epilepsie, Palsie, and Convulsions or the like, do presently perswade themselves that they are bewitched, forespoken, blasted,1Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, p. 322.210fairy-taken or haunted with some evil spirit, and the like; and if you should by plain reasons shew them that they are deceived, and that there is no such matter, but that it is a natural disease, say what you can, they shall not believe you, but account you a Physician of small or no value, and whatever you do to them, it shall hardly do them any good at all because of the fixedness of.their depraved and prepossessed imagination. But if you indulge their fancy and seem to concur in opinion with them, and hang any insignificant thing about their necks, assuring them that it is a most efficacious and powerful charm, you easily settle their imaginations and then give them that which is proper to eradicate the cause of their disease, and so you may cure them, as we havedone great numbers.12

The above passage provides a clue, not only to the practice

of medicine in seventeenth-century Yorkshire, but also, possibly, to the type of people that made up the congregations of ministers like Brerely and Webster in that area. Such superstition could easily have encouraged the more ecstatic type of religious fervor inherent in the Seeker and Quaker movements.

But while the Cartesian method was a most fruitful breakthrough for the advancement of science, the separation of theology from the study of Scripture may not have been as successful, for the mythological imagery of many of the passages of the Hebrew bible, for instance, when taken literally, as they were, might produce an equal degree of folklore and superstition among the faithful. Webster does not hesitate to tell Mr. Glanville, "that the Sacred Scriptures do with infallible certitude teach us that both good and bad Spirits have most certainly an Existence." He insists that "Apparitions do notWebster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, pp. 323-324. .1211prove the existence of Angels and Spirits, Scripture does."1 In strong language, reminiscent of the earlier Webster, he calls Glanville and Casaubon "Demonographs and Witchmongers," and quotes that "precious and pithy sentence of St. Austin, who saith 'Major est hujus Scripturae authoritas, quam omnes humani ingenii perspicacitas.'"An example of the misuse of a Scriptural text is the rationale provided by Webster for the idea that "murdered bodies bleed fresh rosie blood for weeks after their death, they bleed in the presence of the murderer." The reason given for this gruesome function, for Webster, is because the astral soul wanders around a murdered body--the bleeding is caused by its hatred toward

the murderer. The Scriptural proof for such a phenomenon is provided in Genesis 4:10, in which Abel's blood cried out to the Lord.2A year after the publication of The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, Benjamin Camfield, the Rector of Aylston, published A Theological Discourse of Angels and Their Ministries (1678). Camfield wishes that Webster had not used terms such as"scurrilous, impudent, witchmongers" etc. to describe his learned opponents, epithets, Camfield asserts, which are perhaps forgivable in1Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, pp. 42-43. . 2Ibid., pp. 306-309.212

an aging Doctor of Physick, but not in Webster's former role as Curate of Kildwick and an ordained minister.l While Camfield argues against Webster's concept of the Astral Soul, using Scriptural texts, his argument seems to consist in asserting that the rational soul of man should be classified with the angelic spirits as well as man's spirit. There is a long passage disputing the translation and meaning of the Hebrew word for spirit, "ruach."2

Summary

In his later years, Webster made his peace with the Established Church. In the Displaying, he writes

And that it is often as vain to presume upon having the guidance of the Spirit, as are the other two, is manifest in the late times of Rebellion and Confusion: where every man pretending the Spirit, made such wild and extravagant expositions of the Scripture as few ages have known before: and is still kept up by the giddy troop of Fanatical Quakers and the like.1Benjamin Camfield, Rector of Aylston nedr Leicester.A Theological Discourse of Angels and Their Ministries. Wherein Their Existence, Nature, Number, Order, and Offices are Modestly Treated of: With the character of Those, for whose benefit especially they are Commissioned and such Practical Inferences Deduced, as are most proper to the Premises. Also an Appendix containing Some Reflections upon Mr. Webster's Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft. (London: Printed by R. E. for Hen. Brome, at the Gun in S Pauls Churchyard, 1678) p170.

2Ibid., p. 186.

3Webster, The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, pp. 42-43.213

But while Webster repudiated his Seeker views in his old age, the impact of his fiery personality and unorthodox preaching undoubtedly was great among those congregations in the north of England, in Lancashire and Yorkshire, in

which he had practiced his earlier ministry, and his influence was pivotal for the development of Quakerism in that area, for it was in 1652 that Fox saw his vision of the "people in white raiment" at the foot of Pendle Hill, and "convinced" multitudes of Seekers of the truth of the Quaker movement.

Sociological and political factors too may have contributed to the wide acceptance of Fox's message in northern England. Weeks notes

About the year 1645 the Presbyterian system was set up in Lancashire with a Provincial Synod and the county was divided into classes, Clitheroe being in the class of Blackburn. Though this system seems to have received the support of the bulk of the Lancashire clergy, it was not accepted with much enthusiasm on the part of the laity, and the Victoria County History states that from 1653 onwards the apathy of the general body of thelaity became so pronounced, that the decay of the classes could no longer be concealed. Moreover Cromwell's Army and his party in the country generally were strong Independents, with the result that the governing authorities did not give the Presbyterians that support which was necessary to enable them to enforce their disciplinary system. The Victoria County History further says "finding that the wooden sword of discipline had been smitten from their hands, and that they could no longer safeguard the approaach to the Sacrament, the Presbyterian clergy preferred to cease administration altogether."

Weeks comments that it was no wonder that the people generally began to discover with John Milton, that "New Presbyter was but old priest writ large."2 The people were ready, in 1652, for a religion without any ecclesiology at all./Weeks, Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century, p. 178. 2Ibid., P. 178.CHAPTER V

ROBERT TOWNE (1593-1664)

Webster describes Robert Towne as a person he has known for many years, "a godly, faithfull, and painfull Minister, one whom I believe hath for many yeares tasted of and enjoyed the truth, as it is in Jesus, and walked blamelessly in the simplicity and power thereof.nl Webster continues his tribute to Towne:

Having been made, through the grace of God, a constant, and zealous instrument to beare forth his testimony against all unrighteousness of men, fleshly wisdome, carnall formes, and legal worship (though through much persecution, scandall, and suffering) wherein I judge him a faithfull steward of the talent committed to his charge, being upholden through faith by the mighty power of God: And I cannot but much rejoice that God hath at this season drawne forth his spirit to oppose thatAntichristian darkness, and fleshly wisdome that reignes in the children of disobediences, and I hope and pray that the Lord will blesse it to the same

end, unto which purpose he commends it to all that know and love the Lord in truth and sincerity.21Robert Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, or Vindiciae Evangelii.A A Vindication of the gospell-truths, from the unjust censure and undue aspersions of Antinomians. In a modest Reply to Mr. Anth: Burgesses Vindiciae Legis, Mr. Rutherfords Triall and Tryumph of Faith, from which also Mr. Geerie and M. Medford may receive a satisfactory answer. By Robert Towne (London: Printed for the Author and are to be sold at the Angell in Cornhill, 1654) Admonition to the Reader by John Webster.

2Ibid.215Webster signs himself as he "who remaines the lowest and least of Saints, Jo: Webster." The date was December, 1653.Towne, although accused, disclaimed charges of Grindletonianism. O. Heywood describes Robert Towne as "the famous Antinomian who writ some books: he was the best scholar and soberest man of that judgment in the country, but something unsound in principles.nl Towne's "unsound principle" was the doctrine of free grace carried perhaps to an extreme. For him, "Free grace is the richest and chief Diamond belonging to the crown of our King Jesus."2 But to his adversaries, it was, in the words of John Sedgwick, the "damnable doctrine of Free Grace."3Towne describes himself as "ill favoured to the world-ward,n4and asserts, in defending himself against charges of antinomianism, that "I dwell in an obscure and remote place, amongst such who littleA. G. Matthews, Calamy Revised. Being a Revision of Edmund Calamy's Account of the Ministers and Others Ejected and Silenced 1660-1662. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1934)pp. 489-490.

2Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, Author's Preface.

3John Sedgwick, Antinomianism Anatomized, or A Glasse forthe Lawlesse: Who deny the Ruling use of the Morall Law unto Christians under the Gospel. By John Sedgwick, B.D. and Pastor of the Church of God at Alphage, neer Cripple-gate, London. (London: Printed for Samuel Gellibrand, and are to be sold at his Shop in Pauls Church yard at the signe of the Brazen Serpent, 1643) Epistle to the Reader.

4Robert Towne, Monomachia: or a Single Reply to Mr.Rutherford's Book Called Christs dying and drawing of sinners, Vindicating and clearing onely such Positions and Passages in The Assertion of Grace as are palpably mistaken and perverted, and so . miscalled Antinomian. Wherein also it appeareth that the Adversaries dealing is neither just nor candid. (London: Printed by J. C. for Nath. Brook, at the Angel in Cornhil, 1654) To the Christian Reader.1216

meddle with anything controversal [sic]. My bodily infirmities and little leisure do retard me.n1

Towne insists that he knows not one Antinomian and thanks God that he is not acquainted with any sectarians:

I hear of Sects in our Land, and Kingdom, incredible for number and nature. And I bless God, that I am acquainted with none, that adhere to any, as I know: for I have determined to know nothing among my people but Christ and him Crucified. And I both wish and strive, that they, and I may live onely by the faith of hip: for therein is all spirituall peace, rest and consolation. . .

Records reveal that Robert Towne was registered at Oriel College, Oxford in 1612, was nineteen years old at that time, and was from Yorkshire. He was awarded the B.A. degree in 1614 from Oriel. Other records tell us that Towne was Curate of Accrington in Lancashire in 1635 and Curate of Heywood, also in Lancashire, in July 1640, when he apparently signed a protestation to the Bishop of Chester disclaiming the doctrine of the Grindletonians.3 He was oneof the Antinomians complained of before the Westminster Assembly on August 10, 1643, and, according to Matthews, he removed in that year to Todmorden, where, in 1647-8, the Bury Classis issued an order that the churchwardens of Todmorden should not allow him or any other known Antinomian preacher to officiate there. We find Towne as curate of Haworth near Bradford in Yorkshire in 1650, where records show that his curacy was successively sequestered and then restored.1Towne, Monomachia, To the Christian Reader. 2Ibid.3Matthews, Calamy Revised, p. 490.217 Curate of Elland in the difficult years between the establishment of

the Commonwealth and the Restoration, he died and was buried at Haworth in 1664 at the age of 71, leaving three daughters, Hester, Mary, and Sarah.The records of Towne's life bear poignant witness to the intensity of the doctrinal controversies involved in the theology of free grace. The disputes began with the Calvinist defense against

the Arminians in the early part of the seventeenth century, as we have seen, and increased in subtlety and intensity as they continued through the end of the century.Roger Thomas, in a penetrating study of the break-up of non-conformity, describes the Free Grace controversies, which involved the charge of Antinomianism, as "an extreme form of Calvinism."

In an effort to exalt the divine action in salvation, it debased the part played by man so low that it assumed that nothing a man did, good or evil, could improve or jeopardize his prospects of salvation.1At the center of the controversy was Richard Baxter who published his Aphorismes of Justification, a polemic against the Antinomians, in 1649, and whose compromise position between Arminianism and Antinomianism added further fuel to the fire. Thomas explains that:

Roger Thomas, M.A., "The Breakup of Non-Conformity," in The Beginnings of Non-Conformity, by Geoffrey F. Nuttall, Roger Thomas, and H. Lismer Short,

The Hibbert Lectures. (London: James Clarke and Co., 1964) p. 40.218

Ostensibly the quarrel had to do with the differences between Calvinism, Arminianism and what went by the name of the "Middle Way" between the two, or Baxterianism as it was also called. Calvinism insisted upon divine, free, unmerited, grace, with the implication that some were elected to eternal salvation while others were predestined to damnation. Arminians held there was grace sufficient for all, if man would do his part. As the Presbyterian Vindication of 1650 had put it, "The Gospel (i.e. Calvinism) makes free grace put the distinction between the Elect and Reprobate; and the Arminians Free-will. 1Thomas notes that "the only compromise involved in the Middle Way was a cheerful willingness to forget predestination to damnation (or absolute reprobation, as it was called)." 2 Thomas goes on to assert, humorously, that "apart from this the Middle Way men performed with some acrobatic dexterity the impossible feat of coming down firmly on both sides of the fence; it might have been more appropriate to call them the Double Way men "3

Thomas points out that

The Middle Way men were anxious to claim all the virtues of Calvinism, while most of their opponents were anxious not so far to deny all connection between moral conduct and salvation asto land themselves willy Hilly in the dotages (their own word) of antinomianism which did in effect make that denial.4The "Middle Way", then, was a far cry from the absolute election and absolute reprobation of high Calvinism and those of the middle way eventually turned to Arminianism.51Thomas, "Breakup of Non-Conformity," in Beginnings of Non-Conformity, p. 48.2lbid., p. 118. 3Ibid., pp. 48-49. 4Ibid., p. 50. 5lbid., p. 50.219

There is little doubt, in spite of his protestations, that Towne ' was not only associated with the Grindletonian and Antinomian groups by his theology, but also in the minds of his followers. Thomas Barcroft, a Grindletonian who later was to become a Quaker, wrote in 1656,

...chiefly for the service of those with whom I have had in times long past sweet society and union in spirit, in the days of that glimmering of light under the ministry of Brierely, Tonnan (Towne), and some few more, whose memories I honour, - called then by the professors of the world Grindletonians, Antinomians, Heretics, Sectaries, and such-like names of

reproach, as in these days by the men of the same generation of Cain, th1t was a murderer, the Children of Light are in scorn called Quakers.

Towne's Theology

We know Towne's theology from three publications, The Assertion of Grace, printed in 1644 in response to the polemic of Dr. Thomas Taylor and Mr. John Sedgwick; A Reassertion of Grace, printed in 1654 in response to the invective against so-called Antinomians by Anthony Burgess; and Monomachia, printed in 1654 in response to Samuel Rutherford for his accusations. Thus we see that we are plunged into the middle of the antinomian controversies in our study of this Yorkshire minister. Unfortunately, copies of his sermons have not been preserved, as they were for Brerely and Webster, and so we must depend on the content of the above publications for an insight into his theological position.William C. Braithwaite, The Beginning of Quakerism, Second . Edition Revised by Henry J. Cadbury. (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1955) p. 24.1220The literature suggests that Antinomianism was a far larger movement than that of the Grindletonians, and that Brerely and his congregations formed only a northern branch of that movement, with perhaps a more mystical direction due to the influence of John Everard. While Towne emphasizes his remoteness from the controversy, he was very much involved in a theological movement which included such "free grace" men as John Eaton, Tobias Crisp, John Saltmarsh, William Dell, and others, and with Richard Baxter, Anthony Burgess and most of the ministers of the established church as adversaries. "The Assertion of Grace" (1644)

In 1631 Thomas Taylor, Doctor of Divinity, and Pastor of St. Mary Aldermanbury in London, published Regula Vitae, The Rule of the Law under the Gospel. Taylor castigates the "levity, wantonness and instability of unsettled Gospellers that are in every new fashion of opinion. . ."

One preacheth that the whole Law since Christs death is wholly abrogated and abolished. Another that the whole Law was fulfilled by Christ 1600 yeares agoe and we have nothing to doe with that. Another that to teach obedience to the Law of God is to teach popery and to leade men into a dead faith. Another, that to doe anything because God commands us, or to forebeare any thing because God forbids us, is a signe of a morall man, and of a dead and unsound Christian. . •1Thomas Taylor, Regula Vitae, The Rule of the Law under the Gospel. Containing a Discovery of the pestiferous sect of Libertines, Antinomians, and sonnes of Belial, lately sprung up both to destroy the Law and disturb the faith of the Gospell. Wherein is manifestly proved, that God seeth sinne in justified persons. By Thomas Taylor, Dr. of Divinity and Pastour of S. Mary Aldermanbury, London. (Imprinted at London by W. I. for Robert Davelman at the Brazen Serpent in Paules Churchyard, 1631) pp. A 4-5.

1221The seven major errors of these Antinomians, Taylor points out, were types foretold by Luther himself. These seven positions actually form the basis for all the polemics against Towne and the Free Grace men, and apparently represent the adversary understanding of the Antinomian position. Taylor lists these antinomian positions as:1. That the Law being abolished to the justified, God can see no sinne in them, for hee can see no Law transgressed.2. That the regenerate cannot sinne, for where is no Law, is no transgression: according to that Luciferian principle rife among them, Be in Christ and sinne if thou canst.3. That being in Christ, they are Christed with Christ, as pure as Christ, as perfect as Christ, as farre beyond the Law as Christ himselfe: the right brood and spawne of the olde Catharists and Puritans.4. That the Law is not to bee taught in the Church and they are legall Preachers that doe so, and preach not Christ.5. They hence disclaime all obedience to the Law and practice of sanctification as good for nothing but to carry men to hell and cry out on the Ministers as Popish and as having Monks in their bellies.6. They renounce and reject all humility, confession and sorrow for sinne, they scorne fasting and prayer, as the seeking not of God but of our selves. One saith that neither our omissions, nor commissions should grieve us: and another, neither doe my good deedes rejoyce mee, nor my bad deedes grieve mee. They deride and flout the exercise of repentance and mortification and upbraid such as walke humbly before God. What say they? Will you repent all your dayes and, You cannot sinne, but you must repent an whole fortnight after. Nay they are set upon so merry a pin, as they can thinke of their former sinnes with merriment. I am glad of my sinne (saith one) because it hath drawne me to Christ: and why doest thou not mourne that by those sinnes thou hast pierced Christ?222

7. They reject the Saboth as Jewish wholly abrogated with all other commandments, as one of them professed, that were it not for offence of men, he would labour in his calling on that day as well as any other.lTowne claimed, in The Assertion of Grace, that in addition to the above allegations made by Thomas Taylor, he is also responding to the accusations made by John Sedgwick, pastor of the Church of God at Alphage, near Cripplegate in London. Towne asserts that Sedgwick's Antinomianism Anatomized, published in 1643, is a "weer extract" of the charges made by Taylor.2

Towne, in turn, warns that Dr. Taylor

seeketh to the uttermost to deface and discredit and extinguish both the sacred, saving, and most acceptable truth of God and the maintainers thereof, by intolerable and most unchristian termes, aspersions, and censures.3

Towne notes the errors of his adversaries, calling them "antifidians," an epithet more fitting for them than their charge of "antinomianism"1Taylor, Regula Vitae, Preface to the Godly Reader. 2Sedgwick, Antinomianisme Anatomized.3Robert Towne, Minister of the Gospel. The Assertion ofGrace, or, A defence of the Doctrine of Free Justification against the Lawlesse, unjust and uncharitable imputations of Antifidians, or Favorites of Antichrist, who under a pretended zeal of the Law, do pervert, oppugne and obscure the simplicitie of the Faith of the Gospel. Containing an Answer to that Book, entitled, The Rule of the Law under the Gospel, etc. Which Book set forth by Dr. Taylor is shewed to be full both of scandall and danger, as it was sent to the said Doctor a little before his death. Printed for the Edification of the Faithfull, 1644, p. 4223

to him, and he derides Taylor for falsely propounding his (Towne's) tenets and misinterpreting them.lIn defending his position, Towne calls upon Luther, Calvin, Perkins, Tindall, and all classical Reformation authority, but he particularly relies on Luther, since he claims that Dr. Taylor himself seems to rely on Luther's authority.

All of Taylor's seven allegations are defended by Towne in light of the orthodox Lutheran concept of what Steven Ozment, in a recent comparative study of the anthropology of Luther and Tauler, calls the "simultaneity of opposites."2 The imputed righteousness of Christ is perfect, but the sinfulness of man always remains. In justified and regenerate souls, only the righteousness of Christ is perceived by God. Luther, in his Commentary on Galatians writes:

He that believeth hath as great sin as the unbeliever. But to him that believeth, it is forgiven and not imputed: to the unbeliever it is not pardoned but imputed. To the believer it is venial: to the unbeliever it is mortal {and damnable}: not for any difference of sins or because the sin of the believer is less, and the sin of the unbeliever greater: but for the difference of the persons. For the believer assureth himself by faith that his sin is forgiven him, forasmuch as Christ hath given himself for it. Therefore although he have sin in him and daily sinneth, yet he continueth godly: but contrariwise, the unbeliever continueth wicked. And this the true wisdom and consolation of the godly,Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 4.2Steven E. Ozment. Homo Spiritualis. A Comparative Study of theAnthropology of Johannes Tauler, Jean Gerson and Martin Luther (1509-1516) in the Context of their Theological Thought. Volume VI in Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, Edited by Heiko A. Oberman, Tubingen. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969) pp. 179-182.1224

that although they have and commit sins, yet they know that for Christ's sake they are not imputed unto them.lAnd again, the Faithful are not under the law for Luther, for

So great then is the power of the dominion of the Spirit, that the law cannot accuse the godly, though they commit that which is sin indeed. For Christ is our righteousness, whom we apprehend by faith: he is without all sin, and therefore the law cannot accuse him. As long as we cleave fast unto him, we are led by the Spirit, and are free from the law. And so the apostle, even when he teacheth good works, forgetteth not his doctrine concerning justification: but always sheweth that it is impossible for us to be justified by works. For the remnants of sin cleave fast in our flesh, and therefore so long as our flesh liveth, it ceaseth not to lust contrary to the Spirit. Notwithstanding there cometh no danger unto us thereby, because we be free from the law, so that we walk in the Spirit.2For Robert Towne, as for other Antinomians, all the commandments of the Law, the Decalogue, as well as all good actions are "works" and not only are not efficacious for salvation, but to see them as such is a sin. The wide cleavage between faith and works in the Antinomian

position derives, perhaps, from a doctrine of man's depravity . which may be an exaggeration of Luther's position. Everything that man can do is so utterly worthless that even good actions are sinful in sinful man. It was this profound prejudice against all human action that led the antinomians ultimately to assert that even faith was an act, or a "work" and therefore there could only be justification by grace, sola gratia! With these concepts in mind we shall better understand the interrelationship of Towne's positions.Martin Luther. Selections From His Writings, Ed., John Dillenberger (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961) p. 152.

2Ibid., p. 1541225Faith

For Towne, the Law is in full power, but the "beleever" is not under it.

I am of that mind, that the whole Law is in as full force and power as ever it was, and that nothing without damnable violation can be taken from it. Matt. 5:19. But yet that beleevers should be under it, its to me full of danger, and contrarie to all Scripture, and namely, to your text in hand. Let me deliver my mind, and then censure mee. When I say, a beleever, I mean one that is in Christ, and can never be separated or considered apart from Christ (for then he ceaseth, at least to your thoughts to be a Christian or beleever) he is washt from all sinne, made perfectly just and holy, the friend and Sonne of God, the Spouse of Christ, the heire of all things, the conqueror of all his enemies, advanced to sit and remaine with Christ in the glory of Heaven for ever. He is neither male nor female, Jew nor Gentile, etc. Gal. 3:28. He is out of the power, kingdome, and limits of the Law; he is one Spirit with Christ, 1 Cor.

6:17. . . These treasures onely Faith discerneth, attaineth, possesseth. Hence is the peace, securitie, consolation, joy, contentment, and happinesse of the Christian.

Faith, which justifies us, is passive, not active. It is the work of God, not of man, "because in justification it giveth nothing but onely receiveth, and wee are justified with that very thing which it receiveth. It is the vertue of the plaister that healeth, not simply the act of applying."2If Faith were admitted as it acteth in to the point, yet it also is the gift and worke of God, as you will confesse,Eph. 2:8 Joh 6:65. Phil 1:29. Yea and not onely the habit or first beginning of it, but also the very action of that habit or quality; the preservation, continuance and consummatign of it is of God, who worketh all our workes in us. Isa 26:12.Towne, Assertion of Grace. p. 33. 2lbid., p. 52. 31bid., p. 53.1226

Faith works in two ways; in the first we are agents, in the second we are patients. "Faith first saveth a man from all his sinnes, from wrath, death, and the divell, and consequently banisheth all former fears, torments, apprehensions of evill: And then puttethhim into a present possession of all happinesse."1 After this first principle is accomplished, Faith continues its fruition

And now that this first principall, and most acceptable work of Faith is accomplished, whereby the soul hath gotten victory over all her enemies, and is made heire of all things with Christ Rom 8:17. For although Faith continueth its act and fruition causing the soule ever to dwell in joy and to live happily upon this heavenly inheritance, yet the former act of coming unto Christ, of acquisition or attaining hereunto is past and done. And although Faith be most diligent in the means of Faith, to receive a daily increase, whereby the heart and spirits be inlightned, and inlarged to a more cleare discovery and view, and to a more effectuall and full apprehension: yet this inlightning, or perfection of Faith, or what else, is Gods act, Phil 2:13. 2 Thes. 1:11. So that in the use of the meanes we are agents; but in respect of successe onely patients.3Faith then begins to work by Love both towards God and towards our neighbors, but the more that faith is rooted in God the more it will "fructifie and flourish in all newnesse of life," so that "no Doctrine, no not of the Law itselfe is so proper, kindly and effectuall to make a true Christian fruitfull and abundant in all good workes as is the Doctrine of pure and free Grace.i4We must be diligent in the "meanes" of nourishing faith, ,Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 54. 2Ibid., pp. 54-55. 31bid., p. 55. 4Ibid., p. 55.1227 but even here it is really God who works in us, for he "worketh both

the will and the deed," while we ourselves remain passive.

Yea and because our sight and strength spirituall as well as naturall of the body admitteth of degrees, we are exhorted daily to edifie ourselves in our holy faith, to grow up in the knowledge and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ: Yet all this is but diligence in the means of breeding and nourishing faith, which is the onely necessarie work to compasse and lay hold of salvation. Yea and whilest both Pastor and people be thus diligent in the meanes, whatever good is wrought thereby is onely ascribed to God. He worketh bothe the will and the deed. We do what is in the power and reach of Nature, but what ever is spirituall and any whit available to apprehend salvation, that God worketh in us. We at the best work but passively (Calvin) and therefore are bid withall to work with fear and trembling, that is, with much dejectednesse and diffidence of our selves, to wont our selves alone to look up unto the power of God which worketh all in all.

In a beautiful passage, Towne pays tribute to the fruitfulness of the gift of faith:

True faith purifieth the heart, brings the soule into favour and communion with God, stayeth it upon his Name, causeth it to take delight in the multitude of heavenly peace, and so filleth and satiateth it with that fulnesse and goodnesse of God, that it falleth off from all earthly and perishable felicitie.2Thus, by his doctrine of faith as "passive," Towne can emphasize the cleavage between faith and works:

for it is doctrine true or false that guideth and carrieth the soul one way or other, to heaven or hell: and that is either the righteousnesse of faith or the righteousnesse of works. He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved: he that beleeveth not shall be damned: and no good work can help to save him.31Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 90. 2Ibid., PP. 171-172.3Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, p. 21.228 The Depravity of Man

Towne gives Calvin's seventeenth Sermon on Galatians as authority for his doctrine of man:

Mr. Calvin is of some authoritie and credit with you, yet these be his words: God holds us at the staves end, to humble us, testifying that all by nature are utterly lost and damned, etc. Secondly, that there is no soundnesse, nothing but corruption and abomination in us and our wayes. Thus it stands us up on, that God justifie us by his owne meer and alonely goodnesse, and look upon us singlely in our faith, and that we onely rest in his promise. Let us leave therefore all things that men imagine to bring themselves into favour with God, by mingling this and that with faith. For they are all but falshoods and illusions of Satan. lFor Towne, we must not only see ourselves as sinners, but even as sin itself:

... but then is man rightly subdued indeed, when he is not onely a sinner, but even sinne itselfe, a childe of wrath, and so broken in pieces, that he seeth

neither goodnesse, nor strength at all in himselfe; and therefore is forced to lie in his bloud, confusionand conderation, till free grace by Jesus Christ doe rescue and save him.

The Law and the Gospel

The cleavage that exists between faith and works is parallel to the dichotomy between the Law and the Gospel for Towne, following Luther's Pauline dualism. While Towne makes valiant attempts to emphasize the concept of the co-existence of opposites, he consistently emphasizes the dichotomy between Law and Gospel.1Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 20. 2Ibid., p. 125.229

Whatever the Law saith, it saith to them that are under the Law. Rom 3:19. So that the head and chief danger of being under it is in that it revealeth and requireth such puritie and perfection of obedience, and that without any jot of mitigation or favour, as is to man utterly impossible. Matt 5:18, Galat 3:10. And thence is inferred your first danger in the second place, as a consequence of the former, to wit, that man failing to answer the first voice of the Law calling for such absolute holinesse, he is then justly enwrapt as a transgressour in the curse of God. . .

So that whilest a man remaineth a sinner, he necessarily abideth under this fearfull curse. The cause must first be removed before the effect can cease.lTowne continues, that the Law "in the Raign of it shuts up heaven which receives no transgressor, and thrusts the sinner under the power of the Devill as a condemned malefactor." Finally, the Law "addeth a string and sharpneth the point of all afflictions which by it become the beginning of Hell and properly curses."2

The "old Adam" falls under the Law

Thus is the old Adam and all his works shut up under the Law and wrath of God. Here man stands and falls by his owne workes, is praised or dispraised, justified or condemned, rewarded or punished. . .For how can the Law free or cleanse the heart from evil motions and thoughts, seeing Faith onely purifieth the heart. . .

Towne explains that believers in the Old Testament were like a son in his minority whom the father wishes to correct. But in our time, the Law reveals sin; the Gospel is the cure:

The Law is the Corrasive [sic] to eate out the deadnesse, hardnesse and insensiblenesse of heart, to bring to a true sight and feeling of that desperate wound of sinne, but the Gospel is the healing-plaister, curing both in way of justification and sanctification.Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 10.

2Ibid., p. 11. 31bid., p. 35. 4Ibid., p. 38.1230Hence Augustine rightly; the disease is discovered by the law but is healed by the Grace of the Gospel.'Against the assertion by his adversaries that while the Law may not be involved in the justification of the elect, good works are necessary for sanctification, Towne quotes the authority of Luther on Gal. 3:2, who claims that "it was never yet perceived or seen that the Holy Ghost was given to any either Teacher or Scholer, by the doctrine of the Law.n2 He quotes Calvin on John 6:29, who asserts that faith "containeth all good works in it" but without faith, men "miserably wearie themselves all their life, yet they loose their labour, except that faith in Christ be their rule of life."

For Faith is called the onely work of God, because possessing Christ by it, we are made sons of God, that he might govern us by his Spirit, seeing Christ therefore doth not seperate [sic] the fruit of it from faith, it is not to be admired, if he place all in it.3And he quotes Perkins to the same purpose. For Perkins, "the Law doth not minister the Spirit unto us, for it onely shewes our

disease, and gives us no remedie; the Gospel ministereth the Spirit, for it shews what we are to do, and withall the Spirit is given, etc.0 In addition to Luther, Calvin, and Perkins, Towne quotes from Bullinger, Cudworth, Augustine, Tyndale, and Fox to confirm that faith, not works, the Gospel and not the Law, are efficacious for salvation.1Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 147.2Ibid., pp. 166-168. 3Ibid., pp. 167-168. 4lbid., p. 167.231But the Law does have usefulness as a training for Christians. Towne follows the teaching of Calvin himself.

Yes, I say, and find daily, that Gods Law taketh hold on the conscience to convince, rebuke and terrifie, not onely for grosse offences, but for the least failing, yea, for the imperfection of the best thing that ever he doth, till justification our continuall refuge, rescue and deliver the Conscience. Let the Law then be still in full force and authoritie, and its very usefull to a Christian; I know none that teach otherwise: thus it driveth to Christ, keepeth the Soule close that it dare not looke out of his righteousnesse, or depart from faith, to minde and regard his best performances, for fear of condemnation.lFor Towne, the Gospel is the instrument of the Holy Spirit, for "the Spirit disposeth and moveth the heart to faith and love." Towne does not believe that the Law and the Gospel are inseparable, and insists that "the spirit is free, and bloweth where and when he listeth, and doth not alway necessarily accompanie the Word; therefore the Fishers of men many times catch nothing." Using the Law, the Spirit is called the Spirit of bondage, causing fear, but "the same Spirit revealeth and communicateth righteousnesse, adoption, libertie, consolation, life and sanctification by the instrument or ministry of the Gospel.2

And finally, Towne, quoting Luther, asserts that

The Law hath its proper office and use, it revealeth sin, accuseth, terrifieth and condemneth, and we say with Paul, the law is good, if a man use it lawfully that is, if a man use it as a law. If I define the Law rightly (saith Luther) and keep it in its office and use, it is an excellent thing: but if I translate it1Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 45. 2Ibid., p. 147.232

to another use, and attribute what is not to be attributed to it; I not onely then pervert the Law, but all Divinitie.lFree Grace

Free grace, for Towne, means God's gift of grace without any condition whatsoever, which is bestowed on the elect.

This I trust, will sufficiently speak to the world for our just defence against all malevolent cavils and calumniations, and let all clearly see that the Doctrine of Free grace onely reconcileth God, and man, the law and conscience, and man and man, gathering and united all in the bond of love, flowing from the love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Spirit. Rom 5:5 in the . ministration of the Gospel Gal 3:2. And that whosoever laboureth to bring in works any other way do erre.l

And again,

God is not induced or moved by the consideration of any thing in man, to give or impute this Righteousnesse of his Sonne unto him, but Justifieth him freely by his Grace. Rom 3:24, Now can any thing fall to man more passively then that God alone should conferre and works it himselfe, and that freely and fully without any respect or addition on man's part?. . . .

The Grace of the Gospel subdues sinne. Towne points out

That sinne shall not have Dominion over him who liveth under the Grace of the Gospel because it hath a sanctifyiig vertue and power to it, to subdue sinne, which the Law hath not.

"Oh how hard a thing is it in the feeling and horrour of sin to look up to free grace and to receive Christ the gift of God without all disputing and reasoning about workes, or qualifications," exclaims Towne!41Towne, Assertion of Grace, p. 43. 2Ibid., p. 49. 31bid., p. 49. 4Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, p. 31.233But free grace does not open the door to licentiousness:

. . . free grace therefore even to sinners is it no licentious doctrine nor doth it a jot maintaine the continuance in sin. I say therefore, that Christ doth belong to a person that closeth with him, though he be in his sinfulness, Christ indeed doth wash, cleanse and adorn a person when he is closed with, but there is none clean till Christ himself do enter, who makes clean where he doth enter.lSpeaking of his adversaries, Towne notes that other Puritans call the doctrine of free grace antinomian. "Aren't they agreeing with the Papists?" Towne asks, adding that "where the Papists stumble, so do the orthodox Puritans." (The Council of Trent, begun in 1645, had declared the doctrine of free grace to be antinomian.)2 For Towne,... if grace be free, it is without condition, the free gift of God is eternal life. Rom 6:23. All the Orthodox deny the promise of the Gospel to be conditional: for if good works be conditions of life in the Covenant oS Grace, what then are the conditions of the Covenant of Works.

The Covenant of Works was, in the terminology of the controversies, the Old Testament, or the Law: the Covenant of Grace, the Gospel. Towne quotes Luther in asserting that in preaching faith and free grace there is no danger "for good works will follow where that is truely received,"but in preaching works, and the Law so as it may be done and obeyed, is much danger, lest free grace be obscured, destroyed, unknown; men rest in the way of the Law and the gate of eternal life never be opened, etc.4It must be understood that the doctrine of free grace implies free grace only to the elect and is given to them of God's own free1Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, p. 33.2Ibid., pp. 15-16. 3Ibid., p. 47. 4lbid., p. 20.234

choice, without any condition, or "works" of any kind. Towne's emphasis on the "unconditional" aspect of election and justification by free grace may be an exaggeration of orthodox doctrine, or, on the other hand, it may well be that he was simply asserting strongly the original position of Luther and Calvin on this issue, over against an increasingly weakening Calvinist orthodoxy within the established church.

Towne's Reassertion of Grace (London, 1654) is his response to the accusations of Mr. Anthony Burgess, an eminent Puritan who represented Warwickshire in the Westminster Assembly and was vicar of St. Laurance Jury during the years 1644-1645. Burgess held his B.A. from St. John's College, Cambridge (1627) and was a frequent preacher of the "fast and humiliation" sermons to the Long Parliament) Zealous in urging church reformation, along with other prominent Puritans of the period, John Wilson tells us that

Anthony Burgess, echoing the contemporaneous Covenant, maintained that the Word of God provided the only rule for reform and that the people had a duty2 to remove all impediments to the dwelling of Christ with them.

A Reassertion of Grace, or Vindiciae Evangelii was Towne's response to Burgess' Vindiciae Legis (1646), a collection of Burgess' lectures. The lectures are well constructed, cogent and logical refutations of the errors of both the Arminians, and the Antinomians, thus perhaps1John F. Wilson, Pulpit and Parliament, Puritanism during the English Civil Wars 1640-1648. (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1969) p. 113.

21bid., pp. 187-188.235placing him with what Thomas calls the "Double Way Men", since he seems to come down firmly, not on, but against both sides of the argument. Aiming at the very heart of the Antinomian position, Burgess preaches that grace and Christ are not to be advanced as opposite to the Law. "How vaine a thing it is, to advance grace and Christ oppositely to the Law," he exclaims, "nay, they that destroy one, destroy also the other."

The Law bids thee love God with all thine heart and soule, doth not this bid thee goe to Christ? Hast thou any strength to doe it? And what thou dost, being enabled by grace, is that perfect? Vae etiam laudabilis vitae ei, etc. said Austen, make therefore a right use of the Law and then thou wilt set up Christ and grace in thine heart, as well as in thy mouth. Now thou holdst free grace as an opinion, it may be; but then all within thee will acknowledge it.

But Burgess also attacks the Papists and the Arminians for a theology which he claims limits the power of grace by associating it with man's free will:

So Papists and Arminians, they all acknowledge grace, but not grace enough. Gratia non est gracia, nisi sit omni modo gratuita: As for example; First they acknowledge grace to be onely as an universall help, which must be made effectuall by the particular will of man: so that grace is efficacious with them not by any inward vertueAnthony Burgess, Vindiciae Legis, or A Vindication of the Morall Law and the Covenants, From the Errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX Lectures, preached at Laurence Jury, London. (London: Printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill, at the Sign of the Bible in Wood Street, 1646) p. 15.1236

of itself antecedaneous to, and independent upon the Will, but eventually only, because the Will doth yeeld, and therefore Bellarmine compareth it to Sol et homo generant hominem, or as the universal) cause, the other as the particular cause. Thus grace and free will produce a good action; grace as the generall cause, and free-will as the particular: but how derogatory is this to grace? how can our actions be said to be the fruit of grace? For, if I should aske, Who is the father of such a man? it would be very hard to say, The Sun in the firmement: so it would be as absurd to say, Grace regenerated and converted this man. Again, they make grace a partiall cause only: so that it

stirreth up our naturall strength to worke this or that good thing: and therefore we are synergists or co-workers with God in the woke of conversion, but this supposeth us not dead in sinne.

In an extraordinarily beautiful passage, Burgess defends the validity and efficacy of the doctrine of the Law because "it was for love, and the more any Jew did any thing in love to God, the more conformable he was to God's Law."

It requireth such a heavenly heart, that we are to love God more than anything else. It did not only require love to God, but also it commanded it in such a prehiminancy as that none under the times of the Gospel can doe an higher duty or expression of love than then was commanded.2In a clever critique of the antinomian position, Burgess points out that "the Antinomians erreth two contrary wayes about good works." The first error, Burgess explains, is to reduce the meaning of good works so low, that "as soon as thou once beginnest to thinke how

men should live godlily and modestly, presently thou hast wandered from the Gospel. And again, the Law and works only belong to the Court of Rome."2 In other words, just thinking about how to live a holyBurgess, Vindiciae Legis, p. 173. 2lbid., p. 39.1237life would imply "workes" and suggest papist beliefs! But, in accordance with the concept of the "simultaneity of opposites," "workes" are, on the other hand, perfect by reason of Christ's righteousness imputed to the regenerate. For Burgess, this is the second error.Then, on the other side, they lift them up so high that, by reason of Christ's righteousnesse imputed to us, they hold all our workes perfect, and so apply that place, Ephes. 1, Christs cleansing his Church so as to be without spot or wrinkle, even pure in this life. They tell us not onely of a righteousnesse or justification by imputation but also Saintship and holinesse by this obedience of Christ: And hence it is teat God seeth no sin in beleevers. This is a dangerous position.

Towne's Reassertion of Grace is not only an answer to Burgess, but also represents a response to Samuel Rutherford's Tryall

and Tryumph of Faith (London, 1645) in which he claims that some are teaching that the covenant of faith "hath no condition at all."2 Both Burgess and Rutherford attack not only Towne and his position, but also

that of the other leaders in the antinomian controversies, including Tobias Crisp, John Eaton, John Saltmarsh, and William Dell. In the Reassertion, Towne defends his own position, as well as that of the others, and thus aligns himself firmly with the antinomian movement.Burgess, Vindiciae Legis, p. 39.2Samuel Rutherford, Professor of Divinity in the University of

St. Andrews. The Tryall and Tryumph of Faith, or An Exposition of the History of Christ dispossessing the daughter of the woman of Canaan. Delivered in Sermons; In which are opened The Victory of Faith, the Condition of those that are tempted; The excellency of Jesus Christ and Free Grace, and Some Speciall Grounds and Principles of Libertinisme and Antinomian Errors, delivered by Samuel Rutherford (London: Printed by John Field and are to be sold by Ralph Smith, at the Sign of the Bible in Cornhill neer the Royall Exchange, 1645) p. 52.1I238

Of Crisp, Towne wrote, "he was raised up and fitted especially to be a son of consolation in these sad times. Yet I knew him not."1 Towne also supports John Eaton's contention that "although God knows the sin that dwells in his sanctified children, yet he seeth them abolished out of his sight."2

The Imputation of Righteousness

Burgess accused Tobias Crisp of unorthodoxy in asserting the imputation of righteousness to an ungodly man. Towne, in the Reassertion, answers him thus in support of Crisp:

The Doctor (Crisp) speaketh of the Elect, who before calling to the faith of Christ, did not cease to practise rebellion; and saith that God satisfied his justice, even for those wickednesses he is in committing, at that time in which Christ did suffer. And this will be the only refuge, plea, and staff of support and comfort, when that soul is in trouble and distress; which is the very end he propounded to himself, in these so free and absolute expressions of the grace of God.3Towne quotes Crisp's own words

I say, all the weight, and all the burthen, and all the (poyson) itself is long agone laid upon Christ; and that laying it upon him, is a full discharge, and a general release and acquittance to thee, that there is not any one sin now to be charged upon thee. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world, Joh. 1:29. The laying of thy iniquities upon Christ, is an absolute and full discharge to thee, that there neither is, nor can be any iniquity, that for the present, or for hereafter, can be laid to thy charge.4Towne, Monomachia, p. 43.2Ibid., p. 40.3Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, pp. 22-23. 4Ibid., pp. 22-23.1239

Like Luther, Towne sees that while man will always remain a sinner, the righteousness of Christ is not only imputed to the elect in God's act of justification, but it is imputed to him instantaneously:

Keep the Law and works here below on the earth and as Enoch converses in spirit and walke with God; in the alone righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and you shall easily discern that though Justification be an individuall Act, perfected in an instant and not by succession and degrees, as is inherent holinesse yet the vertue and efficacy of it to clear the coast of the conscience, to rase all sinner out of the book of God's remembrance, to keep the beleever in everlasting favour, peace, securitie, and happinesse is perpetuall.lAt the same time, man is both a sinner and not a sinner:

So that though the Jebusite must be in the land and the prick in the flesh, and the law of sin in the members which uncessantly forceth us to sinne, more or lesse, inwardly or outwardly: Yet faith discerneth this glorious Sunne of Righteousnesse by his effectuall beames, and influence perfectly purifying and perfuming the ayre that we live and breath in Gal. 2:20 and banishing all the mist and vapours arising from these earthly members out of God's sight and presence. Col. 2:22. The just liveth by his faith, Hebr. 2:4. Thus I am a sinner, and no sinner, Daily I fall in my self, and stand in Christ for ever. My works fail, his never can, and they are also mine. His righteousnesse is everlasting, and so are all the blessed fruits thereof, as peace, joy, life, acceptance, reconciliation, salvation.2Towne then denies that he ever taught or held a doctrine of perfection in the flesh, and his denial is supported by the above passages. He asserts his orthodoxy by maintaining that his position is affirmed by Luther, Calvin and classic Reformation theology. Just how orthodox his position is may be determined by Towne's interpretation of the meaning of justification.Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 39. 2Ibid., p. 40.1240 JustificationJustification, for the elect, is not only instantaneous, as we have seen, but represents the work of the Spirit of God by which the elect soul is "translated into another Kingdome."

That is, in a new manner according to the operation of the Spirit of God, which attending and accompanying the ministration of Righteousnesse of the Gospel, 2 Cor 3:8-9 Gal 3:2 Createth a new light, Giveth the knowledge of the Glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, declareth his name and will, according to a new Covenant of meere Grace, without addition or mixture of workes, and communicateth and distilleth the sweetnesse of his ravishing and overcoming love. John 17:26. And thus swallowing up all former feares and discontentments, causeth in the beleeving soule new thoughts, motions, and wayes towards God different from what ever could be ingendered by the ministration of the Law. 1 John 4:18. Thus being dead to all opinions and conceipts [sic] of God and our owne condition, according to our owne worthinesse or workes, how ever wrought upon and made humble, devout, and conformable by the Law, Conscience yeelding and captivating her selfe to

the same, the Spirit is raised from death to life delivered from bondage to libertie and translated into another Kingdom of meere grace and favour, onely by the true and effectual) apprehension of Christ and his Righteousnesse. Rom 5:1, 2, 21.1Justification requires a new birth, so that we "put on the Lord Jesus" and through him fulfill the law:

Justice is not satisfied with me till I be made and presented before it pure and blameless. Hence is the necessitie of new birth. John 3:3. Which is our justification, the making of us of unjust just (as Melanchthon expounds that place John 3) and so Master Fox takes regeneration to be justification. Hence it is that every one that will be saved must beleeve, be baptized, put on the Lord Jesus: and hence doth the established Doctrine of our Church rightly teach that now in Christ and by him, every true Christian may be called a fulfiller of the Law.2Justification consists of two parts, the wiping away of our sins and1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 6. 2lbid., pp. 31-32.241the imputation of Christ's righteousness.) All is cured by Christ himself, by "the application of this soveraigne salve, the bloud and obedience of Christ. So as that was but once made sufficiently and perfectly to cure all by Christ himself. Heb. 10:14.n2In his attempt to affirm his orthodoxy, Towne, in the following passage, sees the dynamic of justification as the fruit of a combination of the Spirit, Faith, the Word, and the sacrament (Baptism) and emphasizes that once justified, the elect are always so:

So it is by the Spirit and by Faith in the ministration of the Word and Baptism, but once given and received, to heale all sinnes and infirmities, throughout the whole course of our life. The just live always by Faith in this, and so are ever sound and safe. The one sentence is certaine and immutable, that theRighteousnesse of Christ availeth forever with God for all our sinnes, wherewith being once justified, they are alwayes so, and need not their own righteousnesse to pacifie God for sinne, etc.3

How does Scripture fit into the dynamic of justification? Towne insists that "salvation is but one, and in essence indivisible, though Christ hath saved his people yet is this treasure hid, till God reveale his Sonne in us. Gal. 1:16. And make known the unsearchable treasures of his grace in him by the Gospel, through the Spirit of Illumination and Faith.r4 This is the orthodox view of the process of justification. There is a sense of a transformation, of a newness in the regenerative process, but it is not emphasized, as in Webster.2lbid., p. 82. 31bid., p. 82. 4Ibid., p. 90.)Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 81.242SanctificationAfter justification, good works "are esteemed and valued otherwise then after their owne desert and dignitie," as Burgess has already noted. Towne insists that

Because what ever is imperfect in them, is covered with Christs perfection; Whatever blemish or filthinesse is cleansed by his puritie, lest it should come into question by God's judgment.l"The defect of imperfection, which is wont to pollute all good workes being buried, all good works of the faithfull are acknowledged to be just, or which is all one, are imputed to be righteousnesse."2

Holiness, for Towne, is "Christ communicated by the Spirit and diffused throughout the powers and parts of soule and body like leaven. . . And after the measure of Faith, is sensibly discerned in the light of knowledge, wisdome, peace, joy, patience, confidence, contentment."

... Our growing in the unitie of Faith, Eph. 4 is the inlightning and enlarging of the heart to a more effectuall understanding and full receiving of the unmeasurable sea of righteousnesse, peace, joy, and all manner of blessednesse, which is in Christ, that all things may be swallowed up in us thereby, and not a proceeding in legall holiness as you imagine. But grant that grace or gift of sanctification doth give a fitnesse, doth it follow that blessednesse is not passive? What can you do more towards the sanctifying or changing of your selfe then to your justifying? Its Gods act to sanctify throughout.1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 83. 2Ibid., p. 83. 31bid., p. 68.243For Towne, the Gospel, not the Law, is the instrument of true sanctification, and sanctification is inseparable from justification. He notes that this proposition was questioned by occasion of a

Sermon at St. Bartholomew by the Exchange upon Gal. 4:22 where it was delivered that the promise of the Gospel, and not the Law was the seed and doctrine of our new birth, yea, that the Law did not sanctifie, etc., which divers Ministeres and others excepted against, and many affirmed that the Law was made effectual by Christ for that end and use, but their words wanted warrant and weight.

Towne's response was that he was backed by a "farre more sacred and firm Authoritie." He calls upon Scripture for witness, "Sanctifie them with thy truth, thy Word is the truth." John 17:17. We are sanctified by our justification, by the imputation of Christ's perfect holiness. For Towne sanctification is inseparable from justification, which is

An inward and sensible renewing or changing of the mind, by the operation of the Spirit of Christ, purifying the heart and life by degrees, of this latter branch or part is all the controversie, and yet what man of understanding, being well advised, would question it, seeing sanctification is inseperable [sic] annext to justification, as light is to the Sunne, and virtually is included in it, as the effect in the cause or naturally floweth from it as water from the fountain. 2. Sith the same Christ is the Author of both, the same word of truth revealeth and communicateth both, and the same individuall faith is the

instrument apprehending and working both. But if we note well what this word of truth is, it will be yet more evident, for this end compare with this place Ephes. 1:13 and Colos. 2:5. So its plain that the word of truth is no other word then the Gospel of our salvation, and the Antithesis used in John 1:17 sheweth that it is a peculiar and special prerogative of the Gospel to be called by that name, by1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 163.244way of excellencie: the sense then, is, that God doth sanctifie his Church and people through faith, or by the hearing and believing of the Gospel.'

The Indwelling Christ

In the above passage, we note that sanctification is an inward and sensible renewing or changing of the mind, by the operation of the Spirit of Christ, and that we are purified thereby by degrees. For Towne, the Justified man is united to Christ. He asks

Whether a Christian, a Justified man, hath reference to Christ alone, being united to him, made one with him, and by the imputation of his obedience is become the righteousnesse of God, and so is a certaine spirituall and divine person, the sonneof God, heire of the world the Conqueror of the world, of sinne, death and the Devill, etc.

If the Justified man has become the righteousness of God, this concept is certainly susceptible to interpretation as identification. Thus while Towne retains the Justus et peccator of Luther, his concept of Justus has been exaggerated beyond the orthodox position. Perfectionism

Towne's concept of perfectionism is derived not only from his doctrine of the utter depravity of man, but also from his doctrine of the Justice and perfection of God.

Imperfect works are not accepted of God. . . Gal 3:10 Hab 1:13 Rom 1:18. Whence God hath manifested to be detestable and accursed, that he cannot accept. But he hath manifested by these Scriptures that what ever is not absolutely perfect, is'Towne, The Assertion of Grace, pp. 163-164. 2Ibid.245

detestable and accursed; Ergo, Whatsoever is not absolutely perfect, cannot be accepted with God. The Proposition is grounded ' upon the constant veritie and immutablenesse of God, who cannot denie himselfe or recall his word, and with whom is novariableness nor shadow of change.l

Accused of ignorance, Towne goes on to prove that only perfection is acceptable to God, which is impossible to us. He quotes from

Brentius, Melanchthon, St. Paul, Zanchy, and Calvin. The following are examples of these quotations:

1. Where there is not perfect righteousnesse, there undoubtedly is the curse of God. Brentius.

2. Obedience is neither cause nor condition, for which we are accepted of God. Melanchthon.

3. Our debt was a great deale too great for us to have paid, and without paiment God the Father would never be at one with us: It pleased him (Christ) therefore to be the payer thereof, and so to discharge us quite. Every one knoweth, if it were not as a price in the hand of a foole, that the debt we owe is to be perfectly and constantly throughout all the passages of our life, answerable to the exactest requirings of the Law of God. Zanchy.2Against Taylor's charge that antinomians believe that God is not displeased with the sins of the justified, Towne replies

"... That the righteousness of God doth so necessarily, naturally and immutably encline and move him, to hate and curse sin in whomsoever that he spared not to poure such a sea of wrath and vengeance upon that onely Sonne of his love, when he stood before him charged onely with the sins of others. Can any think that God can be lesse displeased with sin in his adopted sons, which is also of their own committing, then he was with it on his naturall Sonne, when it was onely his by imputation?"31Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 79. 2Ibid., pp. 106-107. 31bid., pp. 106-107246

"Christ by his crosse" has then abolished sin for the just, and Towne believes that God is not displeased with their sin because he has already banished sin. The ground of his belief is that Christ remains always a Mediator between God and his Church, "speaking perpetual peace by vertue of his blood, thereby banishing and keeping away continually all the evils and failings of his peculiar from the sight and presence of his Father," preserving God and his people in "perpetuall unitie, communion and love."

If we sin, we have an Advocate, he is the propitiation for our sins. Christ doth not reconcile us to God, and then leave us in danger of procuring God's displeasure by our after =failings and backslidings. No, the Scripture witnesseth an inviolable Covenant of peace and life; for ever established in the death of the Testator. So that it is of free and pure grace without our dependancie and conditions of our works or worth.

Towne was asserting orthodox doctrine in insisting that while man is always sinful, the sins of the elect have been forgiven and abolished and the perfection of Christ imputed to him before the face of God. It is Luther's concept of the "simultaneity of opposites." Towne writes,

I can looke upon my selfe, my actions, yea into my Conscience,and see my sinnes remaine, but looke into the Records of Heaven and God's justice, and since the bloudshed of Christ, I can finde there nothing against me, but the bond by my suretie is satisfied, and cancelled and even these present sinnes which so fearefully stare in my face, are there blotted out of Gods booke of remembrance Heb 8:12. And as a debt discharged are become a nullitie with the Lord. Faith seeth an everlasting expiatio, which causeth shame and feare to flie away.21Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 2lbid., p. 97247 Ecclesiology

In The Assertion of Grace, Taylor has charged the

antinomians with denying "all outward worship since Christs coming, by John 4:23 yea and inward also, excepting Faith, and they say also, that there is no reward to any good worke." Towne's reply is that "the beleever by Faith performeth all both the outward and inward worship required in the Law Rom 8:4 and is the true fulfiller of the Law . . .1Towne, however, does not eschew the value of the sacraments, so long as they are seen as God's work, not man's. The sacraments, for Towne, are only those allowed by Luther and Calvin, Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

Sacrifices and Sacraments be Gods Ordinances, which rightly understood and taken, and purely used, are not properly mans works, but Gods. He propoundeth and commandeth thereby unto us his grace, and the work of redemption by Jesus Christ, the sole object that our faith is to look at and to be exercised about in theuse of them. If we handle them sincerely, we bring no work, nothing for acceptation with God, but onely are receivers of what he freely giveth unto us. Its an easie and too common an errour to turn all into works, even Baptism and the Lord's Supper, wherey the simple nature and verity of them is extinguished and lost.

While not espousing the "Seeker" ecclesiology of Webster, Towne does advocate "a naked Christ," that is, a Christ divested of all works, for the believer, and would not have religious duties replace the believer's union with him. Replying to a charge by Burgess, Towne1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 94. 2Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, p. 158.248

accuses Taylor of preaching "a Christ invested and clothed with works" instead of "a naked Christ," i.e., a Christ divested of useless religious duties. "Let the poor sinful, miserable and lost soul first be married to him, in whom

dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead, and in whom she is then compleat, wanting nothing,.Col. 2:9-10, then tell of duties."The true Christ wil be all or none; he will be alone, without the joyning or mixture of duty; as Christ hath satisfied the Father, so that in him he is well pleased: so are we to preach him and the unsearchable treasures in him, that he alone may satisfie the Conscience, give true rest to the soul, be the way to favor, peace and life.1Towne castigates his adversaries for claiming that Christ is in duties in the same way as he is in the Sacraments, and he asserts that "duties do differ much from the Sacraments." Duties are our work, that which is wrought by the sacraments, but Christ himself is present in the Sacraments, "there he is represented and exhibited, which I hope you will not affirm of your duties."2

Mourning the high regard given to "works" by the ministers of the established church, he warns them of apostasy. "0 England," he exclaims, "beware of Apostasie. Let the Fearful example of the unwise Galatians awake and admonish thee to take heed of false prophets, Matt. 7:15, of evill workers, Phil 3:2, and deceitfull 2 Cor 11-13 workmen, of corrupters of the Word, 2 Cor 2:17." Towne means "such as so teach faith, as withal they maintaine and foster that pestilent1Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, p. 12. 2lbid., p. 12.249 opinion that works also and the keeping of the law are necessarie tosalvation as Act. 15:15:1 These "false prophets," and "evill workers" who foster the "pestilent opinion" that works and the keeping of the Law are .necessary to salvation, are, of course, the ministers of the established church, his adversaries. In the Preface of Towne's Reassertion of Grace, he writes:

It would make a Christian face to blush, or his heart rather to bleed, to hear what stuff they can put off and vent in their Sermons. I resorted to their Exercises divers yeers, yet never heard one doctrine of Free Grace, of Christ, Faith or Justification: Legal Reformation is taken for Regeneration and Evangelical Sanctification. I have spoken with old and zealous professors, who knew not what it was to be justified by faith, except this was the meaning of i, That God would accept of them for their good works and duties.

Apparently the concept of solafideism was a difficult one for morally conscious Englishmen to embrace completely. Towne describes what seems to be the "works" orientation inherent in English religiosity.

If any one (which yet Nature is principled for) be framed and brought somewhat into a Legal way, and to performances, he is judged a true Convert, and may set up his rest. If they do well, they tell you they can believe sufficiently: upon their kinde of works they build their faith. The Law is not preached as the ministry of death, to cast down and to kill, that Christ may be the life and spiritual resurrection but the life that most speak of is to live and walk in the law.3Much is missing in attempting to grasp Towne's ecclesiological concepts because the documents available to us represent only his

1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, p. 14.2Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, Preface to the Reader by the Author, [p. 5].31bid., [p. 6].250

defence of the so-called antinomian position. He does not advocate

the Seeker position, with its abandonment of all ecclesiastical forms, but the seed of Seeker concepts is evident in his negation of the value of all "works." Towne, in the year 1654 still hoped that what he saw as orthodox in the doctrine of free grace would ultimately be accepted in the established church, but he admits that

I go against the full tyde and violent current of humane policie and learning of such a religious multitude, all being combined and conspiring against me. Are not my adversaries in number infinite, rarely qualified, admired for sanctity and zeal, backed and invested with worldly Authority, countenanced by the times, and the sole esteemed pillars of the Church? What am I? How dare I oppose them? Who is my Patron?1

Towne answers that he does not come forth in his own name, but rather God himself is against his adversaries.

I have been carried against the stream almost these twenty yeers, yet they could not prevail, by reason of the Lords strength and presence. However the voyage fall out, I have not much left to lose, onely my outward liberty in part, and a few days, it may be of my natural life can be put in jeopardy. And hath the sacred Truth of God, and the desired good of his Church been so prevalent, that for their sakes I have sustained such loss, suffered so many things already; and shall I now shrink, or be unwilling to sacrifice the loan q~f what is remaining? The Lord leave me not to that temptation.

Towne's Summary of the Doctrine of Free Grace

"Answer directly," Towne invites his critics, "do these or other Protestant Divines you verse in deny the following?" Here Towne presents eight propositions that effectively summarize his position:1Towne, A Reassertion of Grace, Preface to the Reader by the Author, [p. 8].

2lbid., [p. 8].2511. That whatever is done before justification is sinne.2. That blessednesse is passive.3. That Justification, which is the absolution from all sinnes originall and actuall, past, present and to come; and the imputation of an everlasting righteousnesse doth make our estate and condition absolute and entire.

4. That our peace, favour, adoption, communion with God and His Saints, sanctification and glorification, are the sole effects and fruits of Faith in the said Justification.5. That perfection is the ground of acceptance both of our persons and performances.6. That to return to works with an opinion that the free grace of Christ is not sufficient to justification and salvation unlesse you joyne the keeping of the Law too, is to abrogate grace to fall away from Faith and to make Christs death void.7. That beleevers are one with Christ, are alreadie saved in him, being set together with him in heavenly places, where they possesse blessednesse, immortalitie and glory.8. That salvation as well as justification is free and without works. 1Unfortunately, there were many who would deny the above, including Richard Baxter, Samuel Rutherford, Anthony Burgess, Joseph Sedgwick, etc.Was Towne's Theology Calvinist?Let us now examine Towne's theology in light of the five points of high Calvinism of 1619, as we did the theologies of Brerely and Webster.1. Total Depravity. Towne's doctrine of man outdoes even Calvin in the conviction of man's utter corruption and depravity, or perhaps1Towne, The Assertion of Grace, pp. 153-154.252he has merely remained consistent with Calvin's original doctrine.2. Unconditional Election. Here again, Towne appears to have gone beyond orthodox Calvinism in scrupulosity to eliminate the need for any conditions whatsoever, or again, perhaps he.is simply more consistent with original Calvinist thought.3. Limited Atonement. Christ's atonement for the sins of the elect only, is not articulated. But he has carried the concept of Christ's redemptive act further than Calvin, to eliminate all sin, including original sin, from the elect, once and for all on Calvary, so that the sins presently committed by the elect are also abolished, and not imputed to them. He also appears to accept the doctrine of4. Irresistible Grace. Because the predestined have been elect from eternity, the concept that free grace is irresistible is implicit.5. Perseverance of the Saints. The saints not only persevere, but the perfection of Christ is imputed to them, and His perfection remains in elect souls in perpetuity, even if they commit sin. This also appears to be an exaggeration of orthodox Calvinism.Thus, while Towne's absolute orthodoxy as a Calvinist is somewhat questionable, it was a matter of interpretation. The increasing ascendancy of Arminianism in the Anglican tradition probably made Towne's views seem more unorthodox than they were. But, since we do not have a full overview of Towne's theology, we will bear in mind the fact that Barcroft associated Towne with the Grindletonians, (p. 218) and it was probably Robert Towne who was mentioned by John Cotton as a Familist in a letter from him to Thomas Shepard.253Cotton writes

As for the Familists, I onely expressed what I have found, not onely from my man, but from a Ring Leader of that sect, Mr. Townes of Nottinghamshire who is wont to say, he knowes how farre our scripture learning can leade us, as haveing him selfe found a more perfect way; also in the confession of fayth published with the life and Death of Mr. John Smyth I find they abuse that Place in 2 Peter 1:19: to say that Christians doe well to hearken to the word as to a Light shining in a Darke Place, till the Day Starre arise in theire hearts: but then they are free from the word and sacraments etc.: save onely for offence sake. If they please them selves in their Revelatyons, and Raptures comming upon themlin the word but not from the word, their delusion is manyfest. . .

If Towne was a "Ring Leader" of the Grindletonian Familists, it

is not easy to prove from his available writings. He certainly was committed to the antinomian position espoused by Eaton, and Crisp, and the obvious respect in which he was held by the colorful John Webster would indicate that his preaching was more extreme than his works indicate.1Letter of John Cotton to Thomas Shepard, The Cotton Papers (mss), Prince Collection, Boston Public Library, 1635-36. Quoted in David D. Hall, ed. The Antinomian Controversy 1636-1638. A Documentary History. (Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1968) pp. 32-33.CHAPTER VITHE ANTINOMIAN MOVEMENTIt would appear that the Grindletonians were part of a much larger movement of antinomianism and we can better assess their relationship within the larger movement by reviewing the role of the leaders and the issues involved.Among the leading exponents of "Free Grace" we find John Eaton (1575-1641), sometimes called the "founder of the sect," Tobias Crisp (1600-1643) and John Saltmarsh (d 1647). Saltmarsh, in his tract on Free Grace (London, 1645) also mentions Dr. Preston, Master Rogers, and Dr. Sibbs, as "Assertors of Free Grace." l1John Saltmarsh, Free Grace, or the Flowings of Christs Blood freely to Sinners. Being an Experiment of Jesus Christ upon one who hath been in bondage of a troubled Conscience at times, for the space of about twelve yeers, till now upon a clearer discovery of Jesus Christ and the Gospel; Wherein divers secrets of the soul, of sin and temptations are experimentally opened, and by way of Observation, concerning a natural condition and a mixed condition of Law and Gospel. With a further revealing of the Gospel in its glory, liberty, freenesse, and simplicity for Salvation. By John Saltmarsh, Preacher of the Gospel at Brasteed in Kent. (London: Printed for Giles Calvert, dwelling at the black Spred-Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1645) p. 204.255John Eaton (1575-1641)

John Eaton was born in Kent and educated at Trinity College, Oxford. He received the B.A. degree in 1591 and the M.A. in 1603. After serving several

curacies, including that of St. Catherine, Coleman Street, London, he became vicar of Wickham Market, Suffolk, where he continued for some fifteen years, "being accounted by all the neighbouring ministers a grand Antinomian, if not one of the founders of the sect so called."1 Gordon Goodwin writes of him:Eaton, though undoubtedly much of a fanatic, made an excellent vicar; in a few years the parish was generally reformed; insomuch that most children of twelve years old were able to give a good account of their knowledge in the grounds of religion (Brook, Puritans, 11, 166). At length his heterodox preaching gave offence to his diocesan, and he was deprived of his living 29 April, 1619 as being "an incorrigible divulger of errors and false opinions.2Goodwin goes on to say that Eaton persisted in promulgating his doctrine, "for which he suffered divers imprisonments." The date of his death is uncertain. None of Eaton's writings were published during his lifetime, but after his death several of his works were printed, including The Honey Combe of Free Justification by Christ Alone (London, 1642). He had the dubious honor of being listed in Pagitt's Heresiography and was the object of numerous contumelious references in works by Samuel Rutherford and others.

In Eaton's Honey Combe, the ba4ic doctrines put forth by Towne are seen to be similar to those of Eaton. Eaton quotes Luther1DNB, s.v. "Eaton, John," by Gordon Goodwin. 21 bid.256

extensively on his doctrine of justification by faith alone in defense of his position. In an appendix at the end of the Honey-Combe, Eaton lists four "fundamental points."

First, the horrible filthinesse of sin is such to God's infinite pure and righteous nature, and so defiles a man before God . . .

Second, the best good workes of the most sanctified children of God as they (though moved thereunto by the Holy Ghost) do them, are sin . . .

Third, the onely remedy . . . is free justification whereby God, by the power of his imputation doth so clothe us with the wedding garment of his sonnes perfect righteousnesse that all our sins are abolished . . .

Fourthly, that this true faith of free justification (contrary to the judgment of Popish and carnal reason) unseparably brings the Holy Ghost to dwell in people.1For Eaton, "faith worketh so mightily that he that beleeves that Christ hath taken away his sinnes is as cleane without sinne as Christ himself."2 All sin, including original sin, "the fountain of all other sins," are abolished by justification.31John Eaton, The Honey-combe of Free Justificationby Christ Alone, Collected out of the mere Authorities of Scripture and common and unanimous consent of the faithful Interpreters and Dispensers of

God's mysteries upon the same, especially as they expresse the excellency of free justification. Preached and delivered by John Eaton, Master of Arts, sometime Student in Trinitie College in Oxford and fifteen yeeres Minister and Preacher at Wickham Market in Suffolke. (London: Printed by R. B. at the charge of Robert Lancaster, and are to be sold in Popes-head Alley, anno 1642) Appendix, p. Mm 1-3.2Ibid., p. 25. 31bid., p. 27.257 Eaton describes the process of justification:

. . . First God imputeth to such his sonnes righteousnesse, asthe Holy Ghost testifieth, saying, "Blessed is the man to whom God imputeth righteousnesse without works, Rom. 4.6. But because God's imputation is an immediate act of God himself, it is not a weak, imaginary thing (as the Papists blasphemously scoff) like man's imputation: but it is of such a strong and powerful, reall working and effectual operation that it conveyeth (as the Sun conveys his beams into a dark house) that perfect righteousnesse of Christ to be in us and upon us, so powerfully that we thereby are made of unjust, just before God, but how? not inherently, and actively, but objectively and passively as the dark house is made light with the sun.beames. For the Lord Christ, (being Sol justifiae, the Sun of Righteousnesse Malac 4:2 doth in such sort communicate his righteousnesse with us, that after a certaine marvellous manner, he poureth the force threof into us, so much as serveth to satisfie the justice of God.

Justification is not only of judicial significance, but is a strong and real natural force making the soul just and righteous:

So that the word, that we are justified is not to be taken only in the judicial signification, namely that God only reputeth, accounteth, and pronounceth us just and righteous, and so quitteth us from all guilte and punishment onely: in which judicial signification some do barely rest: But also it must be taken in the natural and proper signification as it is made of Justus and Flo; the force whereof is to be seene in other like words, as in albifico, to make white, fortifico, to fortifie or make strong; because so powerful a thing is the Lord's imputation of righteousnesse that it doth vere et reipsa facere nos Justus, that is, truly and in very realnesse make us just and righteous.2In the act of justification, then, God works in two ways:

(1) By imputing his Sonnes righteousnesse, he utterly abolishes from before himselfe all our sins, (2) and secondly, he reneweth us by his spirit unto inherent and actual holinesse.3For Eaton, as for Towne, sanctification is the result of justification and there is a difference between justification and sanctification:Eaton, The Honey-combe, p. 22. 2lbid., p. 22. 3lbid., p. 22.12581. Justification serveth to approve us for true saints to the eyes of God: Sanctification serveth to approve us true Saints in the eyes of men.

2. Therefore our justification is perfect, that is, making us, to God's eyes, cleare as the Sun, Cant. 6:9 but sanctification is imperfect, makinf us, to the night of this world, faire as the moon. Cant. 6:9Thus, we see a cleric with strong antinomian views preaching in southeastern England, some distance from northwest Yorkshireand Lancashire, and the influence of whose preaching was probably greatest in the 1620's and 1630's, although none of his works were published until after his death about the year 1641. The antinomian concepts which Eaton was promulgating probably influenced both Brerely and Towne.Even more influential than Eaton, perhaps, was the impact of the ideas of Tobias Crisp on the congregations in Wiltshire, in the southern part of England, where he held a vicarage at Brinkworth. Tobias Crisp, D.D. (1600-1643)Crisp was born in 1600 in Bread Street, London. Hiselder brother was Sir Nicholas Crisp, and both were born of a wealthy and aristocratic family which possessed extensive lands in Gloucestershire and engaged in trade in London. The lives of both these wealthy brothers were colorful and of particular interest because of their disparate political stances. Nicholas remained, throughout the civil war, a royalist of the highest loyalty, and on the1Eaton, The Honey-combe, p. 459.259 Restoration was awarded a baronetcy, while Tobias remained not only a

Puritan but an Antinomian of such great influence that even when his sons republished his works in 1690, a new storm of controversy was initiated in the theological debates.

After leaving Eton, Tobias Crisp matriculated at Cambridge, where he took his B.A. Degree, whence he removed to Oxford's Balliol College, where he took the M.A. in 1616. Married about this time to Mary Wilson, daughter of a London merchant and also an M.P., he was presented to the rectory of Newington Butts. He was removed a few months later, however, on account of having been a party to a simoniacal contract.l

Later in the same year he was presented to the rectory of Brinkworth in Wiltshire, where he became very popular, both on account of his preaching and the lavish hospitality which his ample fortune permitted him to exercise. It is said that 'an hundred persons, yea, and many more have been received and entertained at his house at one and the same time, and ample provision made for man and horse.'2Records reveal that Crisp received the D.D. degree some time prior to 1642, the year he was compelled to leave his rectory in consequence of petty persecution by some royalist soldiers because of his Puritan leanings. He retired to London in August, 1642.

While at Brinkworth he had been suspected of antinomianism, and as soon as his opinions became known from his preaching in London, his theories on the doctrine of free grace were bitterly attacked. Towards the close of this year (1642) he held a3 controversy on this subject with fifty-two opponents . . .

1DNB, s.v. "Crisp, Tobias," by Augustus Bickley. 2lbid. 31bid.260A full account of the above-mentioned dispute can be found inNelson's Life of Bishop Bull (pp. 260-270) Crisp died of small-pox on 27 February, 1642-3 and was buried in St. Mildred's Church, Bread Street.Although Crisp is regarded as one of the champions of antinomianism, he was, during the early part of his ministry, a "rigidArminian."l He was extremely unguarded in his expressions and in his writings, which, in spite of his antinomianism, did not in any way encourage licentiousness and revealed a high moral tone. A collection of his sermons was first published in 1643 under the title Christ Alone Exalted, and republished in 1644, 1646, and with two additional sermons in 1683. When the first of these volumes appeared, the West minister Assembly proposed to have it burnt as heretical, but this does not appear to have been done.2 We have already noted that the publication of a new volume of his sermons by his sons in 1690 generated a new volley of controversies among the adversaries of free grace, notably Richard Baxter.3 R. Lancaster, his first publisher, in a prefatory memoir, says of Crisp that his "life was innocent and harmless of all evil. . . . zealous and fervent of all good."41DNB, s.v. "Crisp, Tobias," by Augustus Bickley. 2Ibid., p. 99.3G. F. Nuttall, et al, The Beginnings of Non-Conformity, p. 41.

4DNB, s.v. "Crisp, Tobias," by Augustus Bickley.261

In Crisp's Christ Alone Exalted, the sermons reveal the same antinomian paradigm we have seen in Eaton and Towne. Human nature is utterly corrupt and unworthy. Crisp exhorts the believer,

Oh, forget everything that seems worthy in you or done by you and let all your triumphing and glorying be in the Free Grace of God in Christ, and look upon yourselves only in that and nothing else.l

For Crisp, justification is instantaneous, and after justification, the believer is free from all sin, past and future.

Now it is the main stream of the whole Gospel that Christ Justifies the Ungodly, if he himself justified him, there is no fault to be cast upon him; mark it well, consider it as that wherein consists your honey, the life of your Soul, and the joy of your Spirit. I say, it holds forth the Lord Christ, as freely tendering himself to people considering people only as ungodly persons receiving him, you have no sooner received him, but you are instantly justified by him; and in this Justification, you are discharged from all the faults that may be laid to your charge. There is not one Sin you commit after you receive Christ that God can charge upon your Person.2"We have not onely growth by Christ his Grace, but restoration and recovery upon relapse," according to Crisp.3. He emphasizes the cleavage between the Old Covenant, which he calls the Covenant of Works, and the New Covenant,

the Covenant of Grace, and he insists that faith is the evidence of justification - the assurance of faith is the testimony of the Spirit.41Tobias Crisp, D.D., Christ Alone Exalted, Containing XLII Sermons on Several Select Texts of Scriptures. Who was sometime Minister at Brinksworth in Wiltshire and afterward many of the Sermons were preached in and about London. (London: Printed for William Marshal, at the Bible in Newgate Street, 1690) p. 429.2Ibid., p. 5. 31bid., p. 79. 4Ibid., p. 491.262John Saltmarsh (d. 1647)Closer to Brerely's and Webster's type of spirituality was that of their fellow Yorkshireman, John Saltmarsh. Born of an old Yorkshire family (date unknown) he was educated at Magdalene College, Cambridge, graduating with an M.A. The year of his degree is also unknown, since records at Cambridge begin in the year 1640. He published a volume of academic verse about the year 1636 and, after leaving the university, became, about 1639, the rector of Heslerton, Yorkshire. He was at this time a zealous advocate of episcopacy and conformity, according to Alexander Gordon, and took the "et cetera" oath of 1640.1 A change in his views seems to have been produced byhis intimacy with Sir John Hotham, and he is described as "a very sincere, if eccentric, champion of complete religious freedom."2 Saltmarsh resigned his Yorkshire ministry in the autumn of 1643, Gordon tells us, owing to scruples about taking tithes, and ultimately handed over to public use all the tithes he had received. Some time before January 1645, Saltmarsh was put into the rectory of Brasted, in Kent, in the southeasternmost part of England, not far from London, where he "poured forth a constant stream of pamphlets with fanciful titles pleading for a greater latitude in ecclesiastical arrangements."3 Saltmarsh's theology was Calvinist in its base. Barclay connects him with the Seekers but he considered that he1DNB, s.v. "Saltmarsh, John," by Alexander Gordon. 2Ibid., p. 709. 31bid., p. 709.263had gone beyond their position.) Benjamin Brook notes that "it

appears from Mr. Saltmarsh's writings that he was strongly tinged with the principles of antinomianism."2 Brook observes that Thomas Edwards, "who employes his presbyterian bigotry in reproaching his memory," gives the following account of him,

There is one Mr. Saltmarsh, a man who hath of late writ many trashy pamphlets, fully stuffed with all kinds of errors,ignorance and impudencee, and hath been well answered and baffled by three learned divines.

Saltmarsh was known as a mystic, and Brook notes that "it is said that the very titles of some of his pieces seemed to have some tincture of enthusiasm, if not of frenzy in them.n4'A strange story is related by both Gordon and Brook concerning the unusual circumstances of Salt marsh's death, at an age which could not have been

more than thirty-five years. 5 Saltmarsh apparently felt that he had a message to deliver to General Fairfax of the army, whom he had served as Chaplain during his last years. Brook describes the events.

The death of Mr. Saltmarsh was very extraordinary, and is thus related. December 4, 1647, he was at his own house at Ilford in Essex, when he told his wife that he had received a special message from God, which he must deliver to the army. He went to London the same evening, and early on Monday morning, December 6th, to Windsor. When he came to the council of officers, he addressed them as follows: "I am come hither to reveal to you," said he, "what I have received from God. Though the Lord hath done much1Gordon, DNB, Volume XVII, p. 710.2Benjamin Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume III, p. 74. 3Ibid., p. 71.4Gordon, DNB, p. 710. 5lbid., p. 710.264for you, and by you, yet he hath of late left you, and is not in your counsels because you have forsaken him. God willnot prosper your consultations, but destroy you by divisions among yourselves. I have formerly come to you like a lamb, but Godhath now raised in me the spirit of a lion; because you have sought to destroy the people of God, who have always stood by you in the greatest difficulties. I advise all the faithful to depart from you, lest they be destroyed with you."1Brook goes on to relate how Saltmarsh then went to Sir Thomas Fairfax, the general, and "without moving his hat," told the general that he had a command from God not to honor him at all. "He then went to Cromwell, with the same message, asking him to release several prisoners whom he knew to be faithful to the cause of God. After this, Saltmarsh took his leave of them all, saying, I have done my errand, and must leave you, never to see the army any more." He then went to London to bid his friends farewell, saying his work was done, and asking them to care for his wife.

Thursday, December 9th, he left London well and cheerful; and the same evening arrived at Ilford. The day following, he told his wife that he had now finished his work and must go to his Father. In the afternoon, he complained of the head-ache, desiring to lie down upon his bed, when he rested well through the night. Saturday, December 11th he was taken speechless, and died about four o'clock in the afternoon. 2

The antinomianism of this Puritan mystic resembles that which we have seen in Brerely and Webster. Retaining the concept of the "simultaneity of opposites," Saltmarsh emphasizes the indwelling Spirit of Christ in the soul of the believer as the rationale for his perfection spiritually, but he acknowledges with equal emphasis that ourBrook, Live of the Puritans, Volume III, p. 73. 2Ibid., p. 74.1265"sinful nature is not wholly healed in this life; so there remains a natural inclination" toward sin. 1A transformation is involved in Saltmarsh's concept of regeneration:

That they who are mystically and spiritually planted into Christ, are partakers of the power of his death,'which is that highest purest and most mystical mortification that any have; and with this there goes a spiritual power, transforming and changing the whole man from former lusts, and this latter is called a putting on of the new man, and a being renewed in spirit and in minde, and a puting off the old man which is corrupt. Eph. 4:22-23. Colos. 3:10

We are "compleat" only in Christ, but in ourselves we are "imperfect at best," he insists,

Yet there is such a power, and efficacy, and mighty working in this mystical union and fellowship with Christ, that he shall find sin dying in him from this, the spirit working most in the vertue of this; this being like the spice or the spirit in the Wine that makes it powerful and quick: Therefore we are said to be risen with Christ and to die with Christ, and our life to be hid in Christ. Colos .3:1-3.3"Christ being the life, power, vertue and energy of the spirit," the more we "take" of Christ against sin, the "greater and surer will our victory against sin be," Saltmarsh preaches, and those that are "a little legally biased" would do well to remember this and not to place too much trust in "vows, promises, shunning occasions, removing temptations, strictnesse and severity in duties, fear of hell and judgment," to conquer sin, for "these in themselves are but empty, weak means of prevailing against sin, like the mighty sails of a ship without either winde or tyde.n41John Saltmarsh, Free Grace, p. 69.2Ibid., pp. 66-67. 31bid., pp. 67-68.41bid., p. 71.266With penetrating insight, Saltmarsh observes that the way of the Spirit is "not so grosse and carnal and discernible, as the

Divinity of former times and of some of this present age would make it."

It is as hard to trace and find the impressions of the Spirit as the way of a bird, as Solomon sayes, in the ayr. The Spirit that is of God knows onely the way of the Spirit.1Saltmarsh thus opposes the hasty judgment of those Puritans who, in a quest for the "assurance of the Spirit," "write of regeneration as a work of nature, though not a natural work."2

Saltmarsh has words of comfort for the "backsliders," pointing out that while we are "compleatly or perfectly mortified or dead to sin by our being planted into Christ and the fellowship of his death," in this life our dying to sin is a continuing process, but none should be tempted to neglect the mortification of sin in the body, "no more then the free grace of God in forgiveness of sins ought to tempt any to take liberty to sin."3

But Saltmarsh, while presenting a more profound explanation of the dynamic of regeneration, remains a "free grace" man and insists that God cannot love a sinner as a sinner. Sin is not imputed to the regenerate. Rather, Saltmarsh insists, a justified person is a perfect person.

A person justified or in covenant, is as pure in the sight of God as the righteousnesse of Christ can make him (though not so in his own eyes, that there may be work for faith) because God sees His1Saltmarsh, Free Grace, p. 72. 2Ibid., p. 74. 31bid., p. 74.267

onely in Christ, not in themselves, and if they were not in such perfect righteousnesse, they could not be loved of him, because his eyes are purer then to behold iniquity, or to love a sinner as a sinner.lThe New Covenant, the Covenant of Grace, is a covenant God has made with Christ, for us, so that they that are under Grace revealed, are no more under the Law.

The Law can onely tell a beleever he sins, but not tax him for any. We are not under the law, but under grace: Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God'q2elect? Who shall condemn? It is Christ that died. Rom 8:33

Salt marsh accepts the concept of double predestination, but leans to the Arminian position. For him, "none are excepted, yet none accepted but they that beleeve, and none beleeve but they to whom it is given." In other words, Christ died for all, but salvation is offered only to those to whom it is given to believe. Therefore, it "is as clear and spiritually rational for the Gospel to be preached to all as this ground, That he died for all," thus preaching a doctrine of universal redemption, but limited atonement.3

He describes his concept as that of free grace, free without all conditions of graces:

The first and purest conceive of the Mystery thus: That God the Father for manifestation of his mercy and love purposed some to glory whom he loved freely, and gave his Son to be a way to them for life and righteousnesse, knowing that they should fall under sin and condemnation in the first Adam (where he might justly have left them as the rest, in their blood and pollution) had it not1Saltmarsh, Free Grace, p. 129. 2Ibid., p. 128. 31bid., p. 200.268been for that free grace in himself, and therefore that Son is called the second Adam or quickning Spirit, and this mystery of salvation is free, infinitely free; the Father loving freely, and giving his Son, the Son loving freely, and giving himself freely, and the Spirit working from them both freely for the manifestation of this salvation in the souls of his elect, and through the ministery of a free Gospel, even to sinners, as sinners, and children of wrath in themselves.1

There is a subtlety involved here: Saltmarsh explains that he differs from the orthodox Reformed in that they assert faith as a condition, which he cannot allow. He calls the Reformed Position a Decree with Graces.2 "Faith before justification is no grace," Saltmarsh asserts, quoting John Rogers, just as works beforejustification do not please God.3 Faith here is undoubtedly being seen as a "work."

The most important aspect of Saltmarsh's theology in light of the development toward Quakerism in Yorkshire was that he had embraced the Seeker position on ecclesiology, thus aligning himself not only with Quaker millenarianism but also with its characteristic denial of the need for any ecclesiology. For Saltmarsh, no sacraments are necessary: they are all "works." Baptism is the Baptism of the Spirit; water Baptism is "legall." The true Church, he emphasizes, in Sparkles of Glory, is the "body of Christ which is baptized by oneSaltmarsh, Free Grace, pp. 197-198. 2Ibid., p. 198. 31bid., p. 212.1269Spirit into onenesse and unity of Spirit, unity or incorporation with Christ, being made perfect in one; even one as thou Father art in me and I in thee."1It would seem that the larger antinomian movement, which included many more protagonists than those enumerated here, was a movement that was entrenched in almost every part of England, including Wales, as we have seen in the part played by William Erbery, the Welshman. In general, it was a movement that developed within Calvinist Puritanism in protest of the encroachments of the increasingly Arminian stance of the established church. Worthy of note is the distinctive quality of the Yorkshire antinomians, in which group we can now include Saltmarsh, emphasizing the more mystical elements of the theology, and tending toward the Seeker position.Richard Baxter (1615-1691) and the Antinomian ControversiesOur review of the antinomian movement would not be complete without presenting a brief overview of the main points of the controversy itself. Richard Baxter stood at the center of the controversy, as we have seen, attempting to find a "middle way" between the Arminians and the Antinomians, and he apparently was1John Saltmarsh, Sparkles of Glory, or some Beams of the Morning-Star Wherein are many discoveries as to Truth and Peace. To the establishment and pure enlargement of a Christian in spirit and Truth, by John Saltmarsh, Preacher of the Gospell. (London: Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at the Black-spred Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1647) p. 15.270

involved in a dispute against the concept of universal redemption as well. Baxter relates how he had grown up with an antipathy to Arminianism "since all my reverenced acquaintance (save one) cryed down Arminianism as the Pelagian Heresie, and the Enemy of Grace." But it was Baxter's stint as an army chaplain in 1645 that opened his eyes to the diversity of religious beliefs within the army of "Saints."

I there met with some Arminians, and more Antinomians: These printed and preached as the Doctrine of Free Grace, that allmen must presently believe that they are Elect and Justified, and that Christ Repented and Believed for them (as Saltmarsh writeth). I had a little before engaged my self as a Disputer against Universal Redemption, against two ancient Ministers in Coventry (Mr. Craddock and Mr. Diamond) that were for it. But these new notions called me to new thoughts.

To Baxter, Antinomianism is the "voice of the ungovernable rabble" and it was frequently advanced by contemporaries that "such was Baxter's vehemence against Antinomianism that he over-reacted and actually did become an Arminian."2 Lamont notes thatDr. Bossy has called him 'the father of a rational and humanist "Arminianism" who had begun 'the process of detaching English Presbyterianism from its Calvinist roots.' Baxter himS3elf claimed to have steered a middle course between both extremes.

Now Lamont points out that the protestations which greeted the publication of Baxter's Apohorismes of Justification, his first volleyRichard Baxter,Catholick Theologie,London, 1675, preface. Quoted in William M. Lamont,Richard Baxter and the Millennium, Protestant Imperialism and the English Revolution. ,(London: Croom Helm Ltd.; Totowa, N. J.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1979) p. 126.

2Lamont, Richard Baxter and the Millennium, p.128

3J. Bossy, The English Catholic Community, 1570-1850, London, 1915, p 395. Quoted in Lamont, Baxter and the Millennium, p. 128.1271

of criticism against the antinomians in 1649 might confirm Dr. Bossy's judgment, but "to call him an Arminian or to say that his principles necessitated a detachment from 'Calvinist roots,' begs a number of questions."Predestination never had the primacy for. Calvin that it had for many who came after him. It became the badge of orthodoxy when the majority of delegates at the Synod of Dort (supported by James I's delegates from England) voted down the Arminian alternative. It became the badge of heterodoxy when Archbishop Laud and a group of bishops imposed their Arminian beliefs as the new orthodoxy in the England of the 1630's.lLamont goes on to emphasize that there were always men who were

highly critical of the predestinarian theory "without joining the ranks either of the defeated at Dort or the victorious Laudians." Among these he lists Cameron and Amyraut (quoting Calvin against Beza), Davenant and Ward, and Preston and Sibbes, whom he describes as among the leading covenant theologians of the 1620's and 1630'x.2

Lamont notes the influence of the above theologies on Baxter:

Perhaps it-was the consciousness that Baxter was taking from Davenant and Dort, from Cameron and Amyraut, and even from the covenant theologians, which was his greatest crime in the eyes of his opponents-more than the particular principles themselves. When Baxter began writing in 1649 challenges to strict predestinarian beliefs were in the air. The trouble was that, when they were not tainted with association with a discredited Laudian past, they were tainted with associations with an equally disreputable 'fringe sect' present (Quakers, General Baptists, Walwynite Levellers).3The association with Quakerism prompts us to look more closely

at Davenant's concept of "hypothetical universalism" which Lamont1Lamont, Richard Baxter and the Millennium, p. 129. 2Ibid., p. 129. 31bid., p. 130.272 believes had a strong influence on Baxter's thought. Here we see the

subtleties which were developing in the theology of grace among the "middle way" adversaries of "free grace."

All had their influence on Baxter; none more so than Davenant. He still awaits his biographer, but his 'hypothetical universalism' proved resilient againt the ideologues of both camps. At Dort, Davenant preached universalism against a rather restrictive concept of predestination; twenty years later, against his Laudian critic, Samuel Hoard, he was to insist on its hypothetical nature. The crucial distinction, for Davenant-.1s it was for Baxter-was between sufficient and efficient Grace.

Lamont explains the distinction thus:

Thanks to sufficient Grace all men get the chance to be saved (which sounds Arminian); the fact that they will not all take it up is a consequence of their human frailties without redeeming efficient Grace (which sounds Calvinist). The hypothetical nature of this universalism means not only that it is not Arminian; it is not even full 'covenant' theology. Davenant emphasizes the 'infrustrability' of election, compared to the mutuality of the 'covenant' between God and Man in the theology of Preston.2Lamont points out that "Preston emphasizes that he is talking about 'so small a condition,' but the Antinomian Saltmarsh recognized the

importance of the loophole: to attribute to man some small part in his own salvation is really to put salvation in his power entirely." Davenant's theory does not impose any condition:

The hypothetical universalist escapes this snare, but at the price of common sense in the eyes of the Arminian. As Hoard put it to Davenant, if everybody who receives sufficient Grace is certain to abuse it, what is the point in granting it?

John Goodwin, a radical Arminian, writing in 1651 apparently came to the same conclusion:Lamont, Richard Baxter and the Millennium, p. 129. 2lbid., p. 129.

3Quoted in ibid., p. 129.1273

So that to affirme and grant, that Christ died sufficiently for all Men, and yet deny that he died intentionally for all Men, is to speak contradictions, and to pull down with the left hand, what a Man hath built up with his right.lBaxter then, as we have seen, was the leading adversary of the antinomians and his diatribes were relentless throughout the course of his life. He compared Saltmarsh and Dell to the Anabaptists of Munster. Making a connection between adult baptism, free grace, and bad behavior, his arguments were sometimes quite out of line, e.g., when he charged several Baptist ministers with "being driven by theambition of baptizing naked 'all the maids in Bewdly.m2 He dismissed the Quakers as nothing but Ranters. Lamont claims that "if the Antinomian enemy had to be personified for Baxter, he would have looked very like the Ranter, Coppe.

Coppe progressed, from rebaptizing more men in Warwickshire, Oxfordshire, and parts of Worcestershire than any other minister, to trance-like states, in which he cried down moral duties as 'plaguy holiness' and advanced the theory, that as one of God's Elect, he was free from normal restraints: he can 'swear a full mouth'd oath, and can kiss his Neighbours wife in Majesty and Honour.' Worse: he pleaded for common ownership of property and went up and down the streets of London 'with his hat cockt, his Teeth gnashing, his eyes fixed, charging the great ones to obey his Majesty within him.3

Lamont notes that this psychopathic behavior represented the cumulative effect of a "mistaken ideology in which faith as well as good works had been systematically denigrated, the capricious nature1John Goodwin, Redemption Redeemed, London, 1651, p.94. Quoted in Lamont, Baxter and the Millennium, p. 129.

2Richard Baxter, Plain Scripture Proof, London 1653,pp. 137, 148. Quoted in Lamont, Baxter and the Millennium, p. 131

3Lamont, Baxter and the Millennium, pp 134-135.274of God's Grace had been exaggerated, and a minority had been encouraged to believe that they were exempt from the rules which governed their fellow creatures."1 Reputable ministers such as Crisp, Twisse, and Fisher would have disapproved of Coppe's behavior, but, Lamont asserts, it was they who had made such a phenomenon possible.2Thus it may be suggested that in the development of Quakerism we can perceive the roots not only in the mysticism of the Yorkshire ministers, but perhaps also in the increasing influence of Arminianism, of the softening of

the high Calvinist doctrine of predestination promulgated at Dort, and the corollary "hypothetical universalism" which the Quakers eventually embraced, all issues which were disputed and aired not only in the pulpit but also in print during the Antinomian Controversies.We have examined the concepts of the Grindletonians in detail both in context of the theological background from which they developed and in the context of the larger antinomian movement of which they form a part. It remains now, to review the antinomian controversies which arose out of the same issues on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, in New England, where John Cotton and Anne Hutchinson were accused of holding "Grindletonian" views.1Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume III, p. 154. 2lbid., p. 157.275

The New England Antinomian Controversy (1636-1638)The central issue in the Antinomian crisis in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636 was Anne Hutchinson's accusation that the ministers and teachers of the colony, with the exception of her brother-in-law John Wheelwright, and John Cotton, her minister, were all living under a "Covenant of Works" instead of a "Covenant of Grace." In Calvinist circles this was a theological statement which in effect accused the leading ministers of the Massachusetts church not only of being theologically unsound, but of being "whited sepulchres."John Cotton (1585-1652) was a graduate (B.D.) of EmmanuelCollege of Cambridge University, where he came under the influence first of William Perkins, and later of Richard Sibbes. Known for the power of his preaching and for his brilliant scholarship, Cotton was a successful minister in the parish of Boston in Lincolnshire for twenty years. During this period, his friend Dr. Preston, who had also come under the influence of Sibbes, frequently sent students to Cotton from Cambridge to complete their studies. Since Saltmarsh had named both Sibbes and Preston as "assertors of free grace", as we have seen, the close association of Cotton with these men suggests that he may have imbibed with his Puritanism a predilection for "free grace" doctrine as well as the "covenant theology" which these two had espoused. At length Archbishop Laud got wind of Cotton's unorthodox preaching, and he was denounced, according to Brook, by a debauched fellow" who swore "that neither the minister nor the magistrate of the276town kneeled at the sacrament nor observed certain ecclesiastical ceremonies."57 Warned to flee for his life, this distinguished clergyman departed for New England in May of 1633. The Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were so enthusiastic about the arrival of this eminent cleric, that the town wherein he and his family were to reside, "hitherto known as 'Trimountain' on account of the three hills, was, out of respect to Mr. Cotton, who went from Boston in Lincolnshire, now called Boston.nl Brook goes on to relate thatAbout this time, numerous antinomian and familistic errors beganto be propagated in various parts of New England, particularly atBoston. This raised a dreadful tempest among the people. Mrs.Hutchinson, and Mr. Wheelwright, her brother, were at the head,and Mr. Cotton was deeply involved in the unhappy affair.2

Anne Hutchinson (1591-1643) was the daughter of a Puritan minister, Francis Marbury, and, with her husband, William, a local merchant, resided in Alford in Lincolnshire, about twenty miles distant from Boston, where Cotton had been preaching for so many years, and apparently had come under his influence. When Cotton left England for Massachusetts in 1633, "it was a great trouble unto her," and she and her husband and family followed Cotton to New England in 1634. David Hall describes the influential position of the Hutchinsons in their new home:In the two years between their and the outbreak of the - arrj ~..val ~Antinomian Controversy, the Hutchinsons established themselves as1Brook, Lives of the Puritans, Volume III, p. 154. 2Ibid., p. 157.277 .leaders in the new Boston where Cotton was now preaching. In November, 1634 William Hutchinson was elected a deputy from Boston to the Massachusetts General Court, the highest political authority in the colony. Anne took on the role of spiritual adviser to others of her sex. At first she visited around, usually to women in childbirth. Then, at some unknown date, she began to hold meetings in her home for the purpose of repeating and discussing the previous week's sermons. These meetings became so popular that she had to organize another series for men. In all, some sixty or more persons crowded into the Hutchinson's home each week to hear Anne comment on the sermons not only of Cotton, but alp of the other ministers who were preaching in nearby towns.Hutchinson complained that with the exception of Cotton, the other ministers in the colony were "legalists"; "they took the

outward evidence of "sanctification"-leading a righteous life to mean that Christ had redeemed, or justified, a person's soul.i2 To her, this was to be under a "Covenant of Works." The other ministers soon began to question her orthodoxy and at the same time the preaching of Cotton himself was being scrutinized. In 1636 the ministers confronted the problem directly and gathered in Boston for a conference with Cotton, Mrs. Hutchinson, and her brother-in-law, the Reverend John Wheelwright.3 Details of the New England Antinomian controversy are beyond the scope of this study. What we are concerned with here is that eventually the governor, John Winthrop, in his History of New England, attributed the antinomianism of Mrs. Hutchinson to "Grindletonian influence."4P. 5. 1David D. Hall, ed. The Antinomian Controversy 1636-1638, 2Ibid., p. 6.

3Ibid., p. 6.Nuttall, The Holy Spirit, p. 179. Quoted from John Winthrop's "History of New England, 1630-1649," 1853 edition, Volume I, p 267.278The controversy reached major proportions in the colony of Massachusetts Bay: Winthrop describing the incident as the "sorest tryall that ever befell us since we left our Native soyle," lists twenty-nine errors taught by Anne Hutchinson.l The charges caneasily be read as a more theologically sophisticated version of the charges against Roger Brerely in 1619. The charges of errors taught by Mrs.

Hutchinson reveal a similar antinomian rationale to that of Brerely, Webster, and Towne, as well as to that of Eaton and Crisp. For example:

1. That the Law, and the Preaching of it is of no use at all to drive a man to Christ;

2. That a man is united to Christ and justified without faith: yea from eternity.

10. Sanctification can be no evidence of a mans good estate.

19. Sins in a childe of God must never trouble him, etc.2

It is no wonder that Winthrop, Wilson, and the others were outraged. Winthrop declared that the nature of these opinions would open a "faire and easie way to Heaven, that men may passe without difficulty,"For if a man need not be troubled by the Law, before faith, but may step to Christ so easily; and then if his faith be no going out of himselfe to take Christ, but onely a discerning that Christ is his owne already, and is onely an act of the Spirit upon him, no act of his owne done by him; and if he for his part, must see nothing in himselfe, having nothing, doe nothing, onely he is to stand still and waite for Christ to doe all for him. And then if1Hall, The Antinomian Controversy, pp. 202-203.(A full list of the charges is included as Appendix IV.)

2Ibid., pp. 202-203.279

after faith, the Law no rule to walke by, no sorrowe or repentance for sinne, he must not be pressed to duties and need never pray, unlesse moved by the Spirit: And if he fals into sin, he is never the more disliked of God, nor his condition never the worse. And for his assurance, it being given him by the Spirit, he must never let it goe, but abide in the hight of comfort, though he fals into the grossest sinnes that he can. Then their way to life was made easie, if so, no marvell so many like of it.1Winthrop believes he knows the reason for the popularity of these doctrines:

And this is the very reason, besides the novelty of it, that this kind of doctrine takes so well here in London, and other parts of the Kingdome, and that you see so many dance after this pipe, running after such and such, crowding the Churches and filling the doores and windowes, even such carnal and vile persons (many of them) as care not to heare any other godly ministers but onely their leaders. Q, it pleaseth nature well to have Heaven and their lusts too.

But, while Hutchinson's antinomianism fits the standard paradigm, several distinctive features provide evidence of her "Grindletonian" tendencies, namely,, several of the Familist tenets, including the doctrine of the "celestial flesh" of Christ, and of the resurrected bodies of believers; the doctrine of the sleep of the soul after death (psychopannychism); and, most important of all,

a tendency not only to emphasize the indwelling Spirit as ultimate authority, but to identify the believer with Christ himself.

Twenty-nine charges somewhat different in character were brought against her after she had been imprisoned for a time. She acknowledged she had taughtJohn Winthrop, A Short Story of the Rise, Reign, and Ruine of the Antinomians, Familists & Libertines. Quoted in Hall, The Antinomian Controversy, pp. 203-204.

2lbid., p. 204.2801. That the Soules Ecclesiastes 3.18-21 of all men by Nature are mortal.2. That those that 1 Corinthians 6.19 that are united to Christ have 2 Bodies, Christs and a new Body and you knew not how Christ should be united to our fleshly Bodys.3. That our Bodies shall not rise 1 Corinthians 15.4 with Christ Jesus, not the same Bodies at the last day.4. That the Resurrection mentioned 1 Corinthians 15 is not of our Resurrection at the last day, but of our Union to Christ Jesus.5. That thear be no created graces in the humane Nature of Christ nor in Beleevers after Union.1Worse, it was charged that she believed her particular Revelations about future events "wear as infaliable as the scriptures them selves," and she was "bound to beleeve them as well as the Scriptures because the Holy Ghost was the Author of both."2This distinctive mixture of several Anabaptist or Familist doctrines on a basic Calvinist foundation, with the concept not only of union with Christ, but also identification with him providing the rationale for antinomianism, may be said to be a model for the definition of "Grindletonianism." If this is true, then it might also be said, that in the years between 1634 and 1638, when a majority of the Puritans of Boston were in accord with Anne Hutchinson's teaching, the inhabitants of Boston, Massachusetts were, in effect, by a majority, Grindletonian!1A Report of the Trial of Mrs. Ann Hutchinson before the Church in Boston, March, 1638, The Stiles Papers, Yale University Library. Quoted in Hall, The Antinomian Controversy, pp. 351-352.

2Ibid., pp. 374-375.281We can include then, such men as John Wheelwright, Mrs. Hutchinson's loyal supporter throughout her trials, William Coddington, William Aspinwall, and John Cogshall, the latter three antinomians migrating to Rhode Island after the controversy, along with the Hutchinsons themselves. Among the group of "Grindletonians" who fled to Rhode Island in 1637 was a certain William Balstone, who subsequently purchased what is now Portsmouth, just north of Newport.)In May of 1637, according to Adams, word came that a portion of the congregation of Mr. Brerely and many friends and relatives of Mrs.

Hutchinson were already on the way to Massachusetts from England and planned to join the Boston church. Very quickly a new law was promulgated, the Alien Law of 1637, forbidding any colonist to receive "such persons as might be dangerous to the commonwealth" for a period of longer than three weeks without the permission of the magistrates. The intent of the law, Winthrop admits in his History, was to forestall additions to the Antinomian party through emigration from England.2 These new arrivals then, refused admission to theMassachusetts colony, made their way to New Hampshire, where they were joined soon after by John Wheelwright.31John Winthrop, "A Short Story ..." in Adams, Charles Francis, Ed., Antinomianism in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay 1636-1638.{New York: Burt Franklin, 1967. First Published by the Prince Society, Boston, 1894) p. 154.2Ibid., p. 359.3George Barstow, The History of New Hampshire (New York: George P. Putnam & Co., 1853) Chapter II, pp. 38-55.282It was, in many ways, a question of authority as well as of theology. The Antinomian party, with the ambivalent Cotton, with Wheelwright, the Hutchinsons, and the greater population of Boston in accord, had ambitions to change the ecciesiological pattern of the colony to harmonize with their religious views. In this they were at first supported by the Governor, Sir Harry Vane. But Vane resigned his post, and Winthrop, John Wilson, Hugh Peter, and the others were victorious in the struggle. Had the Antinomian party prevailed, New England Puritanism might have had an entirely different character. It is sad to note the tragic ending of the story of Anne Hutchinson, who was killed, together with her entire family, in an Indian massacre in what is now New York State in the year 1643. But it is sadder still to ponder the intolerance of these founding fathers of our country, an ugly contrast to the eloquent pleas for religious freedom by men such as John Webster, William Erbery, and John Saltmarsh.CHAPTER VII

FROM SEEKER TO QUAKER

In the summer of the year 1652, George Fox was traveling in the north of England with Richard Farnsworth. The two had been fasting for many days, when at the summit of the hill, Fox was seized by the Spirit. Fox describes the event in his Journal:

And the next day we passed on, warning people as we met them of the day of the Lord that was coming upon them. As we went I spied a great high hill called Pendle Hill, and I went on the top of it with much ado, it was so steep; but I was moved of the Lord to go atop of it; and when I came atop of it I saw Lancashire sea; and there atop of the hill I was moved to sound the day of the Lord; and the Lord let me see a -top of the hill in what places he had a great people to be gathered. As I went down, on the hill side I found a spring of

water and refreshed myself, for I had eaten little and drunk little for several days.

Who were the "great people to be gathered?" They were the many groups of Separatist congregations, predominantly Seekers, who formed the nucleus of Fox's first great "convincements" in Westmorland, the success of which were phenomenal and which paved the way for the great waves of "convincements" which followed after 1652. Fox continues,George Fox, The Journal of George Fox, A Revised Edition by John L. Nickalls, with an epilogue by Henry J. Cadbury and an Introduction by Geoffrey F. Nuttall. (Cambridge University Press, 1952) pp. 103-104.1I284

And so at night we came to an alehouse and stayed all night and declared much to the man of the house, and writ a paper to the priests and professors concerning the day of the Lord and how Christ was come to teach people himself by his power and spirit and to bring them off all the world's ways and teachers to his own free teaching, who had bought them and was the Saviour. And the man of the house did spread the paper up and down and was mightily affected with Truth. And the Lord opened to me at that place, and let me see a great people in white raiment by a river's side coming to the Lord, and the place was near John Blaykling's where Richard Robinson lived.1

This place was near Sedbergh in North West Yorkshire, where Giles Wigginton had been vicar, over seventy years before. Map 3 in

Appendix III shows the location of Sedbergh, as well as the general area of Westmorland from which the congregations met in the chapel at Preston Patrick. Map 1 reveals the locations in the north of England where Fox made his first great successful convincements, including the location of Pendle Hill, from whence he first saw his vision of the "people in white raiment."

William Braithwaite describes the Seeker congregations which

met at the chapel in Preston Patrick as holding religious views similar to those that Fox was preaching. Braithwaite points out that these groups were composed in most cases of men of competent Bible knowledge and training, "of singularly advanced religious experience," and were for the most part "young men in the prime of their ardour and strength, who would follow the movings of life rather than the counselsFox, Journal, pp. 103-104.1285

of prudence in shaping the new religious movement to which they had vowed their service.n1Braithwaite believes that the meetings of the Seeker congregations of Westmorland provided the basis for the type of meeting which the Quakers were to develop:

The absorption of the Westmorland Seekers was important in another way. It provided the new movement with a type of meeting out of which the Friends' meeting could naturally develop, and with an existing organization, immature no doubt, but sufficiently established to provide corporate fellowship to a number of groups of persons who met in their own meetings, but also kept in touch with one another, throughout a wide district, as the existence of the General Meetings once a month at Preston Patrick shows. It was accordingly easy for Fox, a few weeks later, to go from place to place and settle meetings at Sedbergh, Preston Patrick, Kendal, Underbarrow, and Hutton, and soon afterwards at Grayrigg. Westmorland thus became at once a strong centre of Quakerism.2

The Westmorland Seekers were a group of Separatists who had been formed under the leadership of Thomas Taylor (not the same Thomas Taylor who had published critiques of Robert Towne's doctrines). Taylor's preaching had attracted a large following from the surrounding area to his services at the chapel at Preston Patrick, evidence of the popularity of Seeker views among the populace. Some time before Fox's arrival in 1652, Taylor was persuaded by Richard Baxter, who was at that time attempting to unify the various Independent sects, to accept infant baptism, a denial of Seeker doctrine which could not accept either sacraments or ritual. The1William C. Braithwaite, The Beginnings of Quakerism Second edition revised by Henry J. Cadbury. (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1955) p. 94.

2Ibid., p. 95.286

Preston Patrick group refused to accept infant baptism and Taylor subsequently had left the congregation to take a lectureship in nearby Richmond, leaving responsibility at Preston Patrick in the hands ofFrancis Howgill and John Audland.l It was at this point in 1652 that George Fox arrived in Westmorland.

Theodor Sippell speculated that this group of Antinomian Independents in Westmorland might have been Grindletonians. Geoffrey Nuttall as well as William Braithwaite believe there was a connection. Nuttall sees a direct sequence between each of three groups of ministers with the Westmorland Seekers who were absorbed into Quakerism. He points out the long tradition at Kildwick in Craven, a parish just a few miles east of Pendle Hill in the West Riding of Yorkshire, of a type of religious dissent which could develop into Quakerism, reminding us that it was at Kildwick that John Wilson was vicar in the latter part of the sixteenth century, and that he was followed by Roger

Brerely and subsequently by John Webster as curates in that parish, just a few miles from Grindleton.

At Kildwick in Craven, where Webster was curate before moving to Mitton, and where Brerely had preceded Webster in the curacy, there had been another Separatist congregation under another suspended clergyman, John Wilson, who was also an associate of Wigginton. In view of these links, it is significant that it was at Sedburgh that George Fox received the 'people in white raiment' whom he had seen in vision after climbing Pendle Hill,Braithwaite, Beginnings of Quakerism, p. 82.1287over against Mitton and Grindleton; and that this people's leader, Thomas Taylor, who was now convinced, had 'naturalfriends and former acquaintances' at Carlton in Craven, almost the next village to Kildwick.lNuttall notes also the evidence of the peculiar character of Grindletonian antinomianism in the area around Halifax. (See Map 1, Appendix III.)

There is considerable evidence of widespread Antinomianism in the parish of Halifax, a town early distinguished for its adherence to Puritanism and its 'prophesyings.' Robert Towne, for instance, who was accused of Grindletonianism when at Heywood, later became curate of Elland, where another antinomian, Thomas Robinson, of Rastrick, was buried. Again at St. Anne's, alias Chapel le Brears, Richard Coore, who was of such pronounced views that in 1672 he applied for a license as an Antinomian, was succeeded in the curacy by Thomas Taylor's brother, Christopher. Elland, Rastrick, and St. Anne's were all chapels in the parish of Halifax.2From evidence of these associations, Nuttall adds a third set to his sequence of ministers whose teachings prepared the way for the development and the success of Quakerism in that area, Thomas and Christopher Taylor. Nuttall's sequence, then, begins in the sixteenth century with (a) Wilson and Wigginton, followed by (b) Brerely, Webster, and Towne in the first half of the seventeenth century, and last, by Thomas and Christopher Taylor, leaders of the Westmorland Seekers, who were "convinced" by Fox in 1652.

Nuttall pointed out that James Nayler came into a similar sequence, having been a member of the Congregational church at1Geoffrey F. Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in PuritanFaith and Experience (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1946) pp. 178-179.•

2Ibid., p. 179.288

Woodkirk or West Ardsley, between Halifax and Wakefield, an area where Anthony Nutter had preached dissenting doctrine years before under the patronage of the Saviles, and where the minister was Christopher Marshall, whose first wife-was a niece of Anne Hutchinson. Nuttall concludes then that

the entire area from which Fox drew his earliest disciples had a long tradition of dissent, beginning with Puritanism, thence to antinomianism of the distinctive type we have associated with the Grindletonians, which he traces through the influence of a sequence of dissenting ministers.

Quaker TenetsBefore we can assess the validity of Nuttall's theory, it will be helpful to examine briefly the early Quaker beliefs which Fox was preaching.The Quakers of the Interregnum were not preoccupied with theology, Barry Reay writes; it was only later in the 1670's that a systematic form began to develop. Before that, they defined their beliefs defensively by means of negatives:

Quakers rejected predestinarian doctrine and proclaimed the possibility of salvation for all: "God woulde have all men to bee saved Marke all men." They argued that Calvin's theory of predestination--the doctrine that "God, by His eternal goodwill, . . . destined those whom He pleased to salvation, rejecting the rest"-would have God "the most Cruel of all Beings." They urged men and women to turn to the light, Christ, spirit within (they used the terms interchangeably). We "call All men to look to the Light289

within their own consciences," wrote the Quaker Samuel Fisher; "by the leadings of that Light, ifthey will, they may come to God, and work out their Salvation."'

While proclaiming a doctrine of universal redemption, Quakers did not believe in universal salvation, for only a few will actually be saved. This Arminian view is similar to the doctrine preached by John Saltmarsh or perhaps to the "hypothetical universalism" of Davenant and Cameron. But, in contrast to the teaching of antinomians like Towne, there was an acknowledgement of the validity of human effort in the process of salvation among the early Quakers. Beyond these doctrines,

There was a strong sense of unity with God. Not all Quakers were as outspoken as Thomas Holme who declared that he was 'above St. Peter & equall with god', but most would have agreed with George Fox when he said that "He that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, ae of one, and the Saints are all one in the Father and the Son.'

The Light within, or the Indwelling Christ, emphasized so strongly in Webster, was central to Quaker thinking, and they tended not only to identify themselves with Christ, but to claim the perfection, not only of Adam before the Fall, but of Christ himself. The notion of regeneration as the birth of a new creature, in whom Christ dwelt, and in which the "old man" was destroyed, led to the excesses of Nayler at Bristol and to other Quaker

aberrations in the early years of Fox's ministry, reminiscent of Racket's mad claims during the1Barry Reay, The Quakers and the English Revolution, Foreward by Christopher Hill (London: Temple Smith, 1985) p. 33.2Ibid., p. 33.290Elizabethan period. Because of the concept of the precedence of the indwelling Spirit of God, Quakers asserted the authority of the Spirit over the letter of Scripture, proclaimed the historical Jesus to be of little consequence, and believed that heaven and hell were internal in the souls of men. They were millenarians in that they believed that Christ had already come in Spirit to the Quakers, thus ushering in the thousand year reign foretold in the Book of Revelation. They believed that through the power of the indwelling Spirit, they could work miracles, and Fox actually kept a record of the miracles he considered that he had wrought. It was claimed that among the miracles ascribed to James Nayler, he had raised Dorcas Erbery, the widow of William Erbery, from the dead.lReay points out out the ecstatic nature of early Quakerism:

People are not always aware that the early Quakers wereessentially an ecstatic movement, that like the Shakers their name derives from their behaviour that.is, trembling and shaking. Quaking was an outward manifestation of the inward workings of the power of God. In London in 1654 when Quakers first visited the city, women cried while Richard Hubberthorne preached and Edward Burrough trembled; 'almost all ye Roome was Shaken,' Richard Farnworth reported of another early meeting, this time in Yorkshire.2The early Quakers continued in the long line of dissent against the established church of England and its "hireling ministers," and sought the abolition of tithing, which, they believed, should be1George Fox, Book of Miracles, Edited with an Introduction and Notes by Henry J. Cadbury, with a Foreword by Rufus M.Jones. (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1948) pp. 5-6.

Reay, Quakers and the English Revolution, p. 35.2291

replaced by voluntary contributions from their congregations. They were, throughout the period of the Interregnum, anti-royalists, aligning themselves with movements such as the Levellers, whose leader, Gerard Winstanley, later became a Quaker, and with the Seekers. A sympathetic association with the Baptist communities seems to have developed in Nottinghamshire. Foxe notes in his Journal in 1648-1649, that in Nottinghamshire, "I found a company of 'shattered' Baptists and others and the Lord's power wrought mightily and gathered many of these."1 The origin of the plain dress, the "thee and thou"forms of address, and the forbidden doffing of the hat, were protests against the social insincerities of the period. Fox writes:

When the Lord sent me forth into the world, He forbad me to put off my hat to any, high or low, and I was required to Thee and Thou all men and women, without any respect to rich or poor, great or small.. And as I travelled up and down, I was not to bid people "Good morrow," or "Good evening" neither might I bow or scrape with my leg to any one, and this made the sects and professions to rage.2The refusal of hat honor was a custom that was prevalent, apparently a manifestation of the egalitarianism taught by groups such as the Diggers and Levellers. We have noted that Saltmarsh, when addressing Cromwell, refused to remove his hat. Another prevalent protest was the refusal to take oaths, a protest which doubtless had its inception in Lollardy and was reinforced by the administrations of the ex officio oath under Archbishop Laud.1Braithwaite, Beginnings of Quakerism, p. 44. 2Ibid., p. 47.292Thus the Quakers, by proclaiming the above doctrines, managed to nullify among themselves almost the entire theological system established by the Reformation, and to eschew the entire ecclesiological and sacramental system set up in Christianity for a thousand years beginning with St. Augustine. Braithwaite explains that

The claims of the Inward Light demanded a separation from all that was outward in religion, and left no place for a man-made ministry or for reliance on the external features of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. But the leaders showed conspicuous courage in so completely laying aside these venerable institutions and relying instead upon the inward spiritual provision of whose substance they were only the shadows. The courage was theirs because it was rooted in experience: they knew the Divine ordination, they were baptized with the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, they had found their spiritual food and communion in Christ Himself.lFox himself describes the simplicity of the Quaker idea:

They who are made ministers by the will of God, their word is God, their light is Christ, their Church is in God, their record is the Spirit, their original is the Word which was before all tongues, their gospel is the Lamb of God ... The saints' baptism is with one Spirit into one body . . . the bread which the saints break is the body of Christ and the cup they drink is the blood of Christ.2

The beauty of Quaker spirituality is expressed in a moving passage by Francis Howgill:

If you build upon anything or have confidence in anything which stands in time and is on this side of eternity and the Being of Beings, your foundation will be swept away, and night will come upon you, and all your gathered-in things and taken-on andimitated will all fail you . . . Why gad you abroad? Why trim you yourselves with the saints' words, when you are ignorant of the life? Return, return to Him that is the first love, and the first born of every creature, who is the Light of the world. . . Return home to within: sweep your houses all, the groat is there,

Braithwaite, Beginnings of Quakerism, pp. 137-138. 2Ibid., p. 138.1293

the little leaven is there, the grain of mustard seed you will see which the kingdom of God is like. . . and here you will see your Teacher not removed into a corner, but present when you are upon your beds and about your labour, convincing, instructing, leading, correcting, judging, and giving peace to all that love and follow Him.1The Theories of Geoffrey Nuttall and Theodor Sippell Muttall's Theory of the Sequence of Ministers

We have taken note of the Puritan dissent of both John Wilson and of Giles Wigginton during the latter part of the sixteenth century in the northwestern counties of England, particularly the area around Sedbergh, Halifax, and Wakefield, where Fox was so successful. While the geographic connection between Wilson and Wigginton and Roger Brerely and the Grindletonians is obvious, the theological connection

is somewhat debatable, despite Wigginton's controversial association with William Hacket. One can speculate that there may have been a tradition of a more ecstatic type of religion among the congregations but it is not easy to prove that the tradition was passed down through the sequence of ministers involved. However, the background of Puritan dissent did provide an environment in which other forms of dissent might develop and flourish among these congregations. The "conventicler" or private meetings held by many of the unlicensed1Francis Howgill, A Lamentation for the Scattered Tribes, Who are now exiled into Captivity, and are now mingled among the Heathen and are joyned to the Oppressor, and refuse to return. By a Servant of Truth and a Friend to Righteousnesse, who suffers with the Seed, which is held in oppression, waiting and labouring for its return, called Francis Howgill. London: Printed for Giles Calvert, at the Black-spread-Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1656, pp. 5-6.294preachers may have been forums for the promulgation of Familist tenets, as they were in New England, as well as the tenets of the Behmenists, the Seekers, Ranters, Fifth Monarchy men, Muggletonians, Diggers, Levellers, and all the rest of the sects which emerged during the period of the Commonwealth.But now let us consider a possible connection with Nuttall's third sequence of ministers, Thomas and Christopher Taylor.The Westmorland Seekers, Thomas and Christopher TaylorWhen we consider that the Westmorland Separatists, including Thomas and Christopher Taylor, were Seekers, it appears that the theological sequence connects only John Webster with them, since only Webster was a Seeker.A background of Baptist doctrine is evident in the ministry of Thomas Taylor (1618-1682), who refused to baptize his own children and

in 1650 held a conference or disputation on baptism with three neighboring ministers in the Kendal church where he held a living. But the denial of the efficacy of water baptism was a component of the Seeker position, which denied the efficacy of any sacraments until a new age would be inaugurated, and was in accord with the extreme antinomian position which denied the validity of any outward forms as "works."Thomas and Christopher Taylor were born near Skipton in Craven, on the borders of Yorkshire and Westmorland. Thomas Taylor was educated at Oxford and apparently held a living in Westmorland.295

Charlotte Fell-Smith, writing in the Dictionary of National Biography, describes him thus:

Taylor was a man of some learning and a student of Jacob Boehme. Both before and after his conversion to Quakerism he avowed intense hatred of bells, bonfires, maypoles, dancing, and other amusements. His collected works, entitled 'Truth's Innocency and simplicity shining through the Conversion,' London, 1697, consist of reprinted addresses, warnings and exhortations.)

The posthumous Testimony to him of his brother, Christopher Taylor, is included in the above-mentioned volume and provides an eloquent description of his sufferings:

As to imprisonment, he suffered much in several Prisons in this nation as at Appleby in Westmorland, at York, Leicester, and Coventry, and last of all above ten years Imprisonment in Stafford, and was there premunired because he could not swear. He was a Faithful Prisoner of Jesus Christ and kept his Blessed Testimony over the Heads of Wicked Brutish, Savage and Unreasonable Men he met withall in his Imprisonments.2Taylor's son testifies that he "was a Man of a Tender Spirit, seeking after a further attainment of the Knowledge of God and his Holy Way."19 Robert Barrow noted that Taylor "had a place in

Westmorland, but in those days was a 'Seeking Man.'"3 Barrow also mentions that many came from the surrounding towns to hear him preach,1Charlotte Fell-Smith, DNBG, Volume XIX, p. 467

2Thomas Taylor, Truth's Innocency and Simplicity,shining Through the Conversion, Gospel Ministry, Labours, Epistles of Love, Testimonies and Warnings to Professors and Profane (With the Long and Patient Sufferings) of that Ancient and Faithful Minister and Servant of Jesus Christ Thomas Taylor, Who Finished his Course in the Year MDCLXXXI. (London: Printed and Sold by T. Sowle, next Door to the Meeting house in White Hart Court in Gracious-street; and at the Bible in Leaden-hall-street near the Market, 1697) Testimony of his brother, Christopher.

31bid., Testimony of his son.

296 and that he refused to baptize infants nor to sign them with the sign

of the cross.

Writing in 1660 to the "Children of Light," Taylor, who was "convinced" by Fox in 1652, upholds the Quaker principle of perfectionism:

As also such as deny sinless Perfection, and so know not the Birth of God in Man, but will plead for Sin, yea in the Regenerate, during the Term of Life, as though Christ were a Minister of Sin, and could make nothing perfect like the weak Figures of the Law. Though the Scripture saith expressly, The Birth of God sins not, and he that abides in Christ sinneth not, and that Christ the better Hope makes perfect. See Heb 7:19 and 1 John 1:5-10.

Taylor continues

Now the Reason why the Law could make nothing perfect was because it could not take away Sin, and so that Perfection that is not sinless is no Perfection at all.2Fox gives an account of the conversion of Thomas Taylor, whom he describes as "our Dear Friend and Brother," in "Truth's Innocency," an account dated 1681.

Perhaps the most valuable evidence we have of events in the period immediately before Fox arrived at the Preston Patrick meeting

is included in an article by William Braithwaite, consisting of letters written to the Preston Patrick congregation by Philip Swales of the congregation in Richmond where Taylor was invited to preach in 1651.1Taylor, Truth's Innocency, A Loving and Seasonable Advice to the Children of Light from a Brother, Thomas Taylor, 1660, p. 14.

2Ibid., p. 14.297 The records of these Seeker congregations confirm the connection with

the earliest Quakers, among whom Thomas Taylor and his brother Christopher are counted. These letters form the basis not only for Braithwaite's contention that the immediate antecedents of the Quakers were these Seekers in Westmorland, but also for Sippell's hypothesis that they may have been Grindletonians, and for Nuttall's regional associations. We have then a record of the Seeker meetings in 1651 in Preston Patrick from Norman Penney's First Publishers of Truth, quoted by BraithwaiteAnd it haveing than bene a comon practise amongst ye sd [said] seeking and religously Inclined people to Rase a Genrall Meeting at Preston Patrick Chapell once a month, upon the ffourth day of the weeke, to wch [which] resorted the most zeallous & religious people in sevrall places Adjacent, as from Sedbergh side in ye County of Yorke, Yelland & Kellet in the County of Lancaster, Kendall, Grayridge, Undrbarrow, Hutton, & in & about the said

Preston Patricke, where ye sd ff:H, J:A:, [Francis Howgill and John Audland] and sevrall other diq vsuially preach to the Congregation there mett. . . .

The wide area from which the General Meeting of the Seekers was drawn confirms the evidence, for Braithwaite, that

the wonderful series of meetings addressed by Fox during Whitsuntide, 1652, at Sedbergh (June 6th and 9th), Firbank Chapel (June 13th), Preston Patrick (June 16th), had all the closest connection with this community, who were "the people in white raiment" of the Pendle Hill vision, and were to supply the incipient Society with the accession of Intellectual and Spiritual force which made possible its rapid extension.21William C. Braithwaite, "The Westmorland and Swaledale Seekers in 1651", Journal of the Friends Historical Society, Volume V, No. 1, First Month, January, 1908. p. 3.

21bid., pp. 3-4.298Braithwaite offers this description of Thomas Taylor extracted from First Publishers of Truth, noting Taylor's importance in the early history of this Seeker community:

.He was a bred up a Scholler at ye univrsety, & became a publike Minister or preacher, but, being a sencear & Conscientious man, denyued to receive his maintaineance by yt antixtan [antichristian] & popish way of tyths. so became minister to a people yt were seprated from ye Comon way of worshipe, then at Preston Chapell in Westmrland aforementioned & tooke for his Mainteainance only wt his hearers was willing (rely to give him, & was for his Cencerety & Godly liveing (according to wt was then made knowne) greatly beloved & esteemed by his Congregation, wch were many, untill such time as theire was Endeaovers used by ye Presbyterians, Independalts, & others for an Uniteing into one body or Church Comunion.

The "Endeavors" of the Presbyterians and Independents were efforts toward unification of the Independent congregations under the leadership of Richard Baxter, and required the acceptance of infant baptism. Apparently Taylor was persuaded to "goe back to sprinkle severall of his Children," which aberration the Preston Patrick Seekers would not countenance, and Taylor "removed into Swodale" [Swaledale] in Yorkshire, and became a teacher there to a Separate

Congregation, "severall of wch was Convinced of Truth soone after him. "2Taylor's congregation in Swaledale was in Richmond, but he was not there for long. Accepting the offer from the Richmond congregation in 1651, Taylor was "convinced" by Fox during that Whitsuntide period1Braithwaite, Westmorland and Swaledale Seekers, p. 4. 2lbid., p. 4.299described above in 1652 at Swarthmore. The letters of Philip Swale confirm the close relationship between the congregation at Richmond and that at

Preston Patrick, and it is noteworthy that after Taylor's "convincement" several members of the Richmond congregation joined him as Quakers.Christopher Taylor, Thomas's brother, also received a classical education at Oxford and became a Puritan minister. In 1652, he too was converted by Fox to Quakerism and subsequently spent two years in prison. Before 1670 Taylor started a school at Waltham Abbey, Essex, assisted by his wife and John Matern, a German Quaker. In 1670 he was summoned to court for teaching without a license and in 1676 he was reported as holding a conventicle. In 1682 Christopher Taylor resigned his school and followed William Penn to Pennsylvania, where he represented Bucks County in the first assembly of the province and was a member of the council of state until his death in 1686.1Unfortunately, we do not have any writings of either Thomas or Christopher Taylor from the period before their "convincement" by Fox, and it is therefore difficult to ascertain the doctrines and type of spirituality of the Westmorland Seekers. What we do know is that they were Seekers, eschewing all forms of sacraments and ecclesiology, that they held silent meetings waiting for the Spirit to move them, that they refused to take oaths, and were opposed to tithing. We do not1Charlotte Fell-Smith, DNB, Volume XIX, p. 467.300know if Thomas Taylor was a "student of Jacob Boehme" as Charlotte Fell-Smith asserts, before his "convincement" or if he became one afterward.Thus, the sequence of dissenting Puritans in the areas of Westmorland, Yorkshire, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, and Lincolnshire in northern England most certainly establishes the areas as hotbeds not only of antinomianism but of an antinomianism in which the indwelling Spirit of Christ was strongly emphasized. Were they Grindletonians? Perhaps not in the full sense of the definition that is evolving from this study.Roger Williams's claim that Quakerism was first brought to London by two Grindletonians from northern England--whom Sippell believes were the one-time leaders of the Seekers, John Camm and Francis Howgill, who traveled to London in 1654 to bring the message to Oliver Cromwell--may or may not be true. One suspects that for Williams the term "Grindletonian" may have signified those aspects of the Grindletonian movement which were parallel to those of Quakerism, viz., identification with Christ, the concept of perfectionism, and the authority of the Spirit over the letter of Scripture. We cannot know how broadly the term was used, but we do know that Williams had little sympathy for the Quaker doctrines, and that he may have been using the term "Grindletonian" in a pejorative sense.Thus, while Nuttall's sequence has validity in the sense of the geographic continuity of a certain type of dissent, the argument for a •. theological continuity lacks sufficient evidence to be entirely301credible.It is more likely that a theological continuity existed among the congregations in the north of England, including a predilection for Familism and the more inward type'of religion taught by John Everard, John Webster, Roger Brerely, and John Saltmarsh, all influenced by the influx of mystical literature from the continent, and developing out of the doctrines associated with dissent in

Puritanism. All these notions, together with disillusionment with the results of the Civil War and the Puritan Commonwealth may have produced the more radical type of Seekers who were so easily "convinced" by George Fox. The vigor of the tradition survives in the records of the beliefs of Anne Hutchinson.Sippell's TheoriesSippell's analysis of the Grindletonians as possible antecedents of the Quakers was published in 1920 and remains an important study of the movement. Sippell contends that in Brerely's sermons, Lutheranism and Pietism contend to gain the upper hand. "It is here," Sippellexclaims, "that we encounter the most pure, untainted pietism, two whole generations before it appeared on the continent, complete with all its characteristic traits."l Sippell is not sure how muchSippell, Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums, p. 25. [This is an English Translation from the German.]1302pietism influenced Brerely, but believes it must have played a role for his followers.

The source of Brerely's Pietism and the development toward mysticism is not clear to Sippell. Brerely's strong approval of John Everard puzzles him, and he notes that many of Everard's favorite images reappear in Brerely's sermons, although rendered somewhat differently here and there.lThere must be some hidden connections here that I cannot uncover. Since Everard's mystical sermons do not appear much earlier than 1625 and were not published untl 1653 a direct literary correlation is out of the question.

While a direct literary correlation cannot be maintained, the similarity of ideas and imagery establish evidence for the influence of Everard's thought on that of Roger Brerely. Everard was a widely acclaimed scholar and preacher and was preaching at St. Martin-in-the-Fields in London by the year 1618, according to Alsager Vian in the Dictionary of National Biography.3 The fiery quality of Everard's preaching is manifested by the fact that in the same year he was censured by the Bishop of London and required to apologize to the Lord Mayor and the aldermen for slandering them in a sermon!4 Sippell describes Everard as a "radical mystic." Rufus Jones notes thatSippell, Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums, footnote 2, 29-30.1PP.2Ibid., footnote 2, pp. 29-30.3DNB, s.v. "Everard, John," by Alsager 4Ibid., p. 948.Vian303

Here in England, then, during the tumultuous years from 1625 to 1650 a solid scholar and a great preacher was teaching the people the same views which the spiritual Reformers of Germany had taught a century earlier.l

Everard was teaching the ideas of Sebastian Franck, Hans Denck, and Sebastian Castellio, the Spiritualists of the sixteenth century, as well as the doctrines of the great medieval mystics of Germany. Everard's influence on Brerely was such that Sippell concedes

that Brerely finally succumbed to Pietism in some degree, affirming that "meanes" are no longer necessary at the height of Christian perfection.2 However, Sippell neglects to point out that while Brerely conceded the possibility of human perfection "in our posterity," he did not think it attainable by any "living wight."

It was a different story with Brerely's congregations. Sippell believes that most of the fifty charges brought against them and their minister were true, although undoubtedly exaggerated by their adversaries, and he sees a correlation between the charges against the Grindletonians and the twenty- nine charges against Anne Hutchinson.3

Sippell explains how Mrs. Hutchinson's concept of justification differs from the orthodox Reformed concept:1Rufus Jones, Spiritual Reformers of the 16th and 17th Centuries, p. 251.

2Sippell, Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums, p. 27. 31bid., p. 43.304

While the Reformed view claimed that the unio mystica always remained an unio moralis, she misunderstood this doctrine, in that Christ enters into a material union with the elect even before the act of faith, and through this (union) the human personality is completely destroyed and a new creature is created. In her view, it is not a restoration of Adam's state beforl the fall that takes place, but rather, a completely new creation.

But this was not what Brerely was teaching. Brerely always retained the Lutheran concept of the "simultaneity of opposites" even when absorbing Everard's mysticism. And Sippell claims that Brerely's preaching of grace is a pure, unadulterated Lutheran preaching, "altogether free of all Calvinist or Melanchthonian and also of antinomian colouring."2 In a sense, Sippell is correct, for the entire antinomian movement bases its rationale on Luther's doctrine of justification by faith, with a strong emphasis on free grace. Brerely's concept is the closest of the various interpretations we have examined to pure Lutheranism, because for Brerely the Law holds even for the born-again person, the righteousness of faith is Christ's righteousness given to us, which consists in the free forgiveness of sins and the free grace of God (Sermon XVII), and faith is retained through daily repentance. But for Brerely, the definition of faith is Calvinist, with its emphasis on the indwelling Spirit of Christ. Brerely was not only a dedicated Puritan, but as such was an equally dedicated orthodox Calvinist. The entire antinomian movement appears to have been a defense of high Calvinism against the encroachments of

1Sippell, Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums, p. 41. 2Ibid.305Arminianism, and the frequent appeal to Lutheran doctrine by quoting the great German Reformer, was, I believe, used to affirm Luther's authority against the Arminians. I find it difficult to agree with Sippell in calling Brerely a Lutheran. Salt marsh, in his essay on Free Grace, claimed that Luther was both "over-quoted and over-writ free grace,"Luther I could quote, but he is now lookt on by some as one that is both over-quoted and over-writ Free grace, and sending himsselfe against works, which was the Popery and Anti-Christianism of those times. He raised up grace rather in opposition, as some think, to whom I dare not so fully agree, to the excesse of works, then to the just advantage of grace, and yet they can allow him in other things. Thus we can pick and chuse from a Reformer what fits to the standard of our own Light and Reformation and cast the other by: I shall therefore quote some later.Sippell believes that it was the distinctive constellation of doctrines which we have ascribed to the Grindletonians that anticipate the radical pietism of the Quakers, and he suggests that the Westmorland Seekers were not only Antinomian Independents, but may have been Grindletonians.If we accept Sippell's theory of the theological development of the Grindletonians into Seekers, we can observe that only one of our three ministers, John Webster, fits this category. Webster was decidedly a Seeker and his theological paradigm is the closest parallel to that of the fifty charges and of Anne Hutchinson's views. Both Brerely and Towne were non-Separatists, and were, in all the literature we have available, maintaining a far more moderate positionSaltmarsh, Free Grace, p.1306than that described in the fifty charges of 1618 or those doctrines espoused by Anne Hutchinson.We would suggest here the possibility that we are dealing with two sources of a similar paradigm, the one drawn from the mysticism of Everard and the medieval mystics, the other drawn from the Anabaptist doctrines of the Familists. We might speculate that the doctrines we have labeled "Grindletonian" were far more widespread among the congregations of the northern counties of England than among the more well-educated clergy. These people, with a traditional heritage of an ecstatic type of religion characteristic of the Familists, were probably deeply influenced by and receptive to the mystical ideas of preachers like Brerely, Webster, and Saltmarsh, and perhaps Towne, and were ready in 1652 to listen to George Fox and to be "convinced" that the age of the Spirit had finally arrived.CHAPTER VIIICOMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND DEFINITION OF GRINDLETONIANISMAs we have seen, our three ministers who were accused of "Grindletonian" views represent three rather distinctive approaches, although all three base their theologies on Calvinism.Roger Brerely (1586-1637), John Webster (1610-1682), and Robert Towne (1593-1664) were more or less contemporaries, with Webster the youngest of

the three. Webster and Towne lived through and were involved in the theological disputes and turmoil of the civil war, beginning in the 1640's, through the twenty-year period of the Puritan Commonwealth, and into the Restoration in 1660. Brerely was dead before the Civil War began. Webster lived the longest, but the period of his greatest religious influence was over when he retired to the practice of medicine in 1657. All three were most active, then, in the first half of the seventeenth century, with Brerely as the earlier influence on the latter two. Webster had been an Army Chaplain and came under the influence of other Army figures such as Erbery, an influence which. may have encouraged his leaning ':-.card Independency. Neither Brerely nor Towne were Separatists, and each considered his308theology to be orthodox Puritanism.Let us first examine those theological positions which our three "Grindletonians" appear to hold in common; then we will attempt to isolate those areas in which the three seem to differ. The object of the analyses will be an effort to draw forth a clear definition of what it meant to be labeled "Grindletonian" in seventeenth-century England.All three, Brerely, Webster, and Towne, have built their theologies on a Calvinist base. All three conform to the five points of the Synod of Dort in 1619 which defined the high Calvinist position at that time, but their interpretations of these positions vary in emphasis. All three deny man's free will in strong statements against Arminianism. All three affirm the sine gua non of free grace in the process of regeneration, and all three consider the "anoynting of the Spirit" to be the assurance of election.Brerely, a true Calvinist, sees faith as a "powerful cleaving unto Christ," who thereby, through faith, dwells within the soul of the believer, but there is no suggestion of identification. Webster also preaches that faith engenders. the indwelling of Christ, but identification is suggested. Brerely and Towne, then, uphold the basic Reformation doctrine of "justification by faith" but with the Calvinist emphasis on the indwelling of Christ. Towne, on the other hand, emphasizes the passive character of faith, asserting, like Calvin, that faith follows justification, and therefore upholds a doctrine of sola gratia or better, free grace alone, a position309which parallels that of the larger antinomian movement.Brerely understands repentance as following faith and central to the process of regeneration. For Brerely, we must repent and "cry out for mercie" daily, seeing the "original fountain" of our guilt. Repentance is not emphasized in Webster for the reason that it might assume the character of a human "work." In Towne, not only is repentance not emphasized, but passivity is stressed, in line with the profound prejudice of the antinomians against "works," now interpreted as human action of any kind.For Brerely the Gospel kills the Law, and the Gospel has ultimate authority as interpreted by the Spirit. For Webster, the historic Christ of the Gospel becomes useless unless he is born again within the soul of the believer. For Towne, defending his orthodoxy, the Gospel is the instrument of.the Holy Spirit.

Following Calvin, Brerely believes the Law is useful for restraining "graceless men," but is opposed by the Gospel, which is the Law written on the hearts of the elect. Webster emphasizes the cleavage between the Law and the Gospel, and Towne, like Brerely, believes the Law has some value as training but can be discarded by the regenerate.Was any kind of preparation required in the process of regeneration? Yes, for Brerely, who asserts the value of "meanes" such as "prayer, publick and private, sacraments and Word, Temples, Preachers, Times and Seasons." Brerely also sees the necessity to fulfill duties, in line with Perkins' concept of "composition."I310Webster, on the other hand, emphasizes the lack of efficacy of any "meanes" and asserts that neither prayers nor works nor duties fulfilled can be of any avail in the process of regeneration. Towne is in accord with Webster in denying the value of any kind of preparation.For Brerely, regeneration implies a new creation. The soul is "born again" of the indwelling Spirit of God. For Webster, the idea of rebirth is not only that of a new creature, but is Christ born within and is accompanied by a concept of identification which is not present in Brerely. Towne asserts that justification and regeneration are instantaneous, and that in the process original sin as well as all past and future sin is abolished, and a new creature is born.Can human beings become perfect in the process of regeneration? Brerely believed that while it might be possible for some men to be so "linkt" to God's will that perfection might be possible some time in the future, he did not believe that any "living wight" could attain it in this life. Webster, however, preached a far more well-developed doctrine, in which Christ's perfection is imputed to the believer as the believer comes to be identified with Christ. Webster's concept of human perfection is based on Everard's mystical concept of the indwelling Spirit. Towne's concept of perfection, on the other hand, is like Luther's idea of the "simultaneity of opposites," and is more judicial in character.Clearly, our three ministers, each in his own way, has taken the mystical doctrines of identification with Christ, of human311perfection and deification, and of the authority of the Spirit and have imposed these doctrines upon the orthodox Reformed doctrine of the indwelling Spirit of Christ as taught by Calvin himself, but in the process a misinterpretation of the concept of regeneration occurred, so that the concept became similar to that of the Familists.

"The Familist doctrine insisted on actual righteousness and a physical or experiential holiness, as contrasted with the imputed or forensic righteousness of classical Protestantism," George Huntston Williams points out.1 Writing of Henry Niclaes, the founder of the Family of Love, Williams asserts that this concept was central to all of Niclaes' thought.

In this he was close to Netherlandish Anabaptism of the Melchiorite Mennonite strain and to Schwenckfeldian Spiritualism. But whereas the divinization in both these otherwise distinct movements had in common the adherence to the doctrine of the celestial flesh of Christ available for inward assimilation (with or without the external Eucharistic elements), the divinization in Familist Spiritualism, akin to and perhaps dependent upon the earlier Netherlandish Libertinism . . . was conceived in analogy to the descent of the Holy Spirit frp the Father tabernacling with the son on the banks of Jordan.

This may be an articulation of the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, a doctrine dear to all mystics, including Eckhart and Tauter. Niclaes himself explains the relationship of the three Persons in the redemptive "manning" of God within each individual believer:1George Huntston Williams, The Radical Reformation, p. 480. 2lbid., p. 480.312

For yee shall evidentilie see/ and.in maner-of-suffering; through . the Sufferinge of Christ; right well perceaue/ and finde in experience/ that God/ with his Christ/ and Holye-gost/ and with the heauenlie Fellowship of all the Holyos/ will inhabit with you/ and lyue and walke in you, and that Hee assuredlie is your God and yee his People. For Hee bath chosen none other Howse nor Temple/ for his Habitation/ but you 0 yee godlye Children/ or Communialite of the Loue.lTwo sources of a more or less parallel concept of regeneration appear to have fused--Everard's mystical interpretation of regeneration, which was probably drawn from Tauler and the German Theology and which exercised a profound influence on both Brerely and Webster--and Familist tenets which may have flourished among his congregations. In addition, the newly available translations of Boehme's works in the 1640's would lend more strength to this mystical concept of total regeneration. These ideas were in all probability equally true of Towne's theology, but the only literature available to us places him in the doctrinal line of the larger antinomian movement. Thus, while Brerely and Webster were preaching the mystical ideas of Everard, the congregations may have been hearing a verification of Familist ideas which had been in circulation among them for decades. And both of these paradigms had been imposed on the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination, so that assurance of election depended upon the presence of the indwelling Christ. No wonder it was said that Brerely's congregations were "more advanced" than he!1Henry Nicholas, Exhortatio, I (c 1574) cop XX, fo. 48b. Quoted in Williams, The Radical Reformation, p. 480.313In addition to Brerely, Webster, and possibly Towne, we must include the thought of John Saltmarsh with the group of antinomians whose concept of regeneration reveals a more mystical tendency. And here we note the regional aspect of this tendency. For all three of our so-called Grindletonians not only were native to the northern counties of England, but had spent the major

portion of their ministries preaching in the north, particularly in the counties of Yorkshire and Lancashire. We also note that while Brerely and Towne were non-Separatists and considered their theology to be orthodox, Webster and Saltmarsh were considered Seekers.Thus the Grindletonians differ from the antinomians of the larger movement in that their concept of perfection was a consequence of a distinctive doctrine of the nature of regeneration, which included belief in an identification with the indwelling Spirit of God, in which human ^3ture is itself transformed completely and a new creature born. The Grindletonians, to a greater or lesser extent, had abandoned the sinful side of the "simultaneity of opposites"! For some, the "old man" had been completely eliminated in the process of regeneration.The only clue we have as to the nature of the entire paradigm of doctrines embraced by the congregations is contained in the list of fifty charges brought against them and their beloved minister, Roger Brerely. While Brerely himself was exonerated, there is no record that the congregation changed its views in any way. What we do have is a record of the beliefs of a member of a congregation from314Lincolnshire who was accused of Grindletonianism, Anne Hutchinson, who followed John Cotton from there to New England. The list of charges against Mrs. Hutchinson, which she acknowledged as true, together with the fifty charges against Brerely and his congregation, form a compendium which, in association with the concepts of Brerely, Webster, and Towne, yield a possible definition of the Grindletonian position.The Definition of GrindletonianismGrindletonianism then, may be considered to be a theological position, the basis of which is Calvinist, but in which various orthodox Calvinist tenets have been exaggerated or misinterpreted-in particular, the concept of regeneration. There is an emphasis on the unconditional aspect of the free grace bestowed by God on the elect which engenders faith. The efficacy of human "works" or action of any kind tends to be negated in relation to election, which, it is emphasized, is unconditional. Justification is accomplished by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the soul of the elect, and it is this indwelling that provides assurance of election. Justification imputes the perfection of Christ to the elect soul, and in union with Christ, the elect soul becomes Christ, identified with Christ himself and/or his Spirit. The indwelling Spirit is given priority over all external or "carnal" authority, including the "letter" of Scripture, and the "historic" Jesus. The Spirit of Christ interprets the Scripture and. speaks through the elect soul. The Law is castigated as a "Covenant315 of Works."Several Anabaptist doctrines closely associated with the Family of Love were also associated with the Grindletonian position, more emphasized in some than in others. These were Psychopannychism or the Mortalist heresy, which involves the sleep of the soul after death, and the Melchiorite doctrine of the celestial flesh--a belief that in the resurrection only the "spiritual body" of the elect, with which he is endowed in his regeneration, will be restored.

The Grindletonian position is a variation of the antinomian tenets, which were part of a much larger movement which represented a defense of high Calvinist doctrine against the inroads of Arminianism and in which Lutheran doctrines were often put forth as authority for orthodoxy.The roots of the Grindletonian variation appear to be in the fusion of the mystical concepts of John Everard with the mystical element in Familist teaching, both of which were imposed on the basic high Calvinist doctrine of Puritan England.316SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONFive theses were put forth at the beginning of this dissertation. It is appropriate now to determine their validity in light of our study.We established that the Grindletonian position was a development within Puritanism in which the concept of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the elect generated the development of an ecstatic type of religion which encouraged an identification with Christ himself, leading to perfectionist and antinomian doctrines. We have presented a definition of what was called "Grindletonianism" in seventeenth-century England.We have established that the Grindletonians were a part of a larger antinomian movement, but a part distinguished by spiritualist tendencies drawn from mystical theology under the influence of John Everard, as well as from Familist doctrines, a deviation which appeared to have prevailed in the northern counties of England in the seventeenth century.We have established that the basis of the Grindletonian position is Calvinist, but that there is a predilection for317 exaggerating various Calvinist tenets.We have established that the Lutheran doctrine of the "simultaneity of opposites" forms the basis for the antinomian position in the larger movement, and in the thought of Robert Towne, but that another theology, the concept of the complete transformation involved in regeneration, forms the basis of the antinomian position in the thought of Roger Brerely, John Webster, and John Saltmarsh and that this concept of regeneration is parallel to that of John Everard.We have also established that the Grindletonians form a link between Puritanism and the Quakers both geographically and theologically. But the theological link is not so much related to the sequence of ministers who were charged with holding Grindletonian views, but rather to the constellation of doctrines embodied in the charges against Brerely and his congregation and to the charges against Anne Hutchinson. The link, then, although unverifiable, is probably with the congregations in the northern counties of England, who had embraced these doctrines,and who had proceeded in a sequence from Puritan dissent, to Grindletonianism, and from thence to the Seeker position which prepared the way for George Fox.BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES

The McAlpin Collection of the Union Theological Seminary

Aylmer, John. [afterwards Bishop of London] An Harborowe for Faithfull and Treu Sub ectes a=ainst the late blowne Blaste concernin_the Government of Women, wherein be confuted all such reasons as a straunger of late made in that behalfe, with a breife exhortation to Obedience. Anno MDLIX (At Strasborowe, 26 April, 1559)

Baxter, Richard. Aphorismes of Justification. With their Explication annexed. Wherein also is opened the nature of the Covenants, Satisfaction, Righteousnesse, Faith, Works, etc. Published especially for the use of the Church of Kidderminister in Worcestershire. By their unworthy Teacher, Ri. Baxter. London: Printed for Francis Tyton, at the Three Daggers in Fleet Street, neer the Inner Temple Gate, 1649.

Behmen, Iacob. The Way to Christ Discovered. In Three Treatises:1. Of True Repentance; 2. Of True Resignation; 3. Of ReGoneration; 4. Of the Super-rational Life. Also the Discourse of Illumination; The Compendium of Repentance, and the mixt World &c. London: by M. S. for H. Blunden at the Castle in Cornehill, 1648.

Brierly, Roger. A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting Truths, Clearly Deduced from Diverse Select Texts of Holy Scripture, and Practically Improven both for conviction and consolation. Being a brief Summary of Several Sermons preached at large, by that faithful and pious servant of Jesus Chr1'c, M. Rodger Brierly, Minister of the Gospel at Grindleton in Craven. Edinburgh: Printed for James Brown, Bookseller in Glasgow; And are to be sold at his shop about the middle of the south side of the Salt Mercat street, Anno Dom 1670.319Brightman, Thomas. A Revelation of the Revelation, that is, the Revelation of St. John opened clearely with a logicall Resolution and Exposition Wherein the Sense is cleared, out of the Scripture, the event also of thinges foretold is discussed out of the Church Historyes. Imprinted at Amsterdam, 1615.

Burgess, Anthony, Preacher of Gods Word. Vindiciae Legis, or A Vindication of the Morall Law and the Covenants, From the Errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX Lectures, preached at Laurence Jury, London. London: Printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill, at the Sign of the Bible in Wood Street, 1646.

Camfield, Benjamin, Rector of Aylston, neer Leicester. A Theological Discourse of Angels and Their Ministries. Wherein Their Existence, Nature, Number, Order, and Offices are Modestly Treated of: With the character of those, for whose benefit especially they are Commissioned, and such Practical Inferences Deduced, as are most proper to the Premises. Also an Appendix containing Some Reflections upon Mr. Webster's Displaying of Supposed

Witchcraft. London: Printed by R. E. for Hen. Brome, at the Gun in S Pauls Churchyard, 1678.

Crisp, Tobias, D.D. Christ Alone Exalted, Containing XLII Sermonson Several Select Texts of Scriptures. Who was sometime Minister at Brinksworth in Wiltshire and afterward many of the Sermons were preached in and about London. London: Printed for William Marshal, at the Bible in Newgate Street, 1690.

Denison, Stephen. The White Wolf, or a Sermon Preached at Paul's Cross February 11, 1627. Wherein Faction is Unmasked and justly taxed without malice for the safetie of weake Christians. Especially the Hetheringtonian Faction growne very impudent in this Citie of late yeeres is here confirmed. London: Printed by George Miller, dwelling in Black Fryers [sic], 1627.

Eaton, John. The Honey-combe of Free Justification by Christ Alone, Collected out of the mere Authorities of Scripture and common and unanimous consent of the faithful Interpreters and Dispensers of God's mysteries upon the same, especially as they expresse the excellency of free justification. Preached and delivered by John Eaton, Master of Arts, sometime Student in Trinitie College in Oxford and fifteen yeeres Minister and Preacher at Wickham Market in Suffolke. London: Printed by R. B. at the charge of Robert Lancaster, and are to be sold in Popes-head Alley, anno 1642.320Edwards, Thomas. Gangraena, Or a Catalogue anda Discovery of many of the Errours, Heresies, Blasphemies and pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of this time, vented and acted in England in these last years. As also A Particular Narration of divers Stories, Remarkable Passages, Letters; an Extract of many Letters, all concerning Present Sects, together with some Observations upon and Corollaries from all the fore-named Premisses. London: Printed for Ralph Smith at the Signe of the bible in Corn-hill near the Royall-Exchange, MDCXLVI.

Edwards, Thomas. The First And Second Part of Gangraena, or a Catalogue and Discovery of the many errors, Heresies, Blasphemies, and pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of this time, vented and acted in England in these four last yeers. Also a particular Narrative of divers Stories, Remarkable Passages, Letters, and Extracts of many Letters all concerning the present Sects, together with some Observations upon, and Corollaries from all the fore-named Premises. By Thomas Edwards, Minister of the Gospel. Third Edition, corrected and much Enlarged. London: Printed by R. R. and E. M. for Ralph Smith at the sign of the bible in Comhill [sic] near the royall Exchange, MDCXLVI.

Erbery, William. The Great Earthquake, Revel. 16:18, or Fall of All the Churches. Discovering the apostasie of purest Churches,not yet sensible-of their spiritual Whoredoms, Ezek. 43:9-10,etc. London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the Black Spread Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1654.

Erbery, William. A Monstrous Dispute, or the Language of the Beast in Two Men Professing Themselves Ministers of the Gospel, both proved at a Publick Dispute in Lumber Street, Oct. 12, 1653. London: Printed by J. C. for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at his Shop at the Black-Spread Eagle, at the West End of Pauls, 1653.

Everard, John. The Gospel Treasury Opened, or The Holiest ofall Unvailing: Discovering yet more the Riches of Grace and Glory to the Vessels of Mercy. In several sermons preached at Kensington and elsewhere. Whereunto is added the Mystical Divinity of Dionysius the Areopagite spoken of in Acts17:34, with collections out of other divine authors, translated by Dr. Everard never before printed in England. London: Printed by John Owsley for Rapha Harford at the Bible and States Arms in Little Brittain, 1657.321H. N. [(Henry Nicholas]. The First Exhortation of H. N. to His Children and to the Family of Love. By him newly Perused and more distinctly declared. Translated out of the Base Almayr, into English London: Printed for Giles Calvert, at the Black-Spread Eagle at the West End of Pauls, and John Allen at the Rising Sun in the New Buildings in Paul's Church Yard, between the two North Doors, 1656.

H. N. [Henry Nicholas]. Introductio, An Introduction to theHoly Understanding of the Glasse of Righteousnesse, Wherein are uttered many notable Admonitions and Exhortations to thegood life, also Sundry discreet Warnings to beware of Destruction and of wrong conceiving and misunderstanding or censuring of any Sentences. Sett-forth by H. N. and by him perused-a-new and expressed more playnly. Translated out of Base-Almayn into English. London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the Black Spread-Eagle neer the West end of Pauls, 1649.

H. N. [Henry Nicholas], Revelatio Dei, The Revelation of God and his Great Prophesie, Which God now (in the last day) Hath shewed unto His Elect. Set forth by H. N. and by him perused anew, and more distinctly declared. Translated out of Base-Almaine London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the sign of the Black-Spred Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1649.

Howgill, Francis. A Lamentation for the Scattered Tribes, Who are now exiled into Captivity, and are now mingled among the Heathen and are joyned to the Oppressor, and refuse to return. By a Servant of Truth and a Friend to Righteousnesse, who suffers with the Seed, which is held in oppression, waiting and labouring for its return, called Francis Howgill. London: Printed for Giles Calvert, at the Black-spread-Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1656.

Jackson, John. A Sober Word to a Serious People or, AModerate discourse Respecting as Well the Seekers (so-called). As the present Churches Therein the Difference between them touching Visible Administrators is Discovered and Discussed. And may

serve as A Plea for the Nations Ministery . By a lover of Truth and Peace. London: Printed by J. Cottrel; for James Noellin Foster-lane; and are to be sold by Giles Calvert at the black Spread Eagle neer the West end of Pauls 1651.322Jessop, Edmund. A Discovery of the Errors of the EnglishAnabaptists, As also an Admonition to all such as are led by the like spirit of error. Wherein is set downe all their severall and maine points of error which they hold, with a full answer to every one of them severally wherein the truth is manifested, by Edmund Jessop who sometime walked in the said errors with them. London: Printed by W. Jones for Robert Bird, and are to be sold at his shop in Cheapside at the signe of the Bible, 1623.

Johnson, George Arthur. "From Seeker to Finder: A Study in Seventeenth Century English Spiritualism before the Quakers." Church History, Vol. XVII, No. 4, December, 1948, pp. 299-315.

Knewstub, John. A Confutation of Monstrous and Horrible Heresies, Taught by H. N. and Embraced of a Number Who Call Themselves the Family of Love. London: Thomas Dawson for Richard Sergier, 1579.

Pagitt, Ephraim. Heresiography, or a description of the Hereticks and Sectaries of these Latter times. The Fourth Edition with some Additions. London: Printed by W. W. for William Lee, and are to be sold at his Shop in Fleet Street, 1647.

Perkins, William. A Golden Chaine, or the Description of Theologie Containing the Order of the Causes of Salvation and Damnation, according to God's word. A view whereof is to bee in the Table Annexed. Written in Latin and Translated by R. H. Hereunto is Adjoined the Order Which M. Theodor Beza used in comforting Afflicted Consciences. The Second Edition, much enlarged, with a Table at the End. Printed by John Legate, Printer to the University of Cambridge, 1597.

Perkins, William. A Treatise of God's Free Grace and Man's Free Will,,Included in The Workes of that Famous and worthy Minister of Christ, Mr. William Perkins. In Three volumes. Newly Corrected according to his own copies. Printed in London by John Legatt, Printer to the Universitie of Cambridge: 1612.

Rogers, John [J. R.3. The Displaying of an Horrible Secte of Grosse and Wicked Heretiques Naming Themselves the Family of Love. London: George Bishop, 1578.323

Rutherford, Samuel, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist Opening the Secrets of Familism and Antinomianism in the Antichristian Doctrine of John Saltmarsh and William Dell, the present Preachers of the Army now in England, and of

Robert Town, Tobias Crisp, H. Denne, Eaton, and others. In which is revealed the rise and spring of Antinomians, Familists, Libertines, Swenckfeldians, Enthysiasts. The minde of Luther, a most professed opposer of antinomians, is cleared and diverse considerable points of Law and Gospel, of Spirit and Letter, of the two Covenants, of the nature of free grace, exercise under temptation, mortification, justication, sanctification, are discovered. In Two Parts. London: Printed by J. D. and R. I. for Andrew Crooke and are to be sold at his shop at the Green Dragon in Pauls Churchyard, 1648.

Rutherford, Samuel, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews. The Tryall and Tryumph of Faith, or An Exposition of the History of Christ dispossessing the daughter of the woman of Canaan. Delivered in Sermons; In which are opened The Victory of Faith, the Condition of those that are tempted; The excellency of Jesus Christ and Free Grace, and Some Speciall Grounds and Principles of Libertinisme and Antinomian Errors, delivered by Samuel Rutherford. London: Printed by John Field and are to be sold by Ralph Smith, at the Sign of the Bible in Cornhill neer the Royall Exchange, 1645.

Saltmarsh, John. Free Grace, or the Flowings of Christs Blood freely to Sinners; Being an Experiment of Jesus Christ upon one who hath been in bondage of a troubled Conscience at times, for the space of about twelve yeers, till now upon a clearer discovery of Jesus Christ and the Gospel; Wherein divers secrets of the soul, of sin and temptations are experimentally opened, and by way of Observation, concerning a natural condition and a mixed condition of Law and Gospel. With a further revealing of the Gospel in its glory, liberty, freenesse, and simplicity for Salvation. By John Saltmarsh, Preacher of the Gospel at Brasteed in Kent. London: Printed for Giles Calvert, dwelling at the black Spred-Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1645.

Saltmarsh, John. Sparkles of Glory, or Some Beams of the Morning-Star Wherein are many discoveries as to Truth and Peace. To the establishment, and pure enlargement of a Christian in Spirit and Truth, by John Saltmarsh, Preacher of the gospell. London: Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at the Black-spred Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1647.324Sedgwick, John. Antinomianism Anatomized, or A Glasse for the Lawlesse: Who deny the Ruling use of the Morall Law unto Christians under the Gospel. By John Sedwick, B.D., and Pastor of the Church of God at Alphage, neer Cripple-gate, London. London: Printed for Samuel Gellibrand, and are to be sold at his Shop in Pauls Church yard at the signe of the Brazen Serpent, 1643.

A Supplication of the Family of Love (Said to be presented into the Kings royall hands, knowen to be dispersed among his Loyall Subiectes) for grace and favour. Examined, and found to be derogorie in an hie degree unto the glorie of God, the honour of our King and the Religion in this Realme both soundly professed & established. Printed for John Legate, Printer to the Universitie of Cambridge, 1606.

Taylor, Thomas. Regula Vitae, The Rule of the Law under the Gospel. Containing a Discovery of the pestiferous sect of Libertines, Antinomians, and sonnes of Belial, lately sprung up both to destroy the Law and disturb the faith of the Gospell. Wherein is manifestly proved, that God seeth sinne in justified persons. By Thomas Taylor, Dr. of Divinity and Pastour of S. Mary Aldermanbury, London. Imprinted at London by W. I. for Robert Davelman at the Brazen Serpent in Paules Churchyard, 1631.

Taylor, Thomas. [Quaker] Truth's Innocency and Simplicity shining Through the Conversion, Gospel Ministry, Labours, Epistles of Love, Testimonies and Warnings to Professors and Profane (With the Long and Patient Sufferings) of that Ancient and Faithful Minister and Servant of Jesus Christ Thomas Taylor, Who finished his Course in the Year MDCLXXXI. London: Printed and Sold by T. Sowle, next Door to the Meeting house in White Hart Court in Gracious-street; and at the Bible in Leaden-hall-street near the Market, 1697.

Towne, Robert, Minister of the Gospel. The Assertion of Grace,or, A. Defence of the Doctrine of Free Justification against the Lawlesse, unjust and uncharitable imputations of antifidians, or Favorites of Antichrist, who under a pretended zeal of the Law, do pervert, oppugne and obscure the simplicitie of the Faith of the Gospel. Containing an Answer to that Book, entitled, The Rule of the Law under the Gospel, etc., Which Book set forth by Dr. Taylor is shewed to be full both of scandall and danger, as it was sent to the said Doctor a little before his death. Printed for the Edification of the Faithful, 1644.325

Towne, Robert. Monomachia: or a Single Reply to Mr. Rutherford's Book Called Christs dying and drawing of sinners, Vindicating and clearing onely such Positions and Passages in The Assertion of Grace as are palpably mistaken and perverted, and so miscalled Antinomian. wherein also it appeareth that the Adversaries dealing is neither just nor candid. London: Printed by J. C. for Nath. Brook, at the Angel in Cornhil, 1654.

Towne, Robert. A Reassertion of Grace, or Vindiciae Evangelii, A Vindication of the gospell-truths, from the unjust censure and undue aspersions of Antinomians. In a modest Reply to Mr. Anth: Burgesses Vindiciae Legis, Mr. Rutherford's Triall and Tryumph of Faith, from which also Mr. Geerie and M. Medford may receive a satisfactory answer. By Robert Towne. London: Printed for the Author and are to be sold at the Angell in Cornhill, 1654.

Ward, Seth. Vindiciae Academiarum, Containing somebriefe Animadversions upon Mr. Websters Book, stiled The Examination of Academies, Together with an Appendix concerning What M. Hobbs, and M. Dell have published on this Argument. Oxford: Printed by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University, for Thomas Robinson, 1654.

Webster, John. Academiarum Examen, or the Examination of Academies. Wherein is discussed and examined the Matter, Method and Customes of Academick and Scholastick Learning, and the insufficiency thereof discovered and laid open. London: Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be sold at the sign of the Black Spread Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1654.

Webster, John. The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft, Wherein is affirmed that there are many sorts of Deceivers and Impostors and Divers persons under a passibe Delusion of Melancholy and Fancy. But that there is a Corporeal League made Betwixt the Devil and the Witch, Or that he sucks on the Witches Body, has Carnal copulation, or that Witches are Turned into Cats, Dogs, raise Tempests, or the like is utterly denied and disproved. Wherein also is handled The Existence of Angels and Spirits. London: Printed by J. M. and are to be sold by the Booksellers in London, 1677.

Webster, John. The Judgment Set and the Books Opened , In severall Sermons at alhallows Lombard Street, by John Webster, A Servant of Christ and His Church. London: Printed for R. Hartford at the bible and State Arms in little Britain; and N. Brooks at the Angel in Cornhill, 1654.326Webster, John. The Saints Guide, or Christ the Rule and Ruler of Saints. Manifested by way of Positions, Consectaries and Quaeries, by John Webster, Late Chaplain in the Army. London: Printed for Giles Calvert at the Black-spread Eagle at the West End of Pauls, 1654.The Bodleian Library, Oxford University

Fifty Charges Against Roger Brerly and His Hearers. Codex Rawlinson, Mss 399, folio 296.The Library of the British Museum

Brierly, Roger. A Bundle of Soul Convincing, Directing and Comforting Truths, clearly deduced from diverse select Texts of Holy Scripture and practically improven, both for Conviction and Consolation. Being a Brief Summary of several Sermons preached at large by that faithful and pious servant of Jesus Chirst, M. Rodger Brierly, Minister of the Gospel at Grindleton in Craven. London: Printed by J. R. for Samuel Sprint in little Brittain, 1677.327SECONDARY SOURCES

Adams, Charles Francis, Ed. Antinomianism in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay 1636-1638. Including The Short Story and Other documents. Burt Franklin Research and Source Works Series#131. (American Classics in History and Social Science #2.) New York: Burt Franklin, 1967. First. Published by the Prince Society, Boston, 1894.

Armstrong, Brian. Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy. Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth Century France. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969.

Bainton, Roland H. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Boston: Beacon Press, 1952.

Bangs, Carl. Arminius, A Study in the Dutch Reformation. Nashville & New York: Abingdon Press, 1971.

Barstow, George. The History of New Hampshire. New York: George P. Putnam & Co., 1853.

Battis, Emery. Saints and Sectaries, Anne Hutchinson and the Antinomian Controversy in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture at Williamsburg, Virginia. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1962.

Bax, E. Belfort. Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists. New York: American Scholar Publications, Inc., 1966.

Baxter, Richard. Autobiography. Being the Reliquiae Baxtaerianae. Abridged from the Folio (1696) with Introduction, Appendices and Notes by M. M. Lloyd Thomas. New York: E. P. Dutton & Company. 1925.

Bett, M. A. Joachim of Flora. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1931.

Bicknell, E. J., A Theological Introduction to the Thirty Nine Articles of the Church of England. Third Edition, Revised by J. J. Carpenter, M.A., D.D., Bishop of Oxford. London: Longmans, Green and Co., Ltd., 1955.

Block, Edward A. John Wyclif, Radical Dissenter. Humanities Monograph Series, Volume I, Number 1., 1962.

Braithwaite, William C. The Beginnings of Quakerism, Second Edition Revised by Henry J. Cadbury. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1955.328

Braithwaite, William C. "The Westmorland and Swaledale Seekers in 1651," Journal of the Friends Historical Society, Volume V, No. 1, First Month, January, 1908.

Brauer, Jerald Carl. Francis Rous, Puritan Mystic 1579-1659. An Introduction to the Study of the Mystical Element in Puritanism. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation. University of Chicago Divinity School, December, 1948.

Brook, Benjamin. Lives of the Puritans. A Biographical Account of Those Divines Who Distinguished Themselves in the Cause of Religious Liberty from the Reformation Under Queen Elizabeth to the Act of Uniformity in 1662. In three Volumes. London: Printed for James Black, 1913.

Burrage, Champlin. The Early English Dissenters in the Light of Recent Research (1550-1641). In Two Volumes. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1912.

Calamy, Edmund. The Non-Conformists Memorial. Abridged and Revised by Samuel Palmer. 2nd ed. 3 vols. London: J. Cundee for Bulton and Son, and T. Hurst, 1803.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. In Two Volumes. The Library of Christian Classics, Volume XX. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, MCMLX (1960).

Calvin, John. On the Christian Faith. Selections from the Institutes, Commentaries and Tracts. Edited and with an Introduction by John T. McNeill. Indianapolis and New York: The Library of Liberal Arts. Published by The Bobbs Merrill Company, Inc. A Subsidiary of Howard W. Sams & Co., Inc., 1957.

Calvin, John. Selections From His Writings. Edited and with an Introduction by John Dillenberger. Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press for the American Academy of Religion, 1975.

Carruthers, W. W., M.D., Ph.D. The Westminister Confessionof Faith. Being an Account of the Preparation and Printing of its Seven Leading Editions. To Which is Appended a Critical Text of the Confession with Notes thereon. Manchester: R. Aikman & Son,20 Shudehill, 1937.

Clebsch, William A. England's Earliest Protestants, 1520-1535. New. Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1964.329Colledge, Eric. The Medieval Mystics of England. Edited and with an Introduction by Eric Colledge. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1961.

Collinson, Patrick. The Elizabethan Puritan Movement. London: Jonathan Cape, 1967.

Collinson, Patrick. English Puritanism. London: The Historical Association, 59a Kensington Park Rd., 1983.

Collinson, Patrick. Godly People, Essays on English Protestantism and Puritanism. London: the Hambledon Press, 1983.

Collinson, Patrick. The Religion of Protestants. The Church in English Society, 1559-1625. The Ford Lectures, 1979. Oxford: At the University Press, 1982.

Copleston, Frederick, S.J. A History of Philosophy. Garden City, New York: Image Books, A Division of Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1963. Volume IV, Descartes to Liebniz.

Dawley, Powel Mills. John Whit:ift and the English Reformation. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1954.

Dickens, A. G. The English Reformation. New York: Schocken Books, 1964.

Dickens, A. G. Lollards and Puritans in the Diocese of York London: Published for the University of Hull by the Oxford University Press, 1959.

Farrer, William, and Brownhill, J., M.A. The Victoria History ofThe County of Lancaster. The Victoria History of the Counties of England, William Page, F.S.A., ed. Institute of Historical Research. London: Reprinted from the Original Edition of 1908 by Dawsons of Pall Mall, 1966. Volume II.

Fox, George. Book of Miracles. Edited with an Introduction and Notes by Henry J. Cadbury, with a Foreword by Rufus M. Jones. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1948.

Fox, George. The Journal of George Fox. A Revised Edition by John L. Nickalls, with an epilogue by Henry J. Cadbury and an Introduction by Geoffrey F. Nuttall. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1952.

Fuller, Thomas, D.D. The Church History of Britain from the Birth . of Jesus until the year MDCCCXLV. A new edition in six volumes, By the Rev. J. S. Brewer, M.A. Oxford: At the University Press, MDCCCXLV (1845) Volume V.330

Geneva Bible, A Facsimile of the 1560 Edition. With an Introduction by Lloyd E. Berry. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969.

Gibson, Edgar C. S., D.D. The Thirty Nine Articles of the Church of England. Explained with an Introduction by Edgar C. S. Gibson. Fourth Edition Revised. London: Methuen & Co. 1904.

Hall, David Drisko. The Antinomian Controversy 1636-1638. A Documentary History. Edited, with Introduction and Notes by David D. Hall. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1968.

Hill, Christopher. The World Turned Upside Down. Radical Ideas during the English Revolution. New York: The Viking Press, 1972.

Horst, Irvin Buckwalter. The Radical Brethren. Anabaptism and the English Revolution to 1558. Printed in the Netherlands by n.v. Drukkerij Trio. The Hague: B. DeGraaf, Nieuwkoop, 1972.

Johnson, George Arthur. From Seeker to Finder. Unpublished dissertation for the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, 1948.

Jones, Rufus. Mysticism and Democracy in the English Commonwealth, Being the William Belden Noble Lectures Delivered in Harvard University, 1930-31. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1932.

Jones, Rufus. Spiritual Reformers of the 16th and 17th Centuries London: Macmillan and Co., Limited, 1928.

Jones, Rufus. Studies in Mystical Religion. New York: Russell & Russell. First Published in 1909, Reissued 1970.

Knappen, Tudor Puritanism. A Chapter in the History of Idealism. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1963.

Lamont, William. Godly Rule. Politics and Religion, 1603-1660. London: Macmillan, St. Martin's Press, 1969.

Lamont, William. Richard Baxter and the Millennium. Protestant Imperialism and the English Revolution. London: Croom Helm Ltd.; Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield, 1979.

Leff, Gordon. Heresy in the Later Middle Ages. In Two Volumes. Manchester University Press. New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1967.331Luther, Martin. Selections From His Writings, Edited and with an Introduction by John Dillenberger. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1961.

Marchant, Ronald A. The Church Under the Law. Justice, Administration and Discipline in the Diocese of York, 1560-1640. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1969.Marchant, Ronald A. The Puritans and the Church Courts in theDiocese of York 1560-1642. London: Longmans, Green & Co., Ltd., 1960.

Marvell, Andrew. "A Dialogue Between Soul and Body." The Complete Poems, Edited and with Notes by Elizabeth Story Donno. Hammondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, Ltd. First published in 1972.

Matthew, F. D. The English Works of Wyclif. Hitherto Unprinted. London: Published for the Early English Text Society, by Regan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1880.

Matthews, A. G. Calamy Revised. Being a Revision of Edmund Calamy's Account of the Ministers and Others Ejected and Silenced 1660-1662. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1934.

McGee, J. Sears. The Godly Man in Stuart England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976.

McGregor, J. F. and Reay, B., Editors. Radical Religion in the English Revolution. London: Oxford University Press, 1984.

McNeill,John T. The History and Character of Calvinism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1954

Nuttall, Geoffrey F. Richard Baxter. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1965.

Nuttall, Geoffrey, D.D. The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1946.

Nuttall, Geoffrey F. Visible Saints. The Congregational Way, 1640-1660. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1957.

Ozment, Steven E. Homo Spiritualism. A Comparative Study of the Anthropology of Johannes Tauter, Jean Gerson and Martin Luther (1509-1516) in the Context of their Theological Thought. Volume VI in Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought. Edited by . Heiko A. Oberman, Tubingen. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969.332

Ozment, Steven E. Mysticism and Dissent, Religious Ideology and Social Protest in the Sixteenth Century. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1973.

Pettit, Norman. The Heart Prepared; Grace and Conversion in Puritan Spiritual Life. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1966.

Porter, H. C. Reformation and Reaction in Tudor Cambridge. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1958.

Purvis, J. S. An Introduction to Ecclesiastical Records. London: St. Anthony's Press, 1953.

Reay, Barry. The Quakers and the En:lish Revolution. Foreword by Christopher Hill. London: Temple Smith, 1985.

Reeves, Marjorie. "The Development of Apocalyptic Thought: Medieval Attitudes." The Apocalypse. C. A. Patrides and Joseph Wittriech, Editors. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1984.

Ritschl, Albrecht. "Prologomena to the History of Pietism." Three Essays. Translated and with an Introduction by Philip Hefner. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972.

Sippell, Theodor. Zur Vorgeschichte des Quakertums. Mit einem Worwort von D. Friedrich Loofs. Studien zur Geschichte des Neueren Protestantismus Herausgegeben von Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann and Prof. D. Leopold Zscharnack. Volumes 12-14. Geissen: Verlag von Alfred Topelmann, 1920.

Stephen, Sir Leslie, and Lee, Sir Sidney, Editors. The Dictionaryof National Biography. Founded in 1882 by George Smith. From the Earliest Times to 1900. Oxford University Press. Published since 1917. Reprinted 1959-60.

Stoeffler, F. Ernest. The Rise of Evangelical Pietism. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965.

Stoever, William K. B. A Faire and Easie Way to Heaven. Covenant Theology and Antinomianism in Early Massachusetts. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1978.

Stoever, William. "Nature, Grace, and John Cotton: The Theological Dimension in the New England Antinomian Controversy. Church History, Vol. 44, No. 1. March, 1975.333

Stoudt, John Joseph. Sunrise to Eternity. A Study of Jacob Boehme's Life and Thought. Preface by Paul Tillich. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1957.

Strype, John, M.A. The Life and Acts of John Whitgift, D.D., the Third and Last Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. In Four Books. Oxford: At the University Press, MDCCCXLV (1845).

Tauler, John. The Sermons and Conferences. Beinghis Spiritual Doctrine. First Complete English Translation with Introduction and Index by the Very Rev. Walter Elliott of the Paulist Fathers. Washington, D.C.: The Apostolic Mission House, 1910.

Thomson, John A. F. The Later Lollards 1414-1520. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965.

Trinterud, L. J. "A Reappraisal of William Tyndale's Debt to Martin Luther." Church History, Volume XXXI, March, 1962. No. 1.

Thompson, Bard. "Ulrich Zwingli" Reformers in Profile. Edited by B. A. Gerrish. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967.

Tuveson, Ernest Lee. Millennium and Utopia. A Study in the Background of the Idea of Progress. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949.

Underwood, A. C. A History of the English Baptists. With a Foreword by J. H. Rushbrooke. London: The Baptist Union Publication Dept. (Kingsgate Press), 1947.

Vendettuoli, James, Jr. The English Seekers: John Jackson the Principal Spokesman. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University, 1958.

Walsh, David. The Mysticism of Otherworldly Fulfillment. A Study of Jacob Boehme. Gainesville: A University of Florida Book. University Presses of Florida, 1983.

White, B. R. "Echoes of Medieval Christendom in Puritan Spirituality". One in Christ, Vol. 16, No. 1/2, 1980, pp. 78-90.White, B. R. "The English Baptists of the Seventeenth Century." A History of the English Baptists. B. R. White, General Editor. London: The Baptist Historical Society, 1983.

Williams, George Huntston. The Radical Reformation. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1962.334Walzer, Michael. The Revolution of the Saints. A Study in the Origins of Radical Politics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1965.

Warnke, Frank J. "Play and Metamorphosis in Marvell's Poetry." Seventeenth Century English Poetry. Edited by William R.Keast. London, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.

Webster,Noah. Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Deluxe Second Edition. Based upon the Broad Foundations Laid Down by Noah Webster. Extensively Revised by the Publisher's Editorial Staff under the. General Supervision of Jean L. McKechnie. Illustrated, Dorset & Baber. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979.

Weeks, William Self, F.S.A. Clitheroe in the Seventeenth Century. Reprinted from the "Clitheroe Advertiser and Times." Clitheroe: Advertiser and Times Co., Ltd., Printers and Publishers, 1928.

Wilson, John F. Pulpit and Parliament. Puritanism during the English Civil Wars 1640-1648. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1969.335APPENDIX IThe Fifty Charges Against Roger Brerely and His Hearers335ATHE FIFTY CHARGES AGAINST ROGER BRERLY AND HIS HEARERS

The Bodleian Library, Oxford University, Codex Rawlinson Mss 399, fol. 196

Certain erronious opinions gathered from the mouth of Bryerley and his hearers.

1. A motion rising from the spiritt is more to be rested in than the word itself, neither dare they take their ground from the woord, because the devil may wrest it to his purpose.

2. It is a sinne to believe the word, as it is the word, without a motion of the spiri,.;

3. The child of God in the power of grace doth performe every duety soe well that to ask pardon for failing in matter or maner is a sinne.

4. The Lord manifesteth himself in every ordinance to the child of god to his contentment more or lesse.

5. That after a man hath assurance of the forgivenes of his sinnes, he can never doubt againe.

6. That faith and feeling are things inseparable.

7. The Christian assured can never commit a grosse sinne.

8. That in conference if the childe of god be willed to speake low for giving of offence it is a sinne to doe it, for gods spiritt will not be ashamed.

9. The childe of god in his comfortable estate cannot pray but prayse god.

10. That every convert hath grace wrought in his heart and affeactions before his understanding be inlightened.

11. Grace being wrought in the heart the spiritt abolisheth all former knowledge and they bidd away with all scripture knowledge.

12. One having attained to the power of grace can more confirme a weake saint then a prayer with 20tie sermons.336APPENDIX I (cont'd)13. It is a sinne to remember presentlie anie thing that the preacher hath spoken or to meditate thereof, for the spirit will bring it to their remembrance when they neede it.14. A soule sanctified must soe aime att gods glorie, as he must never thinke of salvation.15. They hold it unlawful to pray for forgiveness of sinne after conversion.16. They confidentlie affirme that whatsoever sinne they lye in, when they heare it reprooved in the ordinance they never committ againe.17. A minister unsanctified canot either convert or confirme.18. They say they are soe filled with the spiritt that they cannot reade a chapter trulie, yet can expound it, and in prayer they are soe ravished that they cannot speake a woord.19. If temptation be offered, it lighteth (sic!) upon them as uppon a wall, and reboundeth back again, but if att anie time they fall they can by the power of grace carrie theire sinne to the lord, and say heere I had it and heere I leave it.20. It is not necessarie to take notice of their sinnes to humble them, for that will god doe by his spiritt when it is needfull.

21. They hould it a sinne to catechise the ignorant for knowledge is an hindrance to grace.22. If anyone doe not yeald to their opinions, instantlie they say they see the devill in him.23. If they hear a sanctified minister preach, they know when he speaks by the spirit and when not.24. They care not for falling into a sinne, for god turnes that to the best.25. It is an error (say they) to hould that where there is most grace, there is most humiliation.26. That a minister sanctified can preach no errors.27. That it is not fitt to pray for an excellent minister which is like to be silenced, for they say they will not be more pittifull then god.337APPENDIX I (cont'd)28. They hould it a great sinne to read any booke but the bible, and they hould it to be a horrible sinne to read it either in publique or privat without exposition.29. If they hear a man talk they can tell imediately how farr he is gone in Christianitie, and whether he be an hypocrite or noe.30. That everie man should pray without meditation.31. A man humbled in his soule for sinne ought not to putt upp any prayer to god in the name of christ, till by faith he is assured that christ dwelles in him.32. That god hath not revealed enough of himself to mans salvation in his woord, but that wee must starth further by spirituall revelation.33. That a man having the spiritt, may read, pray or preach without any other CALLING whatsoever.34. That the efficacie of woord and sacrament dependes uppon the worthines of the minister.35. As when the wedge of gould and the Babilonian garment weare hid in Achams tent god would not be present with the Israelites; soe looke what church or chappell hath within it surplisse, crosse or such like, there will the lord never reveale himself either to preacher or people.36. That the Arke of the covenant is shutt upp and pinned within the walls of Grindleton Chapell.37. A christian is of no parish, neither hath he any pastor, but him by whom he was converted, and to him must he resort every sabbath day, though he be never soe farr of.38. Neither the preacher nor they pray for the king and the reason is because they know not whether he be elected or not.,39. He is a devill that ever studieth before he preacheth.40. He is no christian unless he dare say in every prayer, lord now take me to thee, for I am fitt for thee.41. That they have received such abundance of grace that now they cann stand without the meanes, and soe will doe when Mr. Brerely goes, whom they terme the Angell of England and the onelie one of a thousand.338APPENDIX I (cont°d)

42. That the Bishop of York is a second Felix, for when he was about to pronounce sentence of silenceinge against Mr. Brerely there fell uppon him such a trembleing that he durst not doe it.43. That Mr. Shute, vickar of Gigleswicke and Mr. Brooke, minister of Gargras are both either ignorant or malicious persecutors of sincerity.44. If Mr. Brerely may stand but a while longer 3 or 4 of the best christians in every parish of England will be assembled thither.45. That they are behoulding to god for nothing, for whatsoever god bath bestowed upon them, he did it for himself, they yealding it fittlie againe to him in obedience.46. That they cannot have more ioy in heaven than they have in this life in the spirit.47. That a christian may have more then faith, and more then assurance, for he may have god himself.48. They hould it not fitteing in the pulpit to bring Quotations, for they say the devill alleadge scripture.49. That the Apostles did convert noe soules before christ his ascention, and that the prophecie of Joell (your young men shall see visions and your old men shall dreame dreames, and your daughters shall prophecie) is now filfilled at Grindleton.50. That there is as much difference betwixt Mr. Brerely's preaching and other mens, as betwext salvation and damnation, and that a wicked man may doe as much as most men preach, nay may obey all the written woordes, and be damned.338AAPPENDIX IIThree MapsMAP I. ENGLAND AND WALMS-NOPTnxaw SUCTION. Showing placer retuned to in the text!nisi. Sketch map showing approximate distribution of Settkd Meetings at the beginning of 1654Mee 3. TNa PRESTON PATRICK DISTRICT. Showing the places referred to is the teat, and present-day main roads and railwaysF.N.II. Friends' Meeting llouse B.G. Burial Ground341AAPPENDIX IIIThe Twenty Nine Errors of Anne Hutchinson The 82 Errors Condemned in New England in 1637342 THE TWENTY NINE ERRORS OF ANNE HUTCHINSON

A Short Story of the Rise, reign, and ruine of the Antinomians, Familists & Libertines, that infected the Churches of New England, by John Winthrop, 1644. Reprinted in C. F. Adams, Three Episodes of Massachusetts History (Boston, 1892).The opinions, (some of them) were such as these; I say, some of them, to give but a tast, for afterwards you shall see a litter of fourescore and eleven of their brats hung up against the Sunne, besides many new ones of Mistris Hutchinson, all which they hatched and dandled; As

1. That the Law, and the Preaching of it is of no use at all, to drive a man to Christ.

2. That a man is united to Christ, and justified without faith; yea from eternity.

3. That faith is not a receiving of Christ, but a man's discerning that he hath received him already.

4. That a man is united to Christ onely, by the worke of the Spirit upon him, without any act of his.

5. That a man is never effectually Christs, till he hath assurance.

6. This assurance is onely from the witnesse of the Spirit.

7. This witnesse of the Spirit is meerly immediate without any respect to the word, or any concurrence with it.

8. When a man hath once this witnesse he never doubts more.

9. To question my assurance, though I fall into Murther or Adultery, proves that I never had true assurance.

10. Sanctification can be no evidence of a mans good estate.

11. No comfort can be had from any conditionall promise.

12. Poverty in spirit (to which Christ pronounceth blessednesse, Mat. 5.3) is onely this, to see I have no grace at all.

13. To see I have no grace in me, will give me comfort; but to take comfort from sight of grace, is legall.343APPENDIX III 4cont'd)14. An hypocrite may have Adams graces that he had in Innocency.15. The graces of Saints and Hypocrites differ not.16. All graces are in Christ as in the Subject, and none in us, so that Christ believes, Christ loves, etc.17. Christ is the new Creature.18. G,d loves a man never the better for any holinesse in him and never the lesse, be he never so unholy.19. Sinne in a childe of God must never trouble him.20. Trouble in conscience for sins of commission, or for neglect of duties, sheaves a man to be under a Covenant of workes.21. all Covenants to God expressed in words are legall workes.22. A christian is not bound to the Law as a rule of his conversation.23. A Christian is not bound to pray except the Spirit moves him.24. A Minister that hath not this (new) light is not able to edifie others that have it.

25. The whole letter of the Scripture is a covenant of works.26. No Christian must be prest to duties of holinesse.27. No Christian must be exhorted to faith, love, and prayer, etc., except we know he hath the Spirit.28. A man may have all graces, and yet want Christ.29. All a beleevers activity is onely to act sinne.344THE 82 ERRORS CONDEMNED IN NEW ENGLAND IN 1637

A Short Story of the Rise, reign, and ruine of the Antinomians, Familists & Libertines, that infected the Churches of New England, by John Winthrop, 1644. Reprinted in C. F. Adams, Three Episodes of Massachusetts History (Boston, 1892)

A Catalogue of such erroneous opinions as were found to have beene brought into New England and spread under-hand there, as they were condemned by an Assembly of the Churches, at New town, August 30, 1637.

1. In the conversion of a sinner, which is saving and gracious, the faculties of the soule, and the workings thereof, in things pertaining to God, are destroyed and made to cease.

2. In stead of them, the Holy Ghost doth come and take place, and doth all the works of those natures, as the faculties of the human nature of Christ do.

3. That the love which is said to remain, when faith and hope cease, is the Holy Ghost.

4, 5. That those that bee in Christ are not under the Law, and commands of the word, as the rule of life. Alias, that the will of God in the Word, or directions thereof, are not the rule whereunto Christians are bound to conforme themselves, to live under.

6. The example of Christs life, is not a patterne according to which men ought to act.

• 7. The new creature, or the new man mentioned in the Gospell, is not meant of grace, but of Christ.

8. By love, 1 Cor. 13.13 and by the armour mentioned Ephes. 6 are meant Christ.

9. The whole letter of the Scripture holds for a covenant of workes.

10. That God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, may give themselves to. the soule, and the soule may have true union with Christ, true remission of sins,

true marriage and fellowship, true sanctification from the blood of Christ, and yet bee an hypocrite.345APPENDIX III (cont'd)11. As Christ was once made flesh, so hee is now first made flesh in us, ere wee bee carryed to perfection.12. Now in the covenant of workes, a legalist may attained the same righteousnesse for truth, which Adam had in innocency before the fall.13. That there is a new birth under the covenant of workes, to such a kind of righteousnesse, as before is mentioned from which the soule must bee againe converted, before it can bee made partaker of Gods Kingdome.14. That Christ workes in the regenerate, as in those that are dead, and not as in those that are alive, or, the regenerate after conversion, are altogether dead to spirituall acts.15. There is no inherent righteousnesse in the Saints, or grace, and graces are not in the soules of beleevers, but in Christ only.16. There is no difference between the graces of hypocrites and beleevers, in the kinds of them.17. True poverty of spirit doth kill and take away the signs of grace.18. The Spirit cloth worke in Hypocrites, by gifts and graces, but in Gods children immediately.19. That all graces, even in the truely regenerate, are mortall and fading.20. That to call into question whether God be my deare Father, after or upon the commission of some heinous sinnes (as Murther, Incest, &c,) doth prove a man to be in the Covenant of workes.21. To be justified by faith is to be justified by workes.22. None are to be exhorted to beleeve, but such whom we know to be the elect of God or to have his Spirit in them effectually.23. We must not pray for gifts and graces, but onely for Christ.24. He that hath the seale of the Spirit may certainely judge of any person, whether he be elected or no.25. A man may have all graces and poverty of spirit, and yet want Christ.346APPENDIX III (cont'd)26. The faith that justifieth us is in Christ and never had any actuall being out of Christ.27. It is incompatible to the Covenant of grace to joyne faith thereunto.28. To affirme there must be faith on mans part to receive the Covenant; is to undermine Christ.29. An Hypocrite may have these two witnesses, 1 John 5.5 that is to say, the water and the bloud.30. If any thing may be concluded from the water and bloud, it is rather damnation, then salvation.31. Such as see any grace of God in themselves, before they have the assurance of Gods love sealed to them are not to be received members of Churches.32. After the revelation of the spirit, neither Devill nor sinne can make the soule to doubt.33. To act by vertue of, or in obedience to a command, is legall.

34. We are not to pray against all sinne, because the old man is in us, and must be, and why should we pray against that which cannot be avoyded?35. The efficacy of Christs death is to kill all activity of graces in his members, that he might act all in all.36. All the activity of a beleever is to act to sinne.37. We are compleatly united to Christ, before, or without any faith . wrought by the Spirit.38. There can be no true closing with Christ in a promise that hath a qualification or condition expressed.39. The due search and knowledge of the holy Scripture, is not a safe and sure way of searching and finding Christ.40. There is a testimony of the Spirit, and voyce unto the Soule, meerely immediate, without any respect unto, or concurrence with the. word.347APPENDIX III (cont'd)41. There bee distinct seasons of the workings of the severall Persons, so the soule may bee said to bee so long under the Fathers, and not the Sons, and so long under the Sons work, and not the Spirits.42. There is no assurance true or right, unless it bee without fear and doubting.43. The Spirit acts most in the Saints, when they indevour least.44. No created worke can bee a manifest signe of Gods love.45. Nothing but Christ is an evidence of my good estate.46. It is no sinne in a beleever not to see his grace, except he be wilfully blinde.47. The Seale of the Spirit is limited onely to the immediate witnesse of the spirit, and doth never witnesse to any worke of grace, or to any conclusion by a Syllogisme.48. That conditionall promises are legall.49. We are not bound to keepe a constant course of Prayer in our Families or privately, unlesse the Spirit stirre us up thereunto.50. It is poverty of spirit, when wee have grace, yet to see we have no grace in ourselves.51. The soule need not to goe out to Christ for fresh supply, but it is acted by the Spirit inhabiting.52. It is legal to say, wee act in the strength of Christ.53. No Minister can teach one that is anoynted by the Spirit of Christ, more then he knowes already unlesse it be in some circumstances.54. No Minister can bee an instrument to convey more of Christ unto another, then hee by his own experience hath come unto.55. A man may have true Faith of dependance, and yet not bee justifyed.56. A man is not effectually converted till hee hath full assurance.57. To take delight in the holy service of God is to go a whoring frbm God.348APPENDIX III (cont'd)58. To help my faith, and comfort my conscience in evill houres, from former experience of Gods grace in mee, is not a way of grace.59. A man may not bee exhorted to any duty, because hee bath no power to do it.

60. A man may not prove his election by his vocation, but his vocation by his election.61. All Doctrines, Revelations and Spirits, must be tried by Christ the word rather then by the Word of Christ.62. It is a dangerous thing to close with Christ in a promise.63. No better is the evidence from the two witnesses of water and blood mentioned in 1 John 5,6,7,8 then mount Calvary, and the Souldiers that shed Christs bloud, and these might have drunke of it; poore evidence.64. A man must take no notice of his sinne, nor of his repentance for his sinne.65. The Church in admitting members is not to looke to holinesse of life, or Testimony of the same.66. To lay the brethren under a Covenant of works, hurts not, but tends to much good to make men looke the better to their evidences.67. A man cannot evidence his justification by his sanctification, but he must needs build upon his sanctification, and trust to it.68. Faith justifies an unbeleever, that is, that faith that is in Christ, justifieth me that have no faith in my selfe.69. Though a man can prove a gracious worke in himselfe, and Christ to be the authour of it, if thereby he will prove Christ to be his, this is but a sandy foundation.70. Frequency or length of holy duties or trouble of conscience for neglect thereof, are all signes of one under a Covenant of workes.71. The immediate revelation of my good estate, without any respect to the Scriptures, is as cleare to me, as the voyce of God from Heaven to Paul.72. It is a fundamental and soule damning errour to make sanctification an evidence of justification.349 APPENDIX III (cont'd)

73. Christs worke of grace can no more distinguish betwene a Hypocrite and a Stint, then the raine that fals from Heaven betweene the just and the unjust.

74. All verball Covenants, or Covenants expressed in words, as Church Covenants, vowes, &c. are Covenants of workes, and such as strike men off from Christ.

T. The Spirit giveth such full and cleare evidence of my good estate, that I have no need to be tried by the fruits of sanctification, this were tc light a candle to the Sun.

76. The Devill and nature may be cause of a gracious worke.

77. Sanctification is so farre from evidencing a good estate that it darkens it rather, and a man may more clearely see Christ, when he seeth no sanctification then when he doth, the darker my sanctification is, the brighter is my justification.

78. God hath given sixe witnesses, three in Heaven and three in earth to beget and build justifying faith upon.

79. If a member of a Church be unsatisfied with anything in the Church, if he expresse his offence, whether he hath used all meanes to convince the Church or no, he may depart.

80. If a man thinke he may edifie better in another congregation then in his owne, that is ground enough to depart ordinarily, from word, seales, fastings, feastings, and all administrations in his owne Church, notwithstanding the offence of the Church, often manifested to him for so doing.

81. Where faith is held forth by the Ministery, as the condition of the covenant of grace on mans part, as also evidencing justification by sanctification, and the activity of faith, in that Church there is not sufficient bread.

82. A Minister must not pray nor preach against any errour, unlesse he declare in the open Congregation, upon any members enquiry, the names of them that hold them.350APPENDIX IV Chronology of Events350AChronology of Events 1521 Lollards executed

1546 Hooper returns to England from Zurich after exile under Henry VIII.

1550 Creed of 1550, a revision of Forty Two Articles, containing the "Black Rubric"

1551 Hooper anointed as Bishop of Gloucester.

1553 Edward VI dies. Mary Tudor takes the throne

1558 Mary Tudor dies. Elizabeth I becomes Queen. William Perkins born

1563 Elizabeth passes legislation forbidding "conventicles"

1564 Vestiarian Controversies

1569 Grindal becomes Archbishop of York

1570 Queen Elizabeth excommunicated by the Pope

1572 An Admonition to Parliament

Giles Wigginton presented to vicarage of Sedbergh 1575 John Everard born

Jacob Boehme born in Silesia

1576 Grindal becomes Archbishop of Canterbury Sandys, Archbishop of York

1577 Elizabeth suppresses "prophesyings"

Archbishop Grindal is sequestered.

1579 John Rogers and John Knewstub publish diatribes against the Family of Love3511583 Grindal dies. John Whitgift appointed Archbishop of Canterbury

1586 Roger Brerely born in Lancashire.

Charges brought against John Wilson for preaching without a license in Kildwick.

Giles Wigginton arrested for involvement in Marprelate affair.

Racket hanged, Coppinger commits suicide.

1589 Arminius replies to Coornhert in Europe

1593 Robert Towne born

1595 Arminian controversy at Cambridge-- Perkins vs. Baro Whitgift issues Lambeth Articles which anticipate Dort.

Nicholas Bownde's book, "The Doctrine of the Sabbath" printed.

1597 Perkins' A Golden Chaine,published

1600 Tobias Crisp born

1602 William Perkins dies

1603 Elizabeth I dies. James I takes throne

1604 Hampton Court Conference

1606 Toby Matthew consecrated Archbishop of York

1610 Parliament dissolved.

In Europe, the Remonstrance issued systematizing the Arminian position.

John Webster born

1611 Abbott becomes Archbishop of Canterbury

1613 James' daughter Elizabeth married to Frederick, Elector Palatine, a leading German Protestant.

3521614 "Addled Parliament" dissolved after nine weeks, voting no supplies.

Cokayne Project led to a crisis of overproduction and unemployment in the clothing industry, England's major industry

1615 Roger Brerely becomes curate of Grindleton

1617 Fifty charges of errors against Brerely and his "hearers"

1618 James I publishes his "Book of Sports"

1619 Anthony Nutter charged with errors along with Brerely by High Commission

Brerely exonerated by Bishop Matthew and preaches at York MinsterJohn Everard receives D.D. from Cambridge University

1622 Brerely moves to vicarage of Kildwick in Craven

1624 Jacob Boehme dies

1625 James I dies.

Charles I takes throne of England

1626 Brerely leaves Kildwick for Rochdale, and then Burnley

1627 Stephen Denison's "White Wolf Sermon"

1633 Anne Hutchinson follows Joseph Cotton to Massachusetts colony

Laud appointed Archbishop of Canterbury 1637 Anne Hutchinson banished from Massachusetts Brerely dies.Alien-Law of 1637 passed in Massachusetts against immigration of members of Brerely's congregation353

1640 Charles calls Parliament. "Short Parliament" dissolved after three weeks.

Convocation, the assembly of the clergy, was continued after Parliament was dissolved. Accepts a series of new canons which ordered the clergy to. preach the Divine Right of kings, placed restrictions on preaching and ordered altars to be railed.

Scots enter England virtually unopposed by mutinous English army. Occupy Newcastle.

Charles calls Great Council of Peers. They recommend calling Parliament, Peace with Scotland signed at Ripon when Charles promises to the Scottish Army. Universal demand for Parliament.

Long Parliament at once impeached Laud. Star Chamber, Council of the North and in Wales, and the High Commission abolished.

Eaton's Honey-combe of Free Juptification published

1643 Solemn League and Covenant

1644 Scottish army crosses the border

Battle of Marston Moor won by the combined armies of Scotland, Yorkshire (Sir Thomas Fairfax) and the Eastern Association (Earl of Manchester and Oliver Cromwell}.

1645 New Model Army with Fairfax as general formed.Self Denying Ordinance deprived all peers and members of Parliament of their commissions. Rout of Royalists at Naseby.

Saltmarsh's treatise on "Free Grace" published 1646 Archbishop Laud executed.

Episcopacy abolished and Bishops' lands offered for sale.

Surrender of Royalists at Oxford. Charles gives himself up to Scots.

1647 Scots hand Charles over to Parliament.3541647 Two parties formed among Parliamentarians, the Presbyterians who were conservatives and the Independents, whowere inclined to be radicals. Presbyterian majority in Parliament proposed to disband army with wages unpaid. Army mutinies. Cromwell and officers throw their lot in with their men. Council of the Army declares it will not disband until grievances were met. Called for purge of Parliament, early dissolution and new elections. Impeached eleven Presbyterian leaders and occupied London, forcing the withdrawl of the Presbyterians from Commons.

Heads of Proposals. Negotiations between Charles and the Generals for the establishment of a limited monarchy roused the suspicions of radicals in London (Levellers).

Agreement of the People. A rival more democratic constitution produced by the Army.

Boehme's works begin to appear in English translation. Everard's "Sparkles of Glory" published.

1648 Scottish army led by Hamilton and the nobility commissioned by Charles enters England and is easily defeated at Preston by Cromwell.

Generals feel the King cannot be trusted, Revive their alliance with the Levellers. Occupy London. Colonel Pride excludes over a hundred members and a court is set up to try the king.

1649 Charles I executed as a traitor to the Commonwealth. Monarchy and House of Lords abolished.

Familist doctrines of Henry Nicholas published in English.

1652 Act for the Settlement of Ireland provided for the expropriation of the owners of some two-thirds of the land, and for their transplantation of the bulk of the Irish population to Connaught.George Fox has vision of "people in white garments" and "convinces" thousands in the northern counties of England.

1653 Rump of Long Parliament expelled by Cromwell.

Assembly selected by Army leaders, 140 men from nominees of the Independent congregations.3551653 Barebones Parliament. Named for Praise-God Barbon, a. leather seller. Proposals for radical reform frightened conservatives and they engineered its dissolution.

Cromwell given title of Lord Protector. Everard's Gospel Treasury Opened published

1654 Webster's Saints Guide, Judgment Set, and Academiarum Examen published.

1657 Cromwell offered the crown of England but refuses.

1658 Cromwell dies. Succeeded by his son Richard.

1659 New Parliament meets and recognizes new Protector.

Generals restore remnant of the Rump Parliament. Richard Cromwell retires into oblivion. Relations between Rump and the Army deteriorate.

1660 General Monck, commander of the army in Scotland, finally crosses into England. Calls for dissolution of Parliament. Opens doors of Parliament to members excluded in 1648.

New Parliament meets, Presbyterian-Royalist in composition. The House of Lords was restored, and Parliament accepts Charles' offer of indemnity,

settlement of disputes about land sales, payment of arrears to the Army and liberty of conscience.

Charles II returns to England. Officially dates his reign from January 30, 1649.

Long Parliament officially dissolved.

Act of Indemnity pardoned all offences arising from the hostilities of the preceding decades, but excepted 57 persons, mostly regicides. 30 of these condemned to death, 11 executed. Church, Crown and confiscated Royalists' lands were restored.

Act of Settlement (1661) and Act of Explanation (1665) two thirds of cultivable land in Ireland in the hands of Protestants.356

1661 Cavalier Parliament. Object of legislation was to exclude nonconformists from any share in central or local government. Church courts were restored with the exception ofthe High Commission.

1664 Robert Towne dies.

1673 Declaration of Indulgence for Roman. Catholic and Protestant dissenters.

Above declaration by the King is rendered powerless by Parliament's enactment of the Test Act, which insisted that the holder of any civil or military office should receive the sacrament according to the ritual of the Church of England, should take the oaths of supremacy and allegiance and make a declaration against the Mass.

1677 Webster's "Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft" published.

1682 Webster dies.